Govt outlines extent of 'Evil' hack

Govt outlines extent of 'Evil' hack

Summary: Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland has outlined the scope of the alleged attacks on Australian businesses by the hacker known under the alias of "Evil".


Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland has outlined the scope of the alleged attacks on Australian businesses by the hacker known under the alias of "Evil".

The 25-year-old Cowra man was yesterday charged with 49 offences relating to an attack on wholesale internet provider Platform Networks. The Australian Federal Police (AFP) has alleged that he bypassed Platform Network's security for at least six weeks. The police had started an investigation in January following an attack on the University of Sydney's website.

Although he has not yet been charged for attacks on businesses outside of Platform Networks, McClelland yesterday confirmed that the recent attack on hosting provider Distribute.IT was part of the investigation, as the company claimed yesterday.

"The affected companies include Distribute.IT, Sydney University, Better Off Networks and Platform Networks," McClelland said in a statement.

Home Affairs Minister Brendan O'Connor said the impact on Distribute.IT had been devastating to the business.

"Cybercrime is not a victimless crime. The AFP continues to investigate the attack on Distribute.IT, which resulted in it going into receivership. About 150,000 of its customers were affected and up to $5 million in damages was sustained," O'Connor said.

The AFP yesterday confirmed to ZDNet Australia that investigations into the extent of the hack were still ongoing and further charges may be laid in due course.

Topics: Government, Government AU, Security, Telcos


Armed with a degree in Computer Science and a Masters in Journalism, Josh keeps a close eye on the telecommunications industry, the National Broadband Network, and all the goings on in government IT.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Heh, no mention of the NBN today...;)
    • I thought it best to snuff the NBN myth out in my last article :)
      Josh Taylor
  • I was amazed to note how the media were conveniently present during the police raid, and was provided access to the suspects home. It would appear that any presumption of innocence has gone out the window, as has the necessity to preserve evidence at a crime scene. Instead we see lots of police and media wandering through his home poking at computers etc.

    Add to that the media's cries that 'he had access for six weeks...and could have done all sorts of nasty things' is a furphy. I've yet to see an evidence he caused any real harm beyond penetrating the networks security.

    If he had 'control' or 'access' for six weeks, yet did no qualifiable harm, does that not imply he didn't have malicious intent?

    I'm also intrigued how the allegedly 150,000 customers were so quickly able to determine the level of damages they experienced. Apparently, it's an average of $33.33 per customer. Me thinks the number is a WAG.

    Yes, he may be guilty of breaking into the network. Yes, that may be a crime for which punishment is applicable. However, I'm somewhat intrigued how this story was made so high profile and immediately accessible to the media. Then there is the unspecified allegations of damages which can be so conveniently quantified.

    A self-taught, truck driving, computer hacker accessing the NBN? Sounds more like a case of poor security practices...

    If anything, this story highlights some poor security by the very people Conroy wants to police his censorship filter. If it's this easy to bypass, imagine what the criminals will do to the NBN and the filter itself.
    Scott W-ef9ad
  • He didn't "hack the NBN". Can't you read?