271–280 of 397 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s a calculated appeal by a biased narrator (his wife) who knows how to exploit the anger and sympathies of a community that often doesn’t click links, read documents, or look for facts before passing judgment (Reddit)
This is why in some corners of the internet we adhere to the "not your personal army" mantra.
4chan in 2010? Is this really ever even said anymore?
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…
> The Origins of a Retaliatory Prosecution (Texas, 2019-2022)
> Early 2019: Conrad Rockenhaus, a supporter of free speech, runs Tor exit nodes used by journalists and activists. Federal agents demand he assist them in decrypting traffic; he repeatedly refuses, asserting his constitutional rights.
> The Coerced Confession: The case against him began when he was forced to confess to a non-violent CFAA (computer crime) offense while under the influence of prescribed painkillers and not lucid following a major surgery.
> The Pretextual Arrest: Just months before the 5-year statute of limitations was set to expire, the federal government arrests Conrad on the CFAA charge. The family alleges this was a pretext for his refusal to cooperate on the Tor matter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is that added, there's an agenda there. Why does "sobriety" matter in a computer crime? This is oppression and this (plus the other conditions) simple set up people like this for a fall.
Not a fan of this kind of thing, and I think that weed should be legal, but don't forget that federally, it is still illegal, and "don't do illegal stuff while out on parole" at least has a pretty basic logic to it.
If you don't like the terms of parole, you are permitted to refuse it and remain incarcerated for your full sentence, at which point you are released and there are no parole restrictions at all. Parole is "you agree to behave and they release you early". And "behaving" is whatever they want it to mean.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since it seems to have been glossed over in the court transcript, can anyone explain how exactly a VM or client for remote VM could be used to bypass the monitoring? Wouldn't the monitoring software capture any application's network activities, including a client for a Remote VM? I'm imagining something like Wireshark?
A VM would bypass monitoring software installed on devices the person uses. A VPN would obscure their traffic such that it is encrypted and not easily monitored. Even something like SSH is encrypted and not straight-forward to monitor, so a VPN isn't required to do this anyway. A remote VM would combine both of these things, where the device/computer is in a location that isn't monitored and accessed by means aimed a…
Not really, no: a VM is just another userspace application and a monitoring software should be able to capture its traffic just fine. If he was also using a VPN, tor or conneting to a remote machine that's another story, but only saying he was using a VM doesn't really mean much.
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
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Here's what the wife says about that[1], for the record: > The Origins of a Retaliatory Prosecution (Texas, 2019-2022) > Early 2019: Conrad Rockenhaus, a supporter of free speech, runs Tor exit nodes used by journalists and activists. Federal agents demand he assist them in decrypting traffic; he repeatedly refuses, asserting his constitutional rights. > The Coerced Confession: The case against him began when he was…
My guess is that things would have gone substantially worse for this person had he taken that case to trial.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 thos…
The setup of Tor has some specific dates in the transcript. Page 10 3 Q. So, Ms. Routh, having been acknowledged of his 4 obligations to monitor and pay for the service on 5 August 29th, can you please tell the Court how 6 Mr. Rockenhaus complied or didn't comply with the terms 7 of his release? 8 A. Yes. On September 22nd the defendant did 9 successfully download the monitoring software program 10 on his computer. O…
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does sound like a crime to me too. But was it a password or other credential that was guessed, or was it just some sequential primary key? The latter is not an authorization system, and I do not believe it a crime to do that unless you have specific knowledge that it is likely to cause damage and/or the intent to cause that damage. As far as I am concerned, I am allowed to send any traffic I wish to public-facing…
Maybe as far as you are concerned, but not as far as the law is concerned ;-)
I am still permitted to do this. None of the details of this case give me the impression that they're using CFAA in such a way as to offend my sensibilities. Sounds like he sabotaged a former employer and caused hundreds of thousands in (tort not physical) damages. I guessed the urls for some issuu.com links that aren't available in search, and downloaded the page images to make a pdf. I was never prompted for a password. Arrest me, I'm a notorious hacker.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not a fan of this kind of thing, and I think that weed should be legal, but don't forget that federally, it is still illegal, and "don't do illegal stuff while out on parole" at least has a pretty basic logic to it.
Booze is legal, and parole can limit your drinking. By law. If you don't like the terms of parole, you are permitted to refuse it and remain incarcerated for your full sentence, at which point you are released and there are no parole restrictions at all. Parole is "you agree to behave and they release you early". And "behaving" is whatever they want it to mean.