The conversation

Lessons learnedExperience excerpt · English

OK, I think I found the original thing Rockenhaus was convicted of

OK, I think I found the original thing Rockenhaus was convicted of. Back in 2014, Rockenhaus worked for a travel booking company. He was fired. He used stale VPN access to connect back to the company's infrastructure, and then detached a SCSI LUN from the server cluster, crashing it. The company, not knowing he was involved, retained him to help diagnose and fix the problem. During the investigation, the company figured out he caused the crash, and terminated him again. He then somehow gained access to their disaster recovery facility and physically fucked up a bunch of servers. They were down a total of about 30 days and incurred $500k in losses. (He plead this case out, so these are I guess uncontested claims).

Original discussionMan jailed for parole violations after refusing to decrypt his Tor node369 source comments · at import
8

What was this responding to?

Parent context · original excerpt

TP

For whatever it's worth, the Reddit story here says that the federal courts used "fraudulent warrants to jail my husband again". Maybe! The other side of that story, via PACER, is a detailed parole violation warrant (you can hear the marshal refer to it in the video); the violations in that warrant: 1. Admitting to using cannabis during supervised release 2. Failing to make scheduled restitution payments and to cooperate with the financial investigation that sets restitution payment amounts. 3. Falling out of contact with his probation officer, who attempted home visits to find him. 4. Opening several new lines of credit. 5. Using an unauthorized iPhone (all his Internet devices apparently have keyloggers as a condition of his release). These read like kind of standard parole terms? I don't know what the hell happened to get him into this situation in the first place, though.

Full original

Community replies 0

No community replies yet. Add your perspective.

Replies from the source 8

Direct replies available in this import. Original-language excerpts.

DH

While I'm sure this is criminal behaviour it seems debatable that this dude is a danger to the public. But there may be more to it I guess.

Full original
SE

good find, there's often more than meets the eyes in these stories. folks forget that the court/case records will reveal hidden details.

Full original
PE

If all of that is true, then that is a very serious CFAA charge. It makes sense that they would want to downplay it as "minor" and "not relevant". It sounds like the parole violations came later? In any case, thank you for researching. There is always more to the story.

Full original
AU

Thanks. The overly aggressive arrest was not warranted, obviously. However, I suspected there was a lot more to this story when the original post buried the actual reason for the arrest several paragraphs down and tried to dismiss it as “minor”. Intentionally damaging a company’s infrastructure with an intent to disrupt their operations is a very serious charge. Not a “minor” disagreement with a former employer.

Full original
KS

Good grief. This is also part of the reason why I have a pact with my coworkers: if I’m terminated, kill my access immediately and universally, and I’ll do the same for them. I don’t even want to have the ability to look at stuff anymore. Remove any shred of possibility that I could get into shenanigans later.

Full original
MA

well the whole thing tells the story of a man with lacks a lot of impulse control and serious anti-social behaviour. I knew people like that, that where unnable to put their lifes togheter until they where fully medicated.

Full original
JT

Yeah this is why I tell hacker/cracker corporate types to not even joke about time bombs and backdoors in company software.

Full original
HE

Here's what the wife says about that[1], for the record: > The Origins of a Retaliatory Prosecution (Texas, 2019-2022) > Early 2019: Conrad Rockenhaus, a supporter of free speech, runs Tor exit nodes used by journalists and activists. Federal agents demand he assist them in decrypting traffic; he repeatedly refuses, asserting his constitutional rights. > The Coerced Confession: The case against him began when he was forced to confess to a non-violent CFAA (computer crime) offense while under the influence of prescribed painkillers and not lucid following a major surgery. > The Pretextual Arrest: Just months before the 5-year statute of limitations was set to expire, the federal government arrests Conrad on the CFAA charge. The family alleges this was a pretext for his refusal to cooperate on the Tor matter. [1] https://rockenhaus.com/press-kit/

Full original
Continue on Hacker News

Respect different perspectives. Share concrete experiences.

Sign in to post, reply, repost, and quote.