1 minute read

Young hacker jailed

appeared in court on Monday. According to legal sources, he was accused of an alleged continuous crime of discovery and disclosure of secrets.

The alleged acts were carried out on October 18 and 20 when the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) detected a cyber ­ attack through the passwords of two officials of the administration of Justice. They had subsequently been used as a springboard to access the databases of the Tax Agency.

In the prison order, the head of examining magistrate’s court explained that the data were transferred to two servers hosted in Lithuania. ‘Alcasec’ sold the personal data of multiple affected people through the uSms platform paid through cryptocurrencies.

Huertas’ arrest was first announced by a news source, and was made by the General Information Police, although ‘Alcasec’ had already been on the radar of officers for other cyberattacks.

THE Superior Court of Justice of Madrid (TSJM) ordered the Community of Madrid on Monday, April 3, to pay €150,000 in compensation to a patient who was infected with HIV during a CT scan at the Gregorio Marañon hospital in Madrid.

An appeal from the patient ­ which had initially requested €400,000 in compensation ­ was partially upheld, with the court condemning the administration for ‘causing this disease’.

She underwent a contrast CT scan in September 2018, prior to surgery for ‘ovarian carcinoma, peritoneal carcinomatosis and tumour ascites’. When kidney problems were detected in December 2018, the infection was confirmed.

At the time, the Community of Madrid did not assume any error and decided not to compensate the patient, so she went to court, as reported by a news source.

The Madrid High Court ruled that: “the existence of two positive cases of HIV on the date on which the CT scan was performed on the plaintiff and the acknowledgement by the administration of failures in work procedures (which determined the outbreak of hepatitis C infection), lead them to consider plausible the hypothesis that the plaintiff was infected as a result of this test.”

This article is from: