Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Teenagers Jailed For Criminal Version of Facebook

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the now-this-sounds-bright dept.

Social Networks 122

An anonymous reader writes "Three teenagers in the UK have been sentenced for up to five years in jail for creating and operating Gh0stMarket.net, one of the world's largest English-language internet crime forums. The Gh0stMarket website, which had about 8,000 members, was dubbed by the court as the 'criminal equivalent of Facebook,' or 'Crimebook.'"

cancel ×

122 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

facebook this, facebook that (2, Insightful)

pinkishpunk (1461107) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377226)

it was a plain and normal forum from what I read, or is suddenly anything facebook, even when you aint having your personal data analysed and sold ?

Re:facebook this, facebook that (3)

MrQuacker (1938262) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377280)

Its the new catch-all term for the ignant public. The same way Xerox is for photocopies, or Kleenex is for tissues; Facebook is for forums/social sites.

Re:facebook this, facebook that (1)

Troll-Under-D'Bridge (1782952) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377400)

Well then I nominate /book [slashdot.org] as the antisocial equivalent of Facebook. Wait, where are the photos and the casual games? Really, if something's going to be called the X version of Facebook, shouldn't it be a site that at least allows you to deal with real people (or at least people pretending to be real) rather aliases and cartoon avatars? According to tFA, the site

appeared as lines of computer code and broken English [where] hackers and fraudsters traded anonymously [...]

Seems more like the "criminal" equivalent of Twitter to me. Or Craiglist, which has already been accused of being one [slashdot.org] .

Re:facebook this, facebook that (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35378130)

the antisocial equivalent of Facebook

I can see the film adaptation now: "The antiSocial Network"

Re:facebook this, facebook that (1)

adolf (21054) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377430)

Wow. That's a nasty cut. Do you need a Band-Aid? Would a Coke make you feel better?

As you say, genericized trademarks are somewhat common.

The question is: Should we treat the very modern (and probably short-lived in the grand scheme of themes) marks of Google or Facebook any differently than we treat the time-tested genericized trademarks of "aspirin," "escalator," or "zipper?"

Re:facebook this, facebook that (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377684)

Yeah but that still makes it similar to calling a Zipper "Metal Velcro". Personally i would have thought genericized trademarks tend to imply a similarity rather more close than exists between a threaded forum and Facebook.

Generic Aspirin tends to be Asaphen, Generic Escalators still tend to be moving stairs, and most people can tell a generic zipper from velcro. A forum may involve a user profile and them posting messages to other people, but it IS still a stretch to compare it to Facebook and its much more distributed, less centralized, more relationship oriented approach. If anything, Facebook is an extended and specialized version of the concept of a forum.

Re:facebook this, facebook that (2)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378274)

It's not good journalism if your audience doesn't know what you're talking about, and many more people are familiar with the idea of an online social forum through Facebook than through discussion boards. It doesn't mean the audience are ignorant in the pejorative sense. Once upon a time we called all first-person games "Doom clones" because we'd all played Doom but nobody knew what the fuck "first-person" meant.

Re:facebook this, facebook that (1)

Wiarumas (919682) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378678)

You realize that's a good thing from a business perspective, right? Many companies spend millions of dollars trying to coin phrases like that in the general public... for example, Kodak tried to convert Kodak synonymous with picture (Kodak moment) like how Polaroid is not the only company to have instant film. To have the word Facebook synonymous with social networking is a great thing for Facebook and their soon to be investors. Kinda like how the word Google is synonymous with a general search nowadays - its the de facto standard.

genericized terms like "Google it with Bing!" (1)

KWTm (808824) | more than 3 years ago | (#35379384)

You realize that's a good thing from a business perspective, right? Many companies spend millions of dollars trying to coin phrases like that in the general public... Kinda like how the word Google is synonymous with a general search nowadays - its the de facto standard.

Apropos of this, take a look at this hilarious YouTube parody produced by CollegeHumor [youtube.com] , supposedly an ad to promote Microsoft's Bing search engine, which keeps using "google" as a generic search term. "You can google lots of things with Bing!" ROTFLMAO.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAk1w/uMACgkQLnc9OVO/yZ4itgCbBn4Sko6XFUUiNhHx9d9yi820
JUwAnikURH8Lz1H+IXB8iIrJikC4raCa
=NyoU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
This is the GPG signature of the text with all spaces, tabs, newlines and other non-printable characters removed.
To check validity of this signature, put the plain text into PlainTextFile, and the signature (including beginning and end lines) into SignatureFile, and use this command:
        tr -cd [:graph:] PlainTextFile | gpg --verify SignatureFile -

Re:facebook this, facebook that (1)

monkyyy (1901940) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377416)

when i read it was about an alt facebook i was thinking "sign me up ^__^ the criminals know how to give me control over my info " but no who ever said that was an idiot it sounds like only an irc, or fourm

Re:facebook this, facebook that (1)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377760)

At least with criminals you don't have to dig through a lot of legalese to know that your data will be sold to others.

Re:facebook this, facebook that (1)

Combatso (1793216) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378298)

its called market branding, and its way older than facebook... We don't search, we google.. we don't blow our noses in generic tissue, we reach for a Kleenex... Our good are delivered on MACK trucks, we dont listen to mp3 players, we listen to iPods. We don't copy things we Xerox them. We don't use correction fluid, we use White-out. We don't use small self adhesive bandages, we use BAND-AIDS. Sometimes it good for the brand, sometimes it isn't.. In the case of White-OUT, it hurts, because all the user wants is white paint to cover up a boo-boo, it doesnt matter to them what the name sais, same with Kleenex.. It works great for brands that didn't invent their respective markets, which is why it works so well for Facebook.. Anyone unfamiliar with the internet post-reply forums, will instantly make a connection to Facebook when you explain the premise... They see Facebook, their cousins and children use it, so it becomes the phrase they use to explain it to others... It's also interesting how it works the opposite way too... eBay is the garage sale of the internet, no one says "my garage sale is the eBay of my neighbourhood"...

Re:facebook this, facebook that (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 3 years ago | (#35379836)

I guess a web site where you reveal your identity wouldn't exactly attract criminals. Except as target, of course.

Arrested for What? (5, Informative)

ko7 (1990064) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377232)

From TFA: "19-year-old Nicholas Webber and 18-year-old Ryan Thomas were still at school when they were arrested after trying to pay a £1,000 ($1,600) hotel bill with a stolen card in October 2009. After finding details of 100,000 stolen credit cards on Webber’s laptop, the police uncovered the existence of the website, as well as registered losses on 65,000 bank accounts. "

It would seem the evidence obtained from the boy's computer implicates them in much more serious crimes than just running a shady website.

Re:Arrested for What? (1, Insightful)

thehodapp (1931332) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377426)

The kid's an idiot for not encrypting his drive. If I were stealing thousands of credit cards and operating an extremely illegal website, I'd at least encrypt those files if not my whole dang hard drive.

Oh and I can't imagine what a stray nerd on wireshark would think if they picked this guy's ftp packets with files of credit card numbers...sheesh....

Re:Arrested for What? (2)

TechnoFrood (1292478) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377442)

Wouldn't have helped much with the Police here in the UK, you can get thrown in jail for not handing over your encryption password/keys.

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377478)

As opposed to being thrown in prison for hacking 100,000 credit cards? Seriously, which crime looks more smart to you?

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

Custard Horse (1527495) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378656)

The laptop was probably stolen anyway so he may as well say he found/stole it but was hoping to strip it for parts. Clearly he was not the criminal genius in all respects.

Re:Arrested for What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35379552)

True, but the RIPA act can put a person in gaol for life:

Judge: "What is your password?"
Perp: "Won't tell ya"
Judge: "That's two years, what is your password?"
Perp: "Won't tell ya"
Judge: "You have four years in the slammer. What is your password?"

Essentially, as the law is written, if a judge asks someone 50 times for the password with refusal all times, they essentially passed a life sentence on that person.

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 3 years ago | (#35379924)

Of course the smart criminal would have had two passwords; one revealing the secret data, and another revealing some legal stuff.
But then, the smart criminal would probably have used steganography anyway, so the police wouldn't have accidentally found anything.

Re:Arrested for What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35380124)

First of all you'd need the Judge to understand what a password was and what it was needed for.
They're not the most clued up people on the planet.

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377578)

Same in Australia - 6 months prison for not divulging passwords.

However TrueCrypt would be his friend - that provides plausibly deniable hidden drives.

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

N1AK (864906) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377614)

But would it? The same argument is proposed here time and time again. The law makes it illegal to refuse to hand over a password. The prosecutions case would go like this: "Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury. The defendant has a hard drive with enough space to store 300 CDs worth of information. He has encrypted it to hide his illegal activities, and has only given us a password for 30 CDs worth (your dummy volume). He continues to refuse to give us access to the other 270 CDs worth, where we believe he keeps records of his illicit activities".

Defence then bores and confuses the jury for hours about encryption, dummy volumes, garbage files etc. Jury isn't interested, but does think anyone going through all that trouble and using such 'advanced' security must have something to hide.... Guilty.

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

tris203 (1768578) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377664)

interesting that he only has a 20gb harddrive, where have you based this fact on?

From the very first page of the TrueCrypt website:

A possible plausible explanation for the existence of a partition/device containing solely random data is that you have wiped (securely erased) the content of the partition/device using one of the tools that erase data by overwriting it with random data (in fact, TrueCrypt can be used to securely erase a partition/device too, by creating an empty encrypted partition/device-hosted volume within it)

This means you could explain that it is secure wiped sensitive data (bank statements, passwords, income tax etc), and that is also why you have truecrypt installed

Re:Arrested for What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377740)

And this fails because in normal use, you would wipe the partition and then use it again, not wipe it and leave it unused. How many people have spare unused partitions on their computers?

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377772)

I still have a Vista partition on one of my machines which I reinstalled for testing purposes but never used.
It only contains the OS, hence nothing of value. Does that count?

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

wed128 (722152) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378382)

i find random data less suspicious...

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377932)

The dummy (host) volume will be reported to the OS as "30 CDs worth" used, the rest free. You can read and write to that free space all you wish. What is required is the key for the hidden volume in order to protect it from being overwritten when you write to the host volume.

In either case, the defence would state that prosecution is speculating, and has no forensic evidence that there is a hidden volume at all. If he did have that evidence, the point would be moot and excluded from cross examination; It would simply stated as fact in the evidence pack given to the jury.

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

Dan541 (1032000) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377942)

What trouble. I would give the jury a quick demonstration of how to encrypt a hard drive. (Time lapse the actual encryption process obviously).

True crypt makes it so easy that there is absolutely no excuse not to use it. It should be standard.

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

rufty_tufty (888596) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378004)

Hang on I have never used TrueCrypt, but if I read what you say correctly any unpartitioned space on a hard drive could be a truecrypt drive. Therefore anyone with unpartitioned space could be accused of having any data the police choose to accuse them of, and there is no possible defence because I don't know the key required to unencrypt that area to give them the data they want.

That can't be right surely?

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378106)

Imagine if you downloaded an image with an encrypted blob appended to it. You wouldn't even know it was there and could still be prosecuted for not knowing the password.

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

mlts (1038732) | more than 3 years ago | (#35379770)

You can convince a jury of anything here in the US and get them to rubber stamp a DA's verdict when it comes to technology. Especially with the lack of education and the rampant technophobic qualities of most people here, all the prosecution has to say, "Nobody in their right mind doesn't use up all the space on a hard disk, so the empty space is hiding something."

The defense has to then try to prove a negative (good luck), and almost always, the jury will side with the prosecution because their brains ache from all the computer terms like "encryption", or "password".

Re:Arrested for What? (2)

Schadrach (1042952) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378090)

Except I thought TrueCrypt hidden partitions worked like this:

You create an encrypted partition/disk image/whatever of a given size.
You request it have a hidden partition, and that the hidden partition be some smaller size.
TrueCrypt creates a partition of the larger size and hides the smaller one in the same space (but at the other end of the disk/file/partition/whatever).

So you have, for example, a 200GB TrueCrypt partition that contains a 160GB hidden TrueCrypt partition. Providing the password for the nonhidden partition shows you the 200GB partition, providing both shows you the 160GB hidden partition, and writing more than 40GB to the 200GB partition corrupts the hidden partition.

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

peragrin (659227) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378128)

But why make the dummy volume so big? Why not make it 1 gb or 1.1 CD's worth and then claim it was bad sectors on the drive?

Or better yet just encrypt everything on a flash drive and keep the drive physically hidden unless your working. An SD card is very easy to hide.

Re:Arrested for What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35378196)

It's harder to explain a thumbdrive full of random data than a hard drive. Overwriting hard drives is relatively common.

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377944)

Wouldn't have helped much with the Police here in the UK, you can get thrown in jail for not handing over your encryption password/keys.

For 2 years, rather than 5. Do the maths.

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

moonbender (547943) | more than 3 years ago | (#35379756)

Wouldn't have helped much with the Police here in the UK, you can get thrown in jail for not handing over your encryption password/keys.

For 2 years, rather than 5. Do the maths.

Okay. [wolframalpha.com]

Apparently, 5 years is 3 years more than 2 years.

Re:Arrested for What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35378096)

Witholding passwords displays backbone and sticking to his principles of privacy, now he's just a spineless common criminal.

In other words: it would have helped him feel better about himself.

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

Ngarrang (1023425) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378990)

Wouldn't have helped much with the Police here in the UK, you can get thrown in jail for not handing over your encryption password/keys.

Which is worse, the jail time for not divulging the password, or the jail time for what they find if you do?

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35378104)

Surely the kid's an idiot for breaking the law in the first place. That's a better focus than just critiquing his lack of tech prowess at covering his tracks.

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378220)

"Idiot" usually refers to the person's intelligence, not moral conduct. He wouldn't be an idiot if he knew enough not to get caught. He would still be a despicable person for stealing people's money, though.

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#35380352)

In theory, laws are structured so that breaking them means making a poor risk/reward judgement. The inability to balance risk and reward is a sign of low intelligence.

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

AmonTheMetalhead (1277044) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378290)

The kid is an idiot alright, i wouldn't store the files on any device i own, plenty of online places you can drop data that isn't linked to you in any way but an email address, and even those can be completely anonymous.

Seriously, what kind of an idiot pays a hotel bill with a stolen card? You have to go through a whole bunch of loops if you don't want the booking/sale to be traceable to you, that means you don't book hotels in your name with a stolen credit card (or any name for that matter, the cops can always wait for you at the hotel while you check in), you deal with goods and drop off points, mules, anything to get as much separation between you and the transaction. Jeesh, anyone with half a brain knows this!

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

Kylock (608369) | more than 3 years ago | (#35379084)

You seem pretty knowledgeable about this type of thing... you should check under your car for an illegal FBI GPS tracker [slashdot.org] !

Re:Arrested for What? (1)

AmonTheMetalhead (1277044) | more than 3 years ago | (#35380236)

No worries, i still live in the free world (Europe)

Not quite... (5, Informative)

nettdata (88196) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377242)

They weren't jailed for a social website, they were jailed for stealing and selling credit card numbers for millions of dollars and had offshore bank accounts.

Re:Not quite... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377328)

Product placement in the "news".

Re:Not quite... (2)

Rakshasa Taisab (244699) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377342)

And they still have those offshore accounts...

What does really (not) surprise me is they were using those stolen cards for stupid smalltime stuff like pay hotel bills. Seriously, that's just stupid when you're making enough money illegally.

Re:Not quite... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377930)

Age and Treachery may overcome Youth and Skill, but Youth and Treachery tends to just be pretty stupid.

Re:Not quite... (1)

SudoGhost (1779150) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378064)

Slashdot poster arrested for misleading articles

"One douchebag in the UK has been sentenced for up to five years in jail for creating and operating bullshit, one of the world's largest English-language internet annoyances. The bullshit, which had about 8,000 misleading statements, was dubbed by the court as the 'criminal equivalent of the television show House, M.D.,' or 'Crimehouse.'"

House is a popular show, so anything not really related to it should be stretched to try to apply it to the article, right? No one cares about criminal forums. But Facebook? That gets page hits.

Potential (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377262)

Sounds like these fellows have potential, someone send them a MBA and put them in charge of a bank!

Re:Potential (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377528)

Someone with potential knows that there are entirely legal and protected ways to completely fuck-over your fellow man. They go to school and learn how to not go to jail. Failing that, you might choose to become a politician.

These were a couple of borderline-retarded kids that did the same BS that's been getting people busted for decades. There's nothing 'l33t' about scamming cards and then making a nice, centralized little website for fellow dumbshits to congregate and brag on.

I, for one, celebrate this kind of ineptitude... as it results in the redirection of asshats to their new, rightful places of residence.

Re:Potential (1)

Combatso (1793216) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378302)

or a large country

Re-educate them! (2)

MrQuacker (1938262) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377276)

They need to be re-educated. Train them in Banking, then they can rob the public blind with impunity!

Hope they get everything they deserve. (1)

vivian (156520) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377286)

Bwahhahahahaha

Serves the little sh*ts right. It takes no great skill to set up something like this - it only takes the willingness to be an aesehole who wants to leech off others, and perhaps an html for dummies book.

Re:Hope they get everything they deserve. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377312)

We're still talking about Facebook, right?

Re:Hope they get everything they deserve. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377742)

Lool

Re:Hope they get everything they deserve. (1)

Combatso (1793216) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378310)

everything they deserve? I'm guessing it works out to 5 months in jail, a year probation and maybe a six month wait before they crack open their offshore accounts with millions... the only people punished here are the victims and their insurance companies.... but it sends a message to other thieves.... "don't get caught"

Crimebook? (1)

mr100percent (57156) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377288)

That brings up an interesting question, legally how liable is a forum operator for the postings on the site?

Re:Crimebook? (2)

Nursie (632944) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377318)

It is an interesting question, but moot in this case because the forum operators were involved in credit card fraud and money laundering.

Re:Crimebook? (2, Funny)

SharpFang (651121) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377376)

It is an interesting question, but moot in this case because

WTF does Moot [wikipedia.org] have to do with this?

Re:Crimebook? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377688)

It's not funny if you have to link it.

Re:Crimebook? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377696)

It is an interesting question, but moot in this case because

WTF does Moot [wikipedia.org] have to do with this?

Somebody please tell me a joke has gone over my head...

Re:Crimebook? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377828)

a joke has gone over your head

Re:Crimebook? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377754)

You're linking to the wrong wiki [encycloped...matica.com] for information on Moot.

Re:Crimebook? (1)

uxbn_kuribo (1146975) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377952)

Alot considering moot's had trouble of his own in the past with forum posters.

Re:Crimebook? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35380392)

It is an interesting question, but moot in this case because

WTF does Moot [wikipedia.org] have to do with this?

I'm very sad anyone wasted mod points on this.

Re:Crimebook? (1)

sparrowhead (1795632) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377388)

I wouldn't want to discuss that based on this story. After all, the intent behind their website was to handle stolen goods and information.

IANAL, but I think they could even face organized crime charges in some legislations

Re:Crimebook? (1)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377448)

It depends on how much they know and where it is at.

If they are hands off, I don't enter, it's up to the members posting and they remove anything brought to their attention- reporting obvious law violations to the authorities, then there is a good chance they aren't liable at all. But if they know and do nothing, or encourage it, they can be very liable.

Chances are, the forum would be considered possession of criminal tools in the act of whatever related crime and some sort of conspiracy charge to commit the crime. Already in regular crimes, if I hand you a crow bar knowing that you are going to use it to break into a store or smash someone with it, those principles apply. So it would depend a lot on the jurisdiction, the laws within, and how intelligent the prosecutor is. You might have all those elements and as prosecutor that is completely dumbfounded because the word cyber doesn't appear in any of the existing laws.

Re:Crimebook? (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377452)

Yup.

This is one of those situations where intent matters. I could quite easily set up a discussion forum on the older threads on Slashdot, taking about exactly the same stuff, but this isn't going to step Slashdot from being primarily a tech news website and that quite obviously being its intent.

If you have a site that is pretty much only about crime, and you seem to be encouraging this, then I'd say you hold some liability.

Lame name... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377302)

more like Crookbook

Re:Lame name... (1)

Crookdotter (1297179) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377568)

Hey!

Wtf has Facebook got to do with it? (1)

miffo.swe (547642) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377344)

This was a normal forum just as any other the past 20 years, not something like Facebook. Facebook is one iteration of a forum, and a crappy at that.

Facebook is inferior to most forums as its just about:
"Status Update" I got nailed today.
"Reply stranger mysteriously called friend" How nice!!!!!1111ponies!!!
"Stupid git trying to be funny" You preggo?

A good forum is about informed debate on prearranged topics with moderators holding the stupidest idiots at bay, or like slashdot.

Crimebook hehe (5, Funny)

philmarcracken (1412453) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377354)

I would have thought the police would have allowed a 'crimebook' to continue if it lived up to the assumption of the name. I'm sure coppers already have their own crimebook and could use this as second life.

Michael Rowland: 'Gonna rob the local servo on Mitchel ave. 12am today..'
Constable Steven Briggs likes this
See all 14 comments

Re:Crimebook hehe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377646)

That's good!

Re:Crimebook hehe (1)

nethenson (1093205) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377658)

Well, criminals are already using Facebook to determine which houses are empty and worth robbing, and even which people can be kidnapped [link [usatoday.com] ]...

So a Crimebook would be only fair.

Re:Crimebook hehe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35378210)

...and real criminals have facebook pages too.

Lockpicks and methcooks, please befriend me.

But they don't update their status to "went safe-cracking, not available right now"

I always thought the term hacker was a joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377356)

after the 80's but then FTFA "sold hacker software". I googled hacker software ha ha anyone who calls themselves a hacker is a complete a total goof. It's like calling a redneck sitting in a garbage can with a stick of dynamite under the garbage can an astronaut and his garbage can a space ship.

Re:I always thought the term hacker was a joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377398)

To the mooooon!

Misleading title (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377404)

Kind of misleading title...Not convicted of running a forum..which would be a free speech issue.

Link to TFA (2)

tick-tock-atona (1145909) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377436)

This is the original article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/mar/02/ghostmarket-web-scam-teenagers [guardian.co.uk]

Bonus picture of kid being a douche.

Re:Link to TFA (1)

zero0ne (1309517) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377562)

Bringing Thug Life to a web forum near you.

Re:Link to TFA (1)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377782)

"After seizing Webber's laptop, police discovered details of 100,000 stolen credit cards and a trail back to the Gh0stMarket website. Webber and Thomas jumped bail that December, fleeing to Majorca, but were rearrested when they flew back to Gatwick airport on 31 January 2010."

Yeah, just wait two months, they'll totally forget about you and you can come back.

In other news... (4, Funny)

gnalre (323830) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377496)

Microsoft has taken a 2% stake valuing the site at 2 billion dollars....

Good Article. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377566)

Good Article.
http://www.yindeeshop.com

Let Facebook sue them ! (1)

alexhs (877055) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377580)

The Gh0stMarket website [...] was dubbed by the court as [...] 'Crimebook.'

We know that Facebook owns trademark on .*book, just let them sue the court !

The courts should thank him (2)

francium de neobie (590783) | more than 3 years ago | (#35377620)

Now that you have criminals going to the Internet and disclosing what they're doing... so you can round them up before they commit crimes. And you wanna stop that? Seriously?

Teenagers Jailed For Criminal Version of Facebook (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377624)

Nice article, thanks for the information.
http://rentalmobil911.webs.com

Best bit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35377764)

"Southwark crown court was told how public-school-educated Webber, the son of a former Guernsey politician"

Note this is UK public (=private, very, very, very expensive) not US public

Perhaps this gives us an idea of the curriculum at these 'public' schools

Re:Best bit (1)

AmonTheMetalhead (1277044) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378432)

Awww... he takes after his daddy

*book.com (1)

Five Bucks! (769277) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378124)

I like how any noun can be 'book'ed if there is a web site and some social structure to it. I should assume that wrought iron fence enthusiasts would start a GateBook.com

And then if there was an insidious scandal between Gatebook.com and PicketFencebook.com the scandal would be termed Gatebook Gate.

Re:*book.com (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35379928)

And then I'll write a based-on-a-true-story about it called The Gatebook Gate Book

i call foul!! I need a lawyer (1)

Combatso (1793216) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378330)

As the author of a Crime Book, I fear I will lose sales as now people will associate my work with Facebook.... Infact, I will sue anyone using the work book

Re:i call foul!! I need a lawyer (1)

snookiex (1814614) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378714)

And if you used IRC instead, they'd call it CrimeMSN so you actually have two problems.

Knew him (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35378680)

Was in my computing class at college. Was an arrogant dumbass. That is all.

Vigilante Wars (1)

davewalthall (878247) | more than 3 years ago | (#35378774)

Do they play Vigilante Wars?

Stupid Criminal: Use a Second Computer (1)

Ngarrang (1023425) | more than 3 years ago | (#35379070)

Duh! Use a second computer, a laptop, plugged in at another location. Remotely access it with an encrypted connection to do your dirty work. The second computer should be running TrueCrypt, as per the advice already given here. Should the device become inaccessible, assume it is found and in the hands of authorities. Create another "criminal" laptop and place it at a different location. Don't go looking for the old laptop.

Haven't kids these days learned anything from watching TV?

WTF?!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35380040)

Once this was BBS's, then was forums, now somehow it's become Facebook? wtf!

This sort of behavior isn't new, nor were these guys really smart...

You work, you get paid... you steal you get ...

And eventually a cell...

What a(n) (oxy)moron! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35380094)

Facebook == Crimebook [guardian.co.uk]

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>