Well “the Uruguayan hacker” was destroyed by the media based on the information the police released. He was a monster. But…
Outside Uruguay, the case was known and it captured the attention of many important players in the world of information security in the world. They analysed the case and their expressions and the way they viewed the hacker was completely different than the one of the media in Uruguay….
Interesting, isn’t it? Why was that? What would that mean?
“Never underestimate the stupidity of law enforcement”
The media in Germany published this article:
Thanks to “responsible disclosure” in the jail
For data travel, general caution is required, emphasized Neumann . This also applies to the actually meaningful practice of “responsible disclosure”, ie the publication of discovered vulnerabilities only after prior warning of those affected. Otherwise, it could end up being “Alberto” from Uruguay, who had encountered standard passwords and unsecured access to data at an e-health service and reported this to the national computer security team or provider.
After a blackmail attempt against the platform operator with Bitcoin demand two years later, the police have kicked the door at Alberto and found “exciting things” such as credit cards, card readers, an Anonymous mask, “strategic cash reserves” and two gold-plated Bitcoin coins, he said , This brought the responsible hacker eight months in jail. It therefore makes sense to maintain the “local host” or the trusted home.