back to article Alleged Anonymous hacker rescued off Cuba by Disney cruise ship

A man sought by the FBI for his alleged involvement in an Anonymous hacking campaign has been arrested after being rescued at sea. Martin Gottesfeld, 31, had been under investigation by the FBI since October 2014 after a hacking attack that April against the Boston Children's Hospital. The hospital was involved in a bitter, …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    'Hackers of The Caribbean'

    No charge to you Mr Disney.

    1. NoneSuch

      Re: 'Hackers of The Caribbean'

      It's a small world after-all.

  2. x 7

    if what is reported is correct, the hospital deserves a bloody large fine for professional incompetence and what effectively amounted to illegal imprisonment

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2661483/Justina-Pelletier-leaves-state-custody-16-month-battle.html

    1. Turtle

      @x 7

      Why do we even need doctors and lawyers when we have Martin Gottesfeld and you, eh?

    2. Matt Bryant Silver badge
      Stop

      Re: x 7

      "if what is reported is correct...." If it is or not deserves to be settled in court by legally-recognised professionals, not a rentamob bunch of Anonyputzs led by a skiddie.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "if what is reported is correct"

      You quoted the Daily Fail. That makes it a (more than very) big "if".

      1. x 7

        plenty of other press reports in the USA indicating the Mail actually got it right this time

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Ineffective

    "After a 16-month custody battle with the hospital, Patent A, later revealed to be Connecticut teenager Justina Pelletier, was released back to her parents by the hospital. The attack, while concerning, did not have any effect on the decision to return the child to her family."

    These people perpetrated an appalling travesty on that girl and her parents. They imprisoned a patient for 16 months because they decided her condition was mental and not medical like others were saying.

    The author of this article now categorically states that the hack attack had no effect on their policy, but with (presumably) only the Hospital's assertion to back it up. How can you be so sure? I guarantee Anonymous doesn't think so!

    1. Old Handle

      Re: Ineffective

      It's true. If there's one thing Anonymous is good at, it's bringing media attention down on certain issues. And that may well be the most effective weapon in a situation like this. Although, I admit I had previously heard about Justina's kidnapping but not the hacking, so perhaps it didn't make a big difference in this case.

  4. Crazy Operations Guy Silver badge

    "causing damage estimated at over $300,000."

    Its a hospital, the human cost is far more important than the cash. Besides, $300,000 is nothing to a hospital's IT budget since anything they buy has had its price inflated by at least a factor of 10 due to it being 'medical grade'...

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    One would think that before taking up the Anonymous mantle, he might have been at least decent enough to look it up in a dictionary.

    Anonymous, my dick.

  6. AustinTX
    Big Brother

    He did what?

    Exercised his free speech anonymously. So naturally the authorities insist on making an example of him. Beware, citizens! Free speech does not extend to discussions about enemies of the State!

    1. Turtle

      @AustinTX Re: He did what?

      "He did what? Exercised his free speech anonymously. So naturally the authorities insist on making an example of him. Beware, citizens! Free speech does not extend to discussions about enemies of the State!"

      Yup. Because what could be a more natural and important form of freedom of expression than interfering with patient care at a children's hospital.

  7. Mark 85 Silver badge

    I really hate to say this, but Anonymous is part of the problem and not part of the solution. Protesting.... ok. But IMO, and INAL, I think it's a bad thing to be hitting any company's computer system. Was it ok to hit SONY? How about any government or any other company? How about your company?

    These are treacherous times. Distinguishing between someone doing it for social justice or for monetary gain isn't the way laws work or at least should work. Those of us in IT should understand the dangers and headaches of anyone attacking the systems we're paid to protect.

    What the hospital did is so very wrong and they should be held accountable but what this guy did is wrong also. Two wrongs don't make a right.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      These are treacherous times. Distinguishing between someone doing it for social justice or for monetary gain isn't the way laws work or at least should work. Those of us in IT should understand the dangers and headaches of anyone attacking the systems we're paid to protect.

      I fully agree, but that also makes the folly of what the FBI is presently trying to pull with Apple all the more dangerous. In this case you can really say "think about the children". The problem we have is that the authorities are no longer perceived to be protecting the population but harming it because they happily break the rules during their efforts to make the population stick to them, and that has consequences, especially if it takes mass protests and riots to see ANY correction in that behaviour.

      Let's take the life expectancy of a black person in certain cities as a good example, even when innocent - even with data deliberately not recorded the remaining statistics were so out of whack with the national mean that it should have rung alarm bells long before the population took to rioting to get ANY kind of correction. Like with terrorism, they have the massive budget, the legal power and the data but they missed what was right in front of them.

      Besides, if Anonymous really wants to draw attention to mishaps (which is in itself not a bad aim, but given the damage they cause has the more the vomity smell of an excuse), they could prod at systems where that could cause less damage. Given that all those agencies do squat all with the data they acquire, maybe a better place to hack? Oh, no, that would be taking an actual *risk* - not so brave warriors after all then...

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      But three rights make a left...

  8. frank ly Silver badge

    I wonder

    "... the FBI got a call from Disney, saying one of its cruise ships had found Gottesfeld and his wife ..."

    Did they actually give their real names when they were picked up?

    1. Barry Rueger Silver badge

      Re: I wonder

      My thought exactly.

      Or more specifically, how in the hell did the Disney cruise people know he was wanted, and why did they call the FBI?

      When did cruise ship operators become extra-territorial bounty hunters?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: I wonder

        When did cruise ship operators become extra-territorial bounty hunters?

        Cruise, Tom Cruise. It's easy to confuse :).

      2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: I wonder

        I was wondering why someone under investigation by the FBI for nearly two years and who was a major suspect who had has his house "raided" was able to disappear so easily.

    2. Mark 85 Silver badge

      Re: I wonder

      Anymore, you need a valid passport just to set foot on a cruise ship. So, Disney knew. I'm a bit surprised there isn't a "no cruise list" much like the "no fly list". But why give the government ideas.

  9. Country_without_a_constitution

    Does anyone here realize the sentence this man is facing for a DDOS attack? It is similar to what would be expected for an armed robbery in the real world. Does that seem rational?

    1. Richard Jones 1
      Flame

      Armed Robbery Simile

      Many armed robberies cause less fiscal loss than many DDOS attacks and the damage can be much longer lasting for a wider and unpredictable amount of the population. Where the robbery also causes actual physical or mental harm then the sentence should be increased to reflect those 'enhanced damages'.

      If the DDOS had resulted in actual deaths as it might well have done since the effects of stupidity are always hard to control, then the sentence should reflect those enhanced damages.

      DDOS is NOT a victimless crime.

      As an agent of change ii is also a dangerously close to 'I will bomb you until you change', I believe that is also considered an illegal act punishable under the law.

      This sad and victim filled saga appears to have been sadly lacking in rational consideration, not an unknown situation when people become irrational as some are suggesting the hospital might have been. (I take those comments on trust as I am not going to research the full background as I doubt I could gain access to probably privileged information.)

    2. Suricou Raven

      Not even for a DDoS attack. The charge is for 'conspiracy.' He wasn't involved in the actual attack at all: He only urged other people to attack and specified a target. He isn't a hacker, he's a cheerleader. A coordinator at best.

      1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        For that matter, it's barley even conspiracy. It's more like incitement. But "conspiracy" sounds more scary to the public and hence to a jury.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019