 skatetechAka DillholePremium
join:2002-07-31
Louisville, KY | Uncapping=Bad, FBI=Worse The men and boys broke their TOS, so cut their service. They stole bandwidth, well... what was their plan's speeds? How much extra did they usurp?
Their is a particular dollar amount before theft becomes a felonious offense. That amount, I think, varies from state-to-state. Lets say they took double their allotted amount, and say that is $50/month. Then that means they stole 50/month. Multiply 50 by 6 (As early as Jan 1 until June) and you have $300. Here in Kentucky, again if my memory serves me, the amount has to be above 300 to be felonious.
This doesn't seem to me to be a true FBI deserving cybercrime. No true cracking was committed. Sure, they modified there modems, but did they own them? Hmm. Their increasing of their bandwidth did nothing to endanger/hurt other citizens.
I personally think that their service should have been cut, and the problem handled by the local authorities or in a lawsuit. This is another example of America misplacing its resources. Just backs up the theory that if you want to steal, you need a white-collar upper-management job, so in the end you get nothing but a slap on the wrist, or a vacation at a plush holding center (many are not truly deserving of the word prison.) Just my opinions... |
|
 Hayward K A R - 1 2 0 CPremium
join:2000-07-13
Key West, FL
kudos:1 | said by skatetech:
Their increasing of their bandwidth did nothing to endanger/hurt other citizens.
BULL... if they were all in one area, good chance their neighbors downstream were dealing with dial-up speeds while they were onlne.
--
»haywardm.com (Hayward's Key West) |
|
skatetechAka DillholePremium
join:2002-07-31
Louisville, KY | I am aware of how cable nodes use distributed bandwidth. We just do not know their plan's speeds or the actual speeds they saw before and after. But, yes if they all were operating at double the allotted bandwidth, and on the same node then others in the area would creep. Although it is a slim chance they were all grouped together, it is possible. It is still not truly cracking or a security threat to others deserving the use of the FBI.
--
"Ignorance is bliss." Oh! That's why I am so damn angry. |
|
Hayward K A R - 1 2 0 CPremium
join:2000-07-13
Key West, FL
kudos:1
| We also don't know what else they may have been doing...
no offense to anyone but extreme bandwidth hogs are usually doing something illegal.... extreme music/film distribution (not just download), porn or something like that. ( sort of suspect that due to machines being confiscated, etc.) That, the cable company might not be interested in per se but just want to make the example of over the service theft issue, and pressing / publicizing those charges.
Also since ISPs and where data goes, are interstate operations, that would involve federal agencies.
--
»haywardm.com (Hayward's Key West)
[text was edited by author 2002-11-02 16:09:21] |
|
skatetechAka DillholePremium
join:2002-07-31
Louisville, KY | said by Hayward:
no offense to anyone but extreme bandwidth hogs are usually doing something illegal.... extreme music distribution (not just download), porn or something like that. ( sort of suspect that due to machines being confiscated, etc.) That, the cable company might not be interested in per se but just want to make the example of over the service theft issue, and pressing / publicizing those charges.
Also since ISPs and where data goes, are interstate operations, that would involve federal agencies.
All very valid points. The lawyer may have been using VPN for work, but due to his previous run-in with the law, that is unlikely. So, I guess you have changed my mind until/unless we learn more details. I am not sure why, but I completely overlooked the interstate portion of their crime. The connections as you say probably were being used for highly illegal purposes. I guess any time I here of FEDs being sent in when it doesn't involve cracking, I get defensive. Thanks for the insight.
--
"Ignorance is bliss." Oh! That's why I am so damn angry. |
|
|
|
| reply to skatetech
I think the FBI was probably mislead as to the nature of the offense. They probably were led to believe that these guys were breaking into cable company computers to get more bandwidth. When it comes out in court that all they did is modify their own modem on their own premises, the FBI is _not_ going to be happy at looking stupid along with Buckeye cable.
Sort of like the E911 case where the documents the govt was told were worth millions turned out to be for sale to the public for $13. |
|
 marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | reply to Hayward
They were not all grouped together. The newspaper article published all their home addresses (as well as their names, places of employement for some of them, and the addresses of the jueveniles in the original arrest article).
They were spread out with no more than 2 of them per city.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://whip.isca.uiowa.edu
or Go to
»isca.whiteboard.net for more information (and java telnet access) |
|
marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | reply to skatetech
said by skatetech:
All very valid points. The lawyer may have been using VPN for work, but due to his previous run-in with the law, that is unlikely.
You do realize his previous run-in with the law was for stealing coffee, cream, and paper from the village supplies. The police chief was forced to resign over the incident.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://whip.isca.uiowa.edu
or Go to
»isca.whiteboard.net for more information (and java telnet access) |
|
skatetechAka DillholePremium
join:2002-07-31
Louisville, KY | .. I understand that the previous incident was trivial. I think I really find myself at an ethical/logical crossroads here. I, as a youth, had many run-ins with the Johnny Law. I also know that even though I might have stolen, I would have never had the gall to attempt anything major, or that would directly effect another human in a negative way. I also know that many things I did were petty theft, but there were instances where it went beyond that. So just because you commit a petty crime, it does not mean you wont commit a greater one. Though committing a crime does not mean you will commit more.
Sorry, I cant make a finite decision. Hmm. This situation is a truly perplexing one. I do not think the Feds should have been brought in, but according to the laws regarding interstate crimes the probably should have been. And as I hinted before I flip-flopped, most likely their uses of this bandwidth (still an undetermined amount) were probably not for highly illegal purposes.
I truly am split here. I try and see all sides. I guess too many assumptions are made by either side. I am glad I am not a judge who will have to handle this case. In the end, I return to my initial stance of feeling FBI use was overzealous, but I am open to changing that when and if more facts emerge.
--
"Ignorance is bliss." Oh! That's why I am so damn angry. |
|
Hayward K A R - 1 2 0 CPremium
join:2000-07-13
Key West, FL
kudos:1 | reply to marigolds
Re: Uncapping=Bad, FBI=Worse said by marigolds:
You do realize his previous run-in with the law was for stealing coffee, cream, and paper from the village supplies. The police chief was forced to resign over the incident.
Or to look at it conversely (that was often applied to Clinton's minor sexual error... much more wrongly) what else might they do if they would break the law for such a minor thing. (LIKE HE might ESCALATE to the NIXON level or real crime...not picking parties here... truth be told INDIE, but more often find wanting to vote for Dems.)
--
»haywardm.com (Hayward's Key West) |
|
 dasesq
join:2001-10-07
Long Beach, CA | reply to skatetech
It's interesting that if you uncap a cable modem you're bad. If the cable company fails to provide the service you pay for it's not.
My cable has been down off and on, and often don't get the speeds I pay for (I know the contract gets them off the hook for this) so wouldn't it be just and fair and within the TOS if I uncap to get what I'm supposed to get? |
|
skatetechAka DillholePremium
join:2002-07-31
Louisville, KY | I understand your sentiments, and am in no way trying to defend the cable companies. I do believe they should forced to have at least a small measure of quality control. I have a belief that all broadband providers should be held to a "75%" rule. Meaning that the service provided should reach, consistently, at least 75% of the advertised plan, and be up for at least 75% of the time.
Even if uncapping brought you up to the levels advertised by your company, it most likely states, that if they own the modem, that you are not allowed to modify it. I say that uncapping is bad because, generally, people do attempt to exceed their caps, and in this modern Patriot Act era who know what the government will accuse you of using the connection for. Again, just my thoughts/opinions...
--
"Ignorance is bliss." Oh! That's why I am so damn angry. |
|
| reply to skatetech
Does anybody know what was there before and after speeds? |
|
skatetechAka DillholePremium
join:2002-07-31
Louisville, KY | No. If you follow this link to the next article/responses on that occurrence: »Nailed to the Wall
In the articles accompanying it, you will notice outlandish dollar estimates for the bandwidth, but no actual speeds. You would think if it really was worth so much, they would have given the actual speeds, but...
--
"Ignorance is bliss." Oh! That's why I am so damn angry. |
|
