“Before you start slinging mud at me about my own activities. Two things to note. I never target the US and If I am arrested, and convicted in due process by a jury of peers I will consider that justice will have been served.”—The Jester, in his blog, Jester’s Court, June 26, 2013
***************
In the International Spy Museum in Washington, D.C., a bulky black laptop rests in an exhibition titled “Weapons of Mass Disruption,” which in turn is part of the museum’s “Exquisitely Evil: 50 Years of Bond Villains” exhibit.
The computer belongs to a hacker who goes by the handle “The Jester,” or “th3j35t3r” in Leet, an alternative alphabet used on the Internet for word encryption or to show computer competence. Jason Werden, public relations manager at the International Spy Museum, said the computer is on loan for five years, an agreement arranged with the help of a go-between from the intelligence community who put museum officials in touch with the Jester through Twitter.
That the Jester’s laptop sits among the lore of spy gadgets from the movies is perhaps fitting. But the title of the exhibit begs the question: on which side of the good-versus-evil line does this pro-government hacktivist fall?
The International Spy Museum
The International Spy Museum’s website strives to educate the public about espionage and provide context for its impact on history.
Museum founder Milton Maltz says “its mission is to reflect the significance of intelligence as a critical component of national security.”
Cyber counterterrorism seems to be part of the Jester’s pro-government hackactivism. He or she has been a thorn in the side of several groups at odds with the U.S. government. A thorough May 2013 Newsweek feature by Michael Moynihan on cyberspies details the Jester’s denial of service attacks on websites such as those used by the Taliban, Libyan newspapers and even Wikileaks.
The Jester vs. Anonymous
On Jan. 11, 2013, Aaron Swartz hanged himself in his New York City apartment.
At the time of his death, Swartz was indicted for downloading nearly 5 million documents from JSTOR in an attempt to post them on the Web for free. He faced up to $1 million in fines and 35 years in prison.
Following Swartz’s suicide, Anonymous announced an unprecedented hacking attack on the U.S. government in retribution.
Anonymous’ willingness to attack the American government exemplifies the difference between that group and the Jester.
Long before Swartz’s death, in a 2011 blog post, the Jester described his problems with Anonymous and specifically a member of the group known as Sabu, or @anonymousabu.
“It’s quite strange that someone who supports democratically elected governments (Hamas) would attack them and tell people to rise up against them, while at the same time try to draw hackers away from attacking non-democratic and anti-democratic regimes as ANONYMOUSABU has done,” wrote the Jester.
The Jester alleged that Anonymous sold out by allowing Sabu to lead the group down a path that he believed lacked credibility.
The man behind Sabu, Hector Monsegur, was arrested by the FBI in June 2011 after posting online without first masking his IP address. He pled guilty to 12 counts of computer hacking conspiracies. Shortly afterward, he started working with the federal government.
On March 6, 2012, Ars Technica reported, “For the last nine months, Sabu has tweeted, hacked, and acted at the FBI’s direction, helping to reveal other members of LulzSec and to sow disinformation at the FBI’s request.” (LulzSec stands for Lulz Security, a group that teamed up with Anonymous to target the government.)
Newsweek’s Moynihan noted that the Jester “sought to expose the real identities of those he considers enemies of the United States—for instance, revealing the names of jihadists who recruit and proselytize online, as well as the names of people affiliated with Anonymous.”
The Jester is even quoted insisting that not long after he went public with names of Anonymous members “there were some more Anonymous arrests. Just as a side note.”
Clearly, he is at odds with hackers attacking the U.S. and the data of some of its largest companies.
But while the Jester may well be claiming the moral high ground of hackerdom, because he is the one defining the terms of his work, the public can’t be sure.
Many Americans maintain that the government is abusing power by collecting data through programs such as PRISM—a secret National Security Agency program that grants agents access to user data stored by companies like Google and Apple if a federal judge authorizes it. But many of these same people don’t know The Jester and view Anonymous as a watchdog.
Legal Issues
The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act makes it a crime to access another person’s computer without authorization or in excess of authorization, according to Cornell University’s Legal Information Institute.
The Jester has repeatedly violated the act with impunity. Maybe he’s lucky. However, it’s difficult to believe this luck will keep up.
It could be speculated that the Jester is serving in a similar capacity as Sabu, one with either direct or implicit approval from the U.S. government. Moynihan offered it as a possibility.
The Jester responded, “I make my work available—sometimes [publicly], sometimes privately—but I have no official relationship with law enforcement agencies. I just put things where certain people might ‘find’ them. It’s an unsaid, unspoken nonrelationship.”
The Jester’s prolific record fits into a museum celebrating the storied histories of the world’s spies, who couldn’t be easily categorized as good or bad guys either.
He probably shouldn’t be the only hacker there, though. The International Spy Museum could open its own cyberspy exhibit. It is unclear how history will reflect on some of the world’s first and most formidable hackers.
(Note: Spelling and grammar errors in quotes attributed to the Jester were printed as they appear either on his blog or Twitter account.)
