Serial Swatter “SWAuTistic” Bragged He Hit 100 Schools, 10 Homes

The individual who allegedly made a fake emergency call to Kansas police last week that summoned them to shoot and kill an unarmed local man has claimed credit for raising dozens of these dangerous false alarms — calling in bogus hostage situations and bomb threats at roughly 100 schools and at least 10 residences.

Tyler Raj Barriss, in an undated selfie.

On Friday authorities in Los Angeles arrested 25-year-old Tyler Raj Barriss, who is thought to be known online as “SWAuTistic.” As noted in last week’s story, SWAuTistic is an admitted serial swatter, and was even convicted in 2016 for calling in a bomb threat to an ABC affiliate in Los Angeles. The Associated Press reports that Barriss was sentenced to two years in prison for that stunt, but was released in January 2017.

In his public tweets (most of which are no longer available but were collected by KrebsOnSecurity), SWAuTistic claimed credit for bomb threats against a convention center in Dallas and a high school in Florida, as well as an incident that disrupted a much-watched meeting at the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in November.

But privately — to a small circle of friends and associates — SWAutistic bragged about perpetrating dozens of swatting incidents and bomb threats over the years.

Within a few hours of the swatting incident in Kansas, investigators searching for clues about the person who made the phony emergency call may have gotten some unsolicited help from an unlikely source: Eric “Cosmo the God” Taylor, a talented young hacker who pleaded guilty to being part of a group that swatted multiple celebrities and public figures — as well as my home in 2013.

Taylor is now trying to turn his life around, and is in the process of starting his own cybersecurity consultancy. In a posting on Twitter at 6:21 p.m. ET Dec. 29, Taylor personally offered a reward of $7,777 in Bitcoin for information about the real-life identity of SWAuTistic.

In short order, several people who claimed to have known SWAuTistic responded by coming forward publicly and privately with Barriss’s name and approximate location, sharing copies of private messages and even selfies that were allegedly shared with them at one point by Barriss.

In one private online conversation, SWAuTistic can be seen bragging about his escapades, claiming to have called in fake emergencies at approximately 100 schools and 10 homes.

The serial swatter known as “SWAuTistic” claimed in private conversations to have carried out swattings or bomb threats against 100 schools and 10 homes.

SWAuTistic sought out an interview with KrebsOnSecurity on the afternoon of Dec. 29, in which he said he routinely faked hostage and bomb threat situations to emergency centers across the country in exchange for money.

“Bomb threats are more fun and cooler than swats in my opinion and I should have just stuck to that,” SWAuTistic said. “But I began making $ doing some swat requests.”

By approximately 8:30 p.m. ET that same day, Taylor’s bounty had turned up what looked like a positive ID on SWAuTistic. However, KrebsOnSecurity opted not to publish the information until Barriss was formally arrested and charged, which appears to have happened sometime between 10 p.m. ET Dec. 29 and 1 a.m. on Dec. 30.

The arrest came just hours after SWAuTistic allegedly called the Wichita police claiming he was a local man who’d just shot his father in the head and was holding the rest of his family hostage. According to his acquaintances, SWAuTistic made the call after being taunted by a fellow gamer in the popular computer game Call of Duty. The taunter dared SWAuTistic to swat him, but then gave someone else’s address in Kansas as his own instead.

Wichita Police arrived at the address provided by SWAuTistic and surrounded the home. A young man emerged from the doorway and was ordered to put his hands up. Police said one of the officers on the scene fired a single shot — supposedly after the man reached toward his waist. Grainy bodycam footage of the shooting is available here (the video is preceded by the emergency call that summoned the police).

SWAuTistic telling another person in a Twitter direct message that he had already been to jail for swatting.

The man shot and killed by police was unarmed. He has been identified as 28-year-old Andrew Finch, a father of two. Family members say he was not involved in gaming, and had no party to the dispute that got him killed.

According to the Wichita Eagle, the officer who fired the fatal shot is a seven-year veteran with the Wichita department. He has been placed on administrative leave pending an internal investigation.

Earlier reporting here and elsewhere inadvertently mischaracterized SWAuTistic’s call to the Wichita police as a 911 call. We now know that the perpetrator called in to an emergency line for Wichita City Hall and spoke with someone there who took down the caller’s phone number. After that, 911 dispatch operators were alerted and called the number SWAuTistic had given.

This is notable because the lack of a 911 call in such a situation should have been a red flag indicating the caller was not phoning from a local number (otherwise the caller presumably would have just dialed 911).

The moment a police officer fired the shot that killed 28-year-old Wichita resident Andrew Finch (in doorway of home).

The FBI estimates that some 400 swatting incidents occur each year across the country. Each incident costs first responders approximately $10,000, and diverts important resources away from actual emergencies.

from
https://krebsonsecurity.com/2018/01/serial-swatter-swautistic-bragged-he-hit-100-schools-10-homes/

Kansas Man Killed In ‘SWATting’ Attack

A 28-year-old Kansas man was shot and killed by police officers on the evening of Dec. 28 after someone fraudulently reported a hostage situation ongoing at his home. The false report was the latest in a dangerous hoax known as “swatting,” wherein the perpetrator falsely reports a dangerous situation at an address with the goal of prompting authorities to respond to that address with deadly force. This particular swatting reportedly originated over a $1.50 wagered match in the online game Call of Duty. Compounding the tragedy is that the man killed was an innocent party who had no part in the dispute.

The following is an analysis of what is known so far about the incident, as well as a brief interview with the alleged and self-professed perpetrator of this crime.

It appears that the dispute and subsequent taunting originated on Twitter. One of the parties to that dispute — allegedly using the Twitter handle “SWauTistic” — threatened to swat another user who goes by the nickname “7aLeNT“. @7aLeNT dared someone to swat him, but then tweeted an address that was not his own.

Swautistic responded by falsely reporting to the Kansas police a domestic dispute at the address 7aLenT posted, telling the authorities that one person had already been murdered there and that several family members were being held hostage.

Image courtesey @mattcarries

A story in the Wichita Eagle says officers responded the 1000 block of McCormick and got into position, preparing for a hostage situation.

“A male came to the front door,” Livingston said. “As he came to the front door, one of our officers discharged his weapon.”

“Livingston didn’t say if the man, who was 28, had a weapon when he came to the door, or what caused the officer to shoot the man. Police don’t think the man fired at officers, but the incident is still under investigation, he said. The man, who has not been identified by police, died at a local hospital.

“A family member identified that man who was shot by police as Andrew Finch. One of Finch’s cousins said Finch didn’t play video games.”

Not long after that, Swautistic was back on Twitter saying he could see on television that the police had fallen for his swatting attack. When it became apparent that a man had been killed as a result of the swatting, Swautistic tweeted that he didn’t get anyone killed because he didn’t pull the trigger (see image above).

Swautistic soon changed his Twitter handle to @GoredTutor36, but KrebsOnSecurity managed to obtain several weeks’ worth of tweets from Swautistic before his account was renamed. Those tweets indicate that Swautistic is a serial swatter — meaning he has claimed responsibility for a number of other recent false reports to the police.

Among the recent hoaxes he’s taken credit for include a false report of a bomb threat at the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that disrupted a high-profile public meeting on the net neutrality debate. Swautistic also has claimed responsibility for a hoax bomb threat that forced the evacuation of the Dallas Convention Center, and another bomb threat at a high school in Panama City, Fla, among others.

After tweeting about the incident extensively this afternoon, KrebsOnSecurity was contacted by someone in control of the @GoredTutor36 Twitter account. GoredTutor36 said he’s been the victim of swatting attempts himself, and that this was the reason he decided to start swatting others.

He said the thrill of it “comes from having to hide from police via net connections.” Asked about the FCC incident, @GoredTutor36 acknowledged it was his bomb threat. “Yep. Raped em,” he wrote.

“Bomb threats are more fun and cooler than swats in my opinion and I should have just stuck to that,” he wrote. “But I began making $ doing some swat requests.”

Asked whether he feels remorse about the Kansas man’s death, he responded “of course I do.”

But evidently not enough to make him turn himself in.

“I won’t disclose my identity until it happens on its own,” the user said in a long series of direct messages on Twitter. “People will eventually (most likely those who know me) tell me to turn myself in or something. I can’t do that; though I know its [sic] morally right. I’m too scared admittedly.”

ANALYSIS

As a victim of my own swatting attack back in 2013, I’ve been horrified to watch these crimes only increase in frequency ever since — usually with little or no repercussions on the part of the person or persons involved in setting the schemes in motion. Given that the apparent perpetrator of this crime seems eager for media attention, it seems likely he will be apprehended soon. My guess is that he is a minor and will be treated with kid gloves as a result, although I hope I’m wrong on both counts.

Let me be crystal clear on a couple of points. First off, there is no question that police officers and first responders across the country need a great deal more training to bring the number of police shootings way down. That is undoubtedly a giant contributor to the swatting epidemic.

Also, all police officers and dispatchers need to be trained on what swatting is, how to spot the signs of a hoax, and how to minimize the risk of anyone getting harmed when responding to reports about hostage situations or bomb threats. Finally, officers of the peace who are sworn to protect and serve should use deadly force only in situations where there is a clear and immediate threat. Those who jump the gun need to be held accountable as well.

But that kind of reform isn’t going to happen overnight. Meanwhile, knowingly and falsely making a police report that results in a SWAT unit or else heavily armed police response at an address is an invitation for someone to get badly hurt or killed. These are high-pressure situations and in most cases — as in this incident — the person opening the door has no idea what’s going on. Heaven protect everyone at the scene if the object of the swatting attack is someone who is already heavily armed and confused enough about the situation to shoot anything that comes near his door.

In some states, filing a false police report is just a misdemeanor and is mainly punishable by fines. However, in other jurisdictions filing a false police report is a felony, and I’m afraid it’s long past time for these false reports about dangerous situations to become a felony offense in every state. Here’s why.

If making a fraudulent report about a hostage situation or bomb threat is a felony, then if anyone dies as a result of that phony report they can legally then be charged with felony murder. Under the doctrine of felony murder, when an offender causes the death of another (regardless of intent) in the commission of a dangerous crime, he or she is guilty of murder.

Too often, however, the perpetrators of these crimes are minors, and even when they’re caught they are frequently given a slap on the wrist. Swatting needs to stop, and unfortunately as long as there are few consequences for swatting someone, it will continue to be a potentially deadly means for gaining e-fame and for settling childish and pointless ego squabbles.

from
https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/12/kansas-man-killed-in-swatting-attack/

Happy 8th Birthday, KrebsOnSecurity!

Eight years ago today I set aside my Washington Post press badge and became an independent here at KrebsOnSecurity.com. What a wild ride it has been. Thank you all, Dear Readers, for sticking with me and for helping to build a terrific community.

This past year KrebsOnSecurity published nearly 160 stories, generating more than 11,000 reader comments. The pace of publications here slowed down in 2017, but then again I have been trying to focus on quality over quantity, and many of these stories took weeks or months to report and write.

As always, a big Thank You to readers who sent in tips and personal experiences that helped spark stories here. For anyone who wishes to get in touch, I can always be reached via this site’s contact form, or via email at krebsonsecurity @ gmail dot com.

Here are some other ways to reach out:

Twitter (open DMs)

Facebook

via Wickr at “krebswickr”

Protonmail: krebsonsecurity at protonmail dot com

Keybase

Below are the Top 10 most-read stories of 2017, as decided by views and sorted in reverse chronological order:

The Market for Stolen Account Credentials

Phishers are Upping Their Game: So Should You

Equifax Breach Fallout: Your Salary History

USPS’ Informed Delivery is a Stalker’s Dream

The Equifax Breach: What You Should Know

Got Robocalled? Don’t Get Mad, Get Busy

Why So Many Top Hackers Hail from Russia

Post-FCC Privacy Rules: Should You VPN?

If Your iPhone is Stolen, These Guys May Try to iPhish You

Who is Anna-Senpai, the Mirai Worm Author?

from
https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/12/happy-8th-birthday-krebsonsecurity/

4 Years After Target, the Little Guy is the Target

Dec. 18 marked the fourth anniversary of this site breaking the news about a breach at Target involving some 40 million customer credit and debit cards. It has been fascinating in the years since that epic intrusion to see how organized cyber thieves have shifted from targeting big box retailers to hacking a broad swath of small to mid-sized merchants.

In many ways, not much has changed: The biggest underground shops that sell stolen cards still index most of their cards by ZIP code. Only, the ZIP code corresponds not to the legitimate cardholder’s billing address but to the address of the hacked store at which the card in question was physically swiped (the reason for this is that buyers of these cards tend to prefer cards used by people who live in their geographic area, as the subsequent fraudulent use of those cards tends to set off fewer alarm bells at the issuing bank).

Last week I was researching a story published here this week on how a steep increase in transaction fees associated with Bitcoin is causing many carding shops to recommend alternate virtual currencies like Litecoin. And I noticed that popular carding store Joker’s Stash had just posted a new batch of cards dubbed “Dynamittte,” which boasted some 7 million cards advertised as “100 percent” valid — meaning the cards were so fresh that even the major credit card issuers probably didn’t yet know which retail or restaurant breach caused this particular breach.

An advertisement for a large new batch of stolen credit card accounts for sale at the Joker’s Stash Dark Web market.

Translation: These stolen cards were far more likely to still be active and useable after fraudsters encode the account numbers onto fake plastic and use the counterfeits to go shopping in big box stores.

I pinged a couple of sources who track when huge new batches of stolen cards hit the market, and both said the test cards they’d purchased from the Joker’s Stash Dynamittte batch mapped back to customers who all had one thing in common: They’d all recently eaten at a Jason’s Deli location.

Jason’s Deli is a fast casual restaurant chain based in Beaumont, Texas, with approximately 266 locations in 28 states. Seeking additional evidence as to the source of the breach, I turned to the Jason’s Deli Web site and scraped the ZIP codes for their various stores across the country. Then I began comparing those ZIPs with the ZIPs tied to this new Dynamittte batch of cards at Joker’s Stash.

Checking my work were the folks at Mindwise.io, a threat intelligence startup in California that monitors Dark Web marketplaces and tries to extract useful information from them. Mindwise found a nearly 100 percent overlap between the ZIP codes on the “Blasttt-US” unit of the Dynamittte cards for sale and the ZIP codes for Jason’s Deli locations.

Reached for comment, Jason’s Deli released the following statement:

“On Friday, Dec. 22, 2017, our company was notified by payment processors – the organizations that manage the electronic connections between Jason’s Deli locations and payment card issuers – that MasterCard security personnel had informed it that a large quantity of payment card information had appeared for sale on the ‘dark web,’ and that an analysis of the data indicated that at least a portion of the data may have come from various Jason’s Deli locations.”

“Jason’s Deli’s management immediately activated our response plan, including engagement of a leading threat response team, involvement of other forensic experts, and cooperation with law enforcement. Among the questions that investigators are working to determine is whether in fact a breach took place, and if so, to determine its scope, the method employed, and whether there is any continuing breach or vulnerability.”

“The investigation is in its early stages and, as is typical in such situations, we expect it will take some time to determine exactly what happened. Jason’s Deli will provide as much information as possible as the inquiry progresses, bearing in mind that security and law enforcement considerations may limit the amount of detail we can provide.”

It’s important to note that the apparent breach at Jason’s Deli almost certainly does not correspond to 7 million cards; typically, carding shop owners will mix cards stolen from multiple breaches into one much larger batch (Dynamittte), and often further subdivide the cards by region (US vs. European cards).

As run-of-the-mill as these card breaches have become, it’s still remarkable even in smaller batches of cards like those apparently stolen from Jason’s Deli customers just how many financial institutions are impacted with each breach.

Banks impacted by the apparent breach at Jason’s Deli, sorted by Bank ID Number (BIN) — i.e. the issuer identified by the first six digits in the card number.

Mindwise said it was comfortable concluding that at least 170,000 of the cards for put up for sale this past week on Joker’s Stash map back to Jason’s Deli locations. That may seem like a drop in the bucket compared to the 40 million cards that thieves hauled away from Target four years ago, but the cards stolen from Jason’s Deli customers were issued by more than 250 banks and credit unions, most of which will adopt differing strategies on how to manage fraud on those cards.

In other words, by moving down the food chain to smaller but far more plentiful and probably less secure merchants (either by choice or because the larger stores became a harder target) — and by mixing cards stolen from multiple breaches — the fraudsters have made it less likely that breaches at chain stores will be detected and remediated quickly, thereby prolonging the value and use of the stolen cards put up for sale in underground marketplaces.

All that said, it’s really not worth it to spend time worrying about where your card number may have been breached, since it’s almost always impossible to say for sure and because it’s common for the same card to be breached at multiple establishments during the same time period.

Just remember that although consumers are not liable for fraudulent charges, it may still fall to you the consumer to spot and report any suspicious charges. So keep a close eye on your statements, and consider signing up for text message notifications of new charges if your card issuer offers this service. Most of these services also can be set to alert you if you’re about to miss an upcoming payment, so they can also be handy for avoiding late fees and other costly charges.

Related reading (i.e., other breach stories confirmed with ZIP code analysis):

Breach at Sonic Drive-in May Have Impacted Millions of Credit, Debit Cards

Zip Codes Show Extent of Sally Beauty Breach

Data: Nearly All U.S. Home Depot Stores Hit

Cards Stolen in Target Breach Flood Underground Markets

from
https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/12/4-years-after-target-the-little-guy-is-the-target/

Skyrocketing Bitcoin Fees Hit Carders in Wallet

Critics of unregulated virtual currencies like Bitcoin have long argued that the core utility of these payment systems lies in facilitating illicit commerce, such as buying drugs or stolen credit cards and identities. But recent spikes in the price of Bitcoin — and the fees associated with moving funds into and out of it — have conspired to make Bitcoin a less useful and desirable payment method for many crooks engaged in these activities.

Bitcoin’s creator(s) envisioned a currency that could far more quickly and cheaply facilitate payments, with tiny transaction fees compared to other, more established and regulated forms of payment (such as credit cards). And indeed, until the beginning of 2017 those fees were well below $1, frequently less than 10 cents per transaction.

But as the price of Bitcoin has soared over the past few months to more than $15,000 per coin, so have the Bitcoin fees per transaction. This has made Bitcoin far less attractive for conducting small-dollar transactions (for more on this shift, see this Dec. 19 story from Ars Technica).

As a result, several major underground markets that traffic in stolen digital goods are now urging customers to deposit funds in alternative virtual currencies, such as Litecoin. Those who continue to pay for these commodities in Bitcoin not only face far higher fees, but also are held to higher minimum deposit amounts.

“Due to the drastic increase in the Bitcoin price, we faced some difficulties,” reads the welcome message for customers after they log in to Carder’s Paradise, a Dark Web marketplace that KrebsOnSecurity featured in a story last week.

“The problem is that we send all your deposited funds to our suppliers which attracts an additional Bitcoin transaction fee (the same fee you pay when you make a deposit),” Carder’s Paradise explains. “Sometimes we have to pay as much as 5$ from every 1$ you deposited.”

The shop continues:

“We have to take additionally a ‘Deposit fee’ from all users who deposit in Bitcoins. This is the amount we spent on transferring your funds to our suppliers. To compensate your costs, we are going to reduce our prices, including credit cards for all users and offer you the better bitcoin exchange rate.”

“The amount of the Deposit Fee depends on the load on the Bitcoin network. However, it stays the same regardless of the amount deposited. Deposits of 10$ and 1000$ attract the same deposit fee.”

“If the Bitcoin price continues increasing, this business is not going to be profitable for us anymore because all our revenue is going to be spent on the Bitcoin fees. We are no longer in possession of additional funds to improve the store.”

“We urge you to start using Litecoin as much as possible. Litecoin is a very fast and cheap way of depositing funds into the store. We are not going to charge any additional fees if you deposit Litecoins.”

On Carder’s Paradise, the current minimum deposit amount is 0.0066 BTCs, or approximately USD $100. The deposit fee for each transaction is $15.14. That means that anyone who deposits just the minimum amount into this shop is losing more than 15 percent of their deposit in transaction fees.

Incredibly, the administrators of Carder’s Paradise apparently received so much pushback from crooks using their service that they decided to lower the price of stolen credit cards to make potential buyers feel better about higher transaction fees.

“Our team made a decision to adjust the previous announcement and provide a fair solution for everyone by reducing the credit cards [sic] prices,” the message concludes.

Mainstream merchants that accept credit card payments have long griped about the high cost of transaction fees, which average $2.50 to $3.00 on a $100 charge. What’s fascinating about the spike in Bitcoin transaction fees is that crooks could end up paying five times as much in fees just to purchase the same amount in stolen credit card accounts!

from
https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/12/skyrocketing-bitcoin-fees-hit-carders-in-wallet/

U.K. Man Avoids Jail Time in vDOS Case

A U.K. man who pleaded guilty to launching more than 2,000 cyberattacks against some of the world’s largest companies has avoided jail time for his role in the attacks. The judge in the case reportedly was moved by pleas for leniency that cited the man’s youth at the time of the attacks and a diagnosis of autism.

In early July 2017, the West Midlands Police in the U.K. arrested 19-year-old Stockport resident Jack Chappell and charged him with using a now-defunct attack-for-hire service called vDOS to launch attacks against the Web sites of Amazon, BBC, BT, Netflix, T-Mobile, Virgin Media, and Vodafone, between May 1, 2015 and April 30, 2016.

One of several taunting tweets Chappell sent to his DDoS victims.

Chappell also helped launder money for vDOS, which until its demise in September 2016 was by far the most popular and powerful attack-for-hire service — allowing even completely unskilled Internet users to launch crippling assaults capable of knocking most Web sites offline.

Using the Twitter handle @fractal_warrior, Chappell would taunt his victims while  launching attacks against them. The tweet below was among several sent to the Jisc Janet educational support network and Manchester College, where Chappell was a student. In total, Chappell attacked his school at least 21 times, prosecutors showed.

Another taunting Chappell tweet.

Chappell was arrested in April 2016 after investigators traced his Internet address to his home in the U.K. For more on the clues that likely led to his arrest, check out this story.

Nevertheless, the judge in the case was moved by pleas from Chappell’s lawyer, who argued that his client was just an impressionable youth at the time who has autism, a range of conditions characterized by challenges with social skills, repetitive behaviors, speech and nonverbal communication.

The defense called on an expert who reportedly testified that Chappell was “one of the most talented people with a computer he had ever seen.”

“He is in some ways as much of a victim, he has been exploited and used,” Chappell’s attorney Stuart Kaufman told the court, according to the Manchester Evening News. “He is not malicious, he is mischievous.”

The same publication quoted Judge Maurice Greene at Chappell’s sentencing this week, saying to the young man: “You were undoubtedly taken advantage of by those more criminally sophisticated than yourself. You would be extremely vulnerable in a custodial element.”

Judge Greene decided to suspend a sentence of 16 months at a young offenders institution; Chappell will instead “undertake 20 days rehabilitation activity,” although it’s unclear exactly what that will entail.

ANALYSIS/RANT

It’s remarkable when someone so willingly and gleefully involved in a crime spree such as this can emerge from it looking like the victim. “Autistic Hacker Had Been Exploited,” declared a headline about the sentence in the U.K. newspaper The Times.

After reading the coverage of this case in the press, I half expected to see another story saying someone had pinned a medal on Chappell or offered him a job.

Jack Chappell, outside of a court hearing in the U.K. earlier this year.

Yes, Chappell will have the stain of a criminal conviction on his record, and yes autism can be a very serious and often debilitating illness. Let me be clear: I am not suggesting that offenders like this young man should be tossed in jail with violent criminals.

But courts around the world continue to send a clear message that young men essentially can do whatever they like when it comes to DDoS attacks and that there will be no serious consequences as a result.

Chappell launched his attacks via vDOS, which provided a simple, point-and-click service that allowed even completely unskilled Internet users to launch massive DDoS attacks. vDOS made more than $600,000 in just two of the four years it was in operation, launching more than 150,000 attacks against thousands of victims (including this site).

In September 2016, vDOS was taken offline and its alleged co-creators — two Israeli man who created the business when they were 14 and 15 years old — were arrested and briefly detained by Israeli authorities. But despite assurances that the men (now adults) would be tried for their crimes, neither has been prosecuted.

In July 2017, a court in Germany issued a suspended sentence for Daniel Kaye, a 29-year-old man who allegedly launched extortionist DDoS attacks against several bank Web sites.

After the source code for the Mirai botnet malware was released in September 2016, Kaye built his own Mirai botnet and used it in several high-profile attacks, including a fumbled assault that knocked out Internet service to more than 900,000 Deutsche Telekom customers.

In his trial, Kaye admitted that a customer of his paid him $10,000 to attack the Liberian ISP Lonestar. He’s also thought to have launched DDoS attacks on Lloyds Banking Group and Barclays banks in January 2017. Kaye is now facing related cybercrime charges in the U.K.

Last week, the U.S. Justice Department unsealed the cases of two young men in the United States who have pleaded guilty to co-authoring Mirai, an “Internet of Things” (IoT) malware strain that has been used to create dozens of copycat Mirai botnets responsible for countless DDoS attacks over the past 15 months. Jha and his co-defendants in that case launched highly disruptive and extortionist attacks against a number of Web sites and used their creation to conduct lucrative click fraud schemes.

Like Chappell, the core author of Mirai — 21-year-old Fanwood, N.J. resident Paras Jha — launched countless DDoS attacks against his school, costing Rutgers University between $3.5 million and $9 million to defend against and clean up after the assaults (the actual damages will be decided at Jha’s sentencing in March 2018).

Time will tell if Kaye or Jha and his co-defendants receive any real punishment for their crimes. But I would submit that if we don’t have the stomach to put these “talented young hackers” in jail when they’re ultimately found guilty, perhaps we should consider harnessing their skills in less draconian but still meaningfully punitive ways, such as requiring them to serve several years participating in programs designed to keep other kids from following in their footsteps.

Doing anything less smacks of a disservice to justice, glorifies DDoS as an essentially victimless crime, and serves little deterrent that might otherwise make it less likely that we will see fewer such cases going forward.

from
https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/12/u-k-man-avoids-jail-time-in-vdos-case/

Buyers Beware of Tampered Gift Cards

Prepaid gift cards make popular presents and no-brainer stocking stuffers, but before you purchase one be on the lookout for signs that someone may have tampered with it. A perennial scam that picks up around the holidays involves thieves who pull back and then replace the decals that obscure the card’s redemption code, allowing them to redeem or transfer the card’s balance online after the card is purchased by an unwitting customer.

Last week KrebsOnSecurity heard from Colorado reader Flint Gatrell, who reached out after finding that a bunch of Sam’s Club gift cards he pulled off the display rack at Wal-Mart showed signs of compromise. The redemption code was obscured by a watermarked sticker that is supposed to make it obvious if it has been tampered with, and many of the cards he looked at clearly had stickers that had been peeled back and then replaced.

“I just identified five fraudulent gift cards on display at my local Wal-Mart,” Gatrell said. “They each had their stickers covering their codes peeled back and replaced. I can only guess that the thieves call the service number to monitor the balances, and try to consume them before the victims can.  I’m just glad I thought to check!”

In the picture below, Gatrell is holding up three of the Sam’s Club cards. The top two showed signs of tampering, but the one on the bottom appeared to be intact.

The top two gift cards show signs that someone previously peeled back the protective sticker covering the redemption code. Image: Flint Gatrell.

Kevin Morrison, a senior analyst on the retail banking and payments team at market analysis firm Aite Group, said the gift card scheme is not new but that it does tend to increase in frequency around the holidays, when demand for the cards is far higher.

“Store employees are instructed to look for abnormalities at the [register] but this happens [more] around the holiday season as attention spans tend to shorten,” he said. “While gift card packaging has improved and some safe-guards put in place, fraudsters look for the weakest link and hit hard when they find one.”

Gift cards make great last-minute gifts, but don’t let your guard down in your haste to wrap up your holiday shopping. There are so many variations on the above-described scheme that many stores have taken to keeping gift cards at or behind the register, where cashiers can more easily spot customers trying to tamper with the cards. As a result, stores that take this basic precaution may be the safest place to purchase gift cards.

from
https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/12/buyers-beware-of-tampered-gift-cards/