Autistic UK Hacker faces being shipped out to the US.

[veloper]

He deleted sensitive files on a US government network,

We don't know that or cite your source.

 

[Megacherv]

"Hey, US Government? Here's my middle finger."

He committed a crime in Britain, as a British citizen, as such he should be tried in Britain, as a British citizen

I second that motion

 

[Borrowed Time]

He deleted sensitive files on a US government network,

We don't know that or cite your source.

oints at root_of_all_evil: Ask him, I'm going off what he said. I find it interesting that you call me out on it when I was responding to his statement of it.

 

[veloper]

He deleted sensitive files on a US government network,

We don't know that or cite your source.

oints at root_of_all_evil: Ask him, I'm going off what he said. I find it interesting that you call me out on it when I was responding to his statement of it.

You stated it as a fact, not as a hypothetical.
Still, let's wait and see if roae will give his source.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Firstly, I said at least trespassing, which is still a crime by the way.

See, this is where you're not making friends. Minor victories of syntax does not lead to an overall win, it just distracts from the topic at hand.

I also notice that you didn't seem it prudent to comment any more on my calling out of the library book example you gave.

Given that I'd already referred to it as an extended butchered metaphor, no I didn't.

I still haven't read one piece of text from any respectable source that this is considered a symptom.

What respectable sources have you read? I'd suggest reading books like Born on a Blue Day(factual) or The Curious Case of the Dog at Midnight(fictional)

Thirdly, my "passive aggressive" behavior was directed at your *snip* made in poor taste. If you want to keep it civil, do so yourself, thank you.

Doesn't make it right and certainly when you don't explain where I *snipped*. If you're talking about the Pokemon metaphor, I repeated it and implied that metaphors only work to explain to others, not as a parallel.

As was made in a comment earlier, he was scanning thousands of systems per minute for vulnerabilities, which you seemed to ignore completely. Having social limitations and not understanding people's emotional reactions in conversation doesn't justify these actions in any sense.

Look at that again. Thousands of systems per minute? Nah.

And concerning the Guantanamo Bay comment, ok yeah you've got me there. =P Although I do have to point out we're not the first nor the last nor the only country to have a situation like this going on. But of course, taking the extreme of any situation is always the best way to win an argument, amirite?

Which is why I said many countries have that. Doesn't matter which side of the fence you're on.

As for deletion of files, the US government have stated that as their reason for pursuing the case. Whether it's true or not...

 

[Borrowed Time]

*snip*

Making friends on an internet forum has never been my motive. All I was doing was pointing out the fact that he commited a crime. If you want to nitpick the "at least trespassing" comment till you're blue in the face, by all means, go for it. I was showing that he was in fact at fault of a criminal act in the least. Yes trespassing isn't an extraditable act, but he didn't just trespass, that's all.

I apologize for the comment made in poor taste. I took your "extended butchered metaphor" as an insulting *snip* of my attempt at explaining the situation through my metaphor. If that was not what was intended, then as I said, I apologize for the snide remark I made.

By respectable sources, I meant more then just random individuals making comments. I've checked a few different medical sites for symptoms related to Aspergers Syndrome and they've listed it as being akin to autism, in some cases related to autism, but not actually being a form of autism. Also, in their lists of symptoms, there's nothing concerning a sufferer's inability to recognize consequences. Even in the article I have listed below, which contains an interview with him, he states he knew exactly what he was doing and understood that it was illegal. Instead he viewed it as being "for the greater good". (the whole UFO search)

Here is one article that states the alleged deletion of files.

http://www.netmag.co.uk/zine/discover-interview/net-exclusive-interview-with-gary-mckinnon

"In one instance he?s alleged to have deleted files at a United States Naval Weapon Station shortly after the 9/11 attacks, rendering the base?s entire network of more than 300 machines inoperable."

Granted this seems to be a bit of a biased article but it at least has the information concerning the US Gov's accusations.

Here is the Crown Prosecution Service analysis of the evidence against McKinnon.

http://www.computerweekly.com/DowntimePDF/pdf/mckinnon.pdf?bcsi_scan_F62B596F1521F8A7=0&bcsi_scan_filename=mckinnon.pdf

He is alleged to have accessed 93 computers and scanned over 70,000. Erm, yeah, that's definitely scanning thousands of computers. They've in fact checked his IP's, the different accounts that are linked to him, which he has admittedly used, and the hash values of the Remotely Anywhere program he installed on the computers to gain access. Plenty of information there. Sure, these are allegations, but that's what a trial is for, right?

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

If you want to nitpick the "at least trespassing" comment till you're blue in the face, by all means, go for it.

Not at all. But what we're looking at here is not that he's done wrong (that's given), but the extreme punishment.

I apologize for the comment made in poor taste.

Accepted and returned.

I've checked a few different medical sites for symptoms related to Aspergers Syndrome and they've listed it as being akin to autism, in some cases related to autism, but not actually being a form of autism.

This is a major trouble. Most mental illnesses (if I'm allowed to call them that?) don't have those sort of things listed. Anorexics will often show symptoms of stress related injuries and kleptomania because of their habits but you won't find it listed. Autistics and Aspergers sufferers tend to move away from the outside world (as they find it too confusing) and justify things to themselves.

Instead he viewed it as being "for the greater good". (the whole UFO search)

Like that. It's not that he's above the law, it's just that he doesn't comprehend the law should apply to him. He's blind to social norms, rather than being aloof from them.

He is alleged to have accessed 93 computers and scanned over 70,000. Erm, yeah, that's definitely scanning thousands of computers. They've in fact checked his IP's, the different accounts that are linked to him, which he has admittedly used, and the hash values of the Remotely Anywhere program he installed on the computers to gain access. Plenty of information there. Sure, these are allegations, but that's what a trial is for, right?

Yeah but c'mon. Even with your best skills, could you manage 1,000 systems scanned? And this guy can do over 70,000 and access 93 of the TOP security in the whole US. He's Aspergers not Savantic.

But that's what the trial is for, as you say. What deeply - really deeply - concerns me is the spin that's going to be put on this for the American public. I'm pretty sure you're old enough to remember the case of Louise Woodward.

Despite being innocent (She had a polygraph test which proved she never hurt the child), her 15 year minimum jail sentence had her in jail for 279 days. This was back in 97.

In 2007, she was voted "most notorious criminal convicted in Massachusetts" and this whole trial was under the mistaken assumption that "popped" in English means the same as it does in American.

You can perhaps see why people are a little scared of sending this guy across the pond?

 

[Borrowed Time]

I've checked a few different medical sites for symptoms related to Aspergers Syndrome and they've listed it as being akin to autism, in some cases related to autism, but not actually being a form of autism.

This is a major trouble. Most mental illnesses (if I'm allowed to call them that?) don't have those sort of things listed. Anorexics will often show symptoms of stress related injuries and kleptomania because of their habits but you won't find it listed. Autistics and Aspergers sufferers tend to move away from the outside world (as they find it too confusing) and justify things to themselves.

Hrm, I was unaware of that. Are these things covered in the books you related? It's disturbing as well considering these are in essence medical journals and the like that are listing these as being the only symptoms and not showing any correlation between Aspergerse, etc... and other disorders.

Instead he viewed it as being "for the greater good". (the whole UFO search)

Like that. It's not that he's above the law, it's just that he doesn't comprehend the law should apply to him. He's blind to social norms, rather than being aloof from them.

That makes a bit more sense, although I still find it disturbing that he admits that he knew what he was doing was wrong. I guess that it's my inability to truly comprehend how his mind works. :shrug:

He is alleged to have accessed 93 computers and scanned over 70,000. Erm, yeah, that's definitely scanning thousands of computers. They've in fact checked his IP's, the different accounts that are linked to him, which he has admittedly used, and the hash values of the Remotely Anywhere program he installed on the computers to gain access. Plenty of information there. Sure, these are allegations, but that's what a trial is for, right?

Yeah but c'mon. Even with your best skills, could you manage 1,000 systems scanned? And this guy can do over 70,000 and access 93 of the TOP security in the whole US. He's Aspergers not Savantic.

I truly don't know. These are supposedly what they've traced his IP and hashed installed progams to. They have the reports and such and have the burden of proof. This also took place years ago and supposedly occured over the course of a full year. He could scan 200 computers a day, every day for a year and have scanned 73,000 computers in that time, so it is a possibility.

But that's what the trial is for, as you say. What deeply - really deeply - concerns me is the spin that's going to be put on this for the American public. I'm pretty sure you're old enough to remember the case of Louise Woodward.

Despite being innocent (She had a polygraph test which proved she never hurt the child), her 15 year minimum jail sentence had her in jail for 279 days. This was back in 97.

In 2007, she was voted "most notorious criminal convicted in Massachusetts" and this whole trial was under the mistaken assumption that "popped" in English means the same as it does in American.

You can perhaps see why people are a little scared of sending this guy across the pond?

Aye, I understand the issue with the term, but as I stated before in previous posts, the chances of this happening is very slim. In fact, there are many individuals who are proposing that the trial take place in the US, but the prison term (if there is one) be carried out back in England. Supposedly he has 8 counts filed against him and he can face up to 10 years in jail and a $250,000 fine for each one, referenced from here...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2464593.stm

Concerning the Woodward case, the defense seriously dropped the ball on it. Part of the issue was the fact that they didn't allow the jury to consider a manslaughter charge, only first or second degree murder. Secondly, why in the world would the defense put Woodward on the stand? Did they expect her to win over the jury? Considering she supposedly seemed "very carefully coached" and didn't come across as forthright, according to a Professor of Political Science at Brown University named Ross Cheit. (who is also an expert on the reporting of child abuse.) There seems to be a bit more to the case then the word "popped".

 

[Agema]

This is generating fury simply because the British have signed their end of what should be a mutual extradition treaty, whereas the US not only haven't, but almost certainly never will. As stands, it severely disadvantages UK citizens in comparison to the USA's.

Despite his Aspergers, he's committed a crime, as he freely admits, and should be prepared to pay the penalty. It's clearly legally acceptable for him to be tried in the US (I'd suspect because the location of the crime rather than the individual committing it matters) so he's beholden to their laws. Whatever misgivings some members of the public have with the inadequacies or vengeance mindset that possibly exist within the US legal system is also neither here nor there. Legally, the British government don't actually have a good reason to refuse extradition, because they voted into law their side of this lopsided treaty.

What the UK government should do is prepare a legislative vote to kick out this treaty they signed, or at least put it on hold until such a time as the US signs it too. (Which they evidently don't want to do, probably because they don't have the balls to stand up to the US.) After that, they could possibly deny extradition just on principle to make it clear they don't appreciate the imbalance in the system, but I don't know whether that would be legal or, again, whether they have the balls to do it.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Hrm, I was unaware of that. Are these things covered in the books you related? It's disturbing as well considering these are in essence medical journals and the like that are listing these as being the only symptoms and not showing any correlation between Aspergerse, etc... and other disorders.

The thing is that these aren't medical issues. Failure to relate to the outside world is part of schizophrenia and a number of other conditions. Medically there's very little known about it that isn't inferred from Autism and if you take a quick look at the film Rainman you can get a very very approximate idea of the effect. Simply put, A/S sufferers fixate on things and can get massively upset (even to the standard of assaulting people) purely based on changes in their environment.

He is alleged to have accessed 93 computers and scanned over 70,000. Erm, yeah, that's definitely scanning thousands of computers. They've in fact checked his IP's, the different accounts that are linked to him, which he has admittedly used, and the hash values of the Remotely Anywhere program he installed on the computers to gain access. Plenty of information there. Sure, these are allegations, but that's what a trial is for, right?

Yeah but c'mon. Even with your best skills, could you manage 1,000 systems scanned? And this guy can do over 70,000 and access 93 of the TOP security in the whole US. He's Aspergers not Savantic.

I truly don't know. These are supposedly what they've traced his IP and hashed installed progams to. They have the reports and such and have the burden of proof. This also took place years ago and supposedly occured over the course of a full year. He could scan 200 computers a day, every day for a year and have scanned 73,000 computers in that time, so it is a possibility.

It's possible, but really really unlikely unless he's actually housebound and having an OCD episode. And if that is the case, it's not like there's not enough "real" material on the existence of UFO's. If he can literally walk through all their security where no-one else can, then something smells rotten.

But that's what the trial is for, as you say. What deeply - really deeply - concerns me is the spin that's going to be put on this for the American public. I'm pretty sure you're old enough to remember the case of Louise Woodward.

Despite being innocent (She had a polygraph test which proved she never hurt the child), her 15 year minimum jail sentence had her in jail for 279 days. This was back in 97.

In 2007, she was voted "most notorious criminal convicted in Massachusetts" and this whole trial was under the mistaken assumption that "popped" in English means the same as it does in American.

You can perhaps see why people are a little scared of sending this guy across the pond?

Aye, I understand the issue with the term, but as I stated before in previous posts, the chances of this happening is very slim.

OK, let's say you're the squad of marines sent across to pick up a rogue hacker after the events of 9/11, and this guy starts freaking out because he's scared stiff. Then imagine being taken to an American court where the prosecution says that this guy is a threat to National Security but he can't tell you why. You know full well what the American media will do to this case, as you've already seen MJ, OJ and Woodward's "cases".

That alone would be enough to lay anyone here into counselling for the rest of their days.

In fact, there are many individuals who are proposing that the trial take place in the US, but the prison term (if there is one) be carried out back in England. Supposedly he has 8 counts filed against him and he can face up to 10 years in jail and a $250,000 fine for each one, referenced from here...

So...he's a dead man then. 46+ anything more than 20 years in jail ends his life.

Concerning the Woodward case, the defense seriously dropped the ball on it. Part of the issue was the fact that they didn't allow the jury to consider a manslaughter charge, only first or second degree murder. Secondly, why in the world would the defense put Woodward on the stand? Did they expect her to win over the jury? Considering she supposedly seemed "very carefully coached" and didn't come across as forthright, according to a Professor of Political Science at Brown University named Ross Cheit. (who is also an expert on the reporting of child abuse.) There seems to be a bit more to the case then the word "popped".

Oh yeah, there was a whole litany of disasters, but if you look into the original case, the only reason that the claim wasn't chucked out of court was that she used the word "popped", which in English means 'placed' and in American means 'thumped'.

Now, on the jury stand, you have a guy that's petrified, and being accused of terrorism in an unfamiliar climate with a media storm whipped up to frenzy, and whose last big name to appear was Saddam, who was killed.

Don't you think that you're basically condemning him to death for showing up the American Military? If he can access 70,000 computers over a year, how safe do you feel knowing those same computers hold your nukes in place?

This is a show trial against cybercrime. Mckinnon is only a scapegoat.

 

[ragamuffingirl]

that's a bit harsh. He didn't know the severity of what he was doing, he couldn't stop himslef, and now america's all like: yeah, he did something bad, we don't care if he's retarded, just bring him in.

In my humble opinion.

Not retarded.

 

[Rolling Thunder]

On a lighter note, who wishes to join me in my campaign to re-occupy our rebellious colonies?

 

[Jamash]

On a lighter note, who wishes to join me in my campaign to re-occupy our rebellious colonies?

I'm up for it.

You warm up the 56k Modem and get the pizza, I'll bring the beer and my DVD's of Rain Man and The X-Files box set.

We'll have them on their knees by this time next week.

 

[Borrowed Time]

*snip*

Sorry, was at home on my days off and almost never check the escapist unless I'm at work.

Call me compassionless, but I really don't feel for this guy. :shrug: I don't hear news stories all that often about A/S or Autistic patients stealing this or doing that. This is an extreme case.

Scanning 70,000 computers doesn't mean accessing them. He only accessed 93, big difference. Scanning means that he checked them for vulnerabilities, and failed. So yeah I feel pretty good about our "nuke codes" if 69,907 government computers were in fact safe. That's a pretty good percentile ya know, %99.87.

I don't care how old anyone is, if they did the crime, :shrug: oh well. If a 95 year old man fell asleep at the wheel while driving and injured 2 ppl by crossing the median (not even killed), I sure as hell wouldn't let him off the hook. What the hell was he doing driving? What the hell was this guy doing getting into government computers. (yes i know, UFO's, making my point}

The big thing for me is that he doesn't just get a slap on the wrist. I don't care what he has or doesn't have, he screwed up, he needs to deal with it. If he'll get at least some time and a fine or something in the English courts, then fine. Personally, I'm afraid of there being a biased trial where because he didn't do anything to England and it was only to the US that he'll get an even more lenient setup. I don't care about whether he's a scapegoat or not. I do care about people having to deal with the consequences of their actions.

Honestly, you aren't going to change my opinion and I'm not going to change yours. I'm a compassionless bastard who feels that people should be responsible for their actions no matter the circumstances, you're a compassionate person who can see past all the crap and give a damn about someone. Guess we should just leave it at that. =)

On a lighter note, who wishes to join me in my campaign to re-occupy our rebellious colonies?

Don't make us kick your butt again. The French won't be so nice this time either. ^_^

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Honestly, you aren't going to change my opinion and I'm not going to change yours. I'm a compassionless bastard who feels that people should be responsible for their actions no matter the circumstances, you're a compassionate person who can see past all the crap and give a damn about someone. Guess we should just leave it at that. =)

Fair enough, I have to try though. You may have noticed the username is a bit of a misnomer.

 

[Superbeast]

Here is one article that states the alleged deletion of files.

http://www.netmag.co.uk/zine/discover-interview/net-exclusive-interview-with-gary-mckinnon

"In one instance he?s alleged to have deleted files at a United States Naval Weapon Station shortly after the 9/11 attacks, rendering the base?s entire network of more than 300 machines inoperable."

Granted this seems to be a bit of a biased article but it at least has the information concerning the US Gov's accusations.

Here is the Crown Prosecution Service analysis of the evidence against McKinnon.

http://www.computerweekly.com/DowntimePDF/pdf/mckinnon.pdf?bcsi_scan_F62B596F1521F8A7=0&bcsi_scan_filename=mckinnon.pdf

He is alleged to have accessed 93 computers and scanned over 70,000. Erm, yeah, that's definitely scanning thousands of computers. They've in fact checked his IP's, the different accounts that are linked to him, which he has admittedly used, and the hash values of the Remotely Anywhere program he installed on the computers to gain access. Plenty of information there. Sure, these are allegations, but that's what a trial is for, right?

Do you know what I think is truly terrifying?

It's not that this man was able to hack into what are supposedly the most secure computer systems in the world with a small amount of computer knowledge and a script found on google...

...it's the fact he's been doing it (according to the article/quote) since 11th September 2001 (allegedly hacking the naval computer and deleting files shortly after 9/11 attack) and they've only just caught him...

How bad is their security, and who the hell else has been in their systems are questions the American public should be far, far more concerned with.

++EDIT++

That .PDF linked to details he was initially arrested in 2001 and interviewed in both 2001 and 2002, and that's when the discussions about extradition took place. Why is this coming up now, and why has it taken 7-8 years? Hell, it's not even "new"s any more (and blows my nice hyperbolic comments above out the water too).

The stuff about Hackers from China being in the system is a concern as well.

The big thing for me is that he doesn't just get a slap on the wrist. I don't care what he has or doesn't have, he screwed up, he needs to deal with it. If he'll get at least some time and a fine or something in the English courts, then fine. Personally, I'm afraid of there being a biased trial where because he didn't do anything to England and it was only to the US that he'll get an even more lenient setup. I don't care about whether he's a scapegoat or not. I do care about people having to deal with the consequences of their actions.

*snip*

Don't make us kick your butt again. The French won't be so nice this time either. ^_^

So you are concerned that he'll be let off in the English courts (unlikely since he's comfessed to the crime - it's more likely his condition will be taken into consideration and he'd escape incarcaration, but not punishment) but don't care if the American system daemonises him and gives him maximum sentence - far more than his crime deserves - for the purpose of public deterrant (aka making him a scapegoat)? Wow, that's harsh.

As for the French - they don't like you so much any more after the whole "french fries > freedom fries campaign and other Iraq war disagreements. They'd most likely root for us, then declare war on the spoils of victory

 

[SmartIdiot]

British, British Person

Bloody hell, just leave him alone
HES AUTISTIC FOR FUCKS SAKES

Even an autistic person can learn the simple rules of law. Like an animal, they don't have to understand why something is wrong, but just know not to do it. Leaving him alone would just be an excuse for bad behaviour.

Er, what? So you think people should just be conditioned into thinking a certain way even if they're not sure why? What the hell is wrong with you?

No he should not have hacked into the computers, although I don't see what America's got to hide anyway. Keeping secrets is bad people. However, his intentions were not malicious and this needs to be taken into account aswell. Oh yeah and given that he left notes on the computers to bring the security flaws to their attention I'd say he balanced it out by doing them a favour. Autistic people are wired differently, they have a different way of thinking. It's clear as fucking day that this man knew what he was doing but perhaps could not comprehend the depth of what would follow given the state of international security at the time and perhaps did not even take that into account when he did it. He does not deserve to be punished in this way.