ta3927590

Malarkey may be the intent. Knowing the case is nonsense and having no expectation of winning, you press on because even if eventually found not-guilty, the process of the defendant getting there if prosecuted can be used to destroy their career, reputation, finances, etc. Enough that it still feels like a win to the state, who rarely has much to lose in a relative sense.

As anyone could probably guess, LEOs that do actual technical work are rarely the same ones talking to the public about that technical work. Thus what gets said to or published for the public is rarely reflective of the actual internal understanding.

Historically, definitely. Currently? Fairly common. However, what's both historically and currently uncommon is having the sense to not do so while also identifying yourself. For the h4x0r cred, or whatever. Which is of course childishly idiotic, but makes my job a whole lot easier. In my experience, if you're not under any such contract and even if you are going to report such a compromise in complete good faith and have done no damage, you are far better off doing so as anonymously as possible. Nobody likes to be embarrassed, and it's a lot simpler for a corporation with a stock price and public image to think about to pin the whole situation on those damn hackers than own up to even the slightest degree of incompetence. Typing at work in sort of a hurry so, please forgive grammatical issues.