Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

MNHQ

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

65 replies

JustineMumsnet · 04/05/2017 20:11

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..."

OP posts:
DoctorDonnaNoble · 05/05/2017 12:19

Yup. What Faithless said

Faithless12 · 05/05/2017 11:50

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.

SpecialFlowSnake · 05/05/2017 11:48
Angry
MNHQ
JustineMumsnet · 05/05/2017 11:44

This explains what happens from our POV

OP posts:
TheNaze73 · 05/05/2017 11:15

Is there a link at all to the case?

PhilODox · 05/05/2017 11:13

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

DoctorDonnaNoble · 05/05/2017 10:51

Twitter as form for not helping police investigations.

JaneJeffer · 05/05/2017 10:41

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.

Groovee · 05/05/2017 09:29

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

KungFuEric · 05/05/2017 00:30

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

Blagging · 05/05/2017 00:27

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.

BillyButtfuck · 04/05/2017 21:20

Thank you for keeping us in the loop

MovingtoParadise · 04/05/2017 20:21

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).

PigletWasPoohsFriend · 04/05/2017 20:18

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 · 04/05/2017 20:16

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.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.