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

Man jailed for parole violations after refusing to decrypt his Tor node

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 397 posts

Re: Man jailed for parole violations after refusing to decrypt his Tor node

#191

Post by JTbane »

tptacek wrote: post #105
tptacek wrote: post #89

For whatever it's worth, the Reddit story here says that the federal courts used "fraudulent warrants to jail my husband again". Maybe! The other side of that story, via PACER, is a detailed parole violation warrant (you can hear the marshal refer to it in the video); the violations in that warrant: 1. Admitting to using cannabis during supervised release 2. Failing to make scheduled restitution payments and to coope…

OK, I think I found the original thing Rockenhaus was convicted of. Back in 2014, Rockenhaus worked for a travel booking company. He was fired. He used stale VPN access to connect back to the company's infrastructure, and then detached a SCSI LUN from the server cluster, crashing it. The company, not knowing he was involved, retained him to help diagnose and fix the problem. During the investigation, the company figu…

Yeah this is why I tell hacker/cracker corporate types to not even joke about time bombs and backdoors in company software.

Re: Man jailed for parole violations after refusing to decrypt his Tor node

#193

Post by mikeyouse »

plorg wrote: post #180
tehwebguy wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oof. Any links to this one?

I believe this is the primary case being currently contested: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69848942/united-states-... This appears to be the earlier filing, but I'm not savvy enough to pull the underlying docs if indeed I can (where I am used to viewing PACER documents I get a permissions error): https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66960649/united-states-... (If you install the RECAP extension in your browse…

Your second case was in the WD of Texas which is where he was arrested - it's just minutia to have him 'removed' to the ED of Texas to face charges where he was indicted - this is the main case there:

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16517474/united-states-...

Here's his plea: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txed.19...

My recap is acting up a bit so I'll just copy/paste in case it doesn't grab docket entry 158 - the 'factual basis' for the plea:

1. That the defendant, Conrad Rockenhaus, who is entering a plea of guilty, is the same person charged in the Indictment;

2. That the defendant worked as a as a developer services manager, and later an infrastructure architect, for an online company providing travel booking and vacation services to customers (hereinafter, Victim Company );

3. That the defendant had access to and could control computer code located on Victim Company s servers throughout the country, including computer code that controlled business functions such as marketing, scheduling, and payment processing;

4. That on or about November 11, 2014, the defendant remotely accessed, without authorization, the Victim Company s servers from his residence in the Eastern District of Texas;

5. That on or about November 11, 2014, the defendant executed a computer code or command that shut down one of Victim Company s servers, which in turn caused several other Victim Company servers to crash;

6. That the defendant was retained by Victim Company to assist with the restoration of Victim Company’s servers;

7. That during the remediation efforts, the defendant, without authorization, disconnected Victim Company’s servers in Plano, Texas, in the Eastern District of Texas, causing further business disruption;

8. That the defendant’s actions cost Victim Company at least $242,775 in lost revenue and at least $321,858 in recovery and remediation costs.

Re: Man jailed for parole violations after refusing to decrypt his Tor node

#194

Post by arp242 »

jMyles wrote: post #110
tptacek wrote: post #89

For whatever it's worth, the Reddit story here says that the federal courts used "fraudulent warrants to jail my husband again". Maybe! The other side of that story, via PACER, is a detailed parole violation warrant (you can hear the marshal refer to it in the video); the violations in that warrant: 1. Admitting to using cannabis during supervised release 2. Failing to make scheduled restitution payments and to coope…

This always happens though. Every time someone is thrown in a cage unjustly, the state tries to redirect us (yes, us, here in this forum and others like it) to look at other details of the situation, whether it's details of the person's political or personality or, in this case, details of this (also seemingly unjust) probation violation. Who cares if he smoked weed or installed a VM or evaded a government keylogger?…

He used encrypted services to commit a bunch of crimes. He was then released on the condition that he would no longer use the encrypted services that he used to commit the crimes with. He then lied and used those encrypted services anyway. It's really that simple.

I am absolutely NOT a fan of "tough on crime" type stuff. By and large I feel the US criminal justice system is an inhumane cruel monstrosity. But the conditions were not all that unreasonable (except the weed stuff) and all of this smells of bad faith on the part of this couple.

Re: Man jailed for parole violations after refusing to decrypt his Tor node

#195

Post by codyb »

boston_clone wrote: post #172
VWWHFSfQ wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The CFAA isn't super complicated. It basically boils down to: Don't fuck with other people's shit if they don't want you to.

Are you a lawyer by chance? I seem to remember cases or interpretations of the CFAA in which even guessing the username password combo of "admin:admin" would violate the act, resulting in teenagers or children being caught up in cYbEr FrAuD

I mean... if someone walked into your house cause you only closed the screen door while running to the store quick you'd still call the cops cause there was someone breaking into your house lol.

Re: Man jailed for parole violations after refusing to decrypt his Tor node

#196

Post by kstrauser »

everforward wrote: post #175
kstrauser wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good grief. This is also part of the reason why I have a pact with my coworkers: if I’m terminated, kill my access immediately and universally, and I’ll do the same for them. I don’t even want to have the ability to look at stuff anymore. Remove any shred of possibility that I could get into shenanigans later.

I also follow the closely related addendum: I do not want standing admin access to your system, unless I need it often enough it really impacts my productivity. Doubly so if it's not hooked up to SSO. If the database gets breached, I don't want my name on the list of people who had the admin password. Most big businesses are good about that, but I've helped a couple family members with their business' WordPress and j…

Same all around for me. I have a couple of longstanding accounts on local businesses I help out, but it’s all via VPNs that send the owner an email when I connect. I also refuse to do any work unless they ask me in writing. Text is OK, and I screenshot it. “Why did you give such-and-such rights to that employee?” “I have it in writing where the owner asked me to, Your Honor.”

This has never come up before, but it’s easy enough to be diligent about it.

Also: I keep a little paper notebook where I log the work I do for everyone, and occasionally have someone else sign and date it. It’s basically a cheap blockchain IRL. “How do you know you did this before you stopped doing work for them?” “Because the owner signed and dated the logbook after I did the work but before they hired the new IT person.”

I’m suuuuuper nitpicky about diligence in all this, for the protection of everyone involved, and especially me.

Re: Man jailed for parole violations after refusing to decrypt his Tor node

#197

Post by boston_clone »

petcat wrote: post #188
boston_clone wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you a lawyer by chance? I seem to remember cases or interpretations of the CFAA in which even guessing the username password combo of "admin:admin" would violate the act, resulting in teenagers or children being caught up in cYbEr FrAuD

It doesn't matter if you brute forced their crappy login with commonly-used credentials. You think it's OK for someone to rummage around in your garage just because they correctly guessed your keycode was 12345? Of course not.

I'm more focused on the assertion that "The CFAA isn't super complicated."

Which raises sincere doubts about the commenter's credibility to make such a claim.

Re: Man jailed for parole violations after refusing to decrypt his Tor node

#198

Post by tptacek »

shagie wrote: post #178
tptacek wrote: post #89

For whatever it's worth, the Reddit story here says that the federal courts used "fraudulent warrants to jail my husband again". Maybe! The other side of that story, via PACER, is a detailed parole violation warrant (you can hear the marshal refer to it in the video); the violations in that warrant: 1. Admitting to using cannabis during supervised release 2. Failing to make scheduled restitution payments and to coope…

From reddit post, from transcript at https://rockenhaus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/U.S.-v.-Ro... 8 Q. Due to the nature of the offense charged being a 9 computer-related crime, did he have specific 10 restrictions on his pretrial release as it relates to 11 his computer usage? 12 A. Yes. One of the conditions was that he must 13 participate in the Computer Restriction and Monitoring 14 Program. 15 Q. How is that…

As I understand it --- I haven't read deeply enough to confirm this, it's what I've pieced together from the Reddit thing --- the Tor stuff came long before any of this. What I gather is:

1. Back in 2014 this person committed a pretty grave computer offense, which was not at the time prosecuted.

2. Some time after that, he became a high-profile Tor relay operator.

3. Some time after that, he was asked to subvert those Tor relays by the DOJ.

4. In 2019 he was prosecuted for the computer offenses, and convicted.

5. In 2021, he was released on parole.

(I think there's a long string of parole issues after that, and then)

6. In 2025 he was accused by the probation office of violating his parole in a bunch of ways and taken into custody.

Re: Man jailed for parole violations after refusing to decrypt his Tor node

#199

Post by whimsicalism »

iLoveOncall wrote: post #101
tptacek wrote: post #89

For whatever it's worth, the Reddit story here says that the federal courts used "fraudulent warrants to jail my husband again". Maybe! The other side of that story, via PACER, is a detailed parole violation warrant (you can hear the marshal refer to it in the video); the violations in that warrant: 1. Admitting to using cannabis during supervised release 2. Failing to make scheduled restitution payments and to coope…

You forgot to mention that in the hearing linked on the Reddit post it is shown that he made a search about a pedophile association as well right before downloading Spice. Page 28, lines 3 to 8 on https://rockenhaus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/U.S.-v.-Ro...

i’ve made the same search multiple times before late at night and i am not a pedophile, just a wikipedia/history deep diver

e: really? why am i downvoted for this

Re: Man jailed for parole violations after refusing to decrypt his Tor node

#200

Post by toast0 »

RandomBacon wrote: post #127
jMyles wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This always happens though. Every time someone is thrown in a cage unjustly, the state tries to redirect us (yes, us, here in this forum and others like it) to look at other details of the situation, whether it's details of the person's political or personality or, in this case, details of this (also seemingly unjust) probation violation. Who cares if he smoked weed or installed a VM or evaded a government keylogger?…

It seems like those are very easy terms to follow, that he agreed to . If someone who did some serious stuff, couldn't follow easy terms, it is cause for concern.

Parole terms aren't usually up for negotiation. It's generally parole or stay in prison. You can agree to the terms offered, but it's a coercive agreement, so I wouldn't put much weight on the parolees agreement. That said, I agree the terms seem reasonable.

But even if you stay in prison for your full term, you're likely to have supervised release which has similar terms.

Post reply on HN