back

by pessimizer·14y ago·view on hn ↗
It is moronic that he thinks that informing cops about child porn on a computer he hacked would get him out of trouble, or get the pedophile in trouble - but the odds that a pedophile is going to call the police and complain about being hacked seem to be to be about where he puts them. He's not talking about "going after" the pedophile, he's talking about hacking the pedophile to have somebody to hack.

Out of curiosity, what possible laws did he break by going through a few public databases, facebook, whois data and google, and what does it have to do with computer forensics? I did this same type of thing to go after a 4chan-type troll who was attacking my blog a few years ago. and it was a joy to really effectively stop somebody who thought they were anonymous on the internet.

1 comments
He should have left the guys wife out of it for one, he also should not admit in public to hacking computers. Regardless of who owns them that's breaking the law.
He definitely shouldn't have mentioned the guy's wife and kids, but it's certainly not against the law. It's definitely not bright to admit in public to hacking computers in the same way it's not bright to admit in public to doing drugs, but it isn't actually against any law but the law of prudence and good sense.
Before you ever decide to hack someone's computer I suggest you consult a lawyer.
I think I missed something. How did he hack the other guy's computer? He based his analysis on email headers received in his own computer, and used Google, whois, fb, etc. after that. Right?
He didn't hack this guys computer but he pretty much documents for the world to see that he's hacked other computers.

There's stupid and then there is this article.

Before you ever decide to smoke marijuana, I suggest you consult a lawyer.