DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

Software developer charged with damaging the computer system of a Cleveland company

Posted on April 14, 2021 by Dissent

Acting U.S. Attorney Bridget M. Brennan announced that a federal grand jury sitting in Cleveland has returned an indictment charging Davis Lu, 51, of Houston, Texas, with one count of damaging protected computers. The Defendant is accused of using his position as a software developer to execute malicious code on his employer’s computer servers. The Defendant was arrested this morning without incident.

According to the indictment, the Defendant was employed as a Software 1 Senior Developer working with emerging technology for Company 1, a corporation that held its principal place of business in Cleveland, Ohio. On or about August 4, 2019, Company 1’s servers experienced a disruption that crashed production servers and prevented employees from accessing those servers.

The indictment states that Company 1 investigated the source of the disruption and discovered unauthorized code installed on a server, causing that server to create an infinite loop and crash. Furthermore, it is alleged that the company found additional code that deleted files associated with user profiles, thereby denying users access to Software 1.

The indictment states that Company 1 requested that the Defendant return his company-issued computer. It is alleged that shortly before returning the computer, the Defendant deleted encrypted volumes, attempted to delete Linux directories and attempted to delete two additional projects. Additionally, the company discovered that the Defendant had allegedly conducted internet searches on how to escalate privileges, hide processes and delete large folders and/or files.

According to the indictment, as a result of these alleged actions, Company 1 suffered a loss of at least $5,000 and damage affecting ten or more protected computers.

An indictment is only a charge and is not evidence of guilt. A defendant is entitled to a fair trial in which it will be the government’s burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

If convicted, the Defendant’s sentence will be determined by the Court after review of factors unique to this case, including the Defendant’s prior criminal record, if any, the Defendant’s role in the offense, and the characteristics of the violation.

In all cases, the sentence will not exceed the statutory maximum, and in most cases, it will be less than the maximum.

This case was investigated by the Cleveland Division of the FBI and is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Brian S. Deckert and Daniel J. Riedl and Senior Counsel Adrienne Rose of the Justice Department’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section.

Source: U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Ohio

Category: Breach IncidentsBusiness SectorInsiderU.S.

Post navigation

← Ca: Data Breach Class Actions: Canadian Courts Taking a Harder Look
CH: Griesser AG victim of ransomware attack →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • Rewards for Justice offers $10M reward for info on RedLine developer or RedLine’s use by foreign governments
  • New evidence links long-running hacking group to Indian government
  • Zaporizhzhia Cyber ​​Police Exposes Hacker Who Caused Millions in Losses to Victims by Mining Cryptocurrency
  • Germany fines Vodafone $51 million for privacy, security breaches
  • Google: Hackers target Salesforce accounts in data extortion attacks
  • The US Grid Attack Looming on the Horizon
  • US govt login portal could be one cyberattack away from collapse, say auditors
  • Two Men Sentenced to Prison for Aggravated Identity Theft and Computer Hacking Crimes
  • 100,000 UK taxpayer accounts hit in £47m phishing attack on HMRC
  • CISA Alert: Updated Guidance on Play Ransomware

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • How the FBI Sought a Warrant to Search Instagram of Columbia Student Protesters
  • Germany fines Vodafone $51 million for privacy, security breaches
  • Malaysia enacts data sharing rules for public sector
  • U.S. Enacts Take It Down Act
  • 23andMe Bankruptcy Judge Ponders Trump Bill’s Injunction Impact
  • Hell No: The ODNI Wants to Make it Easier for the Government to Buy Your Data Without Warrant
  • US State Dept. says silence or anonymity on social media is suspicious

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.