Sharpei-writer arrested

Gigabyte, the Belgian girl (19) who wrote the first-ever C# virus, was arrested by Belgian authorities.

The Sharp virus (aka W32/Sharp-A and W32/Sharpei@mm) is a proof of concept virus, written in 2002 by Gigabyte aka MetaPhase. She always claimed she wrote the virus to "break the stereotype that virus-writers are always male".

Sophos info on Sharp

On Saturday, GigaByte was arrested. She claims she only wrote the virii and never spread them. In that case, Belgian authorities don't have a case, since writing virii is, as in the US, not illegal in Belgium. If found guilty, she faces 3 years in jail and a 100,000 Euro fine.

Source (in Dutch)

Her website (http://www.coderz.net/gigabyte/index.html) has been taken down, too.

Only about a year ago, she hooked up (irl) with Nostalg1c, who is a former member of the hacking group that defaced the White House website.

GigaByte was heard saying back then that "Belgian police could care less that two of the country's most notorious computer malcontents are romantically entwined. If they care at all, they'll see it as a positive thing. Because, after all, while we're busy with each other, we're usually away from the computer".

Heh.

Yeah, I had read it too in the newspaper, I've always wondered what geeky girls made thik :)

I knew it was just a matter of time before she was arrested for her virus writing. I wonder how Nostalg1c feels about this and what he is doing to help her.

Yep, read it in the newspaper too. It realy took the computer crime unit of our federal police a long time to find her, since she got lot's of publicity on the net and in the regional media...
lol, I remember a thread here at ao linking neg and me to gigabyte...

A virus in C#... interesting. Whatever happened to the assembler virii of yesteryear?

/me cries

Thanks for the article Neg. It was a good read.

Post removed. Accidentaly overlooked information in a previous post.

But still even though she didn't release the Virrii as she "claims". She should still got locked away and the key should get melted down and thrown into the Black Hole.
She deserves to get locked up, infact any person that writes virrii should be locked up or shot, they are menaces to the world and there only intent is to "DESTROY".

well that's my 2 cents.

cheers
..::front2back::..

I don't agree with you .:front2back:.

I met her in IRC a couple of times and she struck me as an intelligent person.

The reasons (as far as I know) for her writing stuff like that are:
1) Becouse she could
2) Educational interrest
3) Prove her worth as a female in a male dominated IT world

so front2back, you also think lockheed-martin, smith&wesson etc.. should be locked up for making products where the only intent is to destroy ???

Quote:

---

But still even though she didn't release the Virrii as she "claims". She should still got locked away and the key should get melted down and thrown into the Black Hole.
She deserves to get locked up, infact any person that writes virrii should be locked up or shot, they are menaces to the world and there only intent is to "DESTROY".

---

We all have our own favorite hobby. I for example love computers, security is what turns me on the most. And I for one don't blame the virus writters for anything at all (others might disagree with this) however I blame the average user, who blindly belives s/he knows what their doing and then cries and screams blaming the virus writters for messing up their computer.
I'm not going to continue or else I'll be here all day telling you how I can't stand these computer illiterate people, who cry about every little thing that happens. They all complain but don't actually know what they complain about.

I read once (sometime ago already) that people capable of hacking are above average in inteligence and virus writters are included there.
If you think about it though viruses aren't that bad if you know how to handle them and where to go for tutorials on how to get rid of them.

there is nothing wrong with writing a proof of concept virus, as that helps to show how a software item needs to be patched. DELIBERATELY writing them and releasing them to make a name for yourself or to otherwise disrupt the operations of computers...thats a different animal ALL together.

She never released them.. she just made them available on her website..

if you catch my drift..

Quote:

---

She never released them.. she just made them available on her website..

if you catch my drift..

---

Lol. The fact is that if she had said she made one then never provided proof, namely code, then nobody would believe her anyway. By making it availible she has allowed people to see how it works, its flaws, and most likely how to counteract it. Also, she was in #lobby? As for Nostalgic, do you really think they are romantically involved via IRC? That is kinda wierd and distant. Either way, making a proof-of-concept virus is a good idea, in fact a very good preventative thing to do. If people had taken it seriously, the virus being released into the wild would not be a problem because patches and such would have been made.

-Cheers-

nope, they are romantically involved IRL (In Real Life)..

and she was not in #lobby (unerror)
I met her on a belgian/dutch irc server ( irc.netric.org ;))

Quote:

---

nope, they are romantically involved IRL (In Real Life)..

and she was not in #lobby (unerror)
I met her on a belgian/dutch irc server ( irc.netric.org )

---

Roger that. The unerror irc/server has been down for a while, any info from MB on this?

-Cheers-

Quote:

---

The unerror irc/server has been down for a while, any info from MB on this?

---

Go to irc.loonyservices.com instead.

reading what the virus does it doesnt even seem to have any kind of malicious intent
and on startup it tells you your infected

is she hot?

:(

no matter if she's hot,
she is NOT guilty.

I do not think that virus writing is a crime virtually anywhere? If it was then the AV companies would be in big trouble as they employ people to write them and encourage private individuals to submit proof of concept viruses. This is why they list so many as "not in the wild"?

I think that this is an excellent idea as it is PROACTIVE :) If AVs were purely REACTIVE the IT World would be a much more dangerous place?

I think that the issue boils down to "malicious intent" which is very difficult to prove at the best of times.

There are those who might argue that she was encouraging skiddies by publishing this work? If I were her defence counsel I would say that she made the material equally available to ALL AV companies and actually "defused" skiddies' activities by giving them code that was known to the AV companies, and already detectable?

If any "blame" is to be apportioned, it must largely lie with people who did not have an AV and keep it up to date...............I would argue the doctrine of "contributory negligence" :p

The mere fact that she operated in "plain view" would tend to argue in favour of non-malicious intention. She may have been "rather silly" or even "ill-advised", but there is a big jump from that to a criminal offence IMHO.

Just my £0.02

deftones12, decide for yourself
A nineteen year old Belgian tinny blonde who does kickboxing and writes virusses...

next, illegal... bwah she did not release them... or did she? I wrote virusses myself but did not publish them and didn't put them online. So it was only for learning purposes and out of curiosity and perhaps also frustration? argh... But I never used them. So a small malicious part in me was still smaller than the moral part? Probably.
I think the problems she faces are overdone. The Belgian CCU better concentrates on others who do release their stuff. Bleh, probably they wanted some media attention cause Gigabyte is, female and popular like she is, a big 'media' fish. ??? Or is this a bridge to far?

Did she only publish the source code or the executable?

Because here is where I'm confussed (sorry for being stupid) but if she was to publish an executable on her website then wouldn't that be classified as releasing them as they are out for grabs to the public and just waiting to be set free. So therefore wouldn't her only case be if she had only published the source code for the virus under a strick "for educational purposes only" rule.

I would say that VictorKaum is spot on :)

Quote:

---

I think the problems she faces are overdone. The Belgian CCU better concentrates on others who do release their stuff. Bleh, probably they wanted some media attention cause Gigabyte is, female and popular like she is, a big 'media' fish. ??? Or is this a bridge to far?

---

HDD : I would say that the AV companies are more interested in the executable than the source, as it is the executable they have to detect?

"educational purposes only".............sounds like a US Constitution First Amendment workaround to me?...This is Belgium.

What is the difference between me giving you a loaded FN Browning 1935 model, and an FN Browning with a box of 9mm Parabellum?............even if they are for educational purposes :eek: I do not think that source code and object code are an issue............it is "malicious intent" that has to be proven?............and that is very difficult.

My call is that this is a bit of sabre rattling on the part of the authorities "pour encourager les autres" so to speak?

Unless they have specific evidence that we are not aware of, I think that she will face nothing worse than a "caution", if even that?

Cheers

hey peeps.

can we see the face of that girl online? i tried googling, i can only see her blurred face.

I don't think that she is that stupid that she'll post a non-blurred picture of herself. That would be like winning the Lotto for the police. All they would have to do is print it out and then find her.
(And before you correct me, yes I know there are other methods that you can use in order to track her down just as easily if not even easier)

for people interrested in her homepage..
it was taken down, but here it is, thx to google cache..

http://www.google.com/search?q=cache....net/gigabyte/

and the "way back machine"

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://coderz.net/gigabyte

and her guestbook is still online too

http://www.htmlgear.tripod.com/guest...&a=view&i=1001

it's allways nice if people can decide for them selves and make informed comments..

hmmm, interesting comments on in her guest book. Some people should be banned from using the internet!

Quote:

---

so front2back, you also think lockheed-martin, smith&wesson etc.. should be locked up for making products where the only intent is to destroy ???

---

There has to be a distinction made between creation and utilization. Smith&Wesson has never shot anybody. I believe anybody who creates something that is designed to be used for evil should shoulder a moral responsibility, but it is the person(s) who actually use the thing for evil who need to be punished. I'm starting to ramble so I'll get on to my point. The best illustration of this is BO. (Back Orifice, an old trojan) The programmers cannot be punished for the evil use of the product. They should shoulder a moral responsibility. But that is between them and their consciense. (People who take no steps to prevent this kind of thing on their machines also have a moral responsibility.)

If Gigabyte did not release it she should not be punished. (I want to see how she support's her claim...)

I am saddened by the Gigabyte case. Having never had coontact with her personally I can only speak from what I've seen. She seems to me to be an amazing programmer. Hopefully this experience will change her ways. The IT industry really does need women of her skill. It is a male dominated world. But I cannot condone her methods for fighting the male domination.

I wish her well and only hope that this will change her views a bit.

Edit: Damn, this thread was on page 1 when I wrote it. I guess I got a bit distracted while I was typing.