A former Apple employee who pled guilty to defrauding the company out of over $17 million has been sentenced to three years in prison and ordered to repay his ill-gotten gains. Dhirendra Prasad, who primarily worked as a buyer in Apple's Global Service Supply Chain department during his time at the company, admitted to charges of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and conspiracy to defraud the United States in November. As iMore notes, two charges of conspiracy to commit money laundering were dismissed during sentencing.

Prasad joined Apple in 2008 and carried out his schemes between 2011 and 2018. According to the US Attorney's Office for the Northern District of California, he conspired with two vendors to conduct fraud against Apple by "taking kickbacks, stealing parts, inflating invoices and causing Apple to pay for items and services it never received." Prasad is said to have used his insider knowledge of Apple's fraud detection practices to avoid being caught for several years.

The government has already seized $5.5 million worth of assets from Prasad, who a judge ordered to pay an additional forfeiture money judgment of $8.1 million. On top of that sum and the $17.4 million Prasad has been told to give back to Apple, he was ordered to pay $1.9 million to the Internal Revenue Service — he conceded that he did not pay tax on the proceeds of his schemes. Following Prasad's time in prison, he will have to serve three years of supervised release.

South Korean authorities announced today that they indicted the co-founder of Terraform Labs, the company that develops and manages the blockchain payment platform Terra. According toBloomberg, Daniel Shin and nine others linked to Terra now face multiple charges, including violations of capital markets law, which regulates the nation’s securities and financial markets.

The authorities indicted eight people, including Shin, for illegal trading; two others face breach of trust charges. Prosecutors say all the defendants were directly involved with Terra, having handled marketing, systems development and management. In addition, prosecutors have frozen 246.8 billion won ($184.7 million) in assets from the defendants. Korean officials said they’re working with the US on the case, although they didn’t go into specifics.

Billed as a stablecoin, TerraUSD isn’t backed by real-world assets or fiat currency. Instead, it’s supported by Luna, the native cryptocurrency of the Terra blockchain, that supposedly had a mechanism to restore its value to $1 if its value ever failed. In addition, investors saw it as an alluring money-making opportunity because of its Anchor lending program, which promised annual yields of 20 percent for coin deposits.

However, prosecutors allege the Terra blockchain was a “fabrication” from the get-go, with the entire system essentially built on a house of cards. They claim the blockchain’s algorithm that kept TerraUSD at a stable price was “impossible to get right.” Its value collapsed in May 2022, when depositors lost confidence in the platform and simultaneously tried to sell off their investments. At the time of publication, Terra has a value of less than two cents.

Before the collapse, the defendants took 463 billion won (nearly $346 million) in profit. In addition, prosecutors claim they illegally exposed clients’ payment details and embezzled funds. Authorities say those charged caused “astronomical damage” to global investors as the crash also played a role in the collapse of crypto hedge fund Three Arrows Capital and the broader $2 trillion decline in the cryptocurrency market.

“Shin has nothing to do with the Terra, Luna collapse as he left the [company] two years before the fallout,” said Shin’s lawyer, Kim Ki-dong, in a statement. “He voluntarily returned to South Korea immediately after the collapse, and has been faithfully cooperating with the probe for over 10 months, hoping to contribute to fact finding.”

In September, Korean authorities issued an arrest warrant for Shin’s co-founder, Do Kwon, who was also placed on an Interpol "red notice" list at South Korea’s request. He was finally arrested last month in Montenegro on capital markets law and fraud charges. The US Securities and Exchange Commission also charged Do Kwon and Terraform Labs in February.

In an 89-page complaint unsealed on Monday, the Justice Department alleges 34 current and former members of China’s 912 Special Project Working Group carried out a multi-year campaign to harass critics of Xi Jinping’s regime and discredit American policies. The task force, part of China’s domestic security agency, created thousands of fake social media profiles, including on Twitter and Facebook, to target Chinese dissidents in the US.

In its attempt to disseminate official government propaganda, the group created thousands of fake online personas. Judging from screenshots shared by the Justice Department, many of the profiles did not have more than a dozen accounts following them, but a common thread among them is that they tried to pass as authentic American voices. As The Wall Street Journal points out, one account claimed to be “Susan Miller,” a woman from New York. Another said they were “Julie Torres,” a native of Wisconsin. According to the Justice Department, China’s Ministry of Public Security tracked the performance of the agents involved in the operation and rewarded those who successfully ran multiple online personas without being detected by Twitter and Facebook.

In addition to targeting Chinese dissidents, the group, taking a page from Russia’s disinformation playbook, sought to discredit the US government by exploiting divisions among the American public. For instance, it spread disinformation about George Floyd, the Black Man whose murder by Minneapolis police in 2020 sparked Black Lives Matter protests across the country. The group also amplified Russian propaganda about the war in Ukraine.

“As alleged, the PRC government deploys its national police and the 912 Special Project Working Group not as an instrument to uphold the law and protect public safety, but rather as a troll farm that attacks persons in our country for exercising free speech in a manner that the PRC government finds disagreeable, and also spreads propaganda whose sole purpose is to sow divisions within the United States,” said US attorney Breon Peace, referring to the acronym for the People’s Republic of China.

According to the Justice Department, all 34 of the agents remain at large. This isn’t the first time the US has detailed an effort by China to target overseas dissidents. At the end of last year, US Attorney General Merrick Garland detailed a case involving a multi-year campaign by Chinese operatives to force a US resident to return to China.

The FBI has made an arrest in connection to a recent leak of classified documents that revealed sensitive details about the war in Ukraine and other US intelligence matters, apprehending a young Massachusetts Air National Guard member on Thursday, April 13th. 21-year-old Jack Teixeira, who holds the rank of airman first class, allegedly shared the files to a Discord server primarily dedicated to Minecraft. According to The Washington Post, he first transcribed the documents manually when he started sharing them late last year before posting photos of the classified materials themselves.  

The Justice Department has arrested Jack Douglas Teixeira in connection with an investigation into “alleged unauthorized removal, retention, and transmission of classified national defense information,“ Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement issued by the Justice Department. As NBC News notes, public military records show that Texeira was assigned as a cyber transport systems journeyman at Otis Air National Guard Base on Cape Cod. 

Based on the The Post’s investigation, Teixeira, who used the pseudonym “OG” on the Discord server, claimed he partly worked at a secure facility where phones and cameras are prohibited. That’s reportedly the reason why he originally copied the documents by hand before the lack of interaction on the server prompted him to post photographs of the original documents. Some of the photos contained random items and furniture that may have given investigators a clue on his identity. 

Despite the sensitive information contained in the documents, the suspect apparently did not intend to be a whistleblower — according to The New York Times, members of "Thug Shaker Central," the original Discord server, say the documents were never intended to be shared outside of their small group. Eventually, though, they were shared to other Discord servers before finding their way to Telegram channels, 4chan and other social media platforms.   

The documents Teixeira had leaked included large amounts of information regarding the Russian invasion of Ukraine, including detailed battlefield conditions and missile strike maps for the latter. They also reportedly showed how Egypt had planned to sell Russia tens of thousands of rockets and how Russia approached Turkey, a NATO ally, to buy weapons. In addition, the documents apparently contained information showing how the US spies on its foreign allies.  

Discord previously said that it was cooperating with authorities regarding their investigation on the leak. As for Teixeira, he will make his initial appearance in the US District Court for Massachusetts. 

Police have arrested a suspect in the killing of Cash App founder and former Square executive Bob Lee. Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin has confirmed to The San Francisco Chronicle that someone is in custody in connection with the April 4th stabbing of the 43-year-old in San Francisco.

This might not have been a mugging or random murder. Mission Localsources claim the suspect is Nima Momeni, the Emeryville-based owner of outsourcing firm Expand IT. Lee reportedly knew Momeni and was a passenger in a car belonging to the suspect, the insiders say. A confrontation supposedly erupted in the car, and may have continued after Lee stepped out.

We've asked the San Francisco Police Department for comment. Lee was most recently the chief product officer of crypto startup MobileCoin. Before his time with Square, he helped create Android's early core library. He was also an investor in tech startups and helped develop the World Health Organization's mobile app during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.

If accurate, the report would explain why Lee was killed in a section of San Francisco that rarely sees pedestrian traffic in the early morning. It would also make the death a historical rarity. While there are certainly personal feuds in tech, they seldom escalate to violence.

A federal judge denied Holmes’s motion for release on Monday as she appealed her conviction on four counts of fraud and conspiracy, as reported by The Guardian. As a result, the Theranos founder is scheduled to report to prison on April 27th.

Holmes has appealed her conviction to the federal ninth circuit court of appeals based on questions about the “accuracy and reliability” of evidentiary and procedural issues in the trial. However, US district court judge Edward Davila ruled Monday that the appeals didn’t meet the burden of a “substantial” questioning of facts or law. According to the judge, the request didn’t address the conviction’s underlying wire-fraud issues against investors. Therefore, it wouldn’t warrant a reversal or new trial (the legal standard for remaining free pending appeal) even if the appeals court agreed with her assertions.

However, the judge ruled against prosecutors hoping to brand Holmes as a flight risk after learning that her partner bought her a one-way ticket for a flight to Mexico. Although the judge described the ticket purchase (and failure to cancel it post-conviction) as a “bold move” and “perilously careless oversight,” he gave her the benefit of the doubt, ruling she was “not likely to flee or pose a danger” to the public.

Last November, the Theranos founder was sentenced to over 11 years in prison for defrauding investors after a jury found her guilty last January. Founded in 2003, Theranos claimed to produce a long list of revealing health results using only a single drop of a patient’s blood. The company raised hundreds of millions of dollars from high-profile investors before internal whistleblowers sourced a 2015 Wall Street Journal story revealing that the startup’s underlying technology was bogus. The story has since become a cautionary tale, with podcasts, books and a recent Hulu miniseries cashing in on the one-time Silicon Valley golden child’s downfall.

It's never been about safety as much as it has control, serving and protecting only to the benefit of the status quo. Clearview AI, PredPol, Shotspotter, they're all Carolyn Bryant Donham's testimony behind a veneer of technological validity — a shiny black box to dazzle the masses while giving the police yet another excuse to fatally bungle their search warrants. In More than a Glitch, data journalist and New York University Associate Professor of Journalism Dr. Meredith Broussard, explores how and why we thought automating aspects of already racially-skewed legal, banking, and social systems would be a good idea. From facial recognition tech that doesn't work on dark-skinned folks to mortgage approval algorithms that don't work for dark-skinned folks, Broussard points to a dishearteningly broad array of initiatives that done more harm than good, regardless of their intention. In the excerpt below, Dr. Broussard looks at America's technochauavnistic history of predictive policing. 

MIT Press

Excerpted from More than a Glitch: Confronting Race, Gender, and Ability Bias by Meredith Broussard. Reprinted with permission from The MIT Press. Copyright 2023.

Predictive policing comes from the “broken windows” era of policing and is usually credited to William Bratton, former New York City police commissioner and LAPD chief. As NYC police commissioner, Bratton launched CompStat, which is perhaps the best-known example of data-driven policing because it appeared as an antagonist called “Comstat” on season three of HBO’s The Wire. “CompStat, a management model linking crime and enforcement statistics, is multifaceted: it serves as a crime control strategy, a personnel performance and accountability metric, and a resource management tool,” writes sociologist Sarah Brayne in her book Predict and Surveil. “Crime data is collected in real time, then mapped and analyzed in preparation for weekly crime control strategy meetings between police executives and precinct commanders.” CompStat was widely adopted by police forces in major American cities in the 1990s and 2000s. By relying heavily on crime statistics as a performance metric, the CompStat era trained police and bureaucrats to prioritize quantification over accountability. Additionally, the weekly meetings about crime statistics served as rituals of quantification that led the participants to believe in the numbers in a way that created collective solidarity and fostered what organizational behaviorists Melissa Mazmanian and Christine Beckman call “an underlying belief in the objective authority of numbers to motivate action, assess success, and drive continuous organizational growth.” In other words: technochauvinism became the culture inside departments that adopted CompStat and other such systems. Organizational processes and controls became oriented around numbers that were believed to be “objective” and “neutral.” This paved the way for the adoption of AI and computer models to intensify policing—and intensify surveillance and harassment in communities that were already over-policed.

Computer models are only the latest trend in a long history of people imagining that software applied to crime will make us safer. In Black Software, Charlton McIlwain traced the history of police imagining that software equals salvation as far back as the 1960s, the dawn of the computational era. Back then, Thomas J. Watson, Jr., the head of IBM, was trying to popularize computers so more people would buy them. Watson had also committed (financially and existentially) to the War on Poverty declared by President Lyndon Johnson upon his election in 1964. “Watson searched for opportunities to be relevant,” McIlwain writes. “He said he wanted to help address the social ills that plagued society, particularly the plight of America’s urban poor... He didn’t know what he was doing.”6 Watson wanted to sell computers and software, so he offered his company’s computational expertise for an area that he knew nothing about, in order to solve a social problem that he didn’t understand using tools that the social problem experts didn’t understand. He succeeded, and it set up a dynamic between Big Tech and policing that still persists. Software firms like Palantir, Clearview AI, and PredPol create biased targeting software that they label “predictive policing,” as if it were a positive innovation. They convince police departments to spend taxpayer dollars on biased software that ends up making citizens’ lives worse. In the previous chapter, we saw how facial recognition technology leads police to persecute innocent people after a crime has been committed. Predictive policing technology leads police to pursue innocent people before a crime even takes place.

It’s trIcky to write about specific policing software because what Chicago’s police department does is not exactly the same as what LAPD or NYPD does. It is hard to say exactly what is happening in each police agency because the technology is changing constantly and is being deployed in different ways. The exact specifications tend to be buried in vendor contracts. Even if a police department buys software, it is not necessarily being used, nor is it being used in precisely the way it was intended. Context matters, and so does the exact implementation of technology, as well as the people who use it. Consider license plate readers, which are used to collect tolls or to conduct surveillance. Automated license plate readers used by a state transportation authority to automatically collect tolls is probably an acceptable use of AI and automated license plate reader technology—if the data is not stored for a long time. The same license plate reader tech used by police as part of dragnet surveillance, with data stored indefinitely, is problematic.

Every time the public has become aware of some predictive policing measure, controversy has erupted. Consider the person-based predictive policing enacted by the Pasco County Sheriff’s Office in Florida, which created a watchlist of people it considered future criminals. Tampa Bay Times reporters Kathleen McGrory and Neil Bedi won a Pulitzer for their story about how the Pasco County Sheriff’s Office generated lists of people it considered likely to break the law. The list was compiled by using data on arrest histories and unspecified intelligence, coupled with arbitrary decisions by police analysts. The sheriff’s department sent deputies to monitor and harass the people on the watchlist. Often, the deputies lacked probable cause, search warrants, or evidence of a crime. In five years, almost 1,000 people were caught up in the systematic harassment labeled “Intelligence-Led Policing.” Notably, a large percentage of the people on the watchlist were BIPOC.

The Pasco program started in 2011, shortly after Chris Nocco took office as sheriff. Nocco came up with the idea to “reform” the department with data-driven initiatives. “For 10 years, nobody really understood how this worked, and the public wasn’t aware of what was going on,” said Bedi, explaining the reporting project.8 The sheriff built a “controversial data-driven approach to policing. He also built a wide circle of powerful friends,” including local and national politicians, who didn’t question his actions.

The harassment didn’t stop there, however. Separately, the Sheriff’s Office created a list of schoolchildren it considered likely to become future criminals. The office gathered data from local schools, including protected information like children’s grades, school attendance records, and child welfare histories. Parents and teachers were not told that children were designated as future criminals, nor did they understand that the students’ private data was being weaponized. The school system’s superintendent initially didn’t realize the police had access to student data, said Kathleen McGrory.

Once the investigation was published, civil liberties groups denounced the intelligence programs. Thirty groups formed a coalition to protest, and four of the targeted people brought lawsuits against the agency. Two bills were proposed to prevent this kind of invasion and misuse in the future. The federal Department of Education opened an investigation into the data sharing between the Sheriff’s Office and the local school district. Fortunately, as a result, police analysts will no longer have access to student grades.

Many people imagine that using more technology will make things “fairer.” This is behind the idea of using machines instead of judges, an idea that surfaces periodically among lawyers and computer scientists. We see it in the adoption of body-worn cameras, an initiative that has been growing since LAPD officers brutally assaulted Rodney King in 1991 and the attack was captured on a home camcorder. There’s an imaginary world where everything is captured on video, there are perfectly fair and objective algorithms that adjudicate what happens in the video feed, facial recognition identifies bad actors, and the heroic police officers go in and save the day and capture the bad guys. This fantasy is taken to its logical conclusion in the film Minority Report, where Tom Cruise plays a police officer who arrests people before they commit crimes, on the recommendation of some teenagers with precognition who are held captive in a swimming pool full of goo. “It’s just like Minority Report,” a police officer marveled to sociologist Sarah Brayne, when the two were discussing Palantir’s policing software.

What makes this situation additionally difficult is the fact that many of the people involved in the chain are not malevolent. For example, my cousin, who is white, was a state police officer for years. He’s wonderful and kind and honest and upstanding and exactly the person I would call on if I were in trouble. He and his family are very dear to me and I to them. I believe in the law, and I believe in law enforcement in the abstract, in the way that many people do when they have the privilege of not interacting with or being targeted by law enforcement or the courts.

But the origins of policing are problematic for Black people like me, and the frequency of egregious abuses by police is out of control in today’s United States. Police technology and machine fairness are the reasons why we need to pause and fix the human system before implementing any kind of digital system in policing.

The current system of policing in the United States, with the Fraternal Order of Police and the uniforms and so on, began in South Carolina. Specifically, it emerged in the 1700s in Charleston, South Carolina, as a slave patrol. “It was quite literally a professional force of white free people who came together to maintain social control of black, enslaved people living inside the city of Charleston,” said ACLU Policing Policy Director Paige Fernandez in a 2021 podcast. “They came together for the sole purpose of ensuring that enslaved black people did not organize and revolt and push back on slavery. That is the first example of a modern police department in the United States.” In her book Dark Matters: Surveillance of Blackness, scholar Simone Brown connects modern surveillance of Black bodies to chattel slavery via lantern laws, which were eighteenth-century laws in New York City requiring Black or mixed-race people to carry a lantern if out at night unaccompanied by a white person. Scholar Josh Scannell sees lantern laws as the precedent for today’s policy of police using floodlights to illuminate high-crime areas all night long. People who live in heavily policed neighborhoods never get the peaceful cloak of darkness, as floodlights make it artificially light all night long and the loud drone of the generators for the lights makes the neighborhood noisier.

The ACLU’s Fernandez draws a line from slave patrols maintaining control over Black people to the development of police departments to the implementation of Jim Crow–era rules and laws to police enforcing segregation during the civil rights era and inciting violence against peaceful protestors to escalating police violence against Black and Brown people and leading to the Black Lives Matter movement. Fernandez points out that the police tear-gassed and pepper-sprayed peaceful protestors in the summer of 2020, fired rubber bullets at protestors, charged at protestors, and used techniques like kettling to corner protestors into closed spaces where violence could be inflicted more easily.

The statistics paint a grim picture. “Black people are 3.5 times more likely than white people to be killed by police when Blacks are not attacking or do not have a weapon. George Floyd is an example,” writes sociologist Rashawn Ray in a 2020 Brookings Institute policy brief about police accountability.14 “Black teenagers are 21 times more likely than white teenagers to be killed by police. That’s Tamir Rice and Antwon Rose. A Black person is killed about every 40 hours in the United States. That’s Jonathan Ferrell and Korryn Gaines. One out of every one thousand Black men can expect to be killed by police violence over the life course. This is Tamir Rice and Philando Castile.” When Derek Chauvin, the police officer who killed George Floyd, was found guilty, it was remarkable because police are so rarely held accountable for violence against Black and Brown bodies.

Reform is needed. That reform, however, will not be found in machines.

Law enforcement just took down an important hacker haven. TechCrunchreports the FBI has seized Genesis Market, a major marketplace for stolen logins, as part of an international campaign dubbed "Operation Cookie Monster." The UK's National Crime Agency adds that authorities arrested roughly 120 people worldwide as part of the bust, including 19 site users in that country.

We've asked the FBI and Justice Department for comment. In a release, the Justice Department says the seizure took down a "key enabler" of ransomware. Beyond the US and UK, the campaign included agencies from Australia, Canada, Denmark, Sweden and European countries like Germany and Poland. Europol and the EU's Eurojust were also involved.

Genesis Market was founded in March 2018 and sold logins, cookies and browser fingerprints taken from breached systems. Hackers could not only sign into accounts, but impersonate web browsers to access those accounts without needing a password or two-factor authentication token. So long as Genesis could still reach a victim's devices, it could offer up-to-the-minute data from that victim — a valuable resource for hackers that sometimes have to settle for old and sometimes useless data.

The black market shop has sometimes been linked to high-profile cybercrime incidents. Motherboardnoted that the intruders behind the 2021 EA hack said they bought a $10 bot from Genesis to hijack a Slack account at the game publisher.

The seizure and arrests won't stop sites from peddling bootleg logins. It won't be surprising if many of Genesis Market's customers turn to smaller marketplaces. All the same, this is a significant action that could make it harder for attackers to simply buy the login data they need. It also comes as law enforcement is stepping up efforts to disrupt the ransomware networks themselves. In theory, digital extortion is a more difficult proposition than it was even a few months ago.

FTX founder and former CEO Sam Bankman-Fried (aka SBF) pleaded not guilty to five additional criminal charges this morning, according toCNBC. Prosecutors accuse the disgraced crypto exec of fraud and bribery for conspiring to send at least $40 million to Chinese government officials so they would unfreeze more than $1 billion in cryptocurrency, which he allegedly used to fund loss-generating trades.

On Tuesday, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) unsealed the third round of criminal charges against SBF in a superseding indictment; SBF has now pleaded not guilty to all 13 charges. Additionally, he faces civil charges from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). His attorney, Mark Cohen, claimed he would file a motion that SBF can’t be tried on charges brought after his extradition from the Bahamas in December.

Federal prosecutors allege SBF and his partners tried “numerous” legal and personal methods to unfreeze the funds before moving forward with the bribe. They say SBF directed Alameda Research, FTX’s sister company, to transfer more than $40 million to a private wallet. Of course, it’s illegal for US citizens to bribe foreign officials to generate business. The new charges ramp up pressure on the 31-year-old Bankman-Fried, who reportedly “arrived at the courthouse about an hour before the hearing, looking disheveled after an intense media scrum.”

Three former FTX executives, Caroline Ellison, Zixiao “Gary” Wang, and Nishad Singh, have pleaded guilty to fraud and conspiracy charges and have agreed to cooperate with the prosecution. There’s no word yet on the judge’s ruling about whether SBF will be forced to use a feature phone and limit internet access as part of his bail terms. After it was revealed SBF was using a virtual private network (VPN) and possibly tampering with witnesses, District Judge Lewis Kaplan previously said he didn’t want SBF “loose on his garden of electronic devices.”

Former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried (aka SBF) now faces a total of 13 criminal charges. Per Reuters, a newly unsealed indictment accuses the disgraced entrepreneur of conspiring to pay a $40 million bribe to Chinese government officials. Federal prosecutors allege Bankman-Fried ordered Alameda Research, FTX’s sister company, to transfer the funds to a private wallet, in hopes of convincing Chinese authorities to unfreeze Alameda accounts with more than $1 billion in crypto assets. It is illegal for US citizens to bribe foreign government officials in order to obtain business.

The new charge adds even more pressure on the 31-year-old Bankman-Fried. It was only last month that federal prosecutors added four charges to his then 8-count indictment, accusing SBF of fraudulent activity involving FTX and Alameda Research and violating federal campaign finance laws by making secret donations. Bankman-Fried has pleaded not guilty to eight of the 13 criminal charges he faces. He has yet to be arraigned on the remaining ones. Separately, the former entrepreneur faces civil lawsuits from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). 

SBF has acknowledged FTX employed inadequate risk management. However, he maintains he's not criminally liable for the crypto exchange’s downfall. A trio of former FTX executives – Caroline Ellison, Zixiao "Gary” Wang and Nishad Singh – have pleaded guilty to their own fraud and conspiracy charges, and agreed to cooperate with prosecutors. According to Reuters, SBF is expected to be arraigned on the new charge on Thursday. That same day, Judge Lewis Kaplan will also consider tweaks to Bankman-Fried’s $250 bail package, including a provision that could limit him to using a dumb phone while he waits for the outcome of his trial.