Jump to content

Talk:Erik Bloodaxe (hacker)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Aren't we missing something on this page? Goggans was arrested, as I recall, and gained some notoriety in Masters of Deception. Is anyone going to cover this? Grimhim 10:22, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, He was never in MoD. Though he may have been arrested in Sun Devil, he never did any jail time. How about mentioning Comsec the cecurity company he Doc Holiday and the recently departed Malefactor started?

Sorry, I should have checked before I wrote the opening remark. He was LoD, of course, not MoD, and, as he has pointed out elsewhere, he was raided but never arrested. His early involvement with LoD and his supposed involvement in the formation of MoD, however, certainly deserves coverage in this article. I may get around to writing this ... Grimhim 10:34, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a speculation based on fact from government record on this case that Goggans may not only have turned evidence against Evan-Chaim, but possibly even lured him into a phone call that would incriminate himself in order to prevent Goggans from facing a charge. Goggans is well-documented to having turned in evidence on other hackers after his raid in order to keep his freedom. Netw1z aka john lee

Hi Netw1z, If you have more information, by all means let me know. With the amount of detail the AFP had on Phoenix I don't think they needed anything from Goggans, but if you know otherwise -- and can point me to the "government record" you speak of, I'd be happy to look into it.Grimhim 22:42, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Association with Nahshon Even-Chaim

[edit]

I'm interested to know whether there is any evidence of Goggans and Even-Chaim's actual intentions regarding Execucom. Given that Even-Chaim rooted their boxes and yet didn't appear to actually do anything toward the sort of corporate espionage he and Goggans had discussed, and given that Even-Chaim is quoted in Apro and Hammond (from Apro's wiretap) advising caution because of the possibility of additional charges were they to be caught, I'm inclined to think that this may have been not a lot more than shooting the breeze. Thedangerouskitchen 07:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may be correct in suggesting it was just talk. However Even-Chaim was convicted of four offences for what he did do in Execucom: on one charge of illegally accessing data he was given 300 hours community service; for one charge of altering data and two charges of erasing data he was given three nine-month prison terms, to be served concurrently, but released immediately on good-behaviour bonds. The judge found that Even-Chaim had no malicious motive "in the sense of a motive involving a deliberate plam to destroy or steal for your own advantage, information held by the targeted operators". A curious finding, given that it was contradicted by the evidence of Even-Chaim's comments in the wiretap. Then again, maybe he, too, decided Even-Chaim was just shooting the breeze.Grimhim 09:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm reading over the relevant section in Apro and Hammond now, and whilst Goggans certainly appeared to have invested considerable thought into how he and Even-Chaim might profit from their break-ins at Execucom, I can't find anything that indicates either of them actually copied source code out of Execucom, or that Goggans actually called them for a prospectus sheet, etc. The actual hacking that took place was before either had any ideas about what things "need[ed] to happen to Execucom".
So, is the evidence we have strong enough to contradict Goggans' quote that he never hacked maliciously? Thedangerouskitchen 12:29, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to seem as if I'm nitpicking, but the comment Goggans made in the interview was: "Malicious hacking pretty much stands against everything that I adhere to." The attitude he displayed in his conversation with Even-Chaim, regardless of when he said it, suggests exactly the opposite. He was prepared to do it, willing to do it -- or so he boasted to another hacker. The actions he discussed certainly had the potential to cause Execucom grave financial harm. To me that's a significant point in discussing the "hacker ethic" of such a notable hacker, particularly one who espoused such noble aims.Grimhim 12:57, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Nitpicking is what editing is all about! :)
How about if we said something like: "While there is no evidence that Goggans and Even-Chaim acted on this discussion, its suggestions of impropriety call into question the nobility of Goggans' hacking ethics", only not so POV, nor weaseling. Thedangerouskitchen 11:15, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good.Grimhim 22:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sheesh. Chris Goggans here. It's always weird to read what people are saying about you. I suppose I should read this stuff more often. Regarding Me and Nashon Even-Chaim (who I only knew as David, and will refer to him as going forward). My memory of the specifics of any phone call from 19 years ago is understandably sketchy, but here's what I remember.

David used to call me almost daily. I was in college at the time, and had recently been raided by the USSS in conjunction with Loyd Blankenship and Steve Jackson Games, as part of the fallout from raids on a variety of others all stemming from some kid called Fry Guy who was trying to use stolen credit cards to wire himself money. When asked "Are you in the Legion of Doom" he replied, "No, but I know who is" and gave him the names of friends of mine in Atlanta, thus tipping the dominoes. Anyway...that's the timeframe.

I was living in Austin with a roommate (Also named Chris). Sometimes when I was at school, David would talk to my roommate or anyone who might happen to be in the house. I seem to remember that several girls who hung out with us loved his accent. At the time I had no computer, and was living somewhat vicariously through David and his pals. We would talk endlessly about all manner of garbage, hacking, girls, australia, movies, etc. Whenever he'd do something cool, I'd get a call. He started doing something to the University of Texas systems, but I think I talked him out of it. Although I had to then go to the computing department and explain that any problems they may have been having were coming from Australia, and not me. When he hacked into Cliff Stoll's system, we came up with the pithy banner "Looks like the cuckoo's got egg on his face" which greeted Stoll upon his next login. When he hacked into CERT we speculated about what kind of torture several of their key staff members deserved. (So, I guess I'm also guilty of conspiracy to commit murder by WIkipedia standards?) When he got way out of control, and John Markoff wrote about a "new internet worm" in the New York Times, I introduced David to Markoff saying "this guy is your worm" and Markoff then wrote a long story about Australian hackers.

I remember Execucom being mentioned once, when David's primary internet dial-up died, and he wanted some other way to get online. At this time, he was only using dial-ups in the US, and trying to avoid committing any "computer crime" in Australia. Odd, given the fact that he was using hacked calling cards to call the USA to begin with...but that was a lesser charge or something. In any case, I think he rattled off a series of accounts he had gathered using sniffers, and wanted to know if I had dial-ups for any. Execucom was one of the places in Austin he mentioned that I think also had X.25 access (since I wanted to keep him away from UTexas), so I went through my old war-dialing notes and found a dialup number. (I had scanned almost every prefix in Austin prior to that, so had a pretty exhaustive list of modems in the area).

I don't recall saying anything like "There's things I want to do to that company" or anything else involving source code theft or blackmail, or any other "book-worthy" schemes. But who knows, I was 20 years old, living in a college "party" house, and was prone to hyperbole. I would LOVE to hear the tapes. I'm surprised that nobody ever tried to contact me when they were writing the book or fact-checking stuff. It's not like I've EVER been hard to locate. It would be hilarious to find out that it was my roommate Chris Schumacher on the tape and not me. It wouldn't be the first time something someone else said got blamed on me. (For example, the whole racist thread from Josh Quittner's MOD book that supposedly started the whole LOD vs MOD thing....that was John (Pain Hertz) and Scott Chasin (Doc Holiday) on some multi-user loop in Houston that I had never even called). But hey, I've certainly said plenty of stupid things in my life, as I'm sure everyone who is reading this has. Fortunately for most of you, nobody was listening.

Now trying to tie any of this to my "hacking ethics" is up to you. I'm not going to edit my own main page, because that's just a little too ego-maniacal even for me.

If you have any questions, I'm very easy to find.

->Chris —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cgoggans (talk • contribs) 00:37, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- Did John A. Lacour call himself Pain Hertz because of his wonky eye? --24.13.159.189 (talk) 19:27, 15 May 2011 (UTC)H0nkyK0ng[reply]

[edit]

The image Image:Itispat.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --05:18, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Erik Bloodaxe (hacker). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:47, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Erik_Bloodaxe_(hacker)&oldid=1206339736"