Re: VPN providers and any providers in general...

[adam <adam () papsy net>]

Wikileaks will likely end up being the exception (not the rule), so I'd take
the entire case with a grain of salt.

Also, an example (though not cybercrimes) is Frank Abagnale's extradition.
Twelve different countries wanted to extradite him, but only a handful of
them were actually able to. It's also very interesting how he ended up back
in the US. His passport was revoked, thereby forcing Sweden to deport him
back to the US - where he was able to avoid prosecution from Italy and other
places where he had committed fraud.

On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 8:09 AM, xD 0x41 <secn3t () gmail com> wrote:

> Good q,
> I think B and C would have some juristiction, depending on crime impact
> ofc. yes indeed, if one of those countries is say USA and the hacker has
> used X to rip off A for huge huge amounts of say crecitcard injections...
> then forsure something is there, or, they would make it on the spot i am
> sure, if it were usa :)
> I wonder though, about australia, and uk and some other  smaller countries,
> they may not... wich is, the greyish area still... but, i think it is crime
> impact on this one, and country a or b, being a power,politically,press
> wise, especially..
> It is a good case to watch the Assange, as theyre basically doing just that
> now with him, creating the laws needed to create the extraditions... or so i
> believe.
> Although his case is abit cloudy , the rape being connected with,
> wikilkeaks for example..
> But, that is where they make things up even, to create press,crime
> impact/victim impact, is taramount.
> regards,
> xd
>
>
>
> On 1 October 2011 23:03, Darren Martyn <d.martyn.fulldisclosure () gmail com>wrote:
>
> > Quick question regarding the extradition stuff. Say hacker X was caught in
> > country A, for cyber crimes in country A, but had also comitted crimes
> > against servers in countries B and C. Would B and C have any right to
> > extradite him/her or would they merely be tried for said crimes in country
> > A? (assuming country A brought them to trial in the end).
> >
> > Anyone have a definitive answer?
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 5:50 AM, <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, 01 Oct 2011 09:16:11 +1000, xD 0x41 said:
> > >
> > > > As you also said, murder is a no brainer in any place...well, maybe not
> > > iraq
> > > > or afghanistan just yet :P lol..
> > >
> > > Iraq, for all its problems, is still a place with a somewhat functional
> > > judicial system. The court system may be broken, but you in general
> > > *will* at
> > > least appear in a courtroom with a judge and be pronounced guilty before
> > > you're
> > > punished.
> > >
> > > I was actually thinking more along the lines of  totally failed states
> > > such as
> > > Somalia, Sudan, or the contested parts of Afghanistan, where you can't be
> > > tried
> > > for murder because there isn't a court to try you *in*.
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> > > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/