Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

+ - City of Boston pays $170,000 to settle landmark case involving man arrested for -> 1

Submitted by
Ian Lamont
Ian Lamont writes "The City of Boston has reached a $170,000 settlement with Simon Glik who was arrested by Boston Police in 2007 after using his mobile phone to record police arresting another man on Boston Common. Police claimed that Glik had violated state wiretapping laws, but later dropped the charges and admitted the officers were wrong to arrest him. Glik had brought a lawsuit against the city (aided by the ACLU) because he claimed his civil rights were violated. According to today's ACLU statement:

As part of the settlement, Glik agreed to withdraw his appeal to the Community Ombudsman Oversight Panel. He had complained about the Internal Affairs Division's investigation of his complaint and the way they treated him. IAD officers made fun of Glik for filing the complaint, telling him his only remedy was filing a civil lawsuit. After the City spent years in court defending the officers' arrest of Glik as constitutional and reasonable, IAD reversed course after the First Circuit ruling and disciplined two of the officers for using "unreasonable judgment" in arresting Glik.

"

Link to Original Source
Security

+ - Hackerazzi pleads guilty to targeting celebrities ->

Submitted by
coondoggie
coondoggie writes "In a highly publicized case, A Florida man this week pleaded guilty to hacking into the personal e-mail accounts of more than 50 actors including Scarlett Johansson, Mila Kunis, Renee Olstead.
Specifically Christopher Chaney, 35, pleaded guilty to nine felony counts of a 28-count indictment, including unauthorized access to protected computers, wiretapping and wire fraud, unauthorized damage to protected computers resulting in more than $5,000 loss and physical harm."

Link to Original Source
Crime

+ - Money Mules, Not Customers, The Real Victims?->

Submitted by
chicksdaddy
chicksdaddy writes "Threatpost is reporting on research from Microsoft that argues money mules — the accomplices who help move stolen funds — may be the real victims of online banking scams, not the bank customers who are the ostensible targets of fraudsters.

In a paper that turns conventional wisdom on its head, Microsoft researcher Cormac Herley and two co-authors argue that, mules, unlike fraud victims, are not protected by Federal anti fraud laws. And, unlike the criminals they work for, they are not beyond the reach of the banks or law enforcement. Further, as banks and other financial institutions have gotten better at tracing account takeover scams and reversing charges, it is the mules who pay the price: having funds extracted from their account to make the victim whole, assuming such funds are available.

"The thief is really stealing from the mule, not the compromised account, though that fact does not become clear until the dust settles," the researchers write.

Their conclusion: shoring up customer accounts (say, through stronger passwords) will have only limited utility in stemming fraud. A better approach would be to crack down on muling, denying fraudsters the critical link in getting money out of compromised accounts: a legitimate bank account that will take an illegal money transfer from a hacked account and turn it into a legitimate transfer to the fraudsters' account."

Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Nothing to see here (Score 1) 5

by orkysoft (#38439086) Attached to: how to pirate slashdot

Slashdot doesn't seem to mind about Slashdot.jp: Slashbox preview for Slashdot.jp, but I don't know about solidot.org. If you scroll down, they link back to Slashdot.org, but also to a site about an "anticancer herb", which sounds shifty. Also, one of the article submitters, whose names links to Solidot.org, and so is probably a site editor, is called Blackhat :-P

"Summit meetings tend to be like panda matings. The expectations are always high, and the results usually disappointing." -- Robert Orben

Working...