LulzSec leader arrested in Australia, authorities say

By on April 24, 2013, 12:30 PM

Australian authorities claim they have arrested the self-proclaimed leader of the hacking group LulzSec. The unnamed individual was charged with two counts of unauthorized modification of data to cause impairment and one count of unauthorized access to, or modification of, restricted data. Combined, the offenses carry a maximum sentence of 22 years behind bars.

Law enforcement officials say the 24-year-old from New South Wales, believed to be the person using the online handle “Aush0K”, held a prominent position at an international IT company which explains how he might have been able to obtain sensitive material. Specifically, they believe he may have had hidden, remote access to select government websites.

Other news outlets have pegged the suspect as Matthew Flannery, who was allegedly fired by Content Security on Tuesday following his arrest. In a message on the matter, Content Security told the Sydney Morning Herald that Flannery did not and does not have access to any customer information that was or could have been used to carry out malicious activity.

This isn’t the first time that LulzSec members have faced legal trouble. A California judge recently sentenced LulzSec member Cody Kretsinger, who went by the online name “Recursion,” to a year in prison while three other members pleaded guilty to similar crimes earlier this month in a London courtroom.

Flannery is scheduled to appear in court on May 15, we’re told. For what it’s worth, Anonymous members in Australia claim the feds have the wrong guy.




User Comments: 11

Got something to say? Post a comment
2 people like this | Ranger1st Ranger1st said:

So.. he gets the potential same jail time as a 1st. degree murderer? wow Aussies are goofy.

3 people like this | RH00D RH00D said:

22 years is far to excessive. He should get 2-4 maximum. 22 years will destroy any possibility of him ever changing himself for the better. Instead, he'll just come out even worse.

1 person liked this | H3llion H3llion, TechSpot Paladin, said:

22 years is far to excessive. He should get 2-4 maximum. 22 years will destroy any possibility of him ever changing himself for the better. Instead, he'll just come out even worse.

Welcome to the Justice System, where Rapist and Murderers at times get less amount of jail time then lesser crimes.

Guest said:

He didn't get too harsh, its the others that get too light

mailpup mailpup said:

According to the article I read, he was only arrested and charged. He hasn't even gone to trial yet, much less sentenced to anything. What is everyone else reading?

MilwaukeeMike said:

According to the article I read, he was only arrested and charged. He hasn't even gone to trial yet, much less sentenced to anything. What is everyone else reading?

What they read is one thing, what they choose to believe is another. I can't speak for Australia, but usually non-violent criminals get only a partial sentence and then are release long before it's up. And that sentence is in an easier prison. Martha Stewart's prison was nicer than most other government provided housing.

Guest said:

Let's see how he likes a big Aboriginal cuddling him to sleep and night with a rod in his bum.

1 person liked this | PinothyJ said:

Let's see how he likes a big Aboriginal cuddling him to sleep and night with a rod in his bum.

Aboriginal is an adjective...

H3llion H3llion, TechSpot Paladin, said:

He didn't get too harsh, its the others that get too light

22 years for this at such young age? Oh cmon' now >.>

I cna understand few points such as leaking private information which could harm others but has it?

Tygerstrike said:

I hate to say it but groups such as this gentleman was with have only brought this level of grief on themselves. They choose to hack, then they choose to go to jail if caught. Its quite simple really. It all falls back on "If you cant do the time, dont do the crime"! Its always at the judges discretion on the amount of time he/she gives any individual. There is a baseline minimum. But judges can circumvent that. We also have no idea how much and what type of evidence that was submitted. So where we will sit there and say its unfair the amount of time the other person recieved, we have no idea what the circumstances were that caused the judge to give that much time. Remember: Try and be fair and get ALL the info before you hop on the bandwagon

St1ckM4n St1ckM4n said:

There's discussion over what happened here, as a quote from police say he's a self-proclaimed member, whilst Aus articles on Gizmodo have the title of leader. Funnily enough, the URL for the article also has 'member'.

I am also under the belief that the supposed leader was arrested in USA and gave feds incriminating evidence against his partners. I forget his name...

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.