this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2025
1419 points (98.0% liked)

Technology

643 readers
450 users here now

Share interesting Technology news and links.

Rules:

  1. No paywalled sites at all.
  2. News articles has to be recent, not older than 2 weeks (14 days).
  3. No external video links, only native(.mp4,...etc) links under 5 mins.
  4. Post only direct links.

To encourage more original sources and keep this space commercial free as much as I could, the following websites are Blacklisted:

More sites will be added to the blacklist as needed.

Encouraged:

Misc:

Relevant Lemmy Communities:

founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Comments

Relevant legal documents

Source: Reddit- Private front-end.

(Eastern District of Michigan - Detroit)

My husband, Conrad Rockenhaus, is wrongly incarcerated in a county jail. I’m posting this here because you are one of the few communities that will understand the full technical and political reality of how he ended up there.

My husband is a former Tor operator, and at one point, he ran some of the fastest relays and exit nodes in the world.

This nightmare began when he refused to help the FBI decrypt traffic from his exit nodes.

Months later, the government arrested him. Their official reason? A minor, non-violent CFAA charge from an old workplace dispute that had nothing to do with Tor.

In fact, the statute of limitations was just a couple of months from expiring. It was a clear pretext to target him.

That minor charge was all they needed to get him into the system. To deny him bail, a U.S. Probation Officer in Texas lied under oath, telling a judge that Conrad had installed a "Linux OS called Spice" to "knock out their monitoring software" and access the "dark web."

Read the transcript

Here is the technical reality of their lie: The software was a standard SPICE graphics driver needed for his Ph.D. program. As many of you know, this is a basic utility for displaying graphics from a virtual machine. It is not an OS, has no connection to the dark web, and was technically incapable of interfering with their monitoring software.

The claim is a technical absurdity, equivalent to saying a mouse pad can hack a server.

Based on that lie alone, he was held in pre-trial detention for three years.

Now, the retaliation has escalated in Michigan. After I filed a formal complaint against his US probation officers for harassment, they used fraudulent warrants to jail my husband again.

During this violent arrest by US Marshals (who smashed in our windows and nearly shot my dog) he sustained a severe head injury that caused him to have a grand mal seizure in court. The jail’s “medical attention” was to ask him what year it was (he said 2023) and then send him back to his cell. He is being denied real medical care.

See videos:

To make matters worse, U.S. District Judge Stephen J. Murphy, III has created a procedural trap that has stripped my husband of his right to a lawyer to fight for his life, health, or innocence. He is trapped in a constitutional and medical crisis.

I am not asking for money. I am asking for your help to amplify this story. You understand the technical truth and why this fight is so important.

We have all the evidence: the court transcript of the false testimony, the fraudulent warrants, the proof of medical neglect. It’s documented on my website:

https://rockenhaus.com/

TL;DR: My husband, a former Tor operator, refused to help the FBI decrypt Tor traffic. They retaliated by using an old, unrelated CFAA offense to arrest him and then lied about him using a "graphics driver to access the dark web” to keep him in pre-trial detention for 3 years. Now he's been jailed again in Michigan on fraudulent violations, is being denied care for a head injury, and has no lawyer.

I need help getting the word out🙏

Adrienne Rockenhaus

For updates:

More Context from her comment:

Seeing a lot of questions and some misinformation in the comments, so I wanted to clarify a few key facts with sources:

  • On the original case: My husband did not have a trial. He took a coerced guilty plea in Texas after being held for three years based on perjured testimony about a "SPICE graphics driver." We have the court transcript proving the perjury on our website.
  • On the violent arrest: The claim that my husband was "combative" is a complete fabrication, likely being spread to justify the U.S. Marshals' actions. We have the unedited security camera footage of the entire raid, and it proves the opposite.
  • On the relevance of Tor: The government's retaliation against our family began after my husband, a Tor exit node operator, refused to help the FBI decrypt traffic. They then used an unrelated workplace dispute as the pretext for the initial charge. The entire case stems from his support for online privacy.

Even More Context:

I'm seeing comments about a deeply offensive search term ("NAMBLA") that the prosecution brought up in my husband's 2020 hearing in Texas, and I want to address it directly so there is no confusion. The search was for an article my husband was writing for Encyclopedia Dramatica, a well-known (and very controversial) satirical wiki that parodies offensive topics. He was researching the topic to make fun of it, much like the show South Park did in a famous episode. The prosecution knew this search was irrelevant to the case, but they put it in front of the judge anyway . This is a classic "poison the well" tactic, using something shocking and out-of-context to prejudice a judge against a defendant. It's a hallmark of a malicious prosecution. While they want everyone distracted by this, the real issues are the ones they can't defend: the fraudulent warrants, the perjured testimony, the ongoing medical neglect, and the judge's documented conflict of interest.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

Edit: looks like OP addressed these concerns in an update. I don't regret skepticism but it's clearly an insane civil rights abuse, possibly to forcibly suppress privacy by targeting Tor Node operators directly. This is unprecedented, but also not surprising to me. Misinformation is one hell of a drug, read my post below anyways and don't forget it had 20 upvotes before this edit. We all were fooled for a minute.


Original comment:

Another user brought up the witness testimony. I have no issue posting it because it's critical to determining if this is a privacy violation or simply CSAM abuse, possibly the only useful function of the FBI anymore:

Let me ask you about an entry. It's the last page of the first set of documents in Government's Exhibit 2. The entry is 2:10 a.m. a Google search for North American Man/Boy Love Association. That is not in any way associated with -- is that associated with the dark web or is that a separate search? THE WITNESS: No, that's an open web search that was conducted from the computer.

I did not get a sense after reading the testimony that the FBI had much wrongdoing here. Not saying we can completely trust the testimony or that Rockenhaus did bad things in reality. But that testimony was not even addressed by Mrs. Rockenhaus and therefore I'm immediately skeptical of anything she said about wrongful incarceration. This is not a high profile case where I'd suspect fuckery either, like Luigi Mangione. The FBI should not be violating our privacy, but they did not do that here, at least openly. They incarcerated a possible pedophile who happened to run Tor Nodes. Tor project themselves say running a Tor Node is unlikely to put you at risk.

If I were on a jury I'd be inclined to side with the witness and say Rockenhaus is possibly guilty of wrongdoing.

[–] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Is the entirety of your claim that he's a pedofphle that he ran a TOR relay and search for NAMBLA once?

And that the claims of Mrs. Rockenhaus should be disregarded because she doesn't address this testimony? Is there more material relevant in this testimony that you didn't include? Because I don't see why she would need to address what you included.

[–] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

We don't know if he is, it's complicated. It's worthy of a public trial for sure. I don't have "no reasonable doubt".

Her claims imply this is a wrongful detention when it seems worthy of a trial to me. We don't know the specifics but the transcription implies he was belligerent and so potentially a flight risk. I don't agree with the entire justice system but also it's not as clear cut an injustice as she's saying.

[–] frostysauce@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

A trial for what, exactly? Searching the name of a bad organization? Do you think that is a crime and thus a trial could result from it?

[–] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago

A trial for nothing, as I found out the whole thing is just a civil rights abuse pretty much.

We don't know the specifics but the transcription implies he was belligerent

There's video. There's only so much the video angle can show, but I have my doubts.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

No, he didn't use the tor relay for that particular search.

Omission of evidence of crimes he committed certainly doesn't look good.

[–] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Are you saying searching for NAMBLA is a crime?

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Pedophilia is a crime, the organization advocates for the abolishment of age of consent laws. Searching for that information alone is completely harmless, of course, but that's hardly the only sketchy thing about this dude and his case.

[–] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I understand that pedophilia is a crime. He searched for NAMBLA which is not. That is the only thing that is even remotely sketchy that you provided. Your entire argument is insinuations and tone.

[–] Cruel@programming.dev 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Pedophilia is a sexual attraction to prepubescent kids. It absolutely is NOT a crime. At least not in any US State that I'm aware of.

Sexually abusing minors is a crime, regardless of someone being a pedophile. In law, these things matter.

100% agree. Thank you for the correction.

[–] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No, but it's suspicious given the details of his case. Why would he search that when he knew he was being monitored? I have questions.

Literally asking for the details organized as an argument. Is that even the case the government is building?

[–] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 week ago

I think she's just doing her best to defend him, I don't blame her. But it's much more complicated than that.

[–] Hector@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Searching man boy love is not the same as engaging in it. For instance, you just searched man boy love when you read this. You sick fuck.

[–] sunbytes@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Yeah there was an episode of south park about it probably 20 years ago.

I probably googled it at the time, to see if it was a real club.

[–] zebidiah@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 week ago

i remember that episode lol, the north american marlon brando look alikes

[–] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 week ago

Straight to jail.

[–] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago

I actually did not 😎 and if that's all there is then sure, it's a not guilty verdict.

[–] Dragonstaff@leminal.space 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This country would be a lot better off if people defaulted to suspecting FBI/police fuckery until proven otherwise. This is much closer to the truth.

Searching for "NAMBLA" is not illegal and this whole comment is incredibly wrongheaded.

[–] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I do agree but I absolutely do not have "no reasonable doubt" after hearing that testimony. The long detention is a different and very serious civil rights issue and certainly wrong here. But also we cannot just let suspicious pedophilic activity go without questioning either.

If a Google search is all there is to the case then I'd vote Not Guilty on a jury, for sure. But it deserves a trial.

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 week ago

A single search for NAMBLA deserves a jury trial?

Shit, I just typed it in a Lemmy post. I guess we need to have a trial to make sure I'm not involved in CSAM.

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"No reasonable doubt" is the standard that needs to be met to convict someone, not declare their innocence.

[–] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago

I mean he's innocent by default

[–] thebeardedpotato@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Isn’t that search a reference to a South Park episode?

[–] stiephelando@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The org is real and was made fun of by south park

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Well I'd look it up to see if it was real, but that would apparently make me guilty of pedophilia according to OP.

[–] Hector@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Exactly, one of the above commenters proclaims guilt because of a search query of that name, of which the commenter almost certainly searched that himself. I have searched all sorts of things I do not support and am even hostile to.

[–] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago

I did not proclaim guilt based on a search query. I proclaimed I do not have "no reasonable doubt" and it's worthy of a trial.

[–] thebeardedpotato@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Holy crap, I can’t believe someone would actually make an org with that name 🤦

[–] BanMe@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

It was a weird thing from the 70s if that helps. I don't think it's seriously been a thing since the 80s but idk. Had to look this up when I was a young queer activist because people would bring it up. Smh.

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

Ironically, I thought it was a South Park meme too and then I just Googled it.

I'll tell FBI hello for you guys, see you in 15-25 years.

[–] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

If it is, I wouldn't be using my computer to search it if I was being monitored. Your point is he's probably innocent. It's possible but I do not have "no reasonable doubt" any more.

Actually if possible I'd avoid unnecessary internet searches completely during the period of being monitored. Privacy tools or bust.

[–] thebeardedpotato@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Nah I wasn’t suggesting he’s innocent, I haven’t invested myself enough to form an opinion and the details seem murky and all over the place.

I was genuinely just curious if that could’ve been a South Park search lol.

And if it isn’t (and to your point, even if it is), why would someone technically savvy who knows they’re on probation and under surveillance perform that search?

Was he probing to look for alerts or flags that went off for risky searches? Was it someone else on his device messing with him? Was he just being cheeky? Was he being sketchy?

There’s too many possibilities and hence I’m not really suggesting he’s innocent or guilty.

[–] bigFab@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Do you understand that even pedophiles have rights? FBI can't use excessive force arrest, lie under oath, 3 goddam years of pre-trial detention and medical negligence just because he is the bad guy.

Justice system shouldn't work like that, especially on a person who committed no violent crime at all.

[–] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago

The excessive force is a civil rights injustice, yes. We do not know the details of the case but it certainly deserves a trial.

Pedophiles are not criminals by default but his behavior is highly suspicious and I have questions.