News Linux dev swatted and handcuffed live during a development video stream — perps remain unidentified

[Admin]

René Rebe, a 25-year Free and Open Source Software developer, was swatted live in the middle of a development stream.

Linux dev swatted and handcuffed live during a development video stream — perps remain unidentified : Read more

 

[ThomasKinsley]

OK, the Windows 11 team has definitely gone too far this time!

 

[ex_bubblehead]

The police (no matter the country involved here) went way over the top on this. An anonymous e-mail is nowhere near enough evidence to go arresting/detaining someone without a thorough investigation first. The only possible exceptions being domestic violence, child abuse or a homicide in progress.

 

[USAFRet]

The police (no matter the country involved here) went way over the top on this. An anonymous e-mail is nowhere near enough evidence to go arresting/detaining someone without a thorough investigation first. The only possible exceptions being domestic violence, child abuse or a homicide in progress.

But those are the trigger words that swatters use, to get the major police response.

 

[ex_bubblehead]

But those are the trigger words that swatters use, to get the major police response.

All of which can be instantly determined to be BS when the officers arrive on scene and survey the surroundings and neighbors.

 

[punkncat]

I recall when this happened to Carey Holzman.

 

[Blastomonas]

This makes no sense. Surely any suspicion would have been cleared up at the scene.

I would like to know what he was accused of to justify taking him away. More importantly, what will the punishment be for the guilty party?

 

[bit_user]

He posts on Phoronix as the user rene and I'm sure I'm not giving anything away by saying this, as his posts are quite open about being the maintainer of T2 Linux and including links to his youtube clips.

Among his more interesting contributions are support for Linux on old MIPS-based SGI (Silicon Graphics) machines. I think he also maintains support for big endian on POWER cpus (most distros that support POWER use little endian).

He doesn't strike me as one of the more hyperbolic posters on Phoronix, but he does have pretty strong opinions and isn't shy about them. I'm a little surprised and definitely sad that this happened to him. It's a shame the police didn't first do more to try and substantiate the claims in the email, although I understand they need to be biased towards action, in the event that imminent harm to someone is claimed.

 

[bit_user]

All of which can be instantly determined to be BS when the officers arrive on scene and survey the surroundings and neighbors.

Yeah, I'm a bit surprised that they took him away for questioning. Maybe that's just standard practice for the police there. Otherwise, it would seem tricky to craft a swatting email that both triggers an immediate response, but also can't be trivially dismissed upon surveying the scene.

I would like to know what he was accused of to justify taking him away.

We'll probably never know and it really doesn't matter. It almost certainly has nothing to do with the reality of the situation, and disclosing this would only serve to educate more would-be swatters.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

We'll probably never know and it really doesn't matter. It almost certainly has nothing to do with the reality of the situation, and disclosing this would only serve to educate more would-be swatters.

He posted this on the YouTube video (translated via Google to English):

I thought about making the incident available to a wider public on YT for 24 hours and ultimately decided to do so in order to document to us Germans that this is not a phenomenon limited to the USA and is dangerous. And also to document what kind of ignorant idiots there are in this world, and how completely inappropriately the police acted in my case in my opinion.

When I opened the door there was a team of police officers with their weapons drawn and what looked to me like Tasers. When I heard “hands out of my pockets” in the video, I was immediately handcuffed!!! I had seen about 10 police officers in front of and in our office, and it wasn't until the following day that neighbors reported that the whole street was full of about 10 (or more) emergency vehicles right up to the next intersection!!! about 10 police cars, 2 fire departments, 1 ambulance, an emergency doctor etc...!!!

According to the conversation with the police, an email was sent to the police and another to other rescue workers saying that I had killed my wife and now wanted to take my own life. I assume an email of the type Hans Musterman 6345234@xyz? Hardly anyone will provoke such an action with his real close @t-oline. I find it completely disproportionate that the police go out with such a number of devices and personnel to a registered company registered as a GmbH and not first google the name and company in order to presumably find my YouTube (and Twitch) activities directly.

A team of two or four officers, and if necessary a test call to the company, would have been more than sufficient given such low-quality evidence. Likewise, neither to identify myself nor to put handcuffs on me immediately. The police should act more prudently and balanced here and not allow themselves to be paraded like this.

But I would like to express my gratitude that I was otherwise treated reasonably humanely, that I survived it and that there was no other damage to property. It could have been much worse. If we had all just been on our lunch break, for example, the office would probably have been forced open by the fire department. To be honest, completely unacceptable for an IT company...! :-/

 

[bit_user]

He posted this on the YouTube video (translated via Google to English):

Wow, thanks for posting.

I don't agree with him, though. His take is understandable, given what he went through, but the question of what the police should do is best answered by trying to see it from their perspective and having a really hard think about the nature of police work. When I do that, speaking as one an outsider and with no connection to law enforcement, here's what I see.

The police get a report of a violent incident, with a threat of further violence. Even though it's a threat of suicide, someone who's already committed murder and is still in a heightened state (possibly under the influence of substances) and armed is very much a danger to others. This demands immediate action, to prevent further harm. It's also plausible the victim could still be revived. So, they must decide whether to take the report seriously or not. If they think there's a realistic chance that it's true, they're compelled to act. The backlash for failing to act, not to mention the moral fallout, is not worth risking. In a situation like this, you can't realistically expect them to do research, because time is of the essence.

Next, we must consider how they react, once they've decided to do so. Given a presumably armed assailant and at least one presumed victim, they must be fully prepared for the situation. Showing up insufficiently prepared could mean death or injury to one or more of the responders or other persons. Failing to arrive with preparations to provide life-saving care could result in preventable deaths.

Finally, we should consider how police need to perceive risks. They deal with dangerous situations on a somewhat regular basis - it's an occupational hazard. The way probability works, if you roll the dice enough times, the chance of snake eyes becomes extremely high. Therefore, they need to over-prepare and be overly cautious every single time. It just takes one freak turn-of-events for members of their force not to come home to their family or for other preventable death or injury to occur. Therefore, I'm not surprised they took it seriously and I'm not surprised at the extent of the response.

It seems to me that what's needed is actual preparation and systems for handing these types of reports. If whatever version they have of 9-1-1 services had resources to start researching the report concurrently with getting a response under way, then maybe they could downgrade the risk to a point where at least some of the response could be aborted. For instance, they could actually try to contact the reported individual and his wife. They should also know how to check if the email appears to be spoofed. Most email servers real people actually use employ authentication. If it purports to come from an authenticated server and isn't authenticated, then it's almost certainly a hoax. Also, they could try actually replying. If it doesn't bounce, then they could see whether the response aligned with the initial report. If they reply, whoever sent it might be dumb enough to slip up and give away that it's a hoax.

So, I don't give the police a free pass, here. However, if it had been an actual emergency, those affected would probably be glad emergency services responded in the way they did.

 

[renz496]

OK, the Windows 11 team has definitely gone too far this time!

Well joke aside when i see stuff like this happen i'm pretty sure this is done among their circle. The politics within linux community can go to the extreme sides sometimes.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

I don't agree with him, though. His take is understandable, given what he went through, but the question of what the police should do is best answered by trying to see it from their perspective and having a really hard think about the nature of police work. When I do that, speaking as one an outsider and with no connection to law enforcement, here's what I see. [SNIP]

I can see both sides, and the fundamental flaw is being willing to fully deploy based on an anonymous tip. I mean, when the guy answered the door and apparently looked "normal" the police could have and should have stepped things down a notch. Phone calls to a business, person, spouse do take some time, but if there were 30 or so Politzei deployed on this, surely two or three of them could have been tasked with trying to dig up phone numbers. Two or three more could have responded to the email and tried to look into that!

That this many police were deployed means there's a serious flaw somewhere in the system. Because what happens if you get ten such reports? Well, obviously you think, "Hey, someone's scamming us..." but also, you couldn't do such a massive deployment. The German police must have been seriously bored, or someone was trying to prove a point. I don't know, but either one feels extremely problematic.

Ultimately, it's the chicken and egg scenario, or in this case innocent until proven guilty. Having an anonymous tip system might be helpful, but if the quality of such tips leads to swatting incidents like this, perhaps it should just be ditched. Because criminals will still do bad things, and the police will still be forced to react to those situations. But having fully armed and amped up on adrenaline police deploying to fake calls is a recipe for disaster.

We have seen completely innocent people killed by police in swatting cases already. That's 100X worse than a criminal killing someone in my book, because you can't always stop the criminals but the police should never want to be the ones committing the crime. That's the goal at least.

As I see it, the level of believability should be like this:

1. Person calls and gives name, caller ID confirms
2. Anonymous person calls from a caller ID blocked location (already suspect)
3. Anything via email (respond and see if you get a response back, check headers and server logs, etc.)
4. Random email with no response.

Of those four, only the first IMO warrants a potentially serious response by the police. The rest could be checked out, carefully (obviously), but only with heavy skepticism.

 

[bit_user]

I can see both sides, and the fundamental flaw is being willing to fully deploy based on an anonymous tip.

But, how many times have we heard about police being warned and failing to act on said tips? That's not a position they want to be in, either.

I mean, when the guy answered the door and apparently looked "normal" the police could have and should have stepped things down a notch.

Really? Anyone would be rattled upon opening the door to see an armored-up swat team. It would be hard for them to judge his emotional state, in that situation. Given that they took the tip seriously, I think it wasn't a bad move for them to sit him down in a controlled environment, for questioning. He said they only talked to him for an hour - it's not like they tased him or kept him in jail overnight.

Phone calls to a business, person, spouse do take some time, but if there were 30 or so Politzei deployed on this, surely two or three of them could have been tasked with trying to dig up phone numbers. Two or three more could have responded to the email and tried to look into that!

Yes, they should have someone whose job it is to do this follow-up. If it's anything like the situation in US, the problem would be that police in one city might have knowledgeable personnel and resources to do this follow-up, while others wouldn't.

Also, it didn't say 30 police. He said 10 police + other emergency responders. Some of those 10 police cars certainly belonged to the individuals standing in front of his door. Each person there had their own job to do. The amount of police they sent to be on the scene is presumably the amount they felt were needed to safely respond to a situation like that. If you take a couple out of that total and the report turned out to be true, then it could've gone badly because they police were understaffed to handle the situation adequately.

I think you're falling into the same logical pitfall as he was: that if you're not sure about a situation, do a half-way response. The problem is that half-way responses are how real incidents go from bad to worse. So, once you decide to take the tip seriously, then the only correct course of action is a full response.

... there's a serious flaw somewhere in the system. Because what happens if you get ten such reports?

Yes, there are flaws in the system, as I've acknowledged. However, you're not asking the other question, which is: how many of such reports turn out to be true? If they actually get some real reports via emailed tips, that's enough not to automatically dismiss them, without at least a bit more diligence.

We have seen completely innocent people killed by police in swatting cases already. That's 100X worse than a criminal killing someone in my book, because you can't always stop the criminals but the police should never want to be the ones committing the crime. That's the goal at least.

The proper moral equation is that a life lost is the same, either way. If 1% of such reports are real and a swat response results in some innocent death much less of the time, then it's still worth responding to such reports, when such a response is called for.

It's the job of police to protect people. They have training and practices that are designed to minimize the chance of harming innocents. We're not talking about stops for minor traffic offenses, here, where you could legitimately argue that a police response is truly optional.

Of those four, only the first IMO warrants a potentially serious response by the police. The rest could be checked out, carefully (obviously), but only with heavy skepticism.

And if it turns out to be legit, but investigation burned too much time? "Aw shucks?"

I did say there should be a routine and systematic investigation into the veracity of such reports. What's needed are systems, procedures, and trained personnel, so that it's done in a consistent and high-quality way. There are obviously costs involved in sending a response, but it's also the job of police to respond to reports and it's always been the case that such reports aren't 100% accurate. Essentially, what they need to do is just devise techniques to improve accuracy, in such cases, up to an acceptable level.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

But, how many times have we heard about police being warned and failing to act on said tips? That's not a position they want to be in, either.

Overreacting on a fake call likely means not reacting at all on five other calls. It's a catch-22 situation.

Really? Anyone would be rattled upon opening the door to see an armored-up swat team. It would be hard for them to judge his emotional state, in that situation. Given that they took the tip seriously, I think it wasn't a bad move for them to sit him down in a controlled environment, for questioning. He said they only talked to him for an hour - it's not like they tased him or kept him in jail overnight.

And when he opens the door and shows his hands and clearly has no weapons? What's the need to take him away at that point? "We received an anonymous tip that you had murdered your wife." "WTF? Here's her number, call her right now. You have been tricked and I am willing to sit here while you sort it out."

But the police aren't going to do that, so based on a fake call, this guy gets hauled off to the police station, and wastes at least half a day. For whoever sent the email, that's mission accomplished. They succeeded and will be more likely to do it again. Even an hour wasted is enough to encourage this sort of thing to keep happening. Make the penalties for getting caught much more severe, and stop accepting anonymous calls. That's how you stop fake swatting stuff.

Yes, they should have someone whose job it is to do this follow-up. If it's anything like the situation in US, the problem would be that police in one city might have knowledgeable personnel and resources to do this follow-up, while others wouldn't.

Also, it didn't say 30 police. He said 10 police + other emergency responders. Some of those 10 police cars certainly belonged to the individuals standing in front of his door. Each person there had their own job to do.

He said neighbors said there were a bunch of other police/responders in the vicinity.

And if it turns out to be legit, but investigation burned too much time? "Aw shucks?"

Yes, absolutely you take all of these anonymous calls with skepticism. IMO, it's better to be wrong and/or late and not totally harass innocent people then to show up en force on a prank call. You establish a policy to stop this sort of garbage. The most sensible seems to be, "We can't accept anonymous emails. Here's why." It's literally a no-win situation for the police, and in the modern era, we're quickly approaching the point where the best response is going to be no response.

How often do fake anonymous reports happen? I don't know, only the police departments know. How many anonymous tips do they get in general, real or fake? Again, we have no data. But my feeling is that if there's an apparently urgent call to get people out there on a possible murder, and the person won't give any additional information like their name, it's already suspicious, and an email instead of a phone call may as well be filed in the spam bucket.

This reads like: "Dear police. I heard gunshots at an office near my home. I'm sure the person killed his wife and is now threatening suicide. But I can't be bothered to make a phone call and felt it was easier to create a new email account and send you a message!"

If someone calls the police on a murder, and it's legit, then the police are already too late. It's better to have a criminal get a head start on escaping than to harass innocents. Being able to say, "We can't respond to every anonymous tip" and explain the reasoning is much better than saying, "We overreacted and wasted time/resources, and possibly caused severe harm to an innocent." Real crimes usually take weeks and even months to sort out, so an extra hour or so of caution isn't the end of the world. If it is, then things probably already happened regardless.

Personally, if I saw/heard something that warranted me calling the police? Yeah, I'm calling from my cell phone, giving them details, staying on the line as long as needed. And that will be super inconvenient so I'm not going to do it on a whim. "I heard a creak outside the house" or "I saw a guy openly carrying a gun" sorts of stuff won't get me to call the cops. Someone shooting a gun within city limits, or shooting at someone? Yeah, I'm willing to go on the record. I've done this before when I witnessed an accident, wasting hours of my time to try to help out. So I get why people don't want to get involved, but I also understand why it's important to at times be a good citizen and help out.

As long as police allow anonymous reports and show up at a door ready for war, these fake calls are going to be a problem and they're going to continue to happen more and more often. Continuing to show up isn't the solution, in other words. Something else needs to change. The current approach is a clear downward spiral that can never end well for the police departments. It's untenable!

I personally would happily endorse a policy that says, "We can take anonymous tips, but you will not get and should not expect a rapid response of any form because that has led to problems in the past. If something is urgent and needs an immediate response, you will have to give up your anonymity. This will help us to avoid fake responses and we find that is better than having a system that's ripe for abuse."

 

[USAFRet]

Personally, if I saw/heard something that warranted me calling the police? Yeah, I'm calling from my cell phone, giving them details, staying on the line as long as needed.

And other people would not, out of fear of being later targeted by the criminal in question.

Anon tips are very much a thing. Our police and the news stations call that out every day.
https://hampton.gov/772/Crime-Line

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

And other people would not, out of fear of being later targeted by the criminal in question.

Anon tips are very much a thing. Our police and the news stations call that out every day.
https://hampton.gov/772/Crime-Line

As I said at the end, a policy saying anonymous tips are accepted but will not receive a rapid response seems to be the best path forward from my perspective.

I get why people won't give details, but I also see all the reasons that's bad. Trying to stay anonymous to avoid future issues with a criminal organization? Sure. And criminal organizations don't generally need "get over there now" responses — those are long-term investigations to take them down. The same goes for theft, smuggling, drugs, etc. Those all get attention, but it's probably stuff that will take days, weeks, or even months to sort out.

If I were in a situation where I had details on a murder (or at least thought I had details) and I wanted to remain anonymous and only communicate via email? Fine, I can go that route, but I would fully expect a slow and methodical response. If I want the police to "get over here now!" then I'm making a phone call. And understanding that even that may not get the speed of response I'd like.

 

[bit_user]

Overreacting on a fake call likely means not reacting at all on five other calls. It's a catch-22 situation.

I did say responding to a fake report had costs. I was accounting for the "opportunity cost", among those. Whether it would mean not responding to other calls is something we can't know, since we don't know what their staffing and call volumes were like, at the exact time.

But the police aren't going to do that, so based on a fake call, this guy gets hauled off to the police station, and wastes at least half a day.

This is a sad fact of policing. Sometimes, they haul in and even jail an innocent person. It's a hidden cost of living in a safe society that's shouldered by the very members of that society. That's not to say it doesn't suck, but just to acknowledge that it sometimes happens and that's life. Collisions are a possible consequence of driving, yet we still drive cars.

For whoever sent the email, that's mission accomplished. They succeeded and will be more likely to do it again.

They might also get caught.

I think, in the back of our heads, we all know that the criminal justice system can never be 100% accurate. Some criminals will go unpunished and some innocents will lose time, money, and even freedom. Having 100% accuracy is the goal, not the reality.

Just be glad we don't live in a country like Japan, where 99% of prosecutions result in a guilty verdict. There are always tradeoffs involved and I think criminal justice systems like we have in the US strike a pretty good balance. There's always room for improvement, and we should never stop trying, but going too far in the direction of avoiding false incriminations and convictions comes at the cost of allowing more injustice, victims, and impunity for some real bad guys.

my feeling is that if there's an apparently urgent call to get people out there on a possible murder, and the person won't give any additional information like their name, it's already suspicious, and an email instead of a phone call may as well be filed in the spam bucket.

People have various reasons for making an anonymous tip. Maybe they don't want to be hauled into court, to testify, if they fear for their safety from doing so. Maybe they're afraid the report could implicate them, in some way. Perhaps they're not even in the country, legally. Anonymous tips certainly aren't new, and neither is the problem of them being wrong. If police have decided to accept them, then it clearly must mean they're right often enough to be worthwhile.

Anyway, I think I should probably leave it at that. I enjoyed our exchange and your thoughtful responses.

 

[USAFRet]

As I said at the end, a policy saying anonymous tips are accepted but will not receive a rapid response seems to be the best path forward from my perspective.

I get why people won't give details, but I also see all the reasons that's bad. Trying to stay anonymous to avoid future issues with a criminal organization? Sure. And criminal organizations don't generally need "get over there now" responses — those are long-term investigations to take them down. The same goes for theft, smuggling, drugs, etc. Those all get attention, but it's probably stuff that will take days, weeks, or even months to sort out.

If I were in a situation where I had details on a murder (or at least thought I had details) and I wanted to remain anonymous and only communicate via email? Fine, I can go that route, but I would fully expect a slow and methodical response. If I want the police to "get over here now!" then I'm making a phone call. And understanding that even that may not get the speed of response I'd like.

I wasn't referring to "criminal organization".
Rather...the violent idiot that lives in the apartment right above me.

Once your name and number are recorded as part of the report, that becomes public info. And may be discovered by said violent idiot.

In any case, the police are in a no-win situation.
Subdued response and risk innocent lives from an actual criminal.
Or over the top response to an actual innocent individual who is being swatted by some asshat.

I do not know the answer.