April 26, 2024

Anatoly Shesteryuk, Former Russian Official, Arrested

The official, whom the Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper identified as Anatoly Shesteryuk, worked for the Federal Property Management Agency and was in charge of companies in Moscow owned by the federal government.

Most of Russia’s profitable public companies were privatized in the immediate post-Soviet period, creating a capitalist economy and overnight billionaires. The state companies that were not privatized were of dubious commercial value; many limped into the new century barely profitable.

These companies were the focus of the corruption investigation that ensnared Mr. Shesteryuk and at least two other co-conspirators, said the Main Economic Crime Directorate of the Interior Ministry, which divulged details of the case in statements published by several Russian newspapers.

To pull off the plot, the investigators said, Mr. Shesteryuk and the other suspects, who were directors of private companies, worked from a database of failing government enterprises — the worse off, the better.

Mr. Shesteryuk, the investigators said, would arrange for the managers of these failing companies, like gas stations and other businesses with substantial real estate holdings, to take out loans using their land as collateral, and drawn from a financial company that was also part of the plot. When, predictably, the struggling enterprise was unable to repay the loan, the land was seized in bankruptcy court, and the conspirators — who included the managers of the failing companies — would divide the proceeds.

The plot led to the theft of more than 100 parcels of state property worth more than 10 billion rubles, or about $330 million, the Komsomolskaya Pravda article quoted an unnamed investigator as saying.

The investigators said they were looking into whether the judges in the Treteysk court, where the bankruptcies were processed, were complicit in approving the title changes.

The plot, though eyebrow-raising for being so lucrative, was not unprecedented for corruption cases here.

Sergei L. Magnitsky, a lawyer representing a hedge fund, uncovered what he said was a plot against the Russian government in which taxes paid by at least two investment firms were stolen. Some estimates put the amount involved at more than a half-billion dollars.

Mr. Magnitsky, who was arrested in November 2008 as he tried to expose the fraud and died in prison, said about $230 million in taxes paid by his employer, the Hermitage Capital hedge fund, had been stolen. Collusive lawsuits in Russia’s flawed court system were also a factor in that case.

In 2010, a leaked audit suggested that as much as $4 billion had gone missing in a contracting fraud involving a pipeline project to connect Siberian oil fields with a refinery in China.

In neither case were any senior figures prosecuted.

But arrests have been made in more recent corruption cases. Since Vladimir V. Putin was elected to a third term as president last spring, the police have made half a dozen high-profile arrests for corruption. In November, Mr. Putin ousted his minister of defense in a corruption scandal, and the police have arrested housing officials in St. Petersburg and state telephone company executives in Moscow.

Selective prosecution of corruption cases, Kremlinologists say, serves to purge the elite of figures who have fallen from favor or whose loyalty has been called into question.

Removing the most visible signs of corruption and making high-profile arrests are also seen as a way to mollify the anger of Russians — who must pay bribes in many ordinary situations, as when they visit an emergency room — lest they embrace the opposition.

Also on Tuesday, Prime Minister Dmitri A. Medvedev fired a deputy minister of regional development who is also director of the federal agency for housing maintenance and utilities, the Interfax news service reported, without providing an explanation for the dismissal.

And far to the east, in the Siberian city of Yakutsk, the police accused a regional official in the same housing agency of taking a $9,000 bribe from a contractor.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/26/world/europe/anatoly-shesteryuk-russian-former-official-arrested.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Case Study: Starting Over After a Cyberattack Shuts Down the Business

Case Study

What would you do with this business?

Peter Justen: Daniel Rosenbaum for The New York Times Peter Justen: ” I had known him for more than 15 years.”

Last week we wrote about the situation faced by Peter Justen, chief executive of MyBizHomepage, after the company’s former chief technology officer set in motion a series of crippling cyberattacks against the company’s Web site.

Once valued by its investors at $100 million, MyBizHomepage was founded in 2006 by Mr. Justen as a way to help small-business owners access financial metrics that can help them run their companies. But then, apparently angered by Mr. Justen’s decision not to sell the company, the chief technology officer tried to start a competing company. When Mr. Justen found out, he fired the officer along with two co-conspirators. And that’s when the cyberattacks began. They rendered the site all but useless, and Mr. Justen struggled with what to do next.

In February 2009, Mr. Justen and his board concluded that they would have to take the site offline, which would effectively close the business and saddle board members like Joe Silbaugh, who had invested more than $1 million, with a devastating loss. “We essentially had no choice because we no longer had a product,” Mr. Justen said. “We also decided to be up front about the decision and explain what happened along with an apology. When bad things happen you can hide under the rug and hope it goes away or you can go public with it and take the teeth out of the tiger. Some people were understanding while others were not.”

The decision did not please the company’s vendors, some of whom quickly filed suit over unpaid bills. But many of the company’s channel partners, who helped distribute the product, decided to stay on. “They told me they liked our product, and they were going to stick with us,” Mr. Justen said. “In tough times, you really get to see who your friends really are.”

Ignoring advice from his lawyers, Mr. Justen, who also had invested heavily in the company, decided not to declare corporate bankruptcy because he did not want to give anyone the opportunity to purchase the company’s intellectual property. He also turned down multiple offers to leave the company and take salaried employment. Rather, he asked his original investors to support him in rebuilding the company from scratch. “We held a shareholder meeting and I told them I would kill myself in trying to restore the company to what it should have been,” said Mr. Justen, who also liquidated his 401(k) and his children’s college funds and invested the money in the company. “Fortunately, they gave me that chance.”

Mr. Justen spent the next two years rebuilding the company, which is now called Five Plus. It features an online subscription software package that synchronizes with a company’s QuickBooks software and presents an easy-to-digest version of critical financial figures such as accounts payable, accounts receivable, cost of goods sold and cash on hand. The new software also embraces social media technology, enabling users to connect with each other and to compare their financial results with those of their industry peers.

While the new business is up and running, Mr. Justen said he and the business remain under cyberattack. In one instance, he was forced to fend off a denial-of-service attack against the new site that attempted to redirect his customers to a site where fraud claims against Mr. Justen and the company’s investors (including Mr. Justen’s 87-year-old mother and deceased father) had been posted. Mr. Justen said he continues to work with the United States Secret Service in attempting to track down the former chief technology officer.

After this case study was published last week, the unnamed former employee contacted The New York Times and identified himself as James Bird. He denied that he had been on the lam and offered an address in Santa Monica, Calif., where he said he is living. While asserting that Mr. Justen owes him $25,000, Mr. Bird acknowledged that he had in fact hacked the MyBizHomepage site.

Mr. Justen discussed the experience — and responded to reader comments — in a brief interview that has been condensed and edited.

You have said that you discovered after the attacks that Mr. Bird had been living off the grid — no driver’s license, not paying taxes. Didn’t you have to have his Social Security number to pay him?

Yes, we paid him as a contractor and did have a Social Security number for him. But what are you going to do with it? He doesn’t use it for anything we could track him with. He doesn’t have credit cards or bank accounts. He paid cash for everything, including his car.

Why didn’t you run a background check on him before hiring?

I had known him for more than 15 years. I was like a mentor to him. He came over to our house for dinner six times a month and played with my kids. He was a very talented software engineer and I highly trusted him.

Why was he upset after the sale of the company didn’t go through? What was in it for him?

He had stock options in the company that would vest over different triggers or events, like a sale. He was in line to make a substantial amount of money.

Were you surprised that two of your senior officers went along with Mr. Bird?

Yes, I was quite surprised. One of them had worked for me for three years as a trusted financial adviser. I think they just got caught up in the drama of it all. I terminated all three individuals on the same day.

Do you think Mr. Bird had help in sabotaging the company?

Yes, I think all three of them worked together. Jim did the technical stuff and the other guys did the rest. They went to our clients and told them they were starting a new company and that Peter’s company had failed. They would even pull up the site, which Jim would then crash, as proof.

What lessons do you draw from this experience?

I realize I made many mistakes and I have learned a number of things from this experience. Inspect what you expect and trust but verify come to mind. A big lesson I learned was to separate business from personal. I let my personal emotions cloud my better business judgment.

What do you say to the readers who asked why you didn’t conduct a security audit on the system?

When you’re a start-up, you have to make some tough calls about where to spend your money. You throw nickels around like they’re manhole covers. At the time, there didn’t seem to be any reason for us to spend $70,000 to verify something that didn’t seem to be a risk. Jim was a cyber security expert. Our software was rock solid against attacks from the outside. I just never expected someone I trusted so much and had known for so long to do what he did from the inside. That’s why with our new system, no one else has all the keys to the kingdom and we keep multiple copies of our backup code in different locations. We’ve taken as much precaution as is humanly possible to make sure this doesn’t happen again.

What did you do to protect your customers once you knew the system had been hacked?

The customer information was never a target. As part of our design, we never collected any personal data on our customers like bank account information. That was part of our design. All we collected was data like company revenues and receivables. But it wasn’t connected to any personally identifiable information.

Were you surprised by the reactions of readers?

I’ll admit that I thought some of the comments must have come from people who have never stepped foot in the arena and tried to start a company — people who never shed blood, sweat and tears trying to build something. But when you hear from customers who tell you that what you built helped save their company, that’s what makes it all worthwhile.

Article source: http://boss.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/29/starting-over-after-a-cyberattack-shuts-down-the-business/?partner=rss&emc=rss