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

Amazon Ring cameras used in nationwide ‘swatting’ spree, US Justice Dept. says

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 275 posts

Re: Amazon Ring cameras used in nationwide ‘swatting’ spree, US Justice Dept. says

#51

Post by nickff »

olliej wrote: post #38
nickff wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Proving attempted murder is very difficult, but "SWATting" already falls under the broad umbrella of 'assault'. It seems like the police are likely guilty of criminal negligence as well.

Genuinely curious: What is the crime if I shoot a gun at a house knowing that it is occupied?it seems obvious that if I kill an occupant it would be murder, but what happens if I don’t?

It might not be murder if you shoot a gun at an occupied house; it could be manslaughter, the laws vary by jurisdiction.

One definition (there are many) of assault is as follows: "... the intentional application of force upon another person, directly or indirectly, without the other person’s consent. Classified as a criminal act, it can and will be tried in court."

Re: Amazon Ring cameras used in nationwide ‘swatting’ spree, US Justice Dept. says

#52

Post by ummonk »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #43
pclmulqdq wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It already is considered attempted murder by some localities. The issue is usually catching the swatter. They often use anonymous VOIP services and voice changers (if they are even in the same country as the target), so it is effectively impossible to track them down.

> It already is considered attempted murder by some localities Is there a link to this? The government decided that calling another branch of the government for help is so dangerous it is an attempt to murder?

It’s calling a branch of the government and describing a situation involving imminent or ongoing violence which the government is expected (though not legally obligated) to respond to.

Re: Amazon Ring cameras used in nationwide ‘swatting’ spree, US Justice Dept. says

#53

Post by jahewson »

gnicholas wrote: post #31
jahewson wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems excessive. I would consider swatting lesser than attempted voluntary manslaughter which carries a maximum 10 year federal sentence. It’s also typically prosecuted at the state level, which kinda messes things up for the Feds. Reckless endangerment feels more appropriate, perhaps a bit too soft at 2 years maximum, though it is rarely prosecuted at the federal level. So 5 years maximum for the federal conspi…

Attempted manslaughter is a federal crime? This doesn't sound right to me, as a (former) lawyer. I would think that special circumstances would be necessary for a homicide or attempted homicide to be a federal crime, which would explain why there might be a mandatory minimum.

Yes, 18 U.S. C. § 1113. The special circumstances can be as simple as breaking another Federal law while committing manslaughter. Of course the Feds would much rather stick to prosecuting crimes that don’t overlap state laws.

Re: Amazon Ring cameras used in nationwide ‘swatting’ spree, US Justice Dept. says

#54

Post by gonzo41 »

ummonk wrote: post #50
8note wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stopping the swatter doesn't do much, and still allows for people to be swatted. The thing that needs an overhaul is the decision making on when to actually send out the swat team. It's lazy, expensive, and dangerous to send them out for every opportunity without any investigation

If I call the cops because some armed gunman is breaking into my house, I don’t want them to send some unarmed patrolman to politely knock on my door and check whether everything is okay.

By the time you make that call, regardless of who responds, you'll be dead OR the gunman will have what they want. Home invasions rarely result in hostage situations.

Re: Amazon Ring cameras used in nationwide ‘swatting’ spree, US Justice Dept. says

#55

Post by jahewson »

NaturalPhallacy wrote: post #25
jahewson wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems excessive. I would consider swatting lesser than attempted voluntary manslaughter which carries a maximum 10 year federal sentence. It’s also typically prosecuted at the state level, which kinda messes things up for the Feds. Reckless endangerment feels more appropriate, perhaps a bit too soft at 2 years maximum, though it is rarely prosecuted at the federal level. So 5 years maximum for the federal conspi…

It's completely premeditated which is IIRC the main criterion for legally speaking 'murder'.

It’s not. The premeditated part gets you “voluntary” but the activity they chose to engage in carries only a very minor risk of death. They haven’t set out to kill somebody.

Re: Amazon Ring cameras used in nationwide ‘swatting’ spree, US Justice Dept. says

#56

Post by dwighttk »

olliej wrote: post #38
nickff wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Proving attempted murder is very difficult, but "SWATting" already falls under the broad umbrella of 'assault'. It seems like the police are likely guilty of criminal negligence as well.

Genuinely curious: What is the crime if I shoot a gun at a house knowing that it is occupied?it seems obvious that if I kill an occupant it would be murder, but what happens if I don’t?

reckless endangerment?

Re: Amazon Ring cameras used in nationwide ‘swatting’ spree, US Justice Dept. says

#57

Post by wpietri »

teeray wrote: post #40
pclmulqdq wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It already is considered attempted murder by some localities. The issue is usually catching the swatter. They often use anonymous VOIP services and voice changers (if they are even in the same country as the target), so it is effectively impossible to track them down.

The question is: why is it possible to place a 911 call without all that information being laid bare before the dispatcher and logged. There are extraordinary regulations on carriers for E911, and thus a means to impose that requirement.

Because the system has to fail safe. If there's a network glitch or somebody is using a bottom-tier pay-as-you-go mobile or a cheap-ass VOIP phone, they still need to be able to call for an ambulance, a fire truck, or the police.

Re: Amazon Ring cameras used in nationwide ‘swatting’ spree, US Justice Dept. says

#58

Post by encryptluks2 »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #33
Kibae wrote: post #23

> conduct regular scans for Ring passwords compromised in non-Ring breaches Does this mean that Ring stores plaintext passwords?

No. They use rainbow tables: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_table

If they have a hash, but there is no indication this is due to a breach of Amazon but likely people getting viruses by installing EXE porn and what not.

Re: Amazon Ring cameras used in nationwide ‘swatting’ spree, US Justice Dept. says

#59

Post by jahewson »

olliej wrote: post #34
jahewson wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems excessive. I would consider swatting lesser than attempted voluntary manslaughter which carries a maximum 10 year federal sentence. It’s also typically prosecuted at the state level, which kinda messes things up for the Feds. Reckless endangerment feels more appropriate, perhaps a bit too soft at 2 years maximum, though it is rarely prosecuted at the federal level. So 5 years maximum for the federal conspi…

No. If I drive to a random house and start shooting at it, I don’t get to call that reckless endangerment. If I kill someone I sure as hell don’t get to call it an accident. It does not matter if you think how is police operate is unreasonable, what matters is that what they do is well known and established, and the outcome is foreseeable. Also, if your best defense is “this isn’t attempted murder, it’s just terroris…

Your analogy doesn’t hold because it’s a very different crime with very different intent and culpability.

I’m simply pointing to the most similar Federal crimes and pointing out that the sentences are proportional. For comparison, Federal attempted murder-to-hire is only 10 years and that’s clearly a much worse crime.

Tragically there’s now over 1000 cases of swatting per year. Only one person (Andrew Finch) has been killed by police. (The swatter in this case was charged with involuntary manslaughter and got 20 years in jail).

It’s not comparable to murder because it’s much more likely that someone would be killed by you offering them a ride in your car than by swatting them.

Re: Amazon Ring cameras used in nationwide ‘swatting’ spree, US Justice Dept. says

#60

Post by naasking »

8note wrote: post #6
macintux wrote: post #4

I hope that at some point swatting becomes a felony akin to attempted murder.

Stopping the swatter doesn't do much, and still allows for people to be swatted. The thing that needs an overhaul is the decision making on when to actually send out the swat team. It's lazy, expensive, and dangerous to send them out for every opportunity without any investigation

> Stopping the swatter doesn't do much, and still allows for people to be swatted.

A record of high profile cases where swatters get caught and incarcerated would be a great deterrent.

Post reply on HN