Advanced search

We've just heard from the Met that they are dropping their investigation into MN Swatter

(66 Posts)
JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Thu 04-May-17 20:11:41

We received this mail from the Met today. Not great news but I thought some might be interested in the outcome.

Hacking enquiry

"I am afraid that we can no longer pursue the hacking investigation of Mumsnet any further, there are no other lines of enquiry that we can follow up on. In order to identify the user of the online moniker of DadSec we have approached Twitter for their assistance however they cannot. The suspect used a number of different methods to hide their true identity from using TOR, proxy websites, compromised details and jurisdictions which are not Law enforcement friendly. All of this added together means that we do not at this stage have any viable leads and therefore will have to close this investigation.


I am more than happy to come across and discuss this in more detail in person. Please let me know a date and time and I can visit your offices to speak further. 


I am sorry that in this instance we could not find the others who were responsible. If there is anything else that I can help with please do let me know.

Kind regards..."

MovingtoParadise Thu 04-May-17 20:16:04

I'm pretty surprised. They seem to be saying that they could catch him ? Is the crime not serious enough to warrant them doing that?

I'm guessing it's not serious enough for them to dedicate more resources to it.

PigletWasPoohsFriend Thu 04-May-17 20:18:11

They seem to be saying that they could catch him ?

I don't think they are. They are saying that the person covered their identity in numerous ways and they are unable to trace it.

MovingtoParadise Thu 04-May-17 20:21:59

Well they could compel Twitter with a court order and the other proxies but aren't confused

Not 'law enforcement friendly' doesn't mean they can't, it means that they won't (for whatever reason).

BillyButtfuck Thu 04-May-17 21:20:12

Thank you for keeping us in the loop

Blagging Fri 05-May-17 00:27:38

I'm sorry to hear that. It's really frustrating. It was such a nasty thing to have done.

David Buchanan the Mumsnet hacker is currently at Bristol University hmm I wonder if he regrets what he did. I know he wasn't the person responsible for the swotting attack but if he wasn't involved it wouldn't have happened.

KungFuEric Fri 05-May-17 00:30:50

It's not surprising, priority crimes for police to deal with are ones that can be evidenced and solved in a simple manner.

Groovee Fri 05-May-17 09:29:16

I hope whoever did this doesn't do
It to any other website but it does feel like they got away with it.

JaneJeffer Fri 05-May-17 10:41:24

we have approached Twitter for their assistance however they cannot

Their reply is very badly written.

The hacker will be delighted when they see this. It'll probably encourage them to do worse.

DoctorDonnaNoble Fri 05-May-17 10:51:14

Twitter as form for not helping police investigations.

PhilODox Fri 05-May-17 11:13:34

I guess it's just not a priority for them, is it?

TheNaze73 Fri 05-May-17 11:15:10

Is there a link at all to the case?

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 05-May-17 11:44:38

This explains what happens from our POV

SpecialFlowSnake Fri 05-May-17 11:48:52


Faithless12 Fri 05-May-17 11:50:10

It's not that it's not a priority, some countries don't have the same laws as ours so when servers are based in that country their laws apply. It's the biggest issue with the internet is the ability to just use servers that are favourable to your cause.

DoctorDonnaNoble Fri 05-May-17 12:19:00

Yup. What Faithless said

TressiliansStone Fri 05-May-17 13:19:42

Thanks for the update, Justine. Disappointing, but not too surprising.

Shitalopram Fri 05-May-17 13:25:36

"Not law enforcement friendly"

Diddums. hmm

WannaBe Fri 05-May-17 14:09:49

Not surprised.

childmaintenanceserviceinquiry Fri 05-May-17 15:40:57

It does read a bit as if they don't want to dedicate any more resource to the investigation. I think for me the worst bit was the use of swotting. That waste of public resource and the possible harm that could have been done surely warrants effort. Presumably that is a criminal offence?

OlennasWimple Fri 05-May-17 15:52:44

Thanks for the update

Twitter have very clear policies about the circumstances under which they will release information to law enforcement agencies. Mostly designed to protect its users' personal data, but it's frustrating when it appears to stonewall legitimate requests for information. Considering that they don't allow governments to access information to help thwart terrorist activity, I'm not surprised that Twitter hasn't been more helpful in this case.

bibbitybobbityyhat Fri 05-May-17 16:09:45

That's really disappointing, I'm sorry to read it Justine.

I'm surprised that they aren't going to pursue something that resulted in in two police teams being deployed for no reason.

Hassled Fri 05-May-17 17:37:24

I'm sorry - particularly for Justine and the MNer who were the specific targets. It must have been so distressing - and to find out the bastard has just got away with it is really galling.

DoctorDonnaNoble Fri 05-May-17 17:57:31

They can want to pursue it all they like; without the evidence from Twitter they won't have a case for the CPS. They won't be allowed to charge. Most social networks hide behind the legislation of where their servers are based and refuse to divulge client information as it 'invades privacy' but will happily sell that information to advertisers.

ParadiseCity Fri 05-May-17 18:00:20

Hope MNHQ and the swattees are not too pissed off about this... MN rocks so the swatter may be thinking they've had the last laugh but I wouldn't agree.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: