248
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by FlyingSquid@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

The 25-year-old’s alleged actions in the days after the attack suggest he was not exactly a criminal mastermind. The U.S. Attorney’s Office said Council conducted a series of suspicious internet searches, for phrases like “SECGOV hack,” “telegram swap,” “how can I know for sure if I am being investigated by the FBI,” and “What are the signs you are under investigation by law enforcement or the FBI even if you have not been contacted by them.”

all 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 31 points 1 day ago

I mean you can go to the FBI website and request their data on you.

I did it myself. It was empty. But now its probably not empty.

[-] Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee 3 points 13 hours ago

Kinda shitty that USPS charges $50 for the fingerprinting. $20 for the FBI rap sheet.

[-] Scolding7300@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

Do it again, if it's empty, then it might not be because of the two tries. You'll have to continue to ask for your data until you die of old age

[-] cogman@lemmy.world 171 points 1 day ago

Clickbait title. Makes it sound like he was arrested for searching the term. He was arrested for hacking the SEC account. He later searched for "how do I know if the FBI is investigating me".

[-] Spuddlesv2@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago

No it doesn’t sound like that at all. It sounds like they’re having a bit of a laugh at the fact that he was in fact being investigated by the FBI when he did that search.

[-] orcrist@lemm.ee 1 points 7 hours ago

Yes it does sound like that. The title doesn't suggest that he actually committed crimes. Sorry!

Yeah. It's likely that the terms only came up with a wider investigation of the device/network data that the hack originated from.

[-] NicolaHaskell@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

I recently saw a thread fawning over regular posters without much critical thought to standards for editors in the age of meme-based reporting. The 90s yutes, upset about their aunts' chain mail emails' claims about artificial sweeteners and theology, ran to the Internet in search of Truth but stumbled into a breeding ground for misinformation. Oop!

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

I did read the article before I posted it. Hence my putting something from way down in the article in the body of my post.

And the headline might be a bit deceptive, but it's not inaccurate.

The article was both amusing and it fit the criteria of news, so what's the problem?

[-] Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago

A better title would have been "Man arrested by FBI for SEC hack had searched 'How to know for sure if you are being investigated by the FBI'."That would eliminate the incorrect implication.

[-] JWBananas@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

OP used the title from the article. Is that not convention?

[-] Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works 2 points 20 hours ago

Yes, it is. But when the article's title is bad, that's more than enough reason to break convention.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

I don't disagree that there could have been a better headline. As I said, it's deceptive. But it's also not inaccurate.

[-] NicolaHaskell@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Standards for reporting on Internet forums are the same as for the grocery store tabloids that agitated the forum dwellers to begin with

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

What are you even talking about now?

You're on a forum. You are a "forum dweller."

[-] NicolaHaskell@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

I'm still talking about standards of reporting, and pointing out that Internet culture tends to be especially vocal about truth and science while amplifying the same ol' sensationalism and romanticism.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

Okay? Well I wasn't doing that. I was posting a bit of news that I thought people would find amusing. It was clear from the headline that it was basically fluff news. You could easily have just skipped it.

[-] NicolaHaskell@lemmy.world -5 points 1 day ago

The FOX standard 😂 news when it humiliates the opposition, levity in between

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Which "opposition" is this humiliating? People who run crypto scams that hack government accounts?

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 59 points 1 day ago

Welp! Now he knows for sure!

[-] zcd@lemmy.ca 31 points 1 day ago

That was really nice of them to answer the question personally

Okay, but how do you know? Anyone want to google it?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 32 points 1 day ago

I'm guessing if you have to Google it, either you are or you won't be easily convinced you aren't.

[-] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 17 points 1 day ago

I'm just gonna directly ask the FBI agent investigating me straight up right here.

Yo! Are you investigating me?

[-] Iamsqueegee@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 day ago
[-] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

That giggling requires massive amounts of paperwork. Hope it was worth it

[-] Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

The people we investigate pay for our giggling paperwork with their taxes, which makes it doubly funny.

[-] Phen@lemmy.eco.br 5 points 1 day ago

I'm just curious because I've made some jokes in a thread about snipers before and I wonder if that triggered anything. But now with this article I realize that even if that one didn't, my recent comment "I wish I could know if I have ever been investigated by the FBI" might have. And if neither did, then maybe this new one might.

Crap, I might go as well and say "hey FBI, investigate me". So that I can now be sure.

...unless Lemmy is still out of their automatic tools?

I considered adding more to the joke here but got afraid it would be going too far. I think I'll write a short story about someone who gets so paranoid about knowing if he's on the FBI list or not that they end up actually doing some terrorism act just to be sure they are.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

I'm guessing some government department has a file on all of us based on what Snowden revealed.

[-] Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

Better the devil you know.

[-] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

If you really think you're the subject of a criminal investigation and think there is some utility in engaging with it before it comes to you, retain a criminal defense attorney and let them start making phone calls and sending letters

[-] Mr_Blott@feddit.uk 6 points 1 day ago

I tried and it's just a bunch of legal firms offering advice. There is also a result by the FBI themselves, trying to sell you a copy of your rap sheet lol

[-] synae@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 day ago

If you search it, and they show up, you are indeed under investigation

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

This is EXACTLY what Yahoo Answers was for!

Apart from providing material for the McElroy brothers, of course.

[-] wjrii@lemmy.world 48 points 1 day ago

So, I guess now we need a control group to do those searches without having hacked into government-owned social media accounts.

Any volunteers?

[-] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago

I volunteer you as tribute!

[-] mlg@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

After that student got arrested in the EU for making a joke in his Snapchat group of friends before boarding a flight, I've always wanted to see someone do exactly this experiment to check which messaging apps are actually E2E secure lol.

It'd be interesting to try a phone call group too.

[-] Eheran@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

A person of the group chat simply reported it. There is no way for them to somehow monitor that chat.

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 1 day ago

Definitely not a bag full of drugs

[-] dudinax@programming.dev 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The wicked flee when none persueth.

[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

What a ding dong.

Tech-savvy enough to "hack" the SEC, has to Google "How do I know if the FBI is on to me?".

[-] lemonmelon@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Being tech savvy doesn't automatically bestow knowledge of good opsec.

I wouldn't assume that a guy who builds top-fuel dragster engines could tell me how to avoid a speed trap.

[-] Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago

He should. But no, you shouldn't assume he does.

[-] Red_October@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Not the answer he wanted, but it's the answer he got.

[-] crawancon@lemm.ee 1 points 1 day ago

so that's how.

this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2024
248 points (88.8% liked)

News

23182 readers
3138 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS