A former member of RAIDForums was sentenced to prison today by an Amsterdam court.
The 25-year-old man, Erkan Sezgin, was known as “DataBox” on RAIDforums when he listed the data of millions of Austrians for sale.
Sezgin, who was employed as a data engineer at Matrixian Group, was arrested in November 2022 and detained until other arrests were made in January. The others arrested have not been tried as yet. Sezgin’s trial was held May 19, and the verdict announced today.
The Austrian data sale was not the only crime Sezgin was alleged to have committed. He faced five charges (as machine translated from the original Dutch):
1. Healing of multiple databases/datasets with non-public (personal) data in the period from May 6, 2020 to November 22, 2022 in Almere and/or Amsterdam; [Note: a helpful reader points out the Dutch “heling” really means “selling” or in this case, selling stolen data.]
2. Creating/possibility of one or more phishing websites and e-mails aimed at obtaining seed phrases from a trust wallet and 2,782 files with seed phrases intended to commit fraud in the period from December 28, 2021 to November 22 2022 in Almere and/or Amsterdam;
3. Having one or more servers, phishing sites/panels and programs/software for the automatic transmission of data obtained through the aforementioned phishing panels with the aim of obtaining login codes/data and/or verification passwords and/or seed phrases to catch/obtain access to one or more cryptocurrency wallets/accounts in the period from January 18, 2022 to November 22, 2022 in Almere and/or Amsterdam;
4. (Habitual) money laundering of cryptocurrencies worth a total of € 717,240.84 in the period from January 25, 2022 to November 22, 2022 in Almere and/or Amsterdam;
5. Theft of cryptocurrencies worth a total of EUR 428,221.15 and/or EUR 7,328.68 from one or more unknown persons by means of a false key, i.e. one or more illegitimately obtained seed phrases for logging in/gaining access to the contents of the cryptocurrency wallets belonging to them, in the period from January 25, 2022 to November 22, 2022 in Amsterdam and/or Almere.
Before announcing its findings and verdict, the court indicated it considered the following:
At the hearing, the Defendant admitted that he had committed the charges under counts 1 and 2, but he stated that he received the phishing websites, phishing e-mails and files with seed phrases found on his digital data carriers from a third party. The suspect only knows this third party online and has never met him in person. The Defendant also stated that he ‘cleaned’ the seed phrases for this third party and that he had all cryptocurrencies wallets mentioned in the file, with the exception of his own Cardano cryptocurrencies wallet, in safekeeping for him. The suspect firmly denies having stolen the crypto currency found on it, and also that he has laundered crypto currency
The Court finds the Defendant’s statement about that ‘third party’ implausible and sets aside his statement to that extent. A factor here is that the Defendant only came up with this statement at the hearing and has not substantiated or concretized it in any way. Even after further questioning by the court, the Defendant did not want to provide any further information about this third party, which means that his story cannot be verified. In addition, the file offers no indications that a third party is involved in addition to the suspect. The suspect works as a data engineer and is an expert in the field of software and programming. He therefore has the knowledge and skills to act independently, without the help of third parties. Moreover, the Defendant had highly confidential information that is usually only distributed or shared against payment. The Defendant has also stated that he offered this data for sale via RaidForums (see below in the discussion of count 1). The Court therefore considers it implausible without further substantiation from the Defendant that a third party has entrusted these data to the Defendant in order to “clean up” and store them. Insofar as relevant, further attention will be paid to this in the discussion of the individual facts.
The court also gave its rationale for acquitting Sezgin on the third charge.
In announcing its judgment, the court indicated it took the following into account in particular:
The suspect is guilty of computer crime, in which he possessed a large number of datasets with privacy-sensitive personal data and offered them for sale on an illegal internet forum. This information is eminently not intended to be made public. Users from whom the data originate must be able to assume the confidentiality of the personal information they provide (online) to third parties. Defendant has grossly violated this. The suspect ignored the consequences of his actions and put his own (financial) interests first at the expense of a large number of victims.
In addition, suspected phishing websites, phishing e-mails and a large amount of seed phrases with which to commit phishing and with which he stole more than € 300,000.00 in cryptocurrencies. The suspect only stopped doing so after the police intervened. The damage could therefore have been much greater. The suspect has also been guilty of laundering more than € 700,000.00 for almost a year.
The Defendant acted with all this at the expense of others for his own financial gain. Cryptocurrency fraud undermines the confidence consumers should have in trading and storing cryptocurrencies through blockchain technology. The suspect also laundered large amounts of money. Money laundering poses a serious threat to the legal economy and affects the integrity of financial and economic transactions, because the proceeds from crime are hidden from the view of the judicial authorities in this way.
The impact of computer crime is significant, which means that the sentences imposed in similar cases are, in principle, long unconditional prison sentences. The court also considers this appropriate in this case. The court has taken cognizance of the suspect’s criminal record dated 8 May 2023, which shows that he has not previously been convicted of a criminal offense. The court also sees the person of the suspect as mitigating factors. After all, the Defendant is still very young and at the hearing he said that he regretted his actions and now he also seems to have some insight into the consequences of his actions. The court believes that the suspect must on the one hand pay for the criminal offenses and on the other hand wants to give him extra motivation to take steps in the right direction,
All things considered, the court finds a prison sentence of 36 months, less pre-trial detention, of which 12 months suspended with a probationary period of 3 years, is appropriate and necessary.
The Court of Amsterdam’s full verdict can be found at https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/#!/details?id=ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2023:3748
“Heling” in this case means “the selling of stolen goods”, not “healing”. (charge 1)
That’s what I thought, thanks. Two machine translation services made it “healing” though. I’ll change it now.