Kuji Media Corporation Ltd.

The verdict in the Gary Mckinnon extradition trial was really no shock to me considering the political climate. Lets face it, this is not about hacking or security this is about politics and money. Cynical? You bet I am, having been through an almost identical situation, very similar computer intrusions and similar motives – the only difference was I was pre-terrorism mania where everything and everyone is a suspect.

Think about this, almost a decade ago machines belonging to the military, navy, army etc were broken into and this was the proof Congress needed to show that cyber terrorism existed. An unknown spy running rings of computer hackers to steal secrets for foreign governments. The fact that I was not a spy, and certainly not “possibly the single biggest threat to world peace since Adolf Hitler” didn’t really make much of a difference to the fear machine that was put in place selling the idea that cyber terrorism was a real threat.

Millions of dollars in budget increases, that is where the difference occurred. If you take the threat to be real (which it certainly wasn’t back then and highly unlikely to exist today) then this raises questions, namely;

1. Where have the mega budgetary increases actually been spent?

Education cannot be one of them, as if machines are left in a state of ‘unpatched since install’, with unpassworded points of entry – I cannot see that the money has gone to the improvement of sysadmin skills or awareness of the problems of being online.

If you compare the awareness by consumers of security threats, people have seriously woken up to the fact that unprotected they are just sitting ducks to the onslaught of manual and automated attacks.

Phishing, hacking, spam, bots, virii, worms – the majority of home users now have firewalls, anti virus software, spyware checkers etc – all of which have a much lower budget than the military. I suspect that as governments, unlike corporate entities do not have shareholders to answer to. They do not have to explain why their machines were offline and money was lost, that in fact they can just blame budget instead of actually being proactive and moving with the times.

2. If in this case as in mine, there were clearly many other hackers

with access to the same systems at the same time, why have they not been prosecuted or even mentioned?

This seems to me to be more proof of my theory that so-called super hackers are hauled in front of the courts when it is convenient for their cases to be used for ore proof of computer insecurity and the need for greater budgetary increases..

3. Where are the administrators and their bosses in this case?

In this political climate, one of the dark looming threat from the bad men all around us (as we are constantly reminded), to not secure machines properly they have committed federal offences. It is surely not good practice to have machines, sitting on the Internet, unfirewalled, unpassworded containing alleged sensitive information – and most likely a direct violation of their contract and training.

This is a sysadmins first job, to change any default passwords or to set ones where they are not needed – and certainly ensure that those machines are sitting behind a firewall. I am not trying to say that Gary was attempting to test their security, but if this was a corporate environment the sysadmin would have some major explaining to do.

4. Is the fact that the USA are fighting so hard for extradition a dig at our legal system?

Gary has admitted his guilt and wants his trial to be in the UK, so why can’t he be tried here? Could this be to do with the fact that most computer crime here (financial gain notwithstanding) is dealt with by means of fines. Do the USA see us as a soft touch? This brings the idea of two scenarios;

– Gary being tried by a jury of his peers. They hear the evidence and consider the fact that the machines were badly administrated and this is taken into consideration when sentencing.

– Gary being tried in a foreign country by a jury that hears he has ‘attacked their country’ this is bound to have a bearing on the sentencing.

A possible 70 years in prison, for what exactly? showing that in a decade the USA military have not learned, or at worst, blatantly ignored the security threats around them when it is they who tell us every day that we should be afraid.

In my case I was never debriefed by any of the authorities that I hacked, never asking how I did what I did – never asking me to comment on my peers or related community. Gary says he is guilty, why are we going to punish this man further by sending him to a foreign jail which are known for brutality against inmates: [http://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/prison/report.html]

– where is the leniency for admission of guilt? Let this guy talk to kids about how this trial has affected his life. Let this guy talk to governments.. Let this guy talk and discuss and explain.. don’t send him to a punishment likely to be worse than he would receive in this country for murder.

The extradition bill is being tested right in front of your eyes, it is a blatant decline in our civil liberties and a worrying step forward for our so-called democratic society.

Mathew Bevan
www.kujimedia.com

Criminal gangs taking over from amateur hobbyists

Owen Bowcott, Saturday June 11, 2005, The Guardian

Gary McKinnon is deemed to be so deviously manipulative at the keyboard that he has been banned from using the internet. He is not even allowed a passport. The peculiar bail conditions imposed this week on the 39-year-old computer systems administrator from Wood Green, north London, suggest that the law enforcement community stands in awe of his technological prowess.

Until his next court appearance, due on July 27, the tousle-haired programmer, who is fighting extradition to the United States, has been ordered to stay away from any computer connected to the web.

Mr McKinnon has gained international notoriety for his alleged ability to break into scores of sensitive US defence computers, steal secret passwords, sabotage email systems and delete military files. In the hi-tech world of online hacking, however, he is perceived as one of a dying breed of amateur hobbyists – those the Americans deride as “script-kiddies”.

Despite US prosecution claims that he perpetrated “the biggest military computer hack of all time”, Mr McKinnon’s supposed achievements are by no means unique. The attempt to extradite him to answer charges in Virginia and New Jersey is far more unusual. Systems run by Nasa, the Pentagon and the Department of Defence have long been hackers’ trophy targets. His misfortune, apparently, was to get caught, and to have carried out his explorations shortly after September 11.

According to security experts, US military sites are not the most heavily protected on the internet. They rely on the deterrent threat of legal action rather than deploying highly sophisticated software or enforcing best practice among military personnel.

Mathew Bevan, another British hacker arrested for breaches of security at Nasa and US Air Force sites, found himself similarly demonised by US lawyers as “the single biggest threat to world security since Adolf Hitler” back in 1994. The case against him eventually collapsed. Like Mr McKinnon, he was also hunting for evidence about UFOs hidden on military installations.

Mr Bevan, now 30, is an IT consultant and living in Wiltshire. “The security on US military machines is probably not much better than it was back then,” he said. “There were plenty of military machines with sensitive information that had account names with no passwords. Others had been left with the standard default passwords used by the manufacturers.

“University systems and corporations are much harder to break into than military machines: universities because there are always students testing their skills, and companies because they have shareholders demanding better security.”

In Britain, the hacking subculture that nurtured Mr McKinnon’s talents has been driven underground by diligent enforcement of the Computer Misuse Act, which since 1990 has criminalised those who gain unauthorised access to computer systems.

Mr Bevan typifies the career trajectory once pursued by teenage hackers. After years hunched alone over a computer screen, and an infamous brush with the law, he has graduated to running his own company, the Kuji Media Corporation, which offers security and technology advice.

“Hackers are a dying breed,” said Mr Bevan. “Organised criminals have cottoned on to the potential rewards. There’s viruses and trojan programs flooding out of places like Russia and Bulgaria these days.

“I get people asking, ‘Why is my machine running slowly?’ And when you look, there are 300 viruses, bits of adware [advertising programs] and trojans mucking up the system. Internet service providers should really be doing deals with security firms to provide virus-free connections.”

Mr Bevan said he spoke to Mr McKinnon in 2002, “after he was first busted”.

“He’s only been selected by US prosecutors because he’s an excellent scapegoat. Maybe the amount of recreational hacking is the same, but the volume of people on the net means far more are involved in genuinely nefarious activities.”

“Pharming”, for example, is the latest threat to the integrity of internet banking services. It has emerged from Estonia in the past few months. This cunning electronic fraud may force banks to issue customers with a new generation of identity devices.

Unlike “phishing” scams – which rely on the gullibility of those who receive emails urging them to log on to sites purporting to be their online bank and confirm passwords and account details – pharming is more insidious.

Customers’ computers are infected by a trojan program – either delivered through an innocent-looking email or inadvertently downloaded from a fake advert on the internet. When the user tries to log on to the online account, the hidden program diverts the web browser to a seemingly identical site operated by criminal gangs in eastern Europe. Their electronic identities are captured, then used to empty the accounts.

“There’s discussions about whether banks will eventually have to give out security devices for customers to plug into their computers,” said Sandra Quinn of APACS, the banking industry’s payments organisation. “Barclays have already carried out trials.”

Last year, online fraud cost British banks ?12m, an increase on previous losses. That figure was dwarfed, however, by the ?150m taken via what is known as “card not present” frauds, where goods are purchased over the telephone using stolen credit cards or simply their numbers.

The array of online threats grows all the time. Denial of service (DoS) attacks, where firms’ email systems are bombarded into overload, are frequently accompanied by blackmail demands for cash to switch off the onslaught. Last year, the bookmaker William Hill was targeted and then received a demand for $50,000 (?28,000).

“Bot” programs enable computers across the net to be hijacked by remote users who in effect turn them into “zombie” machines which can be used in DoS attacks. Keylogging programs can infiltrate computers and record the keystrokes customers make in typing in credit card numbers or passwords. The criminals behind these attacks are based mainly in eastern Europe, it is believed, because law enforcement there is relatively slack and there is a plentiful supply of skilled but poorly paid programmers.

“It’s a classic low-risk crime,” said Ms Quinn. “We have seen some police action, however, and now we are getting phishing attacks coming from China.”

Threats have also been made to call-centre staff working in the financial services sector in Britain, in an attempt to force them to record and hand over customer account details. Many companies now prevent staff from using pens or paper when they sit at their screens.

The difficulty in penetrating banks has encouraged gangs to combine online techniques with strongarm tactics. The reported theft of computer backup tapes from US financial institutions while in transit to storage facilities has generated concerns about the security of millions of customers’ accounts.

An attempt earlier this year to steal ?220m by electronic transfers from the London headquarters of the Japanese bank Sumitomo was foiled, but it sparked alarm about criminals infiltrating banks to carry out insider robberies.

“Gary McKinnon appears to be an example of the type of hacking that people have moved away from,” said Felicity Bull of the National Hi-Tech Crime Unit, which investigates major computer crime in Britain. “We know that organised crime is now hiring IT-literate workers.”

Some law enforcement agencies now question whether the Computer Misuse Act needs to be overhauled, enabling it to be used to prosecute those involved in DoS attacks.

In Washington, the secret service is the force responsible for combating online fraud and hacking. “There are still plenty of script-kiddies out there bragging about what they’re doing,” one agent, Jim Dobson, told the Guardian. Some were still at high school, he said, adding: “There’s a huge amount of information out there.”

Other threats, such as gangs in Russia targeting financial institutions, or those in Asia carrying out intellectual property thefts, have eclipsed the old-style hacker community, he acknowledged.

The rise of mobile phone technology has provided fresh opportunities for a new generation of hackers.

Meanwhile, wireless computer networks have been found to be particularly vulnerable, said Paul Carratu, whose Surrey firm carries out penetration testing to assess security systems. “People are not using the encryption devices they should.”

Last month, two British hackers, Jordan Bradley, from Darlington, and Andrew Harvey, from Durham, who belonged to an Anglo-US group called the “Thr34t Krew”, pleaded guilty in Newcastle to computer crime offences. The TK worm they released exploited a weakness in web servers and caused up to ?5.5m damage to companies using the net. They now face possible prison sentences.

It may be too soon to write off the perverse ingenuity of British hackers.

The lingo and what to look out for

Trojan (horse) An innocent-looking program concealing destructive intentions.

Pharming Hijacking online bank customers by infecting web browsers. They are redirected to fake internet sites and asked to disclose account details.

Phishing Sending out emails telling online account customers they must reconfirm IDs and passwords. When they hit reply they are sent to a cloned web page.

Key logging Programs which record keystrokes and can be used to retrieve credit card and PIN numbers.

Malware Umbrella term for assorted malicious software programs which sabotage your computer.

Zombies Online computers that have been infected by trojans and can then be remotely controlled to churn out spam emails at targeted sites.

Bots Programs used to infect and control computers which are then turned into zombies.

Pia Landergren, IDG News Service\London Bureau
June 18, 2001, 06:09

With the rapid increase in security breaches leaving law enforcement struggling to keep up, some organizations are taking the law into their own hands and punishing hackers themselves.

Striking back at hackers with, for example, denial of service attacks is a sensitive subject, since doing so is illegal in most countries. However, security experts say the U.S. Department of Defense has used these methods. In addition, private companies use special firewalls and other counteroffensive software that can be set to automatically strike back at hackers, according to U.K. Internet security consultant and ex- hacker Mathew Bevan, among others.

Conxion Corp., an ISP (Internet service provider) based in Santa Clara, California, is one private company that acknowledges having reversed a denial of service attack on a group of hackers. When asked if giving hackers a dose of their own medicine is company policy, spokeswoman Megan O’Reilly-Lewis said, “We deal with it on a case-by-case basis.”

The World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Web site, which was being hosted by Conxion, was hacked into in late 1999. An organization called Electrohippies, or E-Hippies, bombarded the WTO Web page with download requests, which caused the Web service to slow down but not to crash completely.

“What our security staff did was to quickly write a script to reverse the traffic. Then they followed up with some more sophisticated methods,” said O’Reilly-Lewis. “It seemed to work fine,” she added.

“If they had been sophisticated hackers they would have easily avoided” the reverse attack, she said.

Hack attacks are clearly on the increase, and so are companies that specialize in tracking down the hackers.

“There’s a spectrum of things that we do,” said Bob Ayers, U.K. vice president of Para-Protect Ltd., headquartered in the U.S. The company uses an intrusion detection device with which it keeps tabs on a customer’s IT system. Ayers, a former U.S. military intelligence officer, described some of the actions companies can take when they discover an intrusion: “Disabling an account. Terminating the network link. We can go to the ISP and ask them to step in and take action.”

A company can also go beyond the e-mail address and find the person behind the crime. “You go pay him a visit,” said Ayers. “You talk to him and let him know that you’re not happy with what he is doing.” It might work, depending on your powers of persuasion, he added.

When asked if his company launches denial of service attacks on hackers on behalf of its customers, Ayers said, “I really don’t want to answer that question one way or another. All I can say is that the technology is there and how it is used is something I cannot predict.”

Both Ayers and another security expert, Winn Schwartau, president of IT security company Interpact Inc. in Seminole, Florida, and founder of security Web service Infowar.com, said that the U.S. Department of Defense has at least on one occasion launched a denial of service attack on hackers.

“Absolutely they have,” Schwartau said. “There was a group of pro-Mexicans (the Electronic Disturbance Theater) and they announced they were going to attack the Pentagon,” he said. “The Pentagon (the building that houses the department) knew about it. The Pentagon started shooting back, which was the right thing to do. However, it was illegal,” Schwartau said.

Not surprisingly, the Pentagon denies ever having used these methods.

“I am not aware that we have struck back at anyone with a denial of service attack,” said Susan Hansen, a spokeswoman at the Department of Defense. “We don’t discuss our specific security” measures, she added.

The number of malicious break-ins into companies’ computer systems is becoming alarming. The U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) found in a recent study that 85 percent of respondents had detected computer security breaches during the past year. The survey was based on responses from 538 security experts in various U.S. corporations and government agencies. Sixty-four percent suffered financial losses due to security breaches, and 186 respondents reported a total loss of almost $378 million. Thirty-eight percent of respondents detected denial of service attacks, compared to 27 percent last year.

According to a survey done by Schwartau, about one third of surveyed companies in the U.S. have already, or plan to, develop strike-back capabilities for possible hack attacks.

“Follow-up surveys in England found corresponding responses while an Australian survey found an even higher percentage of that country’s companies to be willing to strike back,” Schwartau said.

Hackers often make use of several computers along the way to their target, which makes it difficult for companies to launch a direct attack on the computer system the attack originated from. If someone has hacked into several computers, a vigilante may even end up striking back at an innocent bystander, whose computer has simply been used by the hacker. A sophisticated hacker can also make it look like an attack is coming from, for example, a company’s competitor.

One type of intrusion-detection equipment is a so-called honeypot, a machine that is set up to look like a network. It has false information, such as databases, installed to lure hackers to spend as much time as possible “inside” the machine. The way in, for a hacker, can be to figure out someone’s password, and to get in through the Internet. The longer a hacker is inside, the easier it is for the system administrator to find out the hackers identity, or IP (Internet protocol) address. Once that is known, the system administrator can launch a counterattack.

A denial of service attack is usually caused by someone sending more traffic to a network address than the server can handle, which causes it to crash. This can result in a Web site going down or a particular service, such as e-mail, becoming unavailable.

One industry insider does not believe in giving hackers a dose of their own medicine.

“I don’t believe in striking back, it would only invite further attacks,” said Mike Graves, European marketing manager at Hewlett-Packard Co.’s Internet Security Solutions Division, and based in Bristol, U.K.

“You may find yourself getting some publicity you don’t want. You may become a beacon for new attacks.” Hackers know each other and look out for each other, he added.

Graves’ suspicions are confirmed by ex-hacker Bevan.

“If my machine crashed and I’ve been hacking, say I was hacking into Barclays Bank, I would not give up then. If hackers gave up so easily there wouldn’t be any hackers. It’s the challenge” that keeps hackers motivated to keep going, Bevan said.

Some years ago, Bevan hacked into the U.S. Department of Defense?s computer system, a British Airforce base as well as many major corporations’ systems. He was charged with conspiracy to cause unauthorized modification to computers operated by the U.S. military and the Lockheed Martin Corp. missile and space company in 1996. Eventually, all charges against him were dropped.

“They were pushing a conspiracy angle,” but couldn’t prove it, Bevan said.

Being a hacker who was never punished, Bevan can understand why companies would want to take the law into their own hands and strike back. However, he insists the method would not work as it would only make him more determined to break the system.

Despite this, finding your own hacker tracker is not difficult. Some victims of hack attacks prefer to take a less drastic action than striking back directly. They hire companies such as Swedish Defcom AB, who specialize in finding hackers and then doing the police’s work for them; collecting enough evidence against the hackers to present the police with a clear case.

Thomas Olofsson is chief operating officer and recently found a gang of professional hackers for a customer. “This was the largest operation we’ve done,” said Olofsson. “We tracked down a gang of hackers who had used computers in different countries to hide along the way.”

“They had used a computer in South Africa and another one in the U.S. At last we found the source, a gang of hackers in one of the Baltic countries,” Olofsson said.

But catching hackers is just one of the first steps in a long process of bringing them to justice.

“What happens if a hacker in the U.K. breaks into a system in South Africa, or in the U.S.?,” said Ayers. “Where did the crime happen? And who has jurisdiction? The police must cooperate across borders, and frankly the police are not very good at that.”

As Ayers says, the police just don’t have enough resources to catch all criminals and laws still haven’t caught up with Internet crime. Despite the efforts of hacker trackers, then, hacker vigilante methods are not likely to go away any time soon.

“If you’re a skilled computer (person) you ain’t gonna go work for the U.K. police force for 20K (20,000 pounds (US$27,800) a year).” You’re going into the private sector, he said, adding, “It’s riskier to walk across Clapham Common (in London) at night than it is to enter into cyber crime.”

Para-Protect, headquartered in Centreville, Virginia, can be contacted online at http://www.para-protect.com/. Conxion, in Santa Clara, California, can be contacted at http://www.conxion.com/. HP, in Palo Alto, California, can be reached at http://www.hp.com/. Interpact is at http://www.interpactinc.com/.

UK Hacker Says He Found Anti-Gravity Engine File
At W/P AFB

By Matthew Williams

2-7-99

Mathew Bevan is a 23 old computer hacker with an interest in UFOs. Recently he made front page world headlines when he was charged with hacking offences which included access to the most secret military computers of the United States Military. Mathew was able to access computers, which had the ability to launch nuclear missiles or other missiles. Described by one pentagon spokesman as being “The biggest threat to world peace since Adolf Hitler”, Mathew Bevan talks to Matthew Williams about how he did it and the fact that whilst in Wright Patterson Air Force Base computers he saw plans to a secret Anti Gravity propulsion engine….

Matthew Williams: How many years have you been into the Internet.

Mathew Bevan: Since about 16. It was a case that over here there were very few Internet providers. The only one was Demon Internet and the closest phone number to dial was in Bristol, so it was just easier to do a free (hacked) phonecall to the States and use a free provider and not worry about paying any bills.

MW: How does one “hack” the phones – what is the procedure involved.

MB: You use a little program on the old computer… The Amiga was the first computer to be used for “Blueboxing” (hacking phones) and the reason was that it has four channels of sound whereas the PC could only go “BEEP”. To get the blueboxing to work you had to play dual tones into your phone. There was a set of frequencies of tone not dissimilar to DTMF which is on most modern phones (DTMF – the tones played when you press a number on your phone keypad). When the special tones were played it would cause the network to do a number of special things.

What you then needed to do is to call a 0800 number for a foreign countries operator service – such as Columbia or Hawaii. You would play a few tones down the line and it would cut the operator off and BT would think that you had hung up the call but in fact you were still in the trunking system and you play a few more tones and you could re-route your call anywhere.

MW: Is it complicated to do these things because playing sets of musical tones down the phone line sounds quite complicated and what if you make a mistake.

MB: Well it is complicated but is a case of playing around to see what you could do. If you make a mistake you just hang up and try again. There were some other interesting things you could do like dialling a number and when you get the engaged signal then play a couple of tones and break into the call and listen without the two parties knowing you were there.

MW: You are saying that there are ways to listen to calls without being detected and this can be done from any home phone with such codes! Are you saying that you could listen to another call anywhere in the world?

MB: Yes but most of the time I was calling into the States anyway so that’s where I did it the most. I think that secretly listening in is what it was designed for.

MW: So when did you go from hacking innocent university computers into hacking the military computers?

MB: It was a case of getting onto a system and getting the password file and then running the encrypted passwords through a code cracking program so that you get the passwords. Once you have the passwords then you can get a higher level of access and get into peoples files and folders and you can monitor the system to see what it is happening. You can see that there are people that are themselves who are going from computer to computer with legitimate reasons. Now it would just happen that some of these people would be working on projects with the military. You could find that a professor would be contacting a military site (computer).

One would get fed up with doing small computer systems and would want to try to hack something bigger. The thing with people is that they tend to like the same password for multiple systems and so if you have hacked their account on a relatively unprotected system then the password will probably work on another more well protected system. The professor probably has some silly password like “professor” on the university computer and more often than not would use the same on a military system.

It is not a case of sitting there typing in millions of passwords and hoping that you get the right one. There are much more intelligent programs to do that for you and get you in to a system.

We now use things called SNIFFERS, which are covert and do not harm the system in any way. These sit in the background and watch for people’s passwords and they send them back to you. This is something that I was charged with and the offence read “modification to a system with intent to impair the operation of the computer”. Well the whole point of a sniffer is that it sits there and nobody knows it is there – if it did any harm we wouldn’t use them.

Well once inside you would use various hacker techniques to bump up your access level to that of systems administrator, so that you would have the entire system under your control. You could connect to other systems on the network with the same authority. You could monitor people’s emails and you could get into their project folders and look at their research and development work or papers that they have written. Occasionally you would get into somewhere that was quite interesting but it wasn’t always that way. Most of it was quite boring. Back in the old days before Internet Browsers that give you nice pictures and buttons to click on, it was all text based and you had to use the keyboard to type commands. There were pictures, but you had to manually download them and view them “offline”.

MW: So what were the most exciting computer systems you hacked?

MW: Firstly there was the FLEX system. This stands for Force Level Execution, and this is the thing which the News of the World newspaper picked up on. The reason this system was of interest because it had control of nuclear missiles. To explain what this program does; the official line is to plan an air war and to find out what things are incoming and what air strikes are pending. The system would then advise you of where to strike next with the best killing ratio and where to launch you missiles etc. From looking on the computer and through the “source code” I got the impression that the system had direct access to real missiles. What type of missiles I do not know and the News of the World printed that these were in fact Peacekeeper Missiles, but that didn’t come from me – I don’t know where they got those details from…?

The easiest comparison I could make is that it was a very similar system to the Skynet System in the Terminator movies. This means that the computer has access to all available information and can make intelligent decisions about how to operate a war and even control the weapons.

Of course the FLEX system is secret and something that they do not want the public to know about and the fact that weapons are controlled solely by computer. You would think that there would be other failsafe system but, as far as I could tell, that was not the case.

There were other systems such as Wright Patterson Air Force base and White Sands Missile Testing Ground, some now I forget – I went to a lot. I had been to so many I had to tell the police that I could not remember all the systems I had been in.

The lawyers couldn’t get their stories straight even for a trial of this type, which you would have expected. They would not present evidence to show how I was able to hack into their systems. So with the details of the computer systems real purpose having been removed from the case then I am now pretty sure that I did have a good idea about the real function of the programs – they didn’t want this information out in any form. This was probably the reason that they were so pissed off about it because I came forward and told everyone. You see after I was arrested then I started to get some very strange phone calls from people claiming to be in the military, Koreans and other people. I had weird semi-threatening things said to me and this is why I moved away to get away from these treats and this is another reason that I spilled the beans, in order to keep myself and my wife safe, after all what is the point of silencing me after I had talked.

MW: Where were you living and did the police give you any assistance in your moving because of these threats.

MB: Firstly I was living in Grangetown and then I was moved by the benefits agency to another location. They were aware of the court case and the sensitivity and people from Scotland Yard were helping in this respect also. I was given a new name under the benefits agency computers and was living under name of Mr Smith for a while.

MW: Why do you think they were prepared to go to this trouble to help you?

MB: What you have to understand is the fact that there was a big Senate hearing on the fact that two hackers had got into secret computer systems. One of these was a 16-year-old who they had arrested and the other person was supposedly thought to be a foreign spy who was paying the 16-year-old for information. I was made out to be the foreign spy and I was prepared to believe from the threats I was getting that these people were serious. So I had to move home.

To give you an idea of the level of the ominous phone calls I was getting, at the time I was just about to change my phone over to British Telecom. Just days before I was arrested I was due to sign the BT phone forms and send them off, but had not done do at that point. Then I had another threatening phone call and I told them to **** off and said that I was now having my number changed. The voice on the other end of the line said “yeah we know that your new number is going to be 01222 233blah blah blah” and so they knew my new number already! My wife asked often who was speaking and one name we got was Chung Lee Makasuki and he gave some phone number in China, I think.

MW: When you were arrested what happened?

MB: I was working at Admiral Insurance at the time in their computer department for around a year and a half. One of the managers came in and asked me to come and have a look at one of their computer systems and I got up and went with him. I went with him to the MDs office and there were seven people in the office, your typical men in black so to speak but as this was the MDs office I didn’t at first see this as abnormal. When I got inside one of then said to me “Mathew Bevan” and I replied “yes” and then he put up his hand and said “I am placing you under arrest for hacking of NASA and various Air Force bases.” I was standing there stunned and I was going “Oh, gosh… ummm.” They then told me that they were going to search my desk, which they did, then they took me back to my house and searched there too.

When they got to the house they took all my X Files videos and X Files posters and the reason was because the “KUJI” hacker that they were after had a computer user description which read “The Truth Is Out There”. So they wanted to use the X Files material to prove that they had the correct “KUJI”. They just wanted to pin me on anything they could. They took all of my computer kit as well as my passport.

During the interview I agreed that I used the handle ‘Kuji’ and afterwards the police gave me my property back such as the X Files videos, posters,monitor and the keyboard back but they kept everything else.

I was taken to the Central Police station in Cardiff. The officers were from the computer crime unit of the Met Police. I believe that the C.C.U. also uses the code S.O.6 which leads me to believe that they are intelligence (MI6) related but I don’t think they would admit that.

MW: What was the atmosphere like in the interviews?

MB: It was a good cop bad cop scenario. The one person was very nice and the other guy was quite nasty and was giving snide remarks and shouting at me. There were bits in the interviews that were really stupid too where I was asked by the nice cop if I had any political leanings and I said no – then the other cop stepped in and said “Yeah, but your a vegetarian” and he then said “So you do have a leaning then.”. To this I then replied “Well if being vegetarian is a political leaning then I plead guilty!”. The other copper then steps in and make a lighthearted comment and then the other one steps in again and says “ah so you indicate a leaning then” and so on.

I was under arrest for the best part of 36 hours but there was about 28 hours spent in the cells. I wasn’t allowed to speak to my wife or anyone else. They threatened that they would arrest my wife and I pointed out that she knew nothing about computers and they said tough because they would arrest her anyway. This was part of their oppression tactics. I said what do I have to do to stop you arresting her and they said that if I co-operated then they would not arrest her. So the only telephone calls I was allowed were to my solicitor because they didn’t want me to tell anyone I had been arrested.

One thing I didn’t realise but found out was the fact that in Cardiff police station they bug the cells with listening devices and recently a few people have had tape recorded evidence used against them when they have admitted to things whilst in custody. This is immoral but they seem to be able to do it.

MW: What sort of specific questions were you asked by the police in the interview.

MB: They asked me about the Rome Labs computer and if I had placed a sniffer program on the computers. I would not admit to this. They also asked me about Goddard Space Flight Centre and Wright Patterson, I admitted to these but was never charged with them! They don’t charge me with the right things. They then charge me with conspiracy with the other hacker, but by the time they realise that they don’t have any evidence to prove this it transpires that they could not charge me with the original intended charges anyway because they are out of time by 6 months; They would have had to charge me with a summary offence within six months of my arrest. They also found out that they were out of time for a 3-year clause

The Americans position in court was that they claimed that they had to spend 1/2 a million dollars to repair their computer systems. A fundamental question that my defence asked was could we see a backup of the system to show before and after these so called repairs to prove what was being claimed. The Americans said that we could not see the records because they were so sensitive and also said that it was not in the jurisdiction of the British courts to order them to show the files. If it were any other trial then you would ask how could we accept this evidence but because we are asked to take the Americans word, this is supposed to be good enough.

The next thing that happened was that my barrister had meetings with the prosecution and he then turns around to me and says that he feels that they will find me guilty on some charges so I should give in and change my plea to guilty. So I ‘relieved’ him of his professional duties and got a new barrister who was then completely on my side and who felt that I did indeed have a worthwhile and quite solid defence.

MW: What was the final stage of the case and how did you get acquitted?

MB: The judge surprised everyone by saying to the prosecution that because my charges were lesser than those of the other hacker and that the other hacker had received a small fine of ?1200 then my sentence at best would be non-custodial so to proceed with such a case would not produce a large penalty whilst the costs for running such a case would run into millions. It was estimated that if I would be found guilty I would get a ?450 fine and considering that the court’s daily costs would be ?10,000 it would not be worth it.

However the prosecution was determined still and said that they would still proceed and then at the last stage they pulled out and said that they wished to offer no evidence and that it wasn’t in the public interest to run the case. Verdicts of not guilty were entered, this being the equivalent of a full acquittal and so ensuring that the police would waive the right to re-arrest me in conjunction with these charges.

This being the case I was then free to admit to the press and everyone else that I had in fact done some of those things and that I did hack those systems. This pissed Scotland Yard off immensely and they are now being very awkward about returning the seized goods that are in evidence storage even though the case has been dropped.

MW: How were you tracked down?

MB: I cannot be sure because this was never disclosed – I have my suspicions that I was grassed on by a hacker. They said they found my number on somebody’s computer system and traced me back like that but I think somebody told them who I was. The point was if it took them 2 years to find my number on the other hackers hard- drive as they claim then that is incompetence, as a search of a 250meg drive takes less than five minutes.

MW: Where does the story take a turn to where you started hacking military sites for UFO information?

MB: In a hacker magazine called PHRACK, it gave a list of sites that people who said they were interested in UFOs would like to see hacked and that hackers should check these out. Allegedly there were forty people who were trying to penetrate these sites and they got into some of them but they all went missing?

MW: A group of forty people went missing?

MB: Apparently so. They said in the magazine that if you were going to do it then do it carefully and printed a list of the sites. I used that list and used it and I also used some of the folklore of UFOs like “Roswell wreckage taken to Wright field”, “Lockheed space missile company have connection to Area 51” etc. It is then just a case then of picking up the addresses and names of these computers. They are quite easy to find as the military provide you with as much information on their computers as you could ever want.

It was a case of “go for it”, “lets have a look”. As far as I was concerned I was not traceable and not causing any harm to anybody. If I couldn’t get in then no big deal, if I could then I was not going to screw the system up.

MW: You did gain access to some interesting UFO type files – what were these?

MB: The information was obtained through the Wright Patterson Air Base computer system. I was looking for information on the Roswell crash. On one of the computers at Wright Patterson the systems administrator was very un-secured. Captain Beth Long was the system administrator she is supposedly working in a pumping station in Alaska now instead of working at Wright Patterson – the reason being, because she had no password so this meant that anyone logging in as her meant they had the highest level of access on the system with no password needed!

Wright Pattersons’ computers were strange because unlike all other computers I had hacked which had clear warnings to hackers and people using the system regarding the classified information, their system had a banner which read in flashing red letters that no classified information is to be stored on the computer system. This throws you a bit. I was unsure if it was a real banner or if it was to put off people who had got that far.

In getting into that there was one machine on the network where I read current files and future project proposals. I read documents which gave me the impression that they had an anti-gravity engine which was capable of at least Mach 12 to Mach 15. I don’t know how exactly how fast that is but I think that is faster than most aircraft we know of today. Supposedly the aircraft which employs this engine uses a reactor to which there were a lot of detailed numbers and figures for, but I have no idea what all this meant. I can remember that the documents referred to a super heavy element, whatever that means. The element is the main fuel for the reactor. The engine worked by making a disturbance of molecules at the front of the craft so that it was able to stop the inertia or G-force inside the craft. I got the impression that this information was the type of material I was looking for because it was far in advance of our current technology and could be something to do with the Roswell UFO. Finding this threw me ecause I didn’t know if this information was a disinformation exercise and that people were meant to get in and find this stuff or if it was real. I can’t be sure and this is the one annoying thing.

In the interviews that were carried out with the police Wright Patterson was mentioned. Officer D S Janes asked me, had I been in there and I said that I had. He then asked me if I had got any information from this computer and I said that I had found details of an anti-gravity propulsion system. He asked if I downloaded any files from this project and I said no and I had only read the files online. As I said earlier I admitted to this but no charges were brought against me on this matter which is a bit odd. Then the interviewing officer asked me if I knew what Hanger 18 meant. I said “well if you are thinking of a building where they store extraterrestrial aircraft then this is what you might mean but perhaps you mean it is a computer or a bulletin board -is this what you mean?”. He replied that this could be the place that he was thinking of. This was the only time that Hanger 18 was mentioned in the interview.

In one of the hearings at magistrates’ court there was a special agent who came over called Jim Hanson. When asked what did he feel I was trying to achieve by my hacking he said that he believed I was not trying to do any harm but was just looking for information on Hanger 18. The prosecution then asked Jim Hanson in a light-hearted manner if he could confirm if Hanger 18 exists and Hanson responded “I can’t tell you that because I am not party to that information”.

What surprised me is the fact that I was asked about the little known Hanger 18 story instead of somewhere well known such as Area 51. Some members of the press alluded that I had hacked into Area 51, but I never said this and I refused to comment on the UFO issue to them. There were things I was not prepared to talk about to the press because I was not sure if I would be able to sell my story or not, so I did not want to give the information away.

The point was that I knew where Wright Patterson airbase was but I didn’t know, until I read a UFO magazine recently, that Hanger 18 was located at Wright Patterson. This was the first I ever learned about this.

When you put it all together it seems weird – the fact that I hacked into Wright Patterson and found details of a secret gravity engine and then the coppers asking me about Hanger 18, even to have a secret service agent in an open court saying about Hanger 18 and then me later on finding out that the two places are the same.

MW: Wasn’t there a ban on press reporting of your case?

MB: The press were there and they heard many interesting things which the failed to print but yes there was a ban on reporting the case, they said because they did not want the press opinion to influence the case in any way. This is the principal of subjudicy.

The prosecution had originally intended to have the case heard in secret (In Camera) but we did not allow this to happen.

MW: Have you ever seen any UFOs yourself?

MB: There was a time when I was going back to Newport from Cardiff and there were two very feint lights which were like passenger plane lights at first. They looked like they were going towards Rhoose airport but in-between them there was a start which was shooting back and forth between these two points. I had to force my friends to look at the lights because they would not look and said was crazy but when eventually they did look they agreed that they had seen something strange.

My Wife and I went on holiday to Fuertaventura in the Canaries and there were unusual lights in the sky above us which we watched for many hours. They changed colour and went on and off. They seemed so far away that they couldn’t be sure if they were satellites or not. I am not saying that this could not have been explainable phenomena.

MW: What interest did you have in UFOs before the trial.

MB: Just before I got into the hacking scene I was making the free phone calls and I found a Bulletin Board in Australia which had loads of UFO files. There were about 500 or 600 text files on offer so I downloaded them all and waded through them slowly. I found it really interesting and I wanted to know more. I go into the MUFON files and Keelynet Bulletin Boards and they had interesting things on them also.

It seems to me that far more people have seen UFOs and have evidence of this than there is evidence of GOD but people go around believing in GOD and are not ridiculed for this in any way!

My opinion is that there is a lot of information UFO information out there and it is hard to separate the liars from the truthful people. The thing is that some of the wilder claims may also be the truth but sometimes you cannot be certain of any claims either way.

The types of thing I mean are cases where people say that they have been onboard spacecraft and seen the classic alien with big black eyes and that they had experiences which are consistent with other witnesses. You then hear from the same person that the aliens took her for a ride and they were walking around on the moon without a spacesuit and the story starts to take a strange turn. It seems that people seem to go overboard but who knows that person may in fact be telling the truth.

MW: Do you know much about Bob Lazar? Tell me what you about his story.

MB: Well yes, Bob Lazar was able to show documents from his previous work to show that he worked with certain companies, but they deny he ever worked for them.

As I remember he is a really nerdy looking guy that claims to have worked at Area 51’s S3 complex I think? He claimed to have been working on crashed UFO technology. He said that he had seen saucers in hangers and had seen one flying one day. Only recently I saw the original interview he gave on video where he talked about his work and was drawing on a blackboard. I think he got prosecuted for running a brothel, I don’t know much more than that.

MW: Do you know anything about the propulsion systems he was talking about in his work on the saucers?

MB: No not really – I can remember the shape of the craft and I can remember that the propulsion system was in the bottom of the craft and that it is like a segmented thing. I remember a little area in the middle where the “guys” would sit. I don’t really remember the details or specifics of that.

MW: I am interested because you used the term “heavy element reactor” earlier on and I wondered if you have heard about something called “element 115”?

MB: No I did chemistry at school but was very bad at it and got kicked out. I don’t know anything about elements full stop really.

MW: Bob Lazars story was that he worked on propulsion systems, which utilised a reactor, fuelled by a super heavy element. Everyday scientists do not know of the element 115 of which he speaks. Does this mean anything to you?

MB: Maybe that is a parallel. The only things I know about him really is that he worked on UFOs and his involvement in the brothel and the fact that he looks a bit “geeky”.

MW: Can you remember any names of people on the project. Were there dates on any of the letters you saw regarding the propulsion system?

MB: Nope, as for dates all the information was current at 1994. Whether this was a totally new engine or if it was a new version I can’t be sure. I do know that it was a working prototype.

MW: Did they say what type of aircraft the propulsion system would be used in?

MB: Not that I remember, although I believe the engine was in use.

MW: Do you fear going to the United States?

MB: I am, not so much worried about being tried in the US for these things because they still have the same flawed evidence – but I fear that over there they would just stick me in prison without a trial and leave me to rot. This is something I have to look at carefully and to study the international law on these matters because there is a question of where was the crime committed on my computer in my house in the UK or in the US on their systems. This is a legal dilemma and is open to question.

A point is that there is a hacker out there now called Kevin Minick who did some minor hacking and has been in prison for 2 years and hasn’t been charged with anything yet! This can happen.

MW: Why did you do all this? Are you an anarchist or is this political or just for pure curiosity?

MB: I just get a thrill out of exploring new computer systems. If you could see my CV I now have knowledge of all these computers systems I have used. If employers wanted to know how I got that experience it may get a bit awkward to have to tell them that these were military systems I was playing with – but it still makes for a good CV! I can now admit to my hacking and not have any fear because it may be a plus point in that I know a lot about systems security.

I did it for the pure adrenaline buzz of hacking a secret system. This can keep you awake on no food for hours and this is one of the other reasons – because of the thrill.

MW: Thank you very much.

MB: Thanks.

In final clarification on some of the interview I asked Mathew if he saw any images on the computer systems at Wright Patterson Airbase. He says he saw one but remembers that the antigravity engine was a working prototype and is fitted in some form of aircraft and is in use although the type of aircraft was not disclosed. The information was dated around 1994, when the system was originally breached. It is now up to researchers and hackers alike to try and find out more.

Inside the Tory ‘hacking’ claims

Net crime fears prompted bank to postpone e-banking

Stories about the alleged “hacking” into the Conservatives bank account bring to mind images of a lone young male – probably a social misfit – sitting in his basement, huddled over his computer.

The reality is probably somewhat more anodyne.

Think instead of a disgruntled Labour- supporting bank employee with a mean eye for a story and you probably have something closer to the truth.

Hands on: Bank employees may be to blame
Ross Anderson,
professor of computing at Cambridge University, told BBC News Online: “Twenty years ago, if you wanted to find out the details of a bank account you would have to get the ledger in the bank branch – which would probably mean bribing or sleeping with the person who had the keys to the safe.

“When the banks computerised it meant that every one of its 70,000 or so tellers could see every customer’s account.

“Insecurity of data increases with the number of people who have access to it.”

Mathew Bevan, a computer security consultant and former computer hacker, backed Prof Anderson’s theory.

All banks are pretty much insecure
– Former hacker Mathew Bevan
“The information could have come from a call centre or from within the bank. All banks are pretty much insecure,” he told BBC News Online.

“It takes a lot of talent to hack into a bank’s computer and I don’t think a hacker could be bothered without any financial reward.

“And aside from the embarrassment, it’s not going to stop the Tories winning the next election.”

The Royal Bank of Scotland – where the Conservatives have their account – said it has “complete confidence” in all its security systems.

If someone has been hacked, they usually keep it secret -Dr Chris Thornton

Dr Chris Thornton, Sussex University computing science lecturer, said: “If someone has been hacked, they usually keep it secret.

“Anyone who makes it public usually has an ulterior motive.”

But the Conservatives say the information could not have come from their London headquarters.

The problems have emerged amid concern in the computer industry that the hackers may be exposing new security flaws as fast as the big software companies, such as Bill Gates’s Microsoft, can repair them.

The hackers are also switching tactics. Instead of attacking banks directly – as they did in one of the few publicised cases when $400,000 (?240,000) was stolen from Citibank in America – security experts believe they are targeting people’s home computers and their personal accounts.

By leaving viruses scattered across the internet, hackers have discovered they can seize control of home computers and steal people’s legal identities.

These can be used to attack bank accounts, lift phone records, electronic shopping accounts and private business information.

Hacker infiltrates military satellite
By Sean Fleming
Posted: 01/03/1999 at 16:42 GMT

The UK Ministry of Defence has come under attack from a hacker who is allegedly threatening to target military satellites unless a £3 million ransom is handed over.

According to a story in today?s Daily Mail, the hacker has already seized control of one satellite, altering its course. The satellite in question is said to be involved in co- ordinating bombing raids on Iraq. Other targets for the hacker have been GCHQ – the spying operation that listens in on telephone calls and other communications – and a number of UK operations overseas. Officers from the Metropolitan Police Computer Crime Unit are said to be engaged in tracking down the source of the attacks. The authorities are said to have been so concerned about the attack on the satellite that the prime minister, Tony Blair, was informed. High profile hackings are becoming more common. One of the most well known was involved two UK hackers, Datastream Cowboy (Richard Pryce) and Kuji (Mathew Bevan), who caught the CIA’s attention in 1994 after the Pentagon?s computer was broken into. The South Korean atomic research institute was also hacked, provoking fears that World War III might be started by a teenage computer hacker sitting in his bedroom.

Hacker finds his skills in demand

By Steve Masters [25-02-1998]

Reformed saboteur warns easy PC access will lead to rising tide of cyber terrorism

It was a case of poacher turned gamekeeper last week when Mathew Bevan, the hacker formerly known as Kuji, found a respectable job as a hacker, writes Sean Fleming.

Bevan was accused of breaking into US military computer systems but walked free from Woolwich Crown Court last November after the case was dropped.

He will work as a member of a team of six reformed saboteurs launching surprise attacks on customers of London-based Tiger Computer Security.

Once weve signed a client up, we tell them to expect an attack within the next six months, but we dont tell them exactly when.

It would defeat the purpose if they were watching out for us, he explained.

Bevan whose job title will be Chief Tiger said the incidence of cyber terrorism will increase over the next five years.

I was 11 when I got my first computer and 14 by the time I had a modem.

You’ve now got kids of eight or nine with PCs at home that have good processing power and Internet access. They will become mature in the use of computers long before they are mature in the wider sense the whole situation could go bananas, he warned.

Taken from “The Sunday Business Post Online” www.sbpost.ie
Cib Cover Story Confessions of a hacker
Dublin , Ireland, April 1, 2001

Mathew Bevan was known as Kuji, hacker extraordinaire, probing everything from company ceo’s files to US military bases. The Pentagon described him as “the number one threat to US security”. One day men in dark suits arrested him and he faced charges that might have sent him to jail for 15 years

This, in his own words, is his story.

I cannot help being a hacker. I have always been clever and resourceful. Later on, I became addicted to the adrenaline of electronically rifling a chief executive’s files or looking at the latest space station plans at NASA. In the months leading up to my arrest, I was described by a Pentagon official as “possibly the single biggest threat to world peace since Adolf Hitler”. Then, I faced 15 years in prison.

But first I would like to tell you about my background. I believe it will help you understand why I became what I am. This is my story.
I was 12 when I first got a computer. I was given a Sinclair ZX81 and a subscription to some computing magazines.

When I was 12, I was a nerd. I was beaten and bullied almost every day of my young school life. Through my latter school years the physical abuse was replaced with name-calling and other mental abuse.

Later on, I realised that it was this time in my life which proved the precursor to my hacking.
Like most nerds, I upgraded my machine as often as I could. At the age of 15, I bought an Amiga 500. To me, the Amiga was a piece of computing genius. Not only did it have better graphics than any PC, but also had four channel stereo sound, something that would prove useful in the months to come.

My first revelation was in discovering bulletin boards. A bulletin board was what would be described as a usenet chat forum today. Except it was much more basic. And much less regulated. My friend gave me his 2,400 baud modem and, for a month, I called every BBS (Bulletin Board) number I could get my hands on.

At the end of the month, my mother showed me a ?400 phone bill. She said she never wanted to see a phone bill like that again. From that point onwards, she never did.

I began learning about manipulation of the phone system. Not only could I make free calls, but I could obfuscate call origin. Like every aspiring hacker, I wanted to be anonymous. I found I could do so by diverting the call through several countries before reaching my destination.

I had the ability to call anywhere in the world for free and be untraceable. I was given the number to a bulletin board in Belgium called Sin City. It was a hangout for electronic deviants. I met people on that bulletin boards who were interested in the skills I had accumulated on the phone system. As a trade for that information they gave me documents, files and other information to break into computers.

Then, hackers were free with their information and less wary of the law. Then, there was no such thing as a Computer Misuse Act (British legislation) and hackers could see no harm in anything they were doing. (Today, we face longer prison sentences than those who have committed the most heinous of crimes. We can now be dealt with under the new [British] anti-terrorist laws putting our crimes above that of murder.)

So I began to make friends. I was able for the first time to interact with people all across the globe. These people wanted nothing more than to share interests and as a result we became good friends, even though I would only ever actually meet a handful of them in person. Here, in the computer realm, I was strong and fearless, even if I felt scared and powerless in real life. I would get up and go to school, hate it, return home and get on the internet until about 4am or 5am. Then I would sleep for an hour or two and repeat the cycle.

I began taking the path of the computer mis-user very quickly, and it was not long before I was breaking into all sorts of machines, big and small. I did it purely because I could. One way of describing it is in relation to the curiosity that a parent feels when they find their child’s diary. They know it is wrong to read it, but something inside is just too inquisitive.

Hacking is like that in many ways. You know it’s wrong but the excitement, the rush of being in a powerful institution’s files is overwhelming. That is where the addictive nature of hacking can take hold. You feel the rush once — you want it again. And again. And again.

I cannot actually remember the first; I hacked so many machines in quick succession that the specifics elude me for all but the most memorable.
But this was soon to come.

I hacked everything I could, but there was something lacking; I wanted a direction. I found that needed direction on a bulletin board based in Australia. The bulletin board was called Destiny Stone and was run by a phone phreaker called Ripmax. A phone phreaker is a term for someone who hacks at systems using a phone connection. Ripmax had ended up on the wrong side of the law. What I found on his system were hundreds of documents about UFOs, government cover-ups and conspiracy theories.

I became interested. At that time, a hacker publication called PHRACK released a story about the alleged disappearance of 40 hackers. They had been targeting military systems to try an uncover the truth.

PHRACK printed the names of the bases that were thought to have been the targets by the missing group. I noted all of the military bases that were named in the various UFO documents I had downloaded.

I then began a systematic attack on each of the ones I could find with online equivalents. I had many jump-off points with which to attack these military bases. I thought I was safe.

I had already broken so many other systems, corporate, educational, and government contractors that it would be easy to find routes into the systems.

I was naive. While I was penetrating the different bases, four thousand miles away a group of high-ranking military personnel from the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) and Air Force Information Warfare Centre (AFIWAC) were gathered around a few computer terminals at Griffiss Air Force Base in Rome, New York.
This group, I learned from later reports (and three subsequent US Senate enquiries), were `hacker trackers’. They monitored all activity including keystrokes within the network and they were watching a particular chain of events closely. Over the preceding days, they had been following the activities of two hackers, Datastream Cowboy and Kuji, who had penetrated numerous sensitive computer systems belonging to the army and Air Force.

They discovered via an informant on an Internet chat system, IRC, that Datastream Cowboy was a 15 year old English boy. Shortly afterwards, a boy, Richard Pryce was arrested by the Metropolitan Computer Crime Unit, in England.
For legal reasons, I must be careful now about how I continue. The other hacker was deemed more elusive and wily and the only thing the group had to go on was his handle Kuji. Little was known about this hacker. Kuji had been spotted on an Australian bulletin board by investigators but that is where information ran dry. Investigators said that Kuji would stay online for only short periods of time, never long enough to be traced successfully.

The investigators said that while Datastream Cowboy made mistakes, Kuji seemes flawless in his technique. They would observe what they believed to be Datastream Cowboy attempting to attack a site, fail, talk to Kuji and a minute later successfully get in.

They concluded that Kuji was far more sophisticated and had financial motives. They decided that Kuji was a spy, tutoring the younger Datastream Cowboy in exchange for military secrets. It did not occur to them that the culprit could be an 18 year old kid living in Cardiff with very little stashed under the floorboards.
In the following year, Kuji became the subject of unprecedented comment and speculation. The story of the hacking broke. US Senate enquiries ensued. One pentagon official described Kuji as “possibly the single biggest threat to world peace since Adolf Hitler”.

One year later, a year after Pryce’s arrest (he was later fined ?1,200), a tip-off to the police identified ‘Kuji’ and subsequently I was arrested at work.

At the time, I was working in the IT department of an Insurance company and was fixing the MD’s computer. A group of dark suited men walked into the office. I was read my rights and arrested for various computer crimes against NATO, NASA, the US Air Force and other military installations.
I had a suspicion they might find me, but believed that due to them looking for a spy the chances were slim. My reaction was one of calm. I had read reports of Pryce’s arrest and was aware that he had broken down in tears. Reports had claimed that he began shouting “God, what have I done”. I did not want that to be held against me.

I was taken to the local police station for questioning and charged with conspiracy under the (British) Computer Misuse Act.
For the next 18 months I was prosecuted and underwent preparation for a trial which could have sent me to prison for 15 years.
I maintained throughout that any hacking I had done was on my own. There was no conspiracy. My argument was that I was in competition. As such I refused to accept any deals with which the prosecution offered based upon conspiracy.
In addition, conflicting information regarding sensitive information held on the sites and various other technical faults affected the prosecution’s case.

By the time the prosecution realised there was no conspiracy, they had run out of time to charge me with the other original offence, unauthorised access. This left them with only three more serious offences including unauthorised access with intent to impair the operation of the computer. This was nonsense. I would never wish to impair a machine I am having fun using to attack other machines.

The case was finally decided before going to trial with the prosecution offering no evidence. That meant a full acquittal with not guilty verdicts recorded. The British Crown Prosecution Service held that it was not in the public interest to prosecute me. They estimated the cost of a four month trial at ?10,000 a day plus the cost of bringing high ranking military personnel from America.

Looking back, I now believe that my case was not about hacking, but an exercise in propaganda. In the same year that a handful of hackers were caught, there was an estimated 250,000 attacks on computers in the US Department of Defence.
It was a prime target. I believe it was no coincidence that when the Senate was being asked for money to fund protection against Information Warfare, a case study appearing to proving their point fell in their laps.

But I am not bitter. I have respect, now. I am not bullied anymore. I will not attack your company anymore. I now work on the right side of the law as a computer consultant, mainly work performing penetration tests. I also volunteer my time and technical ability to www.antichildporn.org.

But I am still a hacker.

Mathew Bevan can be reached at hacker@kujimedia.com or www.kujimedia.com

Ex-hacker to help Nintendo with viral marketing
By: John Leyden
Posted: 29/03/2001 at 14:44 GMT

A well-known former computer hacker has been hired to do viral marketing for games firm Nintendo and TV channel E4.

Mathew Bevan, whose hacker handle is Kuji, was accused of breaking into US military computer systems but escaped without punishment when a 1997 case at Woolwich Crown Court was dropped after a long-running legal battle.

After the case Bevan became an ethical hacker and security consultant with Tiger Computer Security, and later on a freelance basis with his firm the Kuji Media Corporation.

Bevan was reluctant to go into details of his marketing work just yet, but said he was offered work for Nintendo and the E4 site, e4chained, through a third party and the Kuji Media Corporation. As a security expert it was felt he had the talent to help run a successful viral marketing campaign.

Bevan, and Richard Pryce (Datastream Cowboy) were accused of hacking into a research centre at Griffiss Air Force base in New York state and faced charges related to the Computer Misuse Act.

The case revolved an incident when the Korean Atomic Research Institute’s database was found to have had been deposited on USAF’s systems.

In court, USAF investigators admitted that they initially feared the data had come from North Korea – something that could spark a major international incident. This provoked fears that World War III might be started by a teenage computer hacker sitting in his bedroom.

An inquiry into the hack led investigators to Bevan and Pryce, who were subsequently charged.

Pryce, who was 16 at the time, was fined £1,200 in a hearing before the Woolwich Crown Court case. The prosecution against Bevan was dropped because after the leniency shown to Pryce, prosecutors concluded it was too expensive to continue with the case. ?

Foreign hackers working from overseas via the Internet penetrated sensitive U.S. Government computer systems.

Hacking U.S. Government Computers from Overseas

Foreign-based hacker groups working via the Internet have had substantial success breaking into U.S. Government and defense contractor computer systems holding sensitive but not classified information. There is one publicly known case in which computer break-ins from overseas were sponsored by a foreign intelligence service.

Three Germans in Bremen, West Germany were hired by the Soviet KGB during 1986- 1989 to hack into U.S. Government systems. They penetrated Pentagon systems, NASA networks, Los Alamos National Laboratories and Lawrence Berkeley Laboratories. They were detected by Clifford Stoll, at Berkeley, when he checked out minor discrepancies in the account billings. Stoll later wrote the popular book, The Cuckoo’s Egg, about the case. The three hackers were arrested and convicted of espionage.

The following three cases also show the ability of hackers overseas to penetrate protected domestic U.S. systems via the Internet. In these three cases there was some suspicion of possible foreign intelligence involvement. This could not be confirmed, but also could not be ruled out. Enterprising foreign hackers could collect this information on their own and then sell it to a foreign intelligence service, or a foreign service could sponsor the same kind of operation itself.

Argentine Hacker Intrusion Into Navy Systems

In July 1995 computers in several states and Mexico reported intrusions originating from Harvard University. The hacker apparently lifted user IDs and password information from accounts on a system administered by the university. The U.S. government became concerned in August when an intrusion was detected on a network operated by the U.S. Naval Command, Control and Ocean Surveillance Center (NCCOSC). The intruder broke into the NCCOSC computer and installed sniffer programs to capture the IDs and passwords of legitimate users, and other software that would allow him to alter or destroy network files or to make them inaccessible to users.

After attacking a site in Taiwan, the intruder was monitored while “chatting” on the Internet, using the name Griton. Griton was traced back to Argentina where the moniker was known by Argentine authorities as a computer pirate who specialized in hacking, cracking and phreaking. The subject was soon traced to Buenos Aires and identified as Julio Cesar Ardita, then a 21-year-old student in Buenos Aires at the University of Argentina.

According to news reports, this hacker gained access to a host computer at the Army Research Lab in Edgewood, Maryland; the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington; the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, California; and the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Victim sites include 62 U.S. government, 136 U.S. educational, and 31 U.S. commercial facilities. The U.S. Navy, NASA, and Department of Energy’s National Laboratories were high on the list of frequency of penetration.

Ardita was served a warrant and his computer was seized. He admitted responsibility, but claimed he was guilty only of mischief. He was arraigned in December, 1995. The U.S. Department of Justice filed criminal charges against Ardita. Prosecution in the U.S. was initially frustrated by the fact that computer crime is not covered by international agreements for extradition. In December 1997, Ardita agreed to come voluntarily to the United States and plead guilty to unlawfully intercepting electronic communications over a military computer and damaging files on a military computer. In return for Ardita’s agreement to come voluntarily to the United States, he is being sentenced to only three years probation and fined $5,000.1

Although he hacked into important and sensitive government research files on satellites, radiation, and energy-related engineering, Ardita is not accused of obtaining classified information related to national security. To counterintelligence analysts, the hacker’s selection of targets and subject matter suggested a well-defined intelligence collection tasking, but foreign intelligence involvement has not been established. If a foreign intelligence service was involved, it is impossible to know which one, as many countries might have been interested in the information Ardita collected.

The Ardita case was the first time a court-ordered wire tap was used for real-time monitoring of an unknown subject to catch a computer criminal. It demonstrates the ability to chase and identify an international hacker on-line.1

Air Force Rome Development Center Break-In

Two young British hackers, Richard Pryce, age 16, and Mathew Bevan, age 21, broke into U.S. military computer systems. Pryce, who was identified and charged in 1995, allegedly obtained access to files on ballistic weapons research and messages from U.S. agents in North Korea during a 1994 crisis over inspection of nuclear facilities in North Korea. The penetrations were carried out over a period of several months.

Bevan, an information technology technician, was charged in 1996 with conspiracy to gain unauthorized access to computers. Pryce used the on-line nickname of “Datastream Cowboy” while Bevan identified himself as “Kuji.” Kuji was tutoring Datastream in his attempts to break into specific systems. According to news reports, investigators suspected the older culprit of being a foreign agent.

Pryce and Bevan broke into the Rome Air Development Center, Griffiss Air Force Base, NY, and before authorities became aware of their presence (five days later) they had penetrated seven systems, copied files including sensitive battlefield simulations, and installed devices to read passwords of everyone entering the systems. Rome Air Development Center was used as a launching pad for more than 150 intrusions into military, government and other systems including NASA and Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. Large volumes of data were downloaded from penetrated systems. One such data transfer (which was being monitored) involved the downloading of files from the Goddard Space Flight Center to an Internet provider in Latvia. In order to prevent the loss of sensitive data, the monitoring team broke the connection.

In one of these break-ins, Pryce used Rome to access a Korean facility. According to media reports, “For several anxious hours [U.S. authorities] didn’t know whether the intrusion was into a North or South Korean system. The concern was that the North Koreans would trace an intrusion coming from the U.S. and perceive it as an aggressive act of war.” The penetrated system turned out to be the South Korean Atomic Research Institute. The two were arrested after a long investigation by the Air Force Office of Special Investigation and New Scotland Yard.2

Dutch Teen Hackers

A group of Dutch teenagers penetrated computer systems at 34 U.S. military installations during 1990-91. They gained access to information on personnel performance reports, weapons development, and descriptions of movement of equipment and personnel. The systems penetrated included the Naval Sea Systems Command, the Army’s readiness system at Ft. Belvoir, Virginia, and the Army missile research lab at Aberdeen, Maryland.

At least one penetrated system directly supported U.S. military operations in Operation Desert Storm prior to the Gulf War. They copied or altered unclassified data and changed software to permit future access. The hackers were also looking for information about nuclear weapons. Their activities were first disclosed by Dutch television when camera crews filmed a hacker tapping into what was said to be U.S. military test information.

According to an ABC News report, the Dutch hackers had been operating for at least a year reading sensitive information about military plans and operations. Documents obtained by ABC indicate that hackers got so much information about the Patriot Missile that they had to break into several other computers just to find a place to store the data. At one point the intruders shut down computers in Wisconsin and Virginia which were later used to mobilize troops for Desert Storm. Information was gathered on the Patriot rocket launching system, the Navy’s Tomahawk cruise missile, and on the call up of military reserves for the Gulf War. The search words the hackers were particularly interested in were “military,” “nuclear” and “Desert Storm” or “Desert Shield.”

Many of the computer penetrations originated in Geldrop, Holland. At the time, investigators suspected the hackers could have been freelance spies looking for information to sell to the KGB or Iraqi intelligence, but no evidence of foreign intelligence service involvement has been found.