Feeds

back to article Attack on 'Cyberbullying' critic prompts raid by armed cops

The home of a prominent critic of online bullying was raided by heavily armed police officers after someone phoned in a call falsely claiming that a man who had killed four people was inside, holding three others hostage. The call, made from a computer that spoofed the number displayed on caller ID, prompted a tense, three-hour …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Silver badge
Flame

One can only dream...

...that the hoaxer(s) need to call emergency services one day for genuine reasons and all the lines are busy and personel out on existing calls.

9
0
Thumb Down

.... indeed

although having read the story, I can't understand why this woman was targeted? It appears the offense was suggesting Cyber bullying is wrong.

My dream would bet that the hoaxer ends up in prison.

2
0

Well

Time to go switch my registration over to Domains By Proxy, then, I think.

1
0
Silver badge

Revenge

I call on police to find them, send a SWAT team to their houses, and "accidentally" shoot those responsible through the head. You know, accidents happen.

3
4
Bronze badge
Unhappy

@DavCrav

Makes you wonder though doesn't it?!

The RIAA and the various media corps can have a 25 man SWAT team smashing down the front door of some some old biddy within 30 mins of getting a court oder, for supposedly ripping off a few MP3s! Meanwhile someone who genuinely appears to be trying to do something useful to help people avoid bullying, gets bullied themselves and the authoritieis shrug their shoulders!

2
0
Silver badge

@Fuzzy Wotnot

So is this "authorities in only protecting interests of big business" shock?

Sending SWAT teams to perform armed raids on people's houses, thinking there are armed men inside, is attempted murder. No ifs or buts.

2
1
Anonymous Coward

"No one was harmed"

How about the cat?

14
1
Holmes

Re:"No one was harmed"

How do you know that the cat didn't orchestrate the whole thing?

2
0
Coat

I certainly hope the cat is OK

But I'm surprised she didn't buy a dog instead.

3
0
Anonymous Coward

They need to track the call and prosecute

Scum like this deserves to spend some time in prison.

9
1
Trollface

OK, so maybe I'm missing something, but...

...having read the Gawker article, and having read about the power of certain US authorities in scooping up all manner of infirmation on ne'er-do-wells, one has to wonder why the likes of the FBI, NSA, or even ASCPA (given the cat), haven't used all manner of internet computerickery to find those responsible, and give them a well deserved melvilling, or something?

2
0
Thumb Up

"melvilling"

I'm not sure what it means but I like it : )

To your point, I'd be surprised if this wasn't traced back to somewhere. Of course, that might be a McDonalds or Starbucks... but I'd imagine there is a good chance this was a script kiddie hitting from their home connection. If they move quick enough, there will still be logs somewhere I'd imagine.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

The number had been spoofed to appear as an out-of-stat

I'd like to know how there is no path leading back to the caller, someone somewhere must be breaking some national terror law in keeping no logs.

0
0
Silver badge
Big Brother

There sure are to be...

...logs as fat a Miss Piggy's behind.

Telcos are keeping the all Call Data Records for billing purposes.

If the /b/-tards are as circumspect with their borrowed phone numbers as with LOIC, then some forceful removal from mom's basement room is in the pipe.

4
0
Bronze badge

Oh, her.

Given the history of Katie.com I'd question that Parry Aftab is best qualified as an opponent of cyber bullying.

(I suggest you look for that domain name on Wikipedia, since the domain itself now redirects to a porn site, and not even a very good one)

2
0
Joke

Qualifications

I'm just curious by which metrics you qualify a porn site as "good" or "not good". Not my world, but it made me curious :-)

0
0
Silver badge

So these scumbags

Are hassling aftab on the basis of 1 activity years ago that seem to come down to "he said she said".

Well done well done.

0
0

He said she said?

I remember the case, and there never seemed to be much moral ambiguity from what I read. katie.com is a pretty generic site name, and somebody called Katie was lucky enough to grab it. End of story.

The publisher only really needed <girl's name>.com, so they should found a domain which was either untaken or available for sale, and acquired it *before* giving the book its title. Publishing the book and them claiming some right to the domain because they published the book is high handed in the extreme. Much of what happened afterwards probably wouldn't have happened if the book had been called google.com, for example.

Doesn't justify the swatting, but a little ironic.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Freedom isn't free

It's a shame that articles like this don't appear on the same day as those reporting the police asking for regulation of VOIP services making it impossible to anonymously spoof caller iDs.

The clamour of people crying police state and bemoaning the loss of the right to do what you want without consequence would be deafening.

4
6
Mushroom

cyberbullying a cyberbullying critic

Ever notice how these "1337 haxx0rz" have such superior intelligence when it comes to computer stuff, but are absolutely brain dead on originality? gee... my nephew (not quite 2 years old yet) could have thought that one up. "I don't like them... hit them"

Yes, I just likened the perp to the intelligence of a 2 year old. And I'm probably being generous.

If they think they are trying to stop regulators from regulating their tools (VoIP, Internets at large, etc), they're just giving the regulators more fuel for the fire.

If they are just bored and doing crap like this passes the time... seriously, get a hobby/life or go piss yourself since you can't get a life.

lamers for the lameness pull crap like this. people of real intelligence would actually take legal routes to bring about their causes.

/mushroom cloud because these types of idiots need to be nuked from orbit

1
1

Re: cyberbullying a cyberbullying critic

"my nephew (not quite 2 years old yet) could have thought that one up. "I don't like them... hit them""

I agree with what you're saying but....

"mushroom cloud because these types of idiots need to be nuked from orbit"

...you kind of pissed all over your own point there, didn't you?

1
0
Gold badge
Thumb Up

I suspect ..

.. you'll attract lots of downvotes for saying something sensible. I like the openness of the Net, but it appears there are a Godawful amount of people out there with "issues".

There is nothing that discloses character flaws as much as a lack of consequences for your actions, and the Net is proving that aplenty.

3
0
Silver badge
Joke

I don't like them... hit them

AKA merkins foreign policy for the last 50 years.

lucky you areananon poster(wtf?) of NSA would be a-lookin for you

0
1
Bronze badge

long long long time

Unless these folks are in a country with out an extradition treaty m, they are fucked if caught.

Properly fucked.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

@AC Superior Intellicence?

Its a lot less skill to break something than to build it.

You don't need superior intelligence, just a reasonable level of computer skills, the patience to read a few tutorials and play around with some tools. Combine that with the mentality of someone who slashes their neighbors tires for some imagined insult and you have a world class cyber criminal.

2
0
Gold badge

Regulations?

"one has to wonder why the likes of the FBI, NSA, or even ASCPA (given the cat), haven't used all manner of internet computerickery to find those responsible"

They simply aren't as good at tracking this kind of thing down as Anonymous is.

"It's a shame that articles like this don't appear on the same day as those reporting the police asking for regulation of VOIP services making it impossible to anonymously spoof caller iDs."

Is it a shame? Preventing caller ID spoofing is a technical problem, not a regulatory problem.

0
0

maybe, just maybe

"You've got police officers running around with weapons. When it goes bad it can be really freaking bad."

If they weren't outfitted like a military force, a standing army on US soil, if you will, it wouldn't be that dangerous.

1
0
Facepalm

Oh no, a computer was used!

Lovely writing in the Northjersey.com article: "The 911 caller whose hoax prompted a tense police standoff in a quiet Wyckoff neighborhood used a computer to mask the origin of the call, authorities said Sunday".

The whole article reads like the 'reporter' got introduced for the first time to the interesting artefacts of cheap VoIP trunk services and spoofing providers.

0
0
Silver badge

caller ID Spoofing...

... is trivial (all you need is ISDN and it's even easier in the USA)

ANI spoofing is decidely _not_

OTOH quite WHY any emergency call centre is relying on CLID fields (which may be withheld) when ANI is normally supplied automatically to 911 operator consoles is a matter for conjecture.

As for SWATing - it's attempted murder and should be treated as such. I have no problem whatsoever with armed raids on the miscreants so they get an idea what it's like to be at the wrong end of a firearm held by a pissed off cop (see the first few minutes of "hackers" - the only few minutes worth watching anyway.)

1
0
Anonymous Coward

What about the cat?

WHAT ABOUT THE CAT?!

Somebody dun goofed, but the cyber-police should be able to backtrace the emails, right? RIGHT?!

0
0
FAIL

It's always much nicer to shoot people who can't shoot back, isn't it?

"I have no problem whatsoever with armed raids on the miscreants so they get an idea what it's like to be at the wrong end of a firearm held by a pissed off cop"

Yes and of course armed raids _never_ attack to innocent people, like you?

I'd say that majority of attacks are against people who haven't done anything criminal (or are guilty of some totally minimal "crime") and thus aren't "miscreants". Statistics the Police never, ever publishes. Do you ever wonder why?

The Police knows that it's much easier to harass innocent people, they won't shoot back and don't have the money to sue the Police for harassing. If somebody dies to heart attack while raiding there home, who cares, it happens and you can bet that the Police is never guilty of killing anyone, no matter how many people dies: All died from "natural cause".

It's always much nicer to shoot people who can't shoot back, isn't it? The ideology the Police is using every day and deaths are not counted. At least not by the Police.

"To protect and to serve" means nowadays to protect big money and property, not the people and servicing means servicing banking overlords and politicians, not the people: Watchdog who bites the hand that feeds it, every day and watches the owner, not strangers.

Stasi and SS where both for the same purpose. It wont' take long when the methods are also the same, in every respect.

Swat-teams and SS already have same methodology: Raid early at morning and shoot everyone who resists. There are no innocent bystanders in that game, just like SS: If they visit you, you are guilty and it's OK to shoot you on the spot. You may call these guys "police" but I'll say they are professional killers, paid to kill people. Nothing more, nothing less.

1
0
WTF?

Wait, three hours?

OK, I must be misreading this. They pulled off a "three hour standoff" on an *empty* house? With *nobody* inside? What did they do in these three hours?

"Attention, this is the police! I'm repeating this for the 319th time, drop your weapons and come out through the front door, or we'll come inside in less than two hours and get you! And this time, I mean it!"

1
0
This topic is closed for new posts.