from: Bronc Buster bronc@2600.com
subject: in regards to the allegations at
http://www.attrition.org/negation/special

John Vransevich (aka JP),

The staff of Attrition.org, a few other individuals, and I have been working over the last few weeks to peice togeather a complex web of clues. These clues were leading us to something we have suspected for a while; something that could tarnish the entire hacker community.

What if someone, a reporter, was funding a known criminal to commit crimes so that they might have an inside scoop on the story? Not only would this be unethical, but illegal, and dangerous for us all.

Several people have been asking how Antionline.com (AO) has had such an inside scoop on breaking stories, before anyone else regarding big hacks that you have reported on. We have begun to make a theory, based upon facts as to how we think this is happening.

Here are a few simple YES or NO questions regarding these allegations and their impact..

1) Because you had reported, in the past, the exclusive reports and interviews on how Masters of Downloading (MoD) had hacked(?) DISA and were alledged to have taken software off their server, it is obvious you knew who the person was who had comitted this crime. His handle is so1o (aka Chris McNab). You have admitted to this openly. Knowing this, you then started funding a company ran by Chris McNab to make some sort of security program. This you have also openly admitted to. Now Chris McNab, by your own admittance, comitted the crime of breaking into several Government servers and ultimatly defacing www.senate.gov. If you were funding this person, and you knew he was a criminal, not only who has comitted crimes in the past you knew about, but had crimes, such as the senate.gov hack, planned out that you knew about before hand, and he then gave you an exclusive on the story because he was getting money from you (regardless if he still is), doesn't this, in your mind, equal a totaly unethical, not to mention illegal, way to get a story?

2) On your site, you openly admit to prior knowledge of crimes that were comitted that you may or may not have reported on. This is illegal. Do you think this fact, combined with the fact that you, in some fashion, were supplying a known criminal (Chris McNab) with money is an ethical way to run your site/business?

3) In your response to the revealed allegations againt you, you posted on your site, there was no link provided (to attrition.org) so that anyone interested, who may see this on your site but not know about the allegations, to see both sides of the story and come to their own conclusions. Attirtion.org posted many links to your site, so that people could see both sides. Sense you posted a response, don't you think it isn't fair to your readers, to at least let them judge for themselves this matter?

4) Do you think that by making personal attacks against the people behind these allegations, and against the sites that are covering it, that the serious issues raised have been answered or at least addressed?

5) Do you in any way feel obligated to provide any answers to:
a) The people making these allegations?
b) Your readers and supporters?
c) The hacking/security community in general?
6) Last but not least. Do you think anything positive can be gained by the hacking community by your actions in these matters?

I personally think that your response to the criminal charges against you was childish and immature at best, and this matter warrents a serious reply. Slinging mud, and voicing your opinion about people is no way to counter facts. These are felonies, and invlove not only local, but federal laws. This is a serious matter, and like so many of the poor kids you cover who get busted, it appears you will not take it seriously until you too have been arrested and charged.

Bronc Buster
bronc@2600.com