Rutgers Computer Hacker Ordered to Pay $8.6M in Restitution
"Paras has completely turned his life around, he is now a mature, responsible young man who sincerely regrets his past actions. He will continue to live up to the court's expectations and will work hard to repay the loss to Rutgers," said defense attorney Robert Stahl.
October 26, 2018 at 06:24 PM
3 minute read
A federal judge ordered a 22-year-old convicted of carrying out a now-infamous cyberattack on the Rutgers University computer network to pay $8.6 million in restitution.
Paras Jha of Fanwood had previously pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Michael Shipp of the District of New Jersey to violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act for his part in the attack. Two others also have pleaded guilty in connection with the scheme.
Shipp, sitting in Trenton, on Oct. 26 issued the sentence, which includes six months of home incarceration and 2,500 hours' community service, in addition to paying restitution.
In a release announcing the sentencing, U.S. Attorney for New Jersey Craig Carpenito detailed hacking activities that included generating artificial revenue through advertising fraud. The release said Jha took part in creating “clickfraud” botnets that captured thousands of computers and other devices connected to the internet without their owner's knowledge.
Between November 2014 and September 2016, Jha executed a series of “distributed denial of service” (DDOS) attacks on the networks of Rutgers University, Carpentino said.
“These occur when multiple computers acting in unison flood the internet connection of a targeted computer or computers.” the release said. “Jha's attacks effectively shut down Rutgers University's central authentication server, which maintained, among other things, the gateway portal through which staff, faculty, and students delivered assignments and assessments. At times, Jha succeeded in taking the portal offline for multiple consecutive periods, causing damage to Rutgers University, its faculty, and its students.”
Defense attorney Robert Stahl of Westfield said by email that Jha will be allowed to pay the $8.6 million over time as a 20-year judgment.
The money represents the loss Rutgers claims for the interruption to the university's website and internet services, plus the costs associated with repairs and many upgrades, according to the defense attorney.
“Paras did not commit the offense against Rutgers for money. He derived no money at all. The restitution award is strictly the damages Rutgers claimed,” Stahl said.
“Paras and his entire family are very pleased that the judge took into consideration Paras' extensive cooperation, youth and other relevant sentencing factors to fashion a reasonable sentence,” Stahl said. “Paras has completely turned his life around, he is now a mature, responsible young man who sincerely regrets his past actions. He will continue to live up to the court's expectations and will work hard to repay the loss to Rutgers. He is grateful for the support of his school, employer, the FBI, his family and his attorneys through this extremely stressful time.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWave of Office Closures Highlights the Weighty Stakes Surrounding Law Firm Growth
7 minute readSLIDESHOW: Associate Justice John Jay Hoffman Takes Seat on New Jersey Supreme Court
1 minute readSkadden Partners: String of Securities Wins Highlights Cross-Border Practice
3 minute read'Inappropriate' TikTok Posts Net Bergen County Judge 3-Month Suspension Without Pay
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft and Pryor Cashman have entered appearances for Diageo Americas Supply d/b/a Ciroc Distilling Co. and Sony Songs, a division of Sony Music Publishing, respectively, in a pending lawsuit. The case was filed Sept. 10 in New York Southern District Court by the Bloom Firm and IP Legal Studio on behalf of Dawn Angelique Richard. The plaintiff, who performed as a member of producer Sean 'Diddy' Combs girl group Danity Kane and later his band, Diddy - Dirty Money, claims that she was financially exploited by Combs and subjected to inhumane working conditions. Among other violations, Richard claims that Combs required group members to remain at his residences and studios, deprived them of adequate food and sleep and forced them to rehearse for 36 to 48 hours without breaks. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Katherine Polk Failla, is 1:24-cv-06848, Richard v. Combs et al.
Who Got The Work
Mathilda McGee-Tubb and Kevin M. McGinty of Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, as well as Jesse W. Belcher-Timme of Doherty, Wallace, Pillsbury & Murphy, have stepped in to defend Peter Pan Bus Lines in a pending consumer class action. The suit, filed Sept. 4 in Massachusetts District Court by Hackett Feinberg PC and KalielGold PLLC, accuses the defendant of charging undisclosed 'junk fees' on top of ticket prices during checkout. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Mark G. Mastroianni, is 3:24-cv-12277, Mulani et al v. Peter Pan Bus Lines, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250