←back to thread

Man jailed for parole violations after refusing to decrypt his Tor node

(reddit.com)
989 points heavyset_go | 2 comments | 16 Sep 25 12:10 UTC | HN request time: 0.503s | source
Show context
tptacek ◴[16 Sep 25 13:26 UTC] No.45261951[source]▶
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.

replies(13): >>45261987 #>>45262004 #>>45262031 #>>45262032 #>>45262053 #>>45262096 #>>45262107 #>>45262359 #>>45262427 #>>45262489 #>>45262691 #>>45263190 #>>45263322 #
tptacek ◴[16 Sep 25 13:33 UTC] No.45262053[source]▶
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).

replies(12): >>45262123 #>>45262144 #>>45262161 #>>45262367 #>>45262384 #>>45262386 #>>45262724 #>>45262818 #>>45262976 #>>45263837 #>>45263945 #>>45264601 #
kstrauser ◴[16 Sep 25 14:00 UTC] No.45262386[source]▶
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.
replies(3): >>45262488 #>>45262671 #>>45263176 #
1. Almondsetat ◴[16 Sep 25 14:56 UTC] No.45263176[source]▶
This is exactly what all big corporations (rightly) do, and when layoffs come around you see waves of people making sob stories about how nobody told them and suddenly their work laptop stopped working from one minute to the next, or they didn't even let them inside the office because they were terminated during their morning commute.
replies(1): >>45263648 #
2. kstrauser ◴[16 Sep 25 15:32 UTC] No.45263648[source]▶
Yeah. That’s actually a favor in disguise. Now they can’t accuse you of stealing or destroying stuff on your way out.

BTW, last time I posted stuff like this, someone thought I was treating this like an alibi: “ah ha! Now I can run amok and not get blamed for it!” No. Don’t do that, lest ye end up with a felony and permanent unemployability. I just mean that when things inevitably break due to natural entropy, the first question is often of who had access, and you don’t ever want your name to be on that list.