The FBI raided the home of Mateo D’Amato, a renowned computer scientist specializing in cryptography and anonymity technologies, and seized several electronic devices. D’Amato has since vanished, becoming incommunicado with colleagues and family. His university profile has been removed, and the institution refuses to comment, further deepening the mystery surrounding his disappearance and the reason for the FBI's interest. D’Amato's research focused on areas with potential national security implications, but no details regarding the investigation have been released.
This FBI file release details Kevin Mitnik's activities and the subsequent investigation leading to his 1995 arrest. It documents alleged computer intrusions, theft of software and electronic documents, and wire fraud, primarily targeting various telecommunications companies and universities. The file includes warrants, investigative reports, and correspondence outlining Mitnik's methods, the damage caused, and the extensive resources employed to track and apprehend him. It paints a picture of Mitnik as a skilled and determined hacker who posed a significant threat to national security and corporate interests at the time.
HN users discuss Mitnick's portrayal in the media versus the reality presented in the released FBI files. Some commenters express skepticism about the severity of Mitnick's crimes, suggesting they were exaggerated by the media and law enforcement, particularly during the pre-internet era when public understanding of computer systems was limited. Others point out the significant resources expended on his pursuit, questioning whether it was proportionate to his actual offenses. Several users note the apparent lack of evidence for financial gain from Mitnick's activities, framing him more as a curious explorer than a malicious actor. The overall sentiment leans towards viewing Mitnick as less of a criminal mastermind and more of a skilled hacker who became a scapegoat and media sensation due to public fear and misunderstanding of early computer technology.
The FBI and Dutch police have disrupted the "Manipulaters," a large phishing-as-a-service operation responsible for stealing millions of dollars. The group sold phishing kits and provided infrastructure like bulletproof hosting, allowing customers to easily deploy and manage phishing campaigns targeting various organizations, including banks and online retailers. Law enforcement seized 14 domains used by the gang and arrested two individuals suspected of operating the service. The investigation involved collaboration with several private sector partners and focused on dismantling the criminal infrastructure enabling widespread phishing attacks.
Hacker News commenters largely praised the collaborative international effort to dismantle the Manipulaters phishing gang. Several pointed out the significance of seizing infrastructure like domain names and bulletproof hosting providers, noting this is more effective than simply arresting individuals. Some discussed the technical aspects of the operation, like the use of TOX for communication and the efficacy of taking down such a large network. A few expressed skepticism about the long-term impact, predicting that the criminals would likely resurface with new infrastructure. There was also interest in the Dutch police's practice of sending SMS messages to potential victims, alerting them to the compromise and urging them to change passwords. Finally, several users criticized the lack of detail in the article about how the gang was ultimately disrupted, expressing a desire to understand the specific techniques employed by law enforcement.
A 19-year-old, Zachary Lee Morgenstern, pleaded guilty to swatting-for-hire charges, potentially facing up to 20 years in prison. He admitted to placing hoax emergency calls to schools, businesses, and individuals across the US between 2020 and 2022, sometimes receiving payment for these actions through online platforms. Morgenstern's activities disrupted communities and triggered large-scale law enforcement responses, including a SWAT team deployment to a university. He is scheduled for sentencing in March 2025.
Hacker News commenters generally express disgust at the swatter's actions, noting the potential for tragedy and wasted resources. Some discuss the apparent ease with which swatting is carried out and question the 20-year potential sentence, suggesting it seems excessive compared to other crimes. A few highlight the absurdity of swatting stemming from online gaming disputes, and the immaturity of those involved. Several users point out the role of readily available personal information online, enabling such harassment, and question the security practices of the targeted individuals. There's also some debate about the practicality and effectiveness of legal deterrents like harsh sentencing in preventing this type of crime.
Summary of Comments ( 159 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43527001
Hacker News users discussed the implications of the FBI raid and subsequent disappearance of the computer scientist, expressing concern over the lack of public information and potential chilling effects on academic research. Some speculated about the reasons behind the raid, ranging from national security concerns to more mundane possibilities like grant fraud or data mismanagement. Several commenters questioned the university's swift removal of the scientist's webpage, viewing it as an overreaction and potentially damaging to his reputation. Others pointed out the difficulty of drawing conclusions without knowing the specifics of the investigation, advocating for cautious observation until more information emerges. The overall sentiment leaned towards concern for the scientist's well-being and apprehension about the precedent this sets for academic freedom.
The Hacker News post titled "FBI raids home of prominent computer scientist who has gone incommunicado" (linking to an Ars Technica article about the disappearance of Dr. Yingying (Jennifer) Chen) has generated a significant number of comments discussing various aspects of the situation. Many commenters express concern over the lack of information and the chilling effect this kind of action could have on academic research and international collaboration.
Several commenters focus on the potential implications of the FBI raid and Chen's subsequent disappearance. Some speculate about possible reasons, ranging from intellectual property theft to espionage, while acknowledging the absence of publicly available evidence. Others caution against jumping to conclusions and emphasize the importance of due process and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. The secrecy surrounding the case fuels speculation and anxieties.
A recurring theme in the comments is the potential damage to academic freedom and international collaboration. Commenters worry that incidents like this could deter foreign researchers from working in the US or collaborating with American institutions. Some express concerns that the incident could exacerbate existing tensions between the US and China.
Some commenters question the proportionality of the FBI's response, particularly given the lack of publicly disclosed information about the nature of the alleged wrongdoing. They highlight the potential for such raids to disrupt research, damage reputations, and cause significant personal distress even if the individual is ultimately exonerated.
A few commenters offer alternative perspectives, suggesting that the lack of public information might indicate the sensitivity or complexity of the investigation. They argue that it's premature to criticize the FBI's actions without a clearer understanding of the circumstances.
Many comments dissect the Ars Technica article itself, pointing out what they perceive as journalistic shortcomings, such as the reliance on anonymous sources and the lack of concrete details. Some commenters express frustration with the article's focus on speculation rather than verifiable facts.
Finally, several commenters offer practical advice and support, sharing information about legal resources and expressing solidarity with Chen and her family. There's a palpable sense of concern within the community for Chen's well-being and the broader implications of her disappearance. The comments reflect a desire for transparency and a cautious approach to judgment in the absence of confirmed information.