Hacking is one thing. I understand the technical thrill. But blackmail and fraud? That's a human-to-human interaction, not human-to-machine. Once a person cross that line where you are harming another person at that level, there is no going back.
Blackmail and fraud are both offences that involve using others as means to ends, and require the ability to discount the damage and pain you cause to others. If I were hiring a coder (let alone a computer security consultant) I'd search for a long time before hiring someone with a record of that kind of untrustworthy behaviour.
Sorry to be blunt; I know that some companies pay good money to convicted criminal hackers for their expertise. But I think that's a deplorable practice; it encourages the view that hacking/cracking, blackmail and fraud are a sensible route into regular employment. I think those convictions should be a blocker.
A physician who harms his patients through negligence or malice gets struck-off.
A lawyer who steals his clients' money gets disbarred.
A banker who mismanages his clients' funds loses his banking licence.
If any of those was found guilty of using information from their clients to blackmail them, they'd have no future in their chosen trade - ever.
Or think of it this way...
Could someone not be a doctor if they had assaulted someone before medical school?
Would a lawyer not be able to be admitted to the bar if they had been convicted previously?
I'm actually not sure about those, they both might not be allowed. I just lean on the side of forgiveness once you've "paid your debt to society".
That's just the type of bullshit that makes pizza restaurants not wanting to have a person with a criminal record anywhere in the building. It's a form of vigilante punishment that continues to for the life of a felon, way past the point where their debt to society has been supposedly paid.
Employers should be banned to ask or process such information. "Is currently wanted or on parole" - legitimate question, "was ever convicted" - No, you have no right to know that, except very limited cases defined by law: working with children and the vulnerable, large sums of cash, working in the financial sector etc.
This guy seems to be on probation, and under supervision of SOCA - he hasn't yet completed his sentence. Are we talking USA? He's a felon, and in most US states he will never again be allowed to vote in elections.
In this country you don't have to disclose prior convictions to anyone, beyond a certain date - I think something like ten years. I agree with that. In the same way, expired convictions can't be taken into account in sentencing deliberations. I agree with that too - I do think convictions should expire. Past acts shouldn't follow you around forever. But if you're on probation now for two serious crimes, I think it's crazy to say that a prospective employer shouldn't be allowed to ask, and to rely on your answer on pain of instant dismissal.
And FWIW I don't agree with the US practice of denying felons the vote.