Hacker from Russian crime group jailed for global blackmail conspiracy
nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk
nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk
"If the home computer was not protected with up-to-date anti-virus software, the Angler would search for vulnerabilities and, if possible, deliver the "ransomware" that seized control of the machine."
What does that mean exactly?
I see folks say 'establishment' and other phrases that seem heavily loaded and used as evidence of something they're proposing... but it isn't evidence of anything.
This is clearly a severe underestimation of how ignorant most people are about ransomware and how to recognize it when installed on one’s computer.
> It immediately splashed a full screen message to the user,
It's unclear if this exploit / malware was capable of actually encrypting files or if it did something else which could easily be fixed without data loss. I think most peoples reaction would be to pull out their phones and google how to fix it.
> ...visitor to the adult site who clicked on one of Qaiser's fake adverts would trigger the download...
So, yes—if you filter out those domains down the pi-hole.
Ads (and web browsing in general) certainly have been getting much much safer in the past years, working exploit kits are vastly more difficult to come by than they were only a few years ago.
The landscape simply is nothing like it was during blackhole kits heyday.
https://www.ft.com/content/dbaea8c6-2541-11e9-b329-c7e6ceb5f...
If a legal system were to allow a criminal his proceeds you effectively make property rights useless. Because why should I pay for a transaction if I could simply force you to do it and pay nothing in exchange.
Given median wages it seems like they're getting a reasonable return provided they don't mind the stay in prison. Like would you go to prison if you were paid £70k a year to do so?
The reason for the discrepancy is simple: the government can only relcaim money connected to what they indict you for — not all the crimes people suspect, but can’t prove; in contrast, a newspaper is free to speculate “Well, if a month long sting caught them doing $50k, then they did like $500k/yr!”
You can get similar estimates if the government catches them with unsold drugs, and the paper reports how much money they would have made selling it. Again, a reasonable estimate of their cash flow, but sensible the police seize the drugs rather than money they haven’t earned yet. (And can’t seize past money, if not connected to a crime.)
I don’t have specific citations, but I’ve seen both in local papers over the years.
It's got all the hallmarks something made up to incite anger and opinion. A believable yet outragious "fact" from a newspaper followed by a conclusion that any reasonable person would make. This gives the "fact" more credibility because of how we rationalize things.
First from the list in my local paper for "drug gang 'ordered to repay'" (censored):
>A Proceeds of Crime Act hearing was told K and E had benefitted to the tune of £55k each.
>The pair appeared in $place Crown Court from custody and were told by Judge $judge to repay <£1k ea. within 30 days or face an extra 7 days in prison.
>$Y members of the gang who made nearly £200,000 were forced to hand over just over <<£10k between them. //
The next story is headlined about paying back £6k from £180k taking; these are both stories from the last 6 months.
The drugs in the stories are mostly cocaine and heroin in my UK location.
"A person commits an offence if he enters into or becomes concerned in an arrangement which he knows or suspects facilitates (by whatever means) the acquisition, retention, use or control of criminal property by or on behalf of another person."
>Qaiser spent the proceeds of his criminal activity on stays in high-end hotels, prostitutes, gambling, drugs and luxury items including a £5,000 Rolex watch.
... and he probably wasted the rest ...
WC Fields' quote:
“I spent half my money on gambling, alcohol and wild women. The other half I wasted.”
https://thenextweb.com/hardfork/2019/04/08/danish-man-senten...
The guy was a ransomware distributor who used malvertising campaigns to hijack traffic from all sort of sites, not just porn sites.
NCA press release: https://nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk/news/hacker-from-russian-...
But yes, mostly the BBC news output has become trash now. Technology/politics seems especially bad.
The correct title is guy got jailed for infecting computers with ransomware through regular ads. This is something that happens weekly I would assume, and is barely newsworthy.
This is why.