Anti-fascist hacker group break into 'Blood & Honour' server

Forums: Internet, Hacking, Nazi, Neo Nazi, International News
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Left wing, antifascist computer freaks have got (illegally) the data of more than 30,000 persons from the server of 'Blood & Honour', a right-wing, neo-Nazi group, illegal in Germany.

Report (in English) at Deutsche Welle http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3604365,00.html

Quote:

[...]Members of the anti-fascist left-wing group Daten-Antifa on Friday, Aug. 29, managed to break the access codes and enter the databank of Blood and Honour (B&H), a neo-Nazi organization that has been banned in Germany since 2000.
...
According to Daten-Antifa, 31,948 pieces of data were collected clandestinely from the B&H server, including 500 from Germany. This indicated that the international network is also used by members of the German neo-Nazi scene, which authorities had previously suspected. [...]

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 4 • Views: 8,801 • Replies: 28

No top replies

@Walter Hinteler,

What use do they plan to make of the information?

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe wrote:

What use do they plan to make of the information?

It certainly was a criminal act. So they posted the data on (one of their) website(s), launched this to the press (the 'Frankfurter Rundschau' is a liberal-left leaning paper) .... and hoped that the police/prosecution will act - and they at least took notice.

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Police and public prosecutors cannot use information obtained by unlawful means. They can, however, prosecute criminals like hackers breaking into servers and stealing information - what is German and/or British police doing about that?

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Fruit of the poison tree?

Does this apply in Germany?

Or, if the police then launched a legal investigation, would that b eok?

1 Reply

@dlowan,

High Seas wrote:

Police and public prosecutors cannot use information obtained by unlawful means. They can, however, prosecute criminals like hackers breaking into servers and stealing information - what is German and/or British police doing about that?

dlowan wrote:

Fruit of the poison tree?

Does this apply in Germany?

Or, if the police then launched a legal investigation, would that b eok?

In Britain, a couple of weeks ago the memberships data of the BNP (the nationalist, extreme right-wing British [*Nazi"] party were (illegally) published.

I don't know what happened after the above mentioned hacking by the police/prosecution (nothing published as far as I could find out).
[Nullo actore, nullus iudex: 'hacking' is no offence requiring public prosecution as far as I know.]

However, the AntiFa-groups are observed in various German states by the states' offices for the protection of the constitution (= kind of domestic secret service on regional leve; there's a Federal Office as well).

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter - the Verfassungsschutz office itself links to the following article:
http://www.verfassungsschutz.de/de/arbeitsfelder/af_spionageabwehr_und_geheimschutz/af_spionageabwehr_wirtschaftsspionage.html/broschuere_0806_bsi_itschutz.pdf

Quote:

.......Sonderregelungen im Strafgesetzbuch, die sogar Freiheitsstrafen vorsehen, wenn vertrauliche
Angaben von ....bzw. Klienten ohne Einwilligung öffentlich gemacht
werden (§ 203 StGB). Ein fahrlässiger Umgang mit Informationstechnik kann diesen Tatbestand unter Umständen bereits erfüllen.

Whether the persons whose names were published have the right to sue the hackers, or the organization itself, under German law isn't clear from the above, but computer hacking itself is definitely criminal in all EU countries as well as in the US/Canada.

1 Reply

@High Seas,

The link gives the infos from the "Office of IT Security".

I surely have no doubts at all that computer hacking is criminal. It's just not an 'offence requiring public prosecution' ("Ofizialdelikt") in Germany.

Here's what §303 a, b , c says (more often relevant re computer security than the §203 StGB you mentioned):

Quote:

Section 303a Alteration of Data
(1) Whoever unlawfully deletes, suppresses, renders unusable or alters data (Section 202a subsection (2)), shall be punished with imprisonment for not more than two years or a fine.

(2) An attempt shall be punishable.

Section 303b Computer Sabotage
(1) Whoever interferes with data processing which is of substantial significance to the business or enterprise of another or a public authority by:

1. committing an act under Section303a subsection (1); or

2. destroying, damaging, rendering unusable, removing or altering a data processing system or a data carrier,

shall be punished with imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine.

(2) An attempt shall be punishable.

Section 303c Application for Criminal Prosecution
In cases under Sections 303 to 303b the act shall only be prosecuted upon complaint, unless the prosecuting authority considers ex officio that it is required to enter the case because of the special public interest therein.

1 Reply

sometimes it takes civil disobedience to be a good citizen.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

So...the relevant agency likely had all this info anyway.

1 Reply

@dlowan,

One could think so ...

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter - the law you quote may or may not be relevant to the specific hacking (by German residents) of a server in the UK ( owned and managed by British residents), but the law I quoted strikes me as compatible with the Hague evidence convention, to which the following countries are signatories >

Quote:

The Hague Evidence Convention is currently in force in the following countries, Anguilla, Aruba, Australia, Barbados, Bulgaria, Cayman Islands, China, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Estonia, Falkland Islands, Finland, France, French Guiana, French Polynesia, Germany, Gibraltar, Guadeloupe, Guernsey, Hong Kong Sar, Isle of Man, Israel, Italy, Jersey, Latvia, Luxemburg, Macao Sar, Martinique, Mexico, Monaco, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Saint Pierre and Miquelon, Singapore, Slovak Republic, Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States, Venezuela.
http://www.ibls.com/internet_law_news_portal_view.aspx?s=latestnews&id=2185

> but since international law invariably supersedes domestic law for all signatories of treaties, the question of whether the German members of that organisation can or cannot be prosecuted seems wholly irrelevant.

Subject to your learned opinion on applicable law, can you shed some light on whether those members can, or cannot, prosecute the hackers and/or the organization itself? That they cannot be prosecuted on the basis of evidence obtained via a criminal act (to wit, hacking into a server) seems certain - no court will admit such tainted evidence, as long as the jurisdiction is one of the signatories listed above.

1 Reply

@dagmaraka,

Not so, Dagmar, and sorry I didn't post a translation of the German law I linked earlier on thread:

Quote:

,,Sonderregelungen im Strafgesetzbuch, die sogar Freiheitsstrafen vorsehen, wenn vertrauliche
Angaben von ....bzw. Klienten ohne Einwilligung öffentlich gemacht

"additional provisions in criminal law impose prison sentences when confidential data of....clients without express permission.... become public without their express permission...."

1 Reply

@High Seas,

The Hague Evidence Convention allows judicial authorities of the contracting countries to share evidence among them, in civil and/or commercial matters as far as I understand it.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Very true, and is it your claim that this procedure was followed in this case? I doubt it very much,

1 Reply

@High Seas,

I doubt that, too. There are some bi-lateral (or tri- or more-) other legal conventions, though.

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter - you are the legal expert around here, as I don't need to remind you! I (definitely not a lawyer) do know that EU privacy laws are stricter than the ones in the US, but surely Hague conventions trump EU law itself, let alone German law only. I'm really curious, so any light you can shed on this mystery would be gratefully acknowledged Smile

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

This German law (2007) seems relevant, subject to your learned legal opinion, of course:

Quote:

Das Deutsche Gesetz definiert Hacking als das Eindringen in ein Computersicherheitssystem und den Zugriff auf gesicherte Daten, ohne dass dabei notwendigerweise Daten gestohlen werden müssen; jeder Einzelne oder jede Gruppe, die vorsätzlich Hacker Tools herstellt, verbreitet oder erwirbt, die für illegale Zwecke vorgesehen sind, wird als Straftäter angesehen. Im derzeit gültigen Strafgesetzbuch müssen die Zuwiderhandelnden mit Strafzahlungen rechnen und mit Gefängnisstrafen bis zu 10 Jahren bei schweren Vergehen.

http://www.unwatched.org/node/518

Hacking computer systems - even if no monetary gain results - is punishable by up to 10 years in prison.

0 Replies

@High Seas,

High Seas wrote:

Not so, Dagmar, and sorry I didn't post a translation of the German law I linked earlier on thread:

Yes so. It is after all MY opinion, not yours.

1 Reply

@dagmaraka,

This is not a matter of opinion: you came up with the term "civil disobedience"; by definition, any offense punishable with "up to 10 years in prison" is criminal, not civil.

Your opinion will not change the dictionary, or the law. Btw, the other people on this thread seem to require no translation from the German - or at least nobody has asked so far - but if you can't follow the excerpts please say so and I'll be glad to translate.

1 Reply

Anti-fascist hacker group break into 'Blood & Honour' server

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know