Hacker 'Guccifer,' Who Uncovered Clinton's Private Emails, To Be Extradited To US (rt.com) 210
schwit1 writes: Guccifer, the infamous Romanian hacker who accessed emails of celebrities and top US officials, will be extradited to the United States after losing a case in his home country's top court. Reuters reports that Lehel will come to the US under an 18-month extradition order, following a request made by the US authorities. Details of the extradition have not been made public, however. Marcel Lehel, a 42-year-old hacker better known by his pseudonym "Guccifer," achieved notoriety when he released an email with images of paintings by former President George W. Bush, including a self-portrait in a bathtub. He also hacked and published emails from celebrities Leonardo DiCaprio, Steve Martin and Mariel Hemingway. Perhaps most notably, Lehel was also the first source to uncover Hillary Clinton's improper use of a private email account while she was Secretary of State, which the FBI is investigating as a potential danger to national security.
This site is so biased now! (Score:5, Funny)
"Clinton's improper use of a private email"
No. If that was true, the FBI would have charged her long ago.
Re: This site is so biased now! (Score:5, Funny)
Exactly. She already confirmed she did nothing wrong.
Re: This site is so biased now! (Score:5, Insightful)
If she did nothing wrong, then neither did he. If she actually did something wrong -- like exposing state secrets to Romanian hackers -- then she goes to jail, and he is a whistleblower, a Romanian hero who did a great favor to American people.
Re: This site is so biased now! (Score:4, Insightful)
then she goes to jail
As if! She's far too rich and far too white to go to jail in the US.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: This site is so biased now! (Score:5, Funny)
"The republicans can't have it both ways" - you have a LOT to learn about Republicans.
Re: This site is so biased now! (Score:5, Insightful)
It depends. If Powell and Rice were also sending classified information using private email, then yes, they should also go to jail. If they used personal email for non-classified correspondence then they violated retention policy, not the law.
Re: (Score:2)
Were the circumstances exactly the same? Sending classified materials to non-governmental email servers without authorization?
If so, then you are absolutely correct - they should see the inside of a courtroom just the same. "But my political opposition did it first" is not a valid legal defense, no matter how much some politicians and their sycophants would like it to be.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, the law on private e-mail servers was changed after Powell and Rice. It was also changed after Clinton. If Kerry or future Sec.States did it, it would be illegal. Under Clinton/Powell/Rice, it was legal.
Re: This site is so biased now! (Score:5, Insightful)
If she did nothing wrong, then neither did he.
Maybe he did. Maybe he didn't. It depends on how exactly he unearthed details of Clinton's personal server.
From TFS:
Hillary Clinton's improper use of a private email account while she was Secretary of State, which the FBI is investigating as a potential danger to national security.
I suspect that, if Lehel actually got into the server, the hacking charges might be dropped in exchange for his testimony. His viewing classified data, or even getting that close as a foreign national will be used as the evidence of damage in a trial against Hillary. It goes from a potential danger where 'sensitive material could have been at risk' to an actual incident.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Non-sequitur. It does not follow, for those playing the home game. Hacking an account is illegal. To say that if she'd not had encrypted email on there that it is not a crime is, well... Stupid. I'm not sure who moderated you up.
Even if she had done no wrong, his actions are still illegal. They are different crimes (maybe) but they are still going to be charged with other crimes.
Re: This site is so biased now! (Score:5, Insightful)
> Hacking an account is illegal.
Oh, really? Then may I ask for the extradition of the entire NSA staff for hacking the accounts of French, German and Japanese politicians?
Re: (Score:2)
+5 Insightful
Re: This site is so biased now! (Score:5, Informative)
NSA doesn't do warrants - they're spies. The FBI may require warrants but they don't operate outside the USA.
FBI says they operate internationally. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The NSA uses warrants. They are processed by the FISA court in accordance with the FISA act.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, yes the land of the free's Star Chamber.
Those warrants aren't supposed to be used against friendly foreign countries, are they?
Re: This site is so biased now! (Score:5, Insightful)
As a professional systems administrator, The entire concept of a foreign government compromising my accounts or my companies private computing infrastructure because national security. That there is some special group of privileged people who are above the law, above morality, above redress is the very definition of a totalitarian regime .
Thanks to Snowden, we discovered Law Enforcement in the US were cheating via "Parallel construction" of court cases. Ever since then, many of their toys and tactics have been coming into question.
The reason this guy is being extradited isn't because he hacked some celebrities and the aristocracy wants revenge. It's because he compromised the accounts of a high ranking government official which can lead to compromising peace at the worst and at best cause trust and jobs to be lost. The spin here is also outrageous; they add in that celebrities line to get the bleeding hearts to follow suit on the retardation.
Re: (Score:2)
> Hacking an account is illegal.
Oh, really? Then may I ask for the extradition of the entire NSA staff for hacking the accounts of French, German and Japanese politicians?
Nothing is illegal when you're friends with enough soldiers.
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing is illegal when you can buy enough legislators.
I don't think friendship is sufficient, I think they expect financial reward.
Re: (Score:2)
What the NSA does is not illegal (at US law) since they have explicit statutory permission to do it.
It's not treated as illegal since they won't be prosecuted for it.
Re: (Score:2)
If you haven't been able to work out the difference between "illegal" and "illegal with a powerful enough government/agency backing you up" by now...
Re: (Score:2)
Hacking an account is illegal.
Oh, really? Then may I ask for the extradition of the entire NSA staff for hacking the accounts of French, German and Japanese politicians?
Please. I would gladly support this action. Even if you can't get the low level guys even getting the ones at the top would be worthwhile, unfortunately, French, German, and Japanese jails are far too nice for these people.
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely, be my guest. I'll even help fund their trip to your particular country so that you can try them there.
I'm not sure what your point is.
Re: (Score:2)
That's well and good and has nothing to do with my post. Her breaking the law does not mean he didn't break the law. This shouldn't be complicated for you. You should have learned this in Kindergarten.
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit alarm!
Bullshit alarm!
We have here a case of utter bullshit being spouted!
No, the information was HUMINT, it was classified at the source and had the classification markings removed. HUMINT is always classified top secret as exposing it would expose the source, who would be arrested or killed for revealing the information.
http://hotair.com/archives/201... [hotair.com]
Trying to claim that these emails were retroactively classified shows your lack of knowledge of how the system works.
Re: (Score:2)
Most of the classified emails made public so far (after appropriate scrubbing) were classified at the time they were sent.
Things like foreign intelligence information, CIA asset details etc. are considered 'born classified' meaning the documents were classified as soon as they were created. Other things like State Department schedules can be retroactively classified if something important happens and they want to cover up who was present. Since both types of documents exist in Hilary's email cache the 're
Re: (Score:2)
I'm okay with that logic.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We can only hope! She is a sociopath, a megalomaniac. I find it incredible that she runs for president.
Why is this surprising? Most people who run for President are megalomaniacs—they believe they are qualified to be President
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
100% correct. The only way you can run a successful nationwide election campaign is if you truly believe that you have all the solutions, and that everyone else is less capable. How else would you ever get > 50M people to vote for you?
Re: This site is so biased now! (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly. She already confirmed she did nothing wrong.
This is Guccifer's problem. If he would just come out and confirm that he did nothing wrong in a press conference then it would all go away.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
There's a documentary called "The Worst Town on the Internet" and it has him in there. He didn't think he did much wrong and was pissed about having gotten a long sentence in his come country. He's gotta be right pissed now that he's gotta come to the US and face more time.
Re: (Score:3)
Unless he comes to the US, and cuts a deal in order to testify as to what he found on Clinton's email server while hacking it, e.g. testify that he saw classified documents that weren't there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:This site is so biased now! (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
That link is of a conversation where she tells an aide to remove the classified material and headers.
Effectively, she told the aide to do something similar to the process where documents are released redacted. If the classified portion of the material is removed before transmission, the remainder is no longer classified and can be transmitted.
Seriously, if it were as simple as portrayed, this would be a non-issue because she would have been charged.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I work with classified shit everyday. And as much as you may want her to not be guilty as sin....she is. if I did just 1% of what she did I'd be in prison already without any chance of ever getting out. She thinks she can do whatever she wants and not be held accountable to the law like the rest of us. That isn't the way this system is suppose to work, there isn't one set of laws for the "important" people and one for the commoners, it's one set for all of us and I REALLY hope she goes to prison for lif
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Not saying that is d
Re: (Score:2)
Dailymail has not proven to be a reliable source.
Yeap (and that has nothing to do with being 'liberal' or 'conservative,' it's just plain unreliable). I was reticent to post it, but it had copies of the actual emails in the article, so you can ignore the text and focus on the emails themselves.
Anyway, certain communications are classified by default, and apparently those showed up in her emails too.
Anyway, the cleanest way to deal with it would be to wait until after she wins/loses the election to indict her, so it doesn't put too much influence on
Re: (Score:2)
One interesting aspect of the case: it shows that working for the government can be dangerous. If she had been working for a private company, at worst she would have been fired (maybe sued). But working for the government, suddenly the full weight of the law can fall on you like a ton of bricks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The answers as the FBI will consider:
1) Probably multiple people
2) Likely yes as reports indicate information that is classified when it is created was in the emails on her server.
3) If the Secretary of State can't identify classified information when she sees it, then she is incompetent to handle classified information. If she couldn't identify it and didn't bother to ask government agents whose job is specifically to rule whether or not information should be classified, she is incompetent to handle any se
Re: (Score:3)
you forgot:
7. Did she knowingly direct employees of the US Department of State to forward classified information through the private email server?
Which also sounds like 'yes', but I'm waiting to hear something other than rumor and innuendo before making a final decision.
Re: (Score:2)
They are refusing to do their job in order to keep a cloud over her candidacy. They are influencing an election.
What? This would have been over years ago if SHE hadn't deliberately stonewalled and dragged her feet on compliance not only with the requirement that she turn over all her records as she left office, but promptly honored requests associated with all sorts of FOIA, investigative, and even subpoena demands. She's the one that caused this to be happening during campaign season, not Obama's DoJ/FBI people.
General Alexander to be extradited next? (Score:2, Funny)
No?
just remember... (Score:5, Insightful)
you are free to hack and extort from the little people, just don't mess with the people running the show or they will burn you alive. he would have been safer and richer if he just proliferated ransomware.
Re: (Score:2)
Shame on Romania (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I have been to prison, I have ben in most other countries.
You are wrong, prison in the US is nasty, just one step above death. Life in other countries is as good or better than life in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Life in other countries is as good or better than life in the US.
Which explains why a country of 321,000,000 people has an immigrant population of 61,00,000. They're just confused and thought they were heading somewhere else, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Prosecuted for what? Exposing the stupidity of US politicians is not a crime in Romania
I can guess getting unauthorized access to an information system is probably an offense in Romania. And the attacked party an claim for damage in civil trial. All the procedures could have occurred in Romanian's courts, there was no need to go to the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As a Romanian, I say you're full of shit.
Re: (Score:2)
With those, we shall rule the world! :)
Re: (Score:2)
these countries should force the USA to provide a high standard of care (living conditions, health care, legal defense, contact with the outside world),
... a trial in the extradited person own language...
I'm sure he will get 1 year like Palin's hacker (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course she didn't have anything illegal in her emails.
Re: (Score:2)
Hillary is not tech-savvy enough to hack. Her emails revealed she had trouble working her desktop email client, preferring her Blackberry to process emails.
Democrats sure like their Blackberries. I'm surprised they didn't try to bail out that company like they did GM :-)
Re:I'm sure he will get 1 year like Palin's hacker (Score:5, Insightful)
I gather it's the same situation you see at any organisation. The IT department sets up elaborate security systems - multi-factor authentication, resources that can only be accessed from physically secured locations, the works. But all that security greatly annoys the users, so they go behind IT's back and start using their personal email address instead. Because it works, and is more convenient.
Not on US Soil (Score:4, Insightful)
I have a problem with them prosecuting a person in another country. Does that mean I am subject to foreign laws? This is all bullshit.
If you have a server then it's up to you to secure it. Your failure; then arrest yourself. Otherwise don't connect the server to the outside world.
And as general policy there should be no hacking laws. All traffic over a computer network is speech.
If I hook a bomb up to a computer and put it on the internet and someone hacks it who is responsible for the damage? Answer: The idiot that hooked the bomb up to the internet.
Re:Not on US Soil (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
You might not be that far off. I'm sure that the FBI wants to have an absolutely ironclad case before they go after any politician, much less one running for President. If they were to charge early without having a complete case, ready to go, they would look like they are tampering in a national election while being wholly incompetent.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a problem with them prosecuting a person in another country. Does that mean I am subject to foreign laws? This is all bullshit.
Say what you will about the United States, but I don't think there's too many crimes you can commit here that will result in you being extradicted overseas. But there sure seems to be a lot of things you can do overseas that will result in your ass getting shipped to the US to be tried and convicted.
Re:Not on US Soil (Score:4, Informative)
The powers that be view it like this...
The hardware was on US soil. The alleged crime took place at that physical point. The crime is on US soil.
'Snot my fault but that's their reasoning. It makes sense, at least at first blush it does. People should lock their doors but it's still a crime to enter an unlocked home in my jurisdiction.
Re: (Score:3)
Pretty much distills to: "whatever view favours us"
Re: (Score:2)
If even a financial transaction hits a bank in the US (not even owned by a company that is headquartered in the US but simply passing through their bank) then it also magically becomes a US' jurisdiction. There's not a damned thing more that I can do about it. It is what it is.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is amusing when it comes to things like "Yes, your servers are in another nation, but you are American/do business in America, therefore we demand to see what's on your servers.' Pretty much distills to: "whatever view favours us"
And you think this is a bad thing?
Your choice is whtever favours us, or whatever favours them. I know which I prefer.
Re: (Score:2)
If I build a house and install a flimsy lock on its door, and someone breaks through it into my house, I'm not the one who committed a crime.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a problem with them prosecuting a person in another country. Does that mean I am subject to foreign laws? This is all bullshit.
Most likely what he did was illegal in his own country as well. That's one of the things they look at when deciding whether to extradite someone or not.
And as general policy there should be no hacking laws. All traffic over a computer network is speech.
You could make a convincing argument for "with a computer" laws being a bad idea. But then cracking could be covered by a law against using deception to access information that you should have known you were not intended to access. Speech/writing can be illegal, for example fraud.
Re:Not on US Soil (Score:5, Insightful)
This is fucking idiotic logic. I suppose if you have a wallet and get mugged you should be prosecuted for not securing it. Got tail ended by a drunk driver, your prosecuted for causing an accident by not getting out of the way.
Re: (Score:2)
This is fucking idiotic logic....
Unfortunately this is Slashdot these days...
Re:Not on US Soil (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, you are subject to the laws of other countries
Attacking my computer isn't free speech. You want to speak, get a cardboard sign and march around my neighborhood with it and say whatever you want. Don't pretend that breaking into my computer and stealing my email is you freely speaking.
You sound like a burglar blaming his victims for not having better locks on their doors.
Re: (Score:2)
Should I be extradited if I send anti-Chinese-gov't documents to someone in China? This isn't a precedent we want to set.
That said, I do think it's a special case and not the beginning of a slippery slope. I just don't like the logic being applied.
Re: (Score:2)
No, because anti-China speech is protected in the United States under the First Amendment, and the US would have absolutely no problem telling China to pack salt on that. No country extradites (or at least, shouldn't) for crimes that aren't crimes where they are too. I'll bet that unauthorized use of a computer is a crime in Romania, just like it is here in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, right....pre-coffee I can be pretty dumb.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a horrible example. Of course the guy who made the bomb would be responsible, because it's illegal to make bombs. But the guy that hacked it also committed a crime - unauthorized use of a computer system.
Better example: I leave the front door of my house unlocked, and someone comes in and steals all my shit while I'm away. Is that person not a thief, because I didn't secure my house?
Use your brain.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a problem with them prosecuting a person in another country. Does that mean I am subject to foreign laws? This is all bullshit.
If you have a server then it's up to you to secure it. Your failure; then arrest yourself. Otherwise don't connect the server to the outside world.
Oh right, I'll remember that next time any crime is committed. You should have not allowed me to rape you, it's all your fault....
Re: (Score:2)
Premature accusation (Score:3, Informative)
That has NOT been proven in a court of law yet. Many experts say the laws at the time were poorly written such as to make prosecution very difficult.
Bad judgement, yes. Illegal? Subjective.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Who is saying that? The law is very clear, classified information is not allowed on personal email servers. Period.
If it's clear then perhaps you could quote the actual law here? Because I'm sure the wording doesn't actually say "classified information is not allowed on personal email servers. Period."
This is why we have lawyers, because regular folks seem to have no clue about how the law actually works.
Off to the Land of the Free... (Score:2)
He's here to make a deal (Score:2, Interesting)
To avoid the most severe penalties he will deliver up those emails that Hillary conveniently deleted. That way the NSA doesn't have to burn any political bridges by coughing them up. We know he has some of them since he published screenshots of some classified emails that never quite made it to the FBI. Sucks to be caught between two government agencies trying not to look bad...
Any bets he gets more time in jail than Hillary? (Score:2, Insightful)
She is holding Top Secret documents in an unsafe location. She was sending Top Secret documents across open networks.
He found out about it.
She has a team of top lawyers and the POTUS in her pocket.
He gets jail, she continues running for office.
Congressional Medal of Honor (Score:2)
Congressional Medal of Honor is an award that needs to be considered.
Get this: to make the point that she did nothing wrong Miss Clinton would continue to use home server and would state that we have always been doing this and there was never a problem.
In the future, reflecting past and reconsidering their path to success president Bernie, Donald or Cruz, whoever the president at the time, will probably pardon this dude.
Hillary extradition (Score:2, Funny)
Can we extradite Hillary to Benghazi for prosecution to?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm willing to pay that price to not have a proto-facist sitting in the Oval Office.
And yes, I'm a registered Republican that cannot believe what has happened to this political party. I may be going independent soon.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not that simple.
Trump is obviously not a religious person. There's very little record of him being much of a church-goer, and what little religious background he has is non-evangelical (Presbyterian in particular).
His biggest opponent, Ted Cruz, is very religious and is an evangelical. If evangelicals really cared about supporting their own, they'd be voting for Cruz in the primaries.
However, Trump is getting a surprising amount of support from the evangelicals (though a lot are voting for Cruz). Th
Re: (Score:2)
If only saying so on Slashdot made it true.
Re: (Score:2)
The fuck are you talking about.
Maybe you'd like to learn how Teo Peter died. Or, rather, was killed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I shall repeat this message several times in the coming days.
Uh...why? I'm seriously asking here. What's your motivation behind this?
If you just want to annoy us, go for it, I guess. But comment spam is always specific enough that I feel there's a goal behind it. Why do you feel this is the most important story we could be reading right now?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)