Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

vanityfair.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 228 posts

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#101

Post by kasey_junk »

ig1 wrote: post #43
kasey_junk wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a little harsh to say he deleted the audit trail. He deleted his bash history. Something I do on a near daily basis.

The exact details (which aren't disputed) are covered in: http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/021110aleyn... Basically he'd written a backup program which was specifically designed to compress both his home directory and propriety code from elsewhere on the system into a file (which it would do depended on parameters passed). On his last day of employment he ran it several times with different parameters…

I don't doubt he did something illegal and I don't care particularly what his reason is.

What is way more troubling to me is how apparently easy it is for Goldman to get the highest levels of government involved and throw the criminal book at someone over what is typically a civil matter.

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#102

Post by rtkwe »

GeneralMayhem wrote: post #39

This makes me angry. Not just the story itself, but the way VF goes about telling it, which commits the same sins (albeit with better intent) as Goldman Sachs. "So-called 'subversion repository'?" Why don't we just accuse him of summoning demons while we're at it?

(For that specific instance at least) Read the start of that paragraph again. That's supposed to be the FBI agent trying to describe what happened and being completely flummoxed by the use of subversion that doesn't line up with the dictionary definition.

> 'Then he explained what he knew, or thought he knew:...'

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#104

Post by rhizome »

waffle_ss wrote: post #20

On the night of the arrest—without an arrest warrant—Serge waived his right to call a lawyer. He phoned his wife and told her what had happened and that a bunch of F.B.I. agents were on the way to their home to seize their computers, and to please let them in—though they had no search warrant, either. Then he sat down and politely tried to clear up the F.B.I. agent's confusion. "He was completely not interested in th…

Even more on point: ALWAYS record interactions with the FBI:

http://jonathanturley.org/2013/05/11/why-the-fbi-doesnt-reco...

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130516/18383623114/your-w...

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2013/05/10/beware-fbi-whe...

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/20070402_FBI_Me...

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#105

Post by ig1 »

kasey_junk wrote: post #101
ig1 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The exact details (which aren't disputed) are covered in: http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/021110aleyn... Basically he'd written a backup program which was specifically designed to compress both his home directory and propriety code from elsewhere on the system into a file (which it would do depended on parameters passed). On his last day of employment he ran it several times with different parameters…

I don't doubt he did something illegal and I don't care particularly what his reason is. What is way more troubling to me is how apparently easy it is for Goldman to get the highest levels of government involved and throw the criminal book at someone over what is typically a civil matter.

Any company can ask for a criminal referral on a corporate espionage case (United States v. Nosal is a major one), and while it's becoming more common it's still pretty unusual for companies of all sizes because it's often expensive for the company involved (legal counsel, staff time, etc) and means that they lose control of the case.

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#106

Post by candybar »

vasilipupkin wrote: post #53
doug1001 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's inaccurate. I just read the Lewis article and there are plenty of facts recited there contradict your summary; none of those facts support it. He deleted his bash history, which many programmers do every day, indeed, that's what the justice department used as evidence that he "deleted the audit trail" Once you look at the details of this case--in fact, even just the details as recited in the public documents f…

In our industry( HFT ) generally, you sign all sorts of agreements which specifically prohibit you from taking any code whatsoever from your employer without specific authorization to do so. Michael Lewis article almost makes it sound like its Goldman's fault. But the fact is, he signed agreements that prohibited him from doing stuff like this and then did it anyway

Violation of private agreements is typical a civil matter.

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#107

Post by mratzloff »

GeneralMayhem wrote: post #62

An interesting takeaway from this piece is that GS is blatantly and systematically violating the terms of the MIT license, GPL, and whatever else they happen to get their hands on. I'd love nothing more than for the FSF to take them to court over it.

GPL, perhaps, but I'm not sure how you think they're violating MIT.

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#108

Post by ajb »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #46
chiph wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I'm a capitalist, I wouldn't conduct business with Goldman. They have a history of screwing the market (semi-ok), screwing their customers (not ok), and screwing their employees (not ok). And then blaming everyone else. I expect a certain degree of ethical behavior.

On the contrary, Goldman generally stands by their employees provided they believe the employee stood by them. See for example, Fabrice Tourre, who's personal legal expenses were entirely covered by Goldman.

But he was convicted of a financial crime. It's not in Goldman's interest for that sort of thing to happen.

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#109

Post by kbenson »

j_baker wrote: post #97
zeteo wrote: post #48

The justice system is, of course, still in the business of catching and punishing murderers, thieves and such. But, with the decline in crime since the early '90s, this side of their activity is becoming increasingly supplemented by a different game altogether: enforcing a growing set of complex laws against practically everything [1]. There is a lot of prosecutorial discretion in choosing which of these laws to enfo…

Most importantly, don't say anything that might incriminate you. Even if they have you on video doing it with hundreds of witnesses and DNA evidence.

That's the whole point of not talking unless a lawyer is present (and you give them a chance to vet your speech). You have very little chance of knowing what is incriminating, and this is by design.

Their job is to put away criminals. In the case where there is not really a crime, their training, which is meant to get confessions from actual criminals, ends up pulling seeming confessions to nonexistent crimes from innocent people. After that happens, you are screwed.

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#110

Post by msandford »

pdovy wrote: post #77
melling wrote: post #18

In case people aren't clear on this. He worked in an industry that takes this sort of thing very seriously. He shouldn't have even been trying to download open source from work. You don't email stuff home to work on it, for example.

I would think this would be common sense at any job - unless otherwise specified in your contract the work that you do for your employer belongs to your employer, full stop. According to the article he freely admits that what he took included proprietary code - that is theft. Now, was Goldman reasonable here? No, we can probably all agree that Goldman and the government overstepped a lot of bounds chasing this guy do…

That might be, but it's a CIVIL issue not a CRIMINAL one.
Post reply on HN