←back to thread

989 points heavyset_go | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.206s | source
Show context
tptacek ◴[] 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 ◴[] 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 #
tehwebguy ◴[] No.45262367[source]
Oof. Any links to this one?
replies(1): >>45262702 #
plorg ◴[] No.45262702[source]
I believe this is the primary case being currently contested: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69848942/united-states-...

This appears to be the earlier filing, but I'm not savvy enough to pull the underlying docs if indeed I can (where I am used to viewing PACER documents I get a permissions error): https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66960649/united-states-...

(If you install the RECAP extension in your browser you can cache downloaded PACER docs and they will get linked from Courtlistener. Lay users can sign up for a PACER account and if you use less than $30 of document access charge per quarter it will be waived)

replies(1): >>45262836 #
mikeyouse ◴[] No.45262836[source]
Your second case was in the WD of Texas which is where he was arrested - it's just minutia to have him 'removed' to the ED of Texas to face charges where he was indicted - this is the main case there:

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16517474/united-states-...

Here's his plea: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txed.19...

My recap is acting up a bit so I'll just copy/paste in case it doesn't grab docket entry 158 - the 'factual basis' for the plea:

1. That the defendant, Conrad Rockenhaus, who is entering a plea of guilty, is the same person charged in the Indictment;

2. That the defendant worked as a as a developer services manager, and later an infrastructure architect, for an online company providing travel booking and vacation services to customers (hereinafter, Victim Company );

3. That the defendant had access to and could control computer code located on Victim Company s servers throughout the country, including computer code that controlled business functions such as marketing, scheduling, and payment processing;

4. That on or about November 11, 2014, the defendant remotely accessed, without authorization, the Victim Company s servers from his residence in the Eastern District of Texas;

5. That on or about November 11, 2014, the defendant executed a computer code or command that shut down one of Victim Company s servers, which in turn caused several other Victim Company servers to crash;

6. That the defendant was retained by Victim Company to assist with the restoration of Victim Company’s servers;

7. That during the remediation efforts, the defendant, without authorization, disconnected Victim Company’s servers in Plano, Texas, in the Eastern District of Texas, causing further business disruption;

8. That the defendant’s actions cost Victim Company at least $242,775 in lost revenue and at least $321,858 in recovery and remediation costs.

replies(1): >>45265139 #
1. mikeyouse ◴[] No.45265139[source]
Edit; Recap worked,

Here's the link to the full docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16117870/united-states-...

And the factual basis for his plea: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16117870/158/united-sta...