11,000 IP addresses found on accused hacker's PC

Discussion in 'News' started by SimonV, Oct 10, 2003.

  1. SimonV
    Honorary Member

    SimonV Petabyte Poster Gold Member

    [​IMG]<font size="3">11,000 IP addresses found on accused hacker's PC</font>

    Police found a file containing more than 11,000 vulnerable servers on the PC owned by a teenager accused of attacking a US port with a massive DDoS attack, a court heard today

    More than 11,000 IP addresses of vulnerable servers were found on the computer of a UK teenager that has been accused of launching a DDoS attack responsible for knocking out IT systems at the Port of Houston in Texas, Southwark Crown Court was told on Wednesday.

    Aaron Caffrey, whose father is a software engineer and mother is a lecturer in IT, allegedly used a well-known 'Unicode' exploit to take advantage of vulnerabilities in Microsoft's IIS Web server software. His defence counsel has argued that unpatched security holes in Windows enabled someone to use Caffrey's computer to launch the attack.

    Southwark Crown Court heard on Wednesday that on Caffrey's computer, which was forensically examined by the Computer Crime Squad three months after the attack took place, there was a file called webservers.txt that listed the IP addresses of 11,608 servers vulnerable to the Unicode exploit.

    Full Story: zdnet.co.uk
    Certifications: MOS Master 2003, CompTIA A+, MCSA:M, MCSE
    WIP: Keeping CF Alive...


    1. flex22
      What I wonder in cases like this, is how the judge makes sense of all the facts.I mean, someone can explain it to him in a clear way, however it's not easy if your not familiar with IT terminology.

      Even for lawyers haggling over the facts and a jury, if there is one, must find it very difficult.
    2. Sandy

      In my experiance they find it very easy!

      Why? They are never bogged down in the detail. They are very, very bright people (well the ones I have had to stand infront of have been) :oops: :oops: :oops:
    3. flex22
      Compared to the general population, yes.But against an IT guru, nah :daz
    4. tripwire45
      Two words: "expert witness". Each side lines up their expert to testify. The one that seems more credible to the judge and jury (if it's a jury trial) wins. Also, the judge can directly question (at least in the US) any witness to get clarification. Interestingly enough, jurors would be picked in these sorts of cases if they didn't have too much computer experience but had some. That is, they can't be biased too much for or against technology.

      That means while someday, we might end up as witnesses in cases such as this but we'd never be picked as jurors.

      As a side note: I wonder if Mom and Dad, even inadvertantly, contributed to junior's ability to pull of his stunts?
    5. Sandy

      Have you met any Judges? Belive me they ARE bright people. The digest vast amounts of complex situations far quicker than any IT guru. After all computing is simple people are not.
    6. Sandy

      Thankfully! I am barred from jury service but am an expert witness.

    Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.