Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Friday March 31 2017, @09:17PM   Printer-friendly
from the bad-precedent dept.

The visitors were from the FBI, and after a 90-minute search of his house, they left with his computers, only to return two months later with handcuffs. Now free on bond, Huddleston, 26, is scheduled to appear in a federal courtroom in Alexandria, Virginia on Friday for arraignment on federal charges of conspiracy and aiding and abetting computer intrusions.

Huddleston, though, isn’t a hacker. He’s the author of a remote administration tool, or RAT, called NanoCore that happens to be popular with hackers. NanoCore has been linked to intrusions in at least 10 countries, including an attack on Middle Eastern energy firms in 2015, and a massive phishing campaign last August in which the perpetrators posed as major oil and gas company. As Huddleston sees it, he’s a victim himself—hackers have been pirating his program for years and using it to commit crimes. But to the Justice Department, Huddleston is an accomplice to a spree of felonies.

Depending on whose view prevails, Huddleston could face prison time and lose his home, in a case that raises a novel question: when is a programmer criminally responsible for the actions of his users? “Everybody seems to acknowledge that this software product had a legitimate purpose,” says Travis Morrissey, a lawyer in Hot Springs who represented Huddleston at his bail hearing. “It’s like saying that if someone buys a handgun and uses it to rob a liquor store, that the handgun manufacturer is complicit.”

A conviction will set a sweeping legal precedent whereby car manufacturers can be sued if a car is used to kill, or a paper manufacturer can be sued if a scrap of paper is used to pass a ransom note.
.
.
.
Profit!


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by butthurt on Sunday April 02 2017, @03:09AM (1 child)

    by butthurt (6141) on Sunday April 02 2017, @03:09AM (#487801) Journal

    I suppose the other commenter won't answer. At a guess, what may have been meant was that the defendant's choice of an alias, and choice of Web forum, could be prejudicial against him because they contain the word "hack." Another possible meaning is that the online post by Mr. Huddleston, found by the prosecutor, is incriminating because it gives the appearance of assisting black hats.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday April 03 2017, @02:59PM

    by tangomargarine (667) on Monday April 03 2017, @02:59PM (#488207)

    Yeah, no -- it's not just that the site has "hack" in the name. It's literally a forum for people discussing making malware. And if you read the article, the guy was a regular member there, and announced the first release of the software to these guys.

    Then it goes on to say he didn't want it used for evil, but come on...what did you think would happen?

    --
    "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"