Netherlands Seizes 800 Servers, Arrests 2 for Aiding Cyberattacks

(krebsonsecurity.com)

122 points | by jruohonen 2 hours ago

6 comments

  • ziofill 12 minutes ago
    Maybe it's because I haven't had my coffee yet, but I swear my brain read: "Neanderthals Seize 800 Servers"
  • efitz 53 minutes ago
    I’ve been on the defender side of security my whole career.

    I know in some markets crime pays more than legitimate work, but it never ceases to amaze me how much thought, effort, planning, and engineering goes into providing infrastructure IT services for cybercriminals. The people involved definitely have the skills to be profitable at legitimate work; it just puzzles me that they choose to support criminals.

    • Aurornis 38 minutes ago
      I watched the downfall and eventual jailing of someone who had a great job, career, and family after he started getting involved in cybercrime.

      As far as I can make sense of it, he enjoyed the thrill of feeling superior to others: Evading the law, exploiting people who viewed as stupid, and enriching himself in the process.

      He got caught through a mistake that was really dumb in retrospect. I think he believed his intellectual superiority combined with the stupidity of others so much that eventually he couldn’t imagine anyone catching him.

    • thewebguyd 6 minutes ago
      It's not easy to go legit, especially in today's job market, depending on where you live in the world also.

      The US is unique with its high salaries for tech work (on the lower end of those of high salaries is pure ops work like this though). If you're in a country where the average sysadmin salary is substantially lower (to pick on Eastern Europe for a minute, you're looking at the equivalent of ~$30-35k USD/year), it's not hard to see why its tempting to go the cybercrime route.

    • r_lee 44 minutes ago
      > The people involved definitely have the skills to be profitable at legitimate work; it just puzzles me that they choose to support criminals.

      I don't think it's that easy to go legit. having a tech job nowadays is already a luxury

    • dist-epoch 1 minute ago
      You fail to take into account the ideological angle.

      Some people are ready to die for their beliefs. Others just to run businesses supporting their causes.

      3 of the 4 persons named have russian links.

    • amelius 32 minutes ago
      Cybersecurity is always last on the budget list. It is not easy to make money working in cybersecurity.

      The only upside here is that criminals will (through legislation) eventually force companies to invest more.

    • ruined 42 minutes ago
      often the issue is capital. they're working for money, at the end of the day.

      you can build your own skills and develop your own motivation. but if the only funding you can access is illicit, there's one path forward.

      or maybe it's ideological. this example seems to be a bit of a geopolitical thing too.

  • 0xAstro 1 hour ago
    > Stark Industries Solutions

    jarvis, whats the status of my dutch servers

  • legacynl 49 minutes ago
    > those sanctions failed to target Stark’s remaining connection to the Internet — an Internet service provider based in the Netherlands called MIRhosting.

    The fuck, i walk past the office of mirhosting every day

  • analog8374 1 hour ago
    It would be nice if they named/prosecuted the people who paid them to perform the attacks.
    • parineum 27 minutes ago
      Law enforcement doesn't typically talk about ongoing investigations.
  • DeathArrow 1 hour ago
    After reading the article I am not sure what crime did they commit in the Netherlands.
    • msh 1 hour ago
      The article spells it out clearly: charging them with violating sanctions law by directly or indirectly making economic resources available to EU-sanctioned entities.
    • bunbun69 56 minutes ago
      I feel like you’re only asking this because you disagree with their charges, not because you genuinely have no clue why they’re arrested.
    • binaryturtle 1 hour ago
      > …charging them with violating sanctions law by directly or indirectly making economic resources available to EU-sanctioned entities…

      I guess that's why.

    • SecretDreams 1 hour ago
      > charging them with violating sanctions law by directly or indirectly making economic resources available to EU-sanctioned entities.

      Did you read this part?

    • DonHopkins 1 hour ago
      [flagged]