Unless I am expandable, I am expendable - Robert Schuller
|
|
|
Flight sim website tracks hacker
THE OUTFIT that ran a flight simulator website shut down by a cracker in May says it has presented a file of evidence to Inspector Knacker of the Yard which it claims contains "incontrovertible evidence" about the hacker's identity.
Avsim, a US firm, lost data held on two servers and the attack "effectively destroyed" the site, which is still being rebuilt.
According to the firm it expects that the criminal complaint it filed with London police will lead to the alleged hacker spending "time behind bars".
Of course if this was in the US, the hacker would be locked up for many decades in a 'get tough policy', which obviously has deterred so many crackers that website hacking is non-existant there.
Tom Allensworth told the Beeb that he would not name names, because in Blighty if you do you could stuff up a trial. However he said he had forensic evidence and provided that evidence to the London police.
The evidence was submitted on Monday to the Southwark division of the Metropolitan Police, which was "acting on behalf of another constabulary".
The US site, launched in 1996, covered all aspects of flight simulation, although its main focus was on Microsoft's Flight Simulator.
Avsim has spent $50,000 to bring its website back online since the 12 May attack, with $25,000 of that having been contributed by users.
It is fairly clear that the outfit has spoken to the hacker as it said it had given him or her "two opportunities to settle" which were ignored.
Allensworth said that Avsim is ratcheting this matter up to the next, criminal, level. µ
Share this:
Share
I'm sure he'll just whine and complain that he has Asperger's Syndrome, and then if he does get sentenced, he'll be released early on "compassionate" grounds without the government receiving anything in return.
"We know the bloke what did it"
They should because they hired him. There is a leetle-bit more to this tale of woe then is covered here.Somebody could be making out with the Blarney Stone.
WTF...with so many sleezy corps out there that would deserve being hacked and extorted and this scumbag attacks AvSim? Is it gaming or aviation that he hates most? Hacking is not bad in and of itself IMO but a-holes like this who attack "good" businesses deserve a thorough beating [unless he can prove that they screwed him in some unscrupulous way]. Although, I suppose that's why he doesn't attack sleezy businesses because they would likely give him that beating.
Furthermore, I agree with the others that any online business should be responsible enough to maintain a proper backup system.
Jeez, even I, a deranged American with absolutely no knowledge of English, know that the correct version is:
"We know the bloke what done it."
Get your Cockney right, mate!
I agree that not having offsite backup is dumb, but to punish them for it would simply be redundant as well as wrong. After all, they were attacked in May, and here they are in September, and they're still not back up to full capacity. Few businesses could survive that.
Here is the best non-computer scenario I can come up with that covers this situation: A kid throws a brick through a window to get inside your house and tag up everything while destroying your home entertainment system and computers. You find out who the kid is (by asking other kids whose tag it is) and turn that information over to the police.
Your suggestion is similar to saying: "The victim should also be punished for not having a second copy of their expensive stuff in an offsite storage facility!" Not exact, but similar.
My thought: The hacker didn't care that they didn't have offsite backup. If he assumed that they did, then he was an idiot. You take your victims as they are, not as you hope they will be, and should be punished as if you knew their status when you committed the crime.
Not having proper backup off site is as bad as having been hacked.
So half of the sentence would have to go to them.
"We know the bloke what did it"
I think you'll find it was a deliberate kind of coloquialism.
"We know the bloke what did it "
What??? I think the what should be "that"
Is it that hard to do a grammar check? It's like reading an article written by a child.
The sad thing is, if they do actually do anything against the sod which did this, the courts in this country will no doubt just say "naughty boy" and give them a £50 fine or something utterly silly.
I hope this so-called-hacker gets his/her arse kicked hard and has to pay back every penny spent on fixing the shit he/she caused these people (who did nothing to him/her); even if it takes 'it' the rest of 'its' life to do it!
Shame they're not going to do a McKinnon on 'it' too...
Love,
Dave xxx