Twitter hacker's bond hearing "hacked" by Zoombombers

Originally published at:


So what was the porn hub video about?

Inquiring minds and all.


“The security aspect of cyber is very very tough.”
- “President” Trump

Where’s Rudy when you need him?


I don’t blame the judge, they have more things to worry about than Zoom settings. But doesn’t the judge have staff available? Staff who should have warned about Zoom bombing? That’s what support staff is for and I assume all judges (and courts) have such support?


“How the judge in charge of the proceeding didn’t think to enable settings that would prevent people from taking over the screen is beyond me,” tweeted infosec journalist Brian Krebs.

Krebs beat me to it. The usual technophobia we see in the judicial system isn’t enough to explain this fiasco.


On a related note, bitcoin about to cross $12k again this morning and $50k by EOY


Still, no amount of expertise can make up for the fact that many hackers tend to be self-entitled pricks.


Yup. In a real courtroom this would be a case of contempt of court and a trip behind bars. Instead, a bunch of idiots disrupt a court preceding for Lulz. Meh.

That said, anyone who doesn’t know that idiots like that exist certainly shouldn’t be hosting a Zoom meeting.


I don’t know, but I’m sure it was “barely legal”.

Is it “hacking” if all they needed to do was… show up?


Nice fact that the zoom-session only got stopped after porn appeared …
It’s a question we on the other side of the pond always try to answer: Violence. limbs flying around, blood streams everywhere -> no problem. But the slightest showing of a part nipple and/or cursing will have weird consequences …


Play the “Jay Negron” video if you really want to know.

1 Like

I’m not a professional legalmancer; but does anyone else think that allowing an accused white collar criminal to use mystery-money to meet bail conditions seems insane?

1 Like

In the context of Title 18 Section 1030 “Protected Computer” doesn’t actually hinge on the presence of any security measures. So probably.


Which just punts the question forward - is “computer fraud and abuse” the same as “hacking”?

1 Like

The way bail usually works is the person has to actually transfer the asset (in this case money) to the court. He can say his net worth is whatever he wants, but until the court is in possession of the funds, he’s going to be cooling his heels in jail. I would be surprised if the court was equipped to actually receive bitcoin. They probably just used his claim as part of a calculation to determine whether the accused could be reasonably expected to get access to the funds to post bail, and deter the flight risk.

This is why bail bond businesses exist: they provide the bail money for a fee and sometimes some form of security: a car, a lien on a mortgage, etc. If someone jumps bail, they send someone (in-house person or bounty hunter) to recapture the fugitive so they can get their bail money back. I don’t know if bail bondsmen would accept bitcoin, but I don’t really care about them, either.

1 Like

it’s defined as “knowingly accessed a computer without authorization or exceeding authorized access”.

Stuff like mass downloading JSTOR.

1 Like

Bail shouldn’t exist. Period. It keeps working class people indebted. If someone is a flight risk or a danger to the community, they stayed locked up until their court hearing… most people should be released pending trial…


I don’t disagree with you. Bail bonds, payday lenders, and pawn shops are all industries whose business model is preying on the misery and misfortune of the poor and powerless. They should all be eliminated, as well as the underlying socioeconomic conditions that allow them to exist in the first place.

It’ll be a long, tough slog, but the journey is more than worth it.

1 Like

Really, the problem is the political will to change all forms of injustice. We should have been done with shit like this decades ago, but here we are.

1 Like