What is Digg?121 Comments
- OnipSemaj, on 01/18/2008, -3/+67The spammer should be accused of spamming. I'm surprised they had the audacity to actually show up in court.
- Tokyosexwhale, on 01/18/2008, -3/+63I think the real problem is that the Judges probably have no clue what a "whois" DNS lookup is or many of the other technical elements of this case. The prosecution spins it like some terrible invasion of privacy when it is in fact the spammers that invade our privacy. This is further evidence that we need some kind of "nerd court" to handle IT legal cases.
- dwalker, on 01/18/2008, -3/+52***** ME! The wanker spammer gets away with it. What a crock of *****.
Is it just me or does it seem as if the real tossers are getting away with it more often? - InfamousAtheist, on 01/18/2008, -1/+42Pre-comment statement: the spammer deserves to die in a fire.
That said, there's apparently more to this than just the DNS lookups and subsequent analysis. The court had previously issued an injunction to prevent the anti-spammer from "harassing" the spammer, which was promptly ignored. The anti-spammer was also accused of making false statements to the court, which rarely goes over well with any judge.
The judge surely lacks the technical knowledge necessary to make an informed decision, and I'd love to see a higher court overturn the fines, but the anti-spammer apparently didn't make the smartest decisions. - quomen, on 01/18/2008, -3/+43I don't think so. What I got from it is that the SSID violated the HTTP protocol and performed an illegal server-side DNS lookup hack. According to the Beijing Internet Agreement in 2002, the host of a fiber optic PHP system can't process the vast number of packets that are sent when the subnet mask is compromised. Hence the man was given a 60k fine which is a number inversely proportional to the nanominutes that he spent rebooting the BIOS and the IDE that was lost as a result. Usually this is handled by an on board LCD monitoring system, but it was found out to be a transversal of the 802.11b african bullfrog.
- noahhoward, on 01/18/2008, -0/+31Bad karma from trying to stop ***** spammers?
- Amazetbm, on 01/18/2008, -0/+29I'm sorry but using decades old UNIX tools for their intended purposes does not constitute hacking. The jury and judge were a sleep at the wheel on that one.
- proficient, on 01/18/2008, -2/+29Outrageous.
- KrystollMeth, on 01/18/2008, -2/+29Well, if you're paying that much in fees, may as well give the spammer a good old fashioned ass kicking. Sometimes the lawyer fees & whatnot aren't worth what a simple thing like that can do.
- fonik, on 01/18/2008, -2/+27They didn't restrict the transfer of internal dns info, so a host -l gave him their internal network structure. It's like printing a giant map on your garage door of where you keep your valuables in your house and then complaining when people read it from the street.
- Nodaki, on 01/18/2008, -1/+25If this goes to the Supreme Court of North Dakota, which is one floor above where I work. I and others who run the IT for the state will testify on behalf of the defendant.
- RyeBrye, on 01/18/2008, -0/+23How would the jury prove they were 1337 though?
- rnreekez, on 01/18/2008, -1/+21From the Court Transcript:
Judge Cynthia Rothe-Seeger:
After watching "Hackers" on Showtime this morning, I believe it is my duty to share my technical expertise on the subject and explain my ruling. This man is obviously a danger to society. I mean he infiltrated their networks, which for those unaware that means he gained access to the translucent data towers. A security breach such as this one is a danger to all that we hold dear. Mr David Ritz, your "manifesto" of "Hack the Planet" ends here. - relaxeder, on 04/17/2009, -2/+22Sweet mother of god, he could have broken into the Pentagon!
- rabbitt, on 01/18/2008, -2/+18I'm starting to think that my father was right when he said, "Don't speak on things you don't understand." If you actually bothered to do your homework you'd realize that "host -l" is effectively a zone transfer, which is what Error601 was talking about. How would he have known the guy was doing a zone transfer if he hadn't read the article...? Zone transfers are /not/ typically publicly available if you don't allow them (zones typically default to restricted and you have to manually specify what hosts (if any) are allowed to do an AXFR (host -l)). The fact that they start of restricted and you have to specifically allow zone transfers makes the story confusing - why did they have it unrestricted?
Damn - I can't believe I had to explain that to you. - Whackly, on 01/18/2008, -0/+15/fail
- pattink, on 01/18/2008, -1/+16Correction, should read:
"are you retawded?" - NJank, on 01/18/2008, -0/+14Lesson learned: don't violate a court order. You'll get smacked.
- seattle98104, on 01/18/2008, -1/+13You act as if Digg commenters bother to actually read the articles they troll.
- GreyICE, on 01/18/2008, -1/+13Bravo! Comment of the day.
- inactive, on 01/18/2008, -1/+13are you a retard?
- RyeBrye, on 01/18/2008, -0/+11You should be punished for that.
- ferose333, on 01/18/2008, -0/+10WTF, we had to use "host -l" and "whois" commands to do a computer science assignment.
- jcaino, on 01/18/2008, -0/+10There are no stupid questions. Only stupid people.
- umstbkddng, on 01/18/2008, -1/+11We all know what the next steps are... spam the sh*t out of that judge!
...and the plaintiff's attorneys. After all, they make it all possible! - relaxeder, on 04/17/2009, -6/+16HACK THE PLANET
- Error601, on 01/18/2008, -12/+22Confusing story. Did they have unrestricted zone transfer and he used it or did he break into their network in order to do the zone transfer? Usually it's restricted by default.
- Whackly, on 01/18/2008, -1/+11All you'll get is "42."
- psion01, on 01/18/2008, -0/+9Shame on you.
- pgm_01, on 01/18/2008, -0/+9If you know 1337 is not just a number. If you understand the humor in "There are 10 types of people in the world, those who can read binary and those who can't."
Seriously though, lawyers can ask potential jurors about a range of topics, and for technical cases they should try to find people who at least have a clue. The entire judicial system could benefit from smarter people serving on juries. - tgc1, on 01/18/2008, -0/+9Appeal. Judge is not versed enough to appropriate judgment.
- NoCt1, on 01/18/2008, -1/+9Correction: wetawded.
- inactive, on 01/18/2008, -0/+8To all the good hackers around the world -- put on your Batman masks when you fight.
Regards, Donkey. - jerrygofixit, on 01/18/2008, -0/+8Thankfully he saved the data he got directly to disk before his mommy unplugged his computer halfway thru the transfer.
- falafelkiosken, on 01/18/2008, -0/+8Or the evil haxxor tool ping, it should be outlawed ;>
- Double0Doug, on 01/18/2008, -0/+7Crap man, did you ever think about getting on medication for that?
- tripzero, on 01/18/2008, -0/+7there are plenty of things to do to spammers besides harrassment over the internet. For example, burn his house down. You are much less likely to get caught and you will likely distroy his spamming tools in the process.
- insomniac8400, on 01/18/2008, -1/+7US Courts = Fail
- NSResponder, on 01/18/2008, -0/+6Let's hope he appeals it. Is there a defense fund?
-jcr - thcobbs, on 01/18/2008, -3/+9stop with the stupid joke already....
Bill O'Reilly already has a bumper sticker for sale FFS! - ilovenicotine, on 01/18/2008, -0/+6It sounds like the garage door was open, and homeboy had some binoculars.
- geekworking, on 01/18/2008, -0/+6The guy fell for a trap. There is no reason why any company, especially some sort of internet company, would put their internal DNS on their public server and enable zone transfers to the world. The judgment also says that they blocked his primary IP addresses that he used in the past. Why would they black-list his IP's and not restrict zone transfers on their DNS server? They put out the bait and he took it.
- reginaldino, on 01/18/2008, -0/+6you better get used to that thought. that's life
- bobbknight, on 01/18/2008, -0/+6I hate to say this but breeching an injunction is like pissing on an electrical fire.
All it does is make a judge mad.
But David Ritz should appeal. - TheSabre, on 01/18/2008, -0/+5Where you previously asked to stop harassing someone?
- falafelkiosken, on 01/18/2008, -2/+7oh, so now DNS lookup is illegal, too bad your web browser does dozens of them while surfing
stupid spammers - jordanlund, on 01/18/2008, -0/+5He wasn't busted for using common *nix tools.... He was busted for what he did with the information afterwards.
Read the court documents:
http://www.spamsuite.com/node/351
32. Ritz’s ongoing monitoring, tracking, and connection attempts with Sierra's computers is malicious. He admits to having ill will and malice towards Sierra and its principals. While Ritz maintains that the basis for his feelings are Suspicions of Spam activity by Sierra, those suspicions do not justify violations of the law nor trespass. Ritz's constant surveillance is sinister in nature and he continues to this day, to gather and maintain as much information as he can acquire on Sierra and its principals, including gathering information on the son of Sierra's owner. Historically, Ritz has published information including what he believed to be tax credit card number of Sierra's owner.
33. The Court finds by clear and convincing evidence that Ritz is guilty of actual malice. Sierra is entitled to an award of exemplary damages for the sake of example and by way of punishing Ritz.
34. The Court finds by clear and convincing evidence that $50,000.00 in exemplary damages is consistent with the principles and factors set forth under N.D.C.C. § 32-03.2-11(5). There is a reasonable relationship between this award and the harm likely to result from the Ritz's conduct as well as the harm that actually has occurred; the award is consistent with the degree of reprehensibility of Ritz's conduct and the duration of that conduct; and the award is consistent with Ritz's awareness of and concealment of the conduct. - smek2, on 01/18/2008, -0/+4What's the world comming to? The spammer sues the anti-spammer, who has to pay $60K in fines??? Wtf.
- Laiden, on 01/18/2008, -0/+4Dugg for use of 'nerd court'
-
Show 51 - 100 of 119 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is