In a press release issued July 13 (or 13 luglio 2007, if you're in Roma), the Commanding General of the Financial Guard of Milan announced that they had arrested 26 phishers. 18 Italian citizens, and 8 foreigners.
Here's my Babylon 6 assisted translation of the press release:
----------
The Provincial headquarters of the Guardia di Finanza in Milan has, in fact, executed 26 orders of custody to members of two criminal associations responsible for a series of fraud perpetrated on hundreds of users of home banking services, by technical means better known under the name of "phishing".
The operation has identified 18 Italian citizens and 8 Eastern European foreigners, who are regular residents in our country, which are exploiting the home banking personal access credentials to customers of Poste Italiane bank, sent fraudulently in response to randomly dispatched e-mails apparently sent by their financial institution.
Hackers from the group, during questioning, have confessed to having sent the e-mail messages, which appeared to originate from Poste Italiane, by using stolen login credentials for electronic mailboxes of ISPs operating in Italy but with servers abroad. They subsequently logged in to the accounts during the next 30 days and defrauded them out, by transferring the sums on cards specially created by other members of the Organization.
The means of offense were identified thanks to a tight cooperative investigation between the "fraud management" team of Poste Italiane and the officers of the Guardia di Finanza, which have monitored in real time the activations of the cards, initially in the territory of Milan and then on the whole national territory.
The orders of custody have been carried out in the provinces of Milan, Brescia, Novara, Como, Florence, Parma, Forlì and Pescara.
In the course of the searches they seized computers, removable media archives, magnetic cards used to set up credit cards and debit cards, hundreds of credit cards and prepaid cards of various banking institutions, CARDS one, false documents and mobile phones last generation.
------------------
This type of investigation is possible every day in the United States. What is necessary to make it a reality? The belief by the management in charge of the manpower of various investigative and prosecutorial agencies that "small crimes" are worth investigating -- because they lead to Big Criminals!
Well Done, Italy! May you serve as a model for us all!
_-_
gar
(original press release, in Italian, is available here:
Italian Press Release
Wednesday, 18 July 2007
Buone Notizie! (Good News for Italian Bank Customers)
Tuesday, 17 July 2007
UAB Student Newspaper Interview
Kaleidoscope, the UAB Student Newspaper, interviewed me on Identity Theft for their July 10, 2007 issue.
Adrian Thurstin did a very nice job with the interview, and wrote a great story focusing on issues of particular interest to students.
_-_
gar
Adrian Thurstin did a very nice job with the interview, and wrote a great story focusing on issues of particular interest to students.
_-_
gar
New Job!
Just wanted to let my loyal readers (yes, both of you!) know that I have taken a new position.
I am now the Director of Research in Computer Forensics at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. This newly created position is a partnership between the Computer & Information Sciences Department chaired by Dr. Anthony Skjellumand the Department of Justice Sciences chaired by Dr. John Sloan.
Our partnership was the cover article in a recent edition of UAB's magazine. The article, called Bugs in the System, discussed how CIS and JS were working together to create Alabama's first graduate certificate in Computer Forensics. The problem that we are facing is that CyberCrime professionals are either Justice Science majors, with a background in law enforcement but very little computer training, or Computer Science professionals, with a background in technology, but very little knowledge of law enforcement and legal practice. The new certification will be producing graduates who have a combination of knowledge in these areas BEFORE they enter the workforce.
My position, as Director of Research, will be seeking to develop new techniques, tools, and technologies for those who practice CyberCrime investigation, in the legal system, in traditional security companies, and in corporate and government security.
I am now the Director of Research in Computer Forensics at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. This newly created position is a partnership between the Computer & Information Sciences Department chaired by Dr. Anthony Skjellumand the Department of Justice Sciences chaired by Dr. John Sloan.
Our partnership was the cover article in a recent edition of UAB's magazine. The article, called Bugs in the System, discussed how CIS and JS were working together to create Alabama's first graduate certificate in Computer Forensics. The problem that we are facing is that CyberCrime professionals are either Justice Science majors, with a background in law enforcement but very little computer training, or Computer Science professionals, with a background in technology, but very little knowledge of law enforcement and legal practice. The new certification will be producing graduates who have a combination of knowledge in these areas BEFORE they enter the workforce.
My position, as Director of Research, will be seeking to develop new techniques, tools, and technologies for those who practice CyberCrime investigation, in the legal system, in traditional security companies, and in corporate and government security.
Wednesday, 24 January 2007
(Blog alert: Taking Vista By "Storm")
Just a note to say I have updated the Birmingham-InfraGard blog with a couple entries that might be of interest to readers here.
Tuesday, 23 January 2007
Italian Court declares itself Friend of Pirates (or does it?)
I couldn't believe this one.
The Associated Press reported yesterday that Italian high court says file-swapping is not illegal.
In this case, two college students from Turin Politechnic Institute were accused of piracy in 1994, after using the school's network to build a peer-to-peer file sharing network for their classmates.
On January 7, 2007, the Cassation (Italy's equivalent of the Supreme Court) declared that downloading music, videos, and programs from the Internet, even when they are clearly covered by copyright, was not illegal as long as the goal was not distribution for monetary gain.
George Assuma, the President of Italy's watchdog group on copyright law, SIAE (the Italian Society of Authors and Editors), points out that in fairness these students could only be judged by the laws as they stood at the time of their crime. (See his reaction at: Il Presidente Assumma su sentenza Cassazione: Reato downloading non autorizzato di opere.) Since that time, Assuma points out, there are at least four laws which have been added to the court's arsenal which may address these issues more appropriately, not the least of which is the European Union Directive on Copyright, which came into force in October of 2003. But do they help?
A look at the
EU Directive on Copyright shows that Article 5.2(b) says:
So it would seem that this may be a case where the initial panic will subside when people actually understand the true context of the case. The European Directive on Copyright, which would certainly apply in Italy, clearly says that EVEN FOR PRIVATE USE the "rightholder" must "receive fair compensation".
The Associated Press reported yesterday that Italian high court says file-swapping is not illegal.
In this case, two college students from Turin Politechnic Institute were accused of piracy in 1994, after using the school's network to build a peer-to-peer file sharing network for their classmates.
On January 7, 2007, the Cassation (Italy's equivalent of the Supreme Court) declared that downloading music, videos, and programs from the Internet, even when they are clearly covered by copyright, was not illegal as long as the goal was not distribution for monetary gain.
George Assuma, the President of Italy's watchdog group on copyright law, SIAE (the Italian Society of Authors and Editors), points out that in fairness these students could only be judged by the laws as they stood at the time of their crime. (See his reaction at: Il Presidente Assumma su sentenza Cassazione: Reato downloading non autorizzato di opere.) Since that time, Assuma points out, there are at least four laws which have been added to the court's arsenal which may address these issues more appropriately, not the least of which is the European Union Directive on Copyright, which came into force in October of 2003. But do they help?
A look at the
EU Directive on Copyright shows that Article 5.2(b) says:
in respect of reproductions on any medium made by a natural person for private use and for ends that are neither directly nor indirectly commercial, on condition that the rightholders receive fair compensation which takes account of the application or non-application of technological measures referred to in Article 6 to the work or subject-matter concerned;
So it would seem that this may be a case where the initial panic will subside when people actually understand the true context of the case. The European Directive on Copyright, which would certainly apply in Italy, clearly says that EVEN FOR PRIVATE USE the "rightholder" must "receive fair compensation".
Let's hope the Italians get this cleared up in a way that the Associated Press can understand.
_-_
gar
Wednesday, 17 January 2007
First CAN-SPAM Jury Conviction?
Although its not the first conviction under the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003, the AOL phisher conviction this week is still newsworthy. At test? Can a Jury actually understand a spam case.
One of the arguments we've seen repeatedly as we try to get prosecutors to push forward with spamming cases is that they are "too technical" or "too boring" for jury appeal. The convictions so far have been largely based on the fact that, when faced with overwhelming evidence, spammers cop a plea.
So what was this case about?
Jeffrey Brett Goodin, a 45 year old resident of Azusa, California, hacked into a large number of EarthLink accounts (poor passwords and dictionary attacks, I believe), and used those accounts to send emails to AOL users. The AOL customers would receive a spam telling them that their AOL billing information needed to be updated, or that they would lose their service.
Following the link in the email would lead to an AOL phishing site - a fake website that looked very official - which would ask personal questions including their billing information.
Although the headline says "AOL Phisher Faces up to 101 Years in Prison", this blogger bets that on the June 11th sentencing we'll be lucky to see 7 years.
One note on "swift action" . . . Goodin was arrested on January 26, 2006 - so just 10 days short of one year later for a trial.
Goodin, who went by the creative hacker alias "The Hacker", had been a fugitive from the law for four months prior to his ultimate capture. On July 24, 2006, Goodin's photograph was posted on the FBI's "wanted" website as a fugitive. The original arrest press release, which credited the Los Angeles Electronic Crimes Task Force, and the Ontario Police Department with supporting the arrest, said Goodin faced up to 30 years in prison.
The additional charges occurred as a result of crimes committed during his four months of "fugitive" status after failing to appear for his bond hearing, according to this later Press Release from the LA FBI office. The additional charges includes Failure to Appear, and Witness Harassment.
Congratulations all around and all that, but ONE jury conviction in three years? With spam comprising 90% of all the email on the planet? Let's get that fixed!
_-_
gar
One of the arguments we've seen repeatedly as we try to get prosecutors to push forward with spamming cases is that they are "too technical" or "too boring" for jury appeal. The convictions so far have been largely based on the fact that, when faced with overwhelming evidence, spammers cop a plea.
So what was this case about?
Jeffrey Brett Goodin, a 45 year old resident of Azusa, California, hacked into a large number of EarthLink accounts (poor passwords and dictionary attacks, I believe), and used those accounts to send emails to AOL users. The AOL customers would receive a spam telling them that their AOL billing information needed to be updated, or that they would lose their service.
Following the link in the email would lead to an AOL phishing site - a fake website that looked very official - which would ask personal questions including their billing information.
Although the headline says "AOL Phisher Faces up to 101 Years in Prison", this blogger bets that on the June 11th sentencing we'll be lucky to see 7 years.
One note on "swift action" . . . Goodin was arrested on January 26, 2006 - so just 10 days short of one year later for a trial.
Goodin, who went by the creative hacker alias "The Hacker", had been a fugitive from the law for four months prior to his ultimate capture. On July 24, 2006, Goodin's photograph was posted on the FBI's "wanted" website as a fugitive. The original arrest press release, which credited the Los Angeles Electronic Crimes Task Force, and the Ontario Police Department with supporting the arrest, said Goodin faced up to 30 years in prison.
The additional charges occurred as a result of crimes committed during his four months of "fugitive" status after failing to appear for his bond hearing, according to this later Press Release from the LA FBI office. The additional charges includes Failure to Appear, and Witness Harassment.
Congratulations all around and all that, but ONE jury conviction in three years? With spam comprising 90% of all the email on the planet? Let's get that fixed!
_-_
gar
Saturday, 6 January 2007
Evidence Handling
Just a link to another article where I blog on Birmingham InfraGard:
Best Practices in Electronic Evidence
_-_
gar
Best Practices in Electronic Evidence
_-_
gar
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)