Computer and Internet Fraud Defense Attorney

Federal Defense for Online and Financial Fraud Cases

Arkady Bukh represents individuals, business owners, executives, technology professionals and companies facing federal computer and internet fraud investigations.

These cases may involve online payment schemes, phishing allegations, compromised accounts, business email communications, stolen financial information, electronic transfers, fraudulent websites or accusations that digital platforms were used to obtain money or property through deception.

Representation may begin before formal charges are filed and continue through:

Federal fraud investigations
Target letters and interview requests
Grand jury subpoenas
Search warrants
Seizure of computers and mobile devices
Requests for email, account and payment records
Bank-account and cryptocurrency restraints
Pre-indictment negotiations
Indictment and arraignment
Review of electronic and financial evidence
Pretrial motions
Plea negotiations
Federal trial
Sentencing
Restitution and forfeiture proceedings

A computer and internet fraud defense attorney should examine both sides of the government’s case: the electronic communications allegedly used to carry out the scheme and the movement of the money or property that prosecutors claim was obtained.

The presence of an email account, IP address, online profile or payment record does not by itself establish who controlled it, what that person knew or whether the communication was made with fraudulent intent.

Who This Attorney Represents

Arkady Bukh represents clients in federal internet and cyber fraud matters, including:

Individuals accused of internet fraud
Business owners facing online fraud investigations
Executives whose companies received federal subpoenas
Employees accused of sending misleading communications
Individuals accused of phishing or social engineering
Defendants in account-takeover cases
Clients accused of payment-card or access-device fraud
Individuals accused of redirecting electronic payments
Online sellers and marketplace operators
Technology and payment-service professionals
Individuals accused of operating fraudulent websites
Clients facing wire fraud and conspiracy charges
Foreign nationals accused of targeting U.S. accounts or customers
Businesses responding to searches, subpoenas and account restraints
Individuals whose devices, accounts or cryptocurrency have been seized

The roles of alleged participants may differ substantially. A website developer, salesperson, account owner, payment processor, customer-service employee and recipient of funds may not possess the same information or share the same intent.

The defense should determine what the client personally knew, communicated, authorized and received.

Computer and Internet Fraud Compared With Cyber Crime

Computer and internet fraud cases overlap with cybercrime, but the two practice areas are not identical.

The broader Cyber Crime practice focuses primarily on alleged unauthorized access, computer intrusion, malware, botnets, system damage and violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

This page focuses on alleged schemes to obtain money or property through:

Emails and electronic messages
Online accounts
Payment platforms
Websites and applications
Banking systems
Digital advertisements
Social media
Marketplace transactions
Electronic identity information
Interstate or international transfers

A case may include both categories. For example, prosecutors may allege that an email account was accessed without authorization and then used to redirect a payment. The indictment could include both a computer-access charge and wire fraud.

For allegations centered on hacking, malware, system intrusion or unauthorized access, visit the Federal Cyber Crime Defense Attorney page.

What Is Federal Computer and Internet Fraud?

Computer and internet fraud is a broad description rather than one specific federal offense.

Federal prosecutors may allege that a person used electronic communications, online platforms or digital accounts to participate in a scheme intended to obtain money or property through false statements, impersonation, concealment or another form of deception.

The alleged scheme may involve:

False emails or text messages
Fraudulent payment instructions
Compromised business accounts
Online banking activity
Stolen payment information
Fake websites or online stores
False customer or investor communications
Account-opening documents
Unauthorized purchases
Marketplace transactions
Electronic invoices
Cryptocurrency payments
Use of another person’s identity
Coordination among several participants

Not every inaccurate online statement, disputed transaction, failed business deal or unpaid obligation is criminal fraud.

The government generally must prove the elements of a specific federal statute, which may include fraudulent intent, a scheme directed at money or property, use of electronic communications and the client’s knowing participation.

Federal Wire Fraud Allegations

Wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1343 is one of the most frequently used charges in internet fraud prosecutions.

The government generally alleges:

A scheme or plan to defraud or obtain money or property through false or fraudulent representations
Knowing and intentional participation by the defendant
Use of interstate or foreign wire communications to carry out or advance the scheme

The term “wire” is broader than a bank wire transfer. It may include:

Emails
Text messages
Telephone calls
Website communications
Online account activity
Payment-platform records
Electronic invoices
Bank transfers
Cloud services
Social media messages
Cryptocurrency transactions

A separate wire fraud count may be based on each communication or transfer that prosecutors claim furthered the scheme.

The Supreme Court has made clear that ordinary federal wire fraud must concern money or traditional property. Depriving someone only of useful information or the ability to make an informed economic decision is not, by itself, a traditional property-fraud theory.

The defense should examine the alleged property, the purpose of each communication and whether the message or payment was actually used to advance the alleged scheme.

For more information, visit the Wire Fraud Defense Attorney page.

How an Internet Fraud Investigation May Begin

A federal internet fraud investigation may remain undisclosed while authorities collect account, payment and communication records.

A person may first learn of the investigation after receiving:

A target letter
A grand jury subpoena
A voluntary interview request
A visit from federal agents
A search warrant
Notice that an online provider disclosed records
Suspension of a payment or marketplace account
A frozen bank or cryptocurrency account
Questions directed to employees or customers
Notice that another alleged participant was arrested
Information that a business partner is cooperating
An international arrest or extradition request

By that time, authorities may already possess:

Emails and text messages
Account-registration records
Login history
IP addresses
Bank statements
Payment-processor records
Cryptocurrency-exchange information
Domain and hosting records
Telephone data
Documents recovered from another participant
Statements from customers or alleged victims

Federal investigations may involve the FBI, Secret Service, Homeland Security Investigations, Postal Inspection Service, IRS Criminal Investigation and specialized fraud or cybercrime prosecutors.

Pre-Indictment Internet Fraud Defense

Pre-indictment representation begins before a grand jury returns formal federal charges.

At this stage, defense counsel may:

Contact prosecutors and clarify the client’s status
Identify the alleged scheme and relevant transactions
Determine which statutes are under investigation
Respond to grand jury subpoenas
Review requests for electronic and financial records
Prepare the client for a possible government interview
Advise whether an interview or proffer is appropriate
Conduct an independent investigation
Preserve favorable communications and account data
Interview employees and other witnesses
Review payment and banking records
Retain digital-forensic or financial experts
Examine the government’s identity and attribution theory
Present factual or legal information to prosecutors
Address frozen accounts and seized business records
Coordinate with foreign counsel
Prepare for an indictment, arrest or voluntary surrender

Early representation cannot guarantee that charges will be avoided. It can help prevent incomplete productions, inconsistent explanations and decisions made before the client understands the government’s evidence.

Phishing Allegations

Phishing allegations typically involve emails, text messages, advertisements or websites allegedly designed to induce another person to disclose credentials or financial information.

The government may claim that a message:

Impersonated a bank or financial institution
Appeared to come from a legitimate business
Directed the recipient to a false login page
Requested a password or authentication code
Created a false security alert
Induced the recipient to download a file
Collected credit-card or bank-account information
Redirected a payment
Obtained access to an email, exchange or financial account

Evidence may include:

Email headers
Message content
Domain-registration records
Website files
Hosting records
IP addresses
Login history
Payment information
Files recovered from devices
Communications among alleged participants

The defense should determine who registered and controlled the domain, who created the content, who received the information and whether the client understood the purpose of the operation.

Providing hosting, design, advertising or payment services does not automatically prove knowledge of a fraudulent scheme.

Business Email Compromise Allegations

Business email compromise, sometimes called BEC or email account compromise, generally involves an allegation that electronic communications were used to cause a company or individual to send money to an unauthorized destination.

An investigation may concern:

An email account accessed by another person
A similar or spoofed email domain
False instructions changing bank-account details
Impersonation of an executive or vendor
Fraudulent invoices
Real estate closing instructions
Payroll changes
Requests to purchase gift cards
Transfer of funds to an intermediary account
Movement of money through several accounts

The government may rely on the timing of emails, account logins, wire instructions and subsequent transfers.

The defense may examine:

Whether the account was actually compromised
Who had access to the mailbox
Whether forwarding rules were created
Who sent the disputed instructions
Whether the recipient verified the change
Who controlled the receiving account
Whether the client knew the funds were connected to fraud
Whether the client was another victim or an unwitting intermediary
Whether the payment was connected to a legitimate transaction

Receipt of disputed funds does not, without more, prove participation in the original email scheme.

Account-Takeover Fraud

Account-takeover allegations involve the unauthorized control or use of an existing account.

The account may be connected with:

A bank
Credit or debit cards
A brokerage firm
A cryptocurrency exchange
A payment service
A mobile telephone provider
An online marketplace
An email platform
A loyalty or rewards program
A government-benefit system

Investigators may examine:

Password resets
Changes to contact information
Authentication codes
Device identifiers
SIM-card changes
Customer-service calls
Login locations
IP addresses
Transfers after the alleged takeover
Communications with account holders

The defense may dispute who controlled the account, whether credentials were shared, whether a device was compromised and whether electronic records can reliably identify the person who completed a transaction.

Online Payment and Access-Device Fraud

Federal internet fraud cases may include allegations under 18 U.S.C. § 1029 involving access devices.

Depending on the subsection, an access-device case may involve:

Credit or debit card numbers
Bank-account information
Account credentials
Authentication information
Counterfeit cards
Unauthorized access devices
Equipment used to create or alter access devices
Possession or trafficking of stolen payment data

An indictment may allege that the defendant obtained, used, possessed or sold access information with fraudulent intent.

Important issues may include:

How the information was obtained
Whether it belonged to a real account holder
Who possessed or controlled the data
Whether the client knew it was unauthorized
Whether any transaction was attempted or completed
Whether the government has accurately counted the access devices
Whether the data was usable
Whether another person placed the data on the client’s device

For allegations focused specifically on payment-card information, visit the Credit Card Fraud Defense Attorney page.

Identity and Impersonation Allegations

Internet fraud prosecutions may include accusations that another person’s identifying information was used without lawful authority.

The information may include:

A name
Social Security number
Date of birth
Bank-account number
Credit-card number
Email credentials
Telephone number
Government identification
Tax information
Biometric or authentication data

Aggravated identity theft under 18 U.S.C. § 1028A may be charged when prosecutors allege that the defendant knowingly transferred, possessed or used another person’s means of identification without lawful authority during and in relation to an enumerated felony.

A conviction under that statute can require a consecutive term of imprisonment in addition to the punishment for the underlying offense.

The defense may examine whether:

The information belonged to another actual person
The client knew that fact
The use was without lawful authority
The information was used during and in relation to a qualifying offense
The client personally used or possessed it
Several people had access to the relevant files or account

For a more focused discussion, visit the Identity Theft Defense Attorney page.

Online Banking and Transfer Fraud

Internet fraud allegations may involve electronic access to bank accounts or instructions directing funds to another account.

The disputed transactions may include:

Bank wires
ACH transfers
Peer-to-peer payments
Mobile deposits
Online bill payments
Transfers between related accounts
International remittances
Cryptocurrency purchases
Payments to digital wallets
Changes to beneficiary information

Investigators may obtain records showing:

When an account was accessed
Which device or IP address was used
Whether authentication was completed
Who added a beneficiary
Where the funds were transferred
Whether the money was withdrawn or moved again
Which person opened the receiving account

A transfer record shows that money moved. It does not necessarily prove who ordered it or what each account holder knew about the source of the funds.

For cases involving a scheme directed at a financial institution, visit the Bank Fraud Defense Attorney page.

Online Marketplace and E-Commerce Fraud

An investigation may concern products, services or investment opportunities offered through websites, applications or online marketplaces.

Prosecutors may allege:

Products were advertised but not delivered
Counterfeit or misrepresented goods were sold
False tracking information was supplied
Refunds or chargebacks were manipulated
Multiple customer identities were used
Merchant accounts were opened under false information
Reviews or sales data were fabricated
Payments were routed through related accounts
Customers were charged without authorization
The business concealed its true owners or location

A failed business, delayed shipment or customer dispute is not automatically criminal fraud.

The defense may examine whether:

The business actually operated
Goods or services were provided
Delays resulted from supply or payment problems
Refunds were issued
Customer complaints were addressed
Advertising statements had a reasonable basis
The client relied on suppliers or contractors
Another participant controlled fulfillment or payments
The dispute is contractual or civil rather than criminal

Fraudulent Websites and Online Services

Prosecutors may claim that a website, application or online service was designed to obtain payments or information through false representations.

The investigation may focus on:

Who registered the domain
Who designed and hosted the website
Who wrote its content
Who controlled customer accounts
Who received payments
Which services were actually supplied
Whether terms and risks were disclosed
Whether customers received refunds
Whether the website was copied or impersonated by another party

Domain ownership alone does not establish responsibility for every statement or transaction associated with a website.

Businesses commonly use developers, marketing agencies, hosting providers, payment processors and outside customer-service personnel. The role and knowledge of each participant must be examined separately.

Electronic Communications as Evidence

Emails, messages and online communications often form the central narrative of an internet fraud case.

Prosecutors may use:

Email conversations
Text messages
Encrypted messages
Social media communications
Customer-support chats
Marketplace messages
Recorded calls
Online advertisements
Payment instructions
Account notes

The defense should review the entire communication rather than an isolated phrase.

Relevant questions may include:

Who sent the message
Whether the account was shared
Whether the message was edited or forwarded
What information the sender possessed at the time
Whether the statement concerned a present fact or a future expectation
Whether later events changed the situation
Whether the recipient misunderstood the statement
Whether the communication was material to the payment
Whether the message actually advanced the alleged scheme

A statement that later proves inaccurate was not necessarily knowingly false when it was made.

Provider and Account Records

The government may obtain information from:

Email providers
Social media platforms
Cloud-storage services
Payment processors
Banks
Online marketplaces
Domain registrars
Hosting providers
Telephone companies
Cryptocurrency exchanges
Advertising platforms

Records may include:

Subscriber information
Recovery email addresses
Telephone numbers
Login history
IP addresses
Device information
Stored communications
Payment records
Account changes
Customer-service contacts

Provider records may be incomplete or open to more than one interpretation.

An account may have several authorized users. A recovery telephone number may belong to a business. An IP address may identify a network rather than a particular person. Credentials may have been compromised.

Account ownership and account use are related but different questions.

Search Warrants and Device Seizure

Federal agents may obtain warrants to search homes, offices, online accounts and electronic devices.

They may seize:

Computers
Mobile phones
Tablets
Servers
Storage devices
Authentication devices
Hardware wallets
Payment cards
Banking records
Written passwords
Business documents

The defense may examine:

Whether probable cause supported the warrant
Whether the warrant described the accounts, devices and data with sufficient particularity
Whether agents remained within the authorized scope
Whether unrelated devices were seized
Whether privileged communications were captured
Whether several people used the device
Whether the government obtained additional warrants when required
Whether digital evidence was preserved correctly
Whether essential business information can be copied or returned

The presence of a file, message or login credential on a device does not automatically show who created it, downloaded it or used it.

Digital Attribution

Federal prosecutors may attempt to identify an online participant through a combination of technical and financial evidence.

The evidence may include:

IP addresses
Email addresses
Usernames and aliases
Device identifiers
Browser records
Telephone information
Location data
Payment accounts
Cryptocurrency wallets
Files found on devices
Communication patterns
Transactions received by the client

Each category has limitations.

The defense may examine whether:

The network was shared
The IP address changed over time
A VPN or proxy was used
The account was compromised
Credentials were shared
Several people used the device
Remote-access software was installed
Timestamps were converted correctly
Online aliases were attributed based on assumptions
The government confused account ownership with personal use

Digital attribution should be supported by several consistent forms of evidence rather than a single technical identifier.

Financial Records and Tracing of Funds

Internet fraud cases often depend on tracing money through several accounts or payment services.

The government may prepare charts showing:

Payments from alleged victims
Transfers to intermediary accounts
Cash withdrawals
Purchases
Cryptocurrency conversions
Payments to alleged participants
Transfers to foreign accounts
Movement through related companies
Refunds or chargebacks
Personal spending

The defense may retain forensic accountants or financial experts to:

Reconstruct the transaction history
Identify legitimate income
Separate business and personal funds
Trace refunds and repayments
Identify payments for actual goods or services
Determine who controlled each account
Identify duplicate counting
Examine third-party ownership
Review exchange rates and valuation dates
Test the government’s calculation of loss

A flow-of-funds chart is an interpretation of the records. It should be compared with original bank statements, invoices, contracts and account data.

Financial Loss, Restitution and Intended Loss

Financial loss can affect charging decisions, negotiations, restitution and sentencing.

The government may claim loss based on:

Money transferred by alleged victims
Unauthorized purchases
Withdrawals from compromised accounts
Refunds issued by banks or payment processors
Chargebacks
Business-response costs
Property obtained through the alleged scheme
Transactions that were attempted but not completed

The defense should examine whether:

Payments were returned
Customers received products or services
A bank or insurer reimbursed the account holder
The government counted the same loss more than once
The alleged loss resulted from the client’s conduct
The transaction occurred within the charged period
The claimed intended loss is supported by evidence
Legitimate value should be credited
Amounts attributable to other participants were included
Foreign currency or digital assets were valued correctly

The amount of restitution is not necessarily identical to the amount used for every other purpose in the case. The applicable legal standards should be examined separately.

Conspiracy Allegations

Internet fraud cases frequently include a conspiracy charge.

The government may allege that several people agreed to participate in an online scheme and divided responsibilities, such as:

Creating accounts
Sending messages
Registering websites
Collecting credentials
Receiving payments
Withdrawing funds
Converting money into cryptocurrency
Recruiting other participants
Providing customer support
Moving money through intermediary accounts

The defense may examine:

Whether an agreement actually existed
Whether the client knew the alleged objective
Whether the client intended to join the agreement
Whether the client provided ordinary business services
Whether the client joined only part of the alleged activity
Whether several separate schemes have been combined
Whether communications were misinterpreted
Whether cooperating witnesses are reliable

A person does not automatically join a conspiracy by knowing one participant, performing a routine service or receiving a payment.

What the Government May Need to Prove

The required elements depend on the statutes charged.

Disputed issues may include whether:

A scheme to defraud existed
The object of the alleged scheme was money or property
The client knowingly and intentionally participated
A statement or omission was materially false
Electronic communications were used to advance the scheme
The relevant communication crossed state or national boundaries
The client controlled the account or device
The payment or transfer can be attributed to the client
The client knew that payment information was unauthorized
The client knowingly used another person’s identity
The client agreed to participate in a conspiracy
The claimed financial loss was caused by the charged conduct

The government must prove every element of every criminal count beyond a reasonable doubt.

Possible Computer and Internet Fraud Defense Strategies

There is no single defense for every internet fraud case. The strategy depends on the alleged scheme, communications, account data and movement of funds.

No Intent to Defraud

The client may have believed that the statements were true and that the transaction was legitimate.

Contemporaneous messages, business records and efforts to complete the transaction or issue refunds may support good faith.

No Scheme Directed at Money or Property

A deception or undisclosed fact does not automatically satisfy the federal fraud statutes.

The alleged object generally must be money or a traditional property interest rather than only the loss of useful information or control over an economic decision.

The Statement Was Accurate When Made

A statement may have been based on information reasonably available at the time.

Later business failure, delay or change in circumstances does not automatically prove that an earlier representation was knowingly false.

The Statement Was Not Material

The disputed information may not have been capable of influencing the payment or property decision at issue.

Legitimate Business Dispute

Nonpayment, delayed performance, refund disagreements and failed commercial projects may create civil liability without proving criminal fraud.

Lack of Knowledge

The client may have received funds, provided services or processed transactions without knowing about another participant’s misrepresentations.

Mistaken Digital Identity

The government may have incorrectly connected the client with an account, alias, IP address, device or message.

Shared or Compromised Account

Several people may have used the same email, payment account, device or business login. The account may also have been compromised.

No Control Over the Payment Account

The client may not have opened, controlled or benefited from the account that received the disputed funds.

Authorized Transaction

The account holder may have approved the transaction, supplied credentials or authorized the client to act.

Legitimate Products or Services Were Provided

Customers may have received goods, access, consulting, advertising, software or another item of value.

This can be relevant to whether a scheme existed and to the calculation of loss.

No Agreement to Join a Conspiracy

The client may have performed ordinary technical, marketing, financial or administrative services without agreeing to participate in fraud.

Unreliable Cooperating Witnesses

A witness may be seeking reduced charges, a shorter sentence or another benefit.

The witness’s statements should be compared with original communications, financial records and prior accounts.

Incomplete Electronic Evidence

Provider records may omit messages, account users, login information or context relevant to the defense.

Improper Search or Seizure

The defense may challenge evidence obtained under an unsupported or overly broad warrant or through a search that exceeded the authorized scope.

Improperly Obtained Statements

Government interview reports may be challenged when statements were obtained unlawfully or presented without their full context.

Incorrect Loss Calculation

The government may have omitted refunds, legitimate value, returned funds or transactions attributable to other participants.

Related Federal Charges

Computer and internet fraud may be charged together with:

Wire fraud
Bank fraud
Mail fraud
Access-device fraud
Identity theft
Aggravated identity theft
Unauthorized computer access
Money laundering
Conspiracy
False statements
Obstruction of justice
Securities fraud
Cryptocurrency-related offenses
Criminal forfeiture

Each charge has separate legal elements.

Evidence that may support one count does not automatically prove every related count. The defense should match each alleged email, account, payment and transaction to the particular offense charged.

Indictment and Federal Court Proceedings

If a grand jury returns an indictment, the case may proceed through:

Arrest or voluntary surrender
Initial appearance
Detention or release proceedings
Arraignment
Production of discovery
Review of digital and financial evidence
Pretrial motions
Plea negotiations
Trial
Sentencing

An indictment is an accusation and does not establish guilt.

Internet fraud discovery may include:

Large email collections
Account-provider records
Device images
Payment histories
Bank statements
Customer communications
Foreign evidence
Undercover messages
Reports from cooperating witnesses
Financial-loss calculations

Each fraud count should be matched to the specific communication or transfer on which the government relies.

Plea Negotiations and Federal Trial

A plea proposal should be evaluated only after reviewing the evidence, possible defenses and financial consequences.

Negotiations may concern:

Which charges will remain
The factual basis of the plea
The client’s role
The number of alleged victims
Actual and intended loss
Restitution
Forfeiture
Aggravated identity-theft counts
Cooperation provisions
Sentencing recommendations
Dismissal of related charges

If an acceptable resolution cannot be reached, the defense must prepare for trial.

At trial, prosecutors must prove every element beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense may challenge fraudulent intent, identity, electronic attribution, account control, witness credibility, the existence of a property scheme and the calculation of financial loss.

Asset Restraint and Forfeiture

Federal authorities may seek to restrain, seize or forfeit property they allege is connected with internet fraud.

The property may include:

Bank accounts
Payment-platform balances
Cryptocurrency
Cash
Computers
Mobile devices
Real estate
Vehicles
Business interests
Property purchased with disputed funds

The defense may examine:

The source of the property
Who legally owns it
Whether legitimate and disputed funds were mixed
Whether third parties have valid interests
Whether the property can be traced to the alleged offense
Whether the government’s valuation is accurate
Whether the required procedures were followed

The freezing or seizure of property is not necessarily a final decision that it belongs to the government.

Potential Consequences

There is no universal sentence for computer or internet fraud.

Possible consequences depend on the statutes, number of counts, financial loss, number of alleged victims, client’s role and prior record.

They may include:

Federal imprisonment
Criminal fines
Restitution
Asset forfeiture
Supervised release
Restrictions involving particular accounts or devices
Employment and licensing consequences
Civil lawsuits
Regulatory proceedings
Immigration consequences for non-U.S. citizens
Extradition proceedings for international clients

Certain charges may carry mandatory consecutive penalties. For example, aggravated identity theft can add a consecutive term when all statutory requirements are established.

The actual consequences must be evaluated from the indictment and the facts rather than from the general label “internet fraud.”

How Internet Fraud Allegations Can Affect a Business

A business may face serious disruption before the criminal case is resolved.

Possible effects include:

Frozen bank and payment accounts
Suspension of merchant services
Removal from online marketplaces
Seizure of computers and business records
Loss of access to customer accounts
Contract termination
Chargebacks and payment reserves
Civil claims
Regulatory inquiries
Employee departures
Loss of customers and partners
Costs of responding to subpoenas
Costs of financial and digital review
Charges against executives or the company

The defense strategy should consider both the criminal case and the organization’s ability to continue lawful operations.

Internal Review for Businesses

A company that receives a subpoena, search warrant or payment restraint may need an internal review.

The review may include:

Preserving emails, messages and account data
Identifying employees with access to disputed systems
Reviewing customer communications
Examining payment and refund records
Determining who controlled domains and websites
Reviewing representations made in advertising
Examining merchant and marketplace accounts
Identifying compromised credentials
Tracing the movement of disputed funds
Determining whether employees need separate counsel

The review should be organized carefully because interview notes, reports and communications may raise privilege and disclosure issues.

Bukh Law Firm Computer and Internet Fraud Defense Services

Federal Internet Fraud Investigation Defense

Representation during federal inquiries, interviews, subpoenas, searches and pre-indictment proceedings.

Wire Fraud Defense

Defense involving emails, messages, websites, digital payments and other interstate or international communications.

Phishing and Business Email Compromise Defense

Representation in cases involving alleged deceptive messages, spoofed accounts, false payment instructions and compromised email accounts.

Account-Takeover Defense

Defense involving bank, email, telephone, brokerage, cryptocurrency, payment and marketplace accounts.

Payment and Access-Device Fraud Defense

Representation in matters involving payment-card numbers, account credentials, authentication data and unauthorized transactions.

Online Banking and Transfer Defense

Defense involving bank wires, ACH payments, electronic transfers, mobile banking and international payments.

Online Marketplace and Website Fraud Defense

Representation of sellers, platform operators, service providers and business owners accused of online commercial fraud.

Identity-Theft Defense

Defense of allegations involving another person’s name, account, payment information or other means of identification.

Subpoena and Search-Warrant Response

Review of demands for records, seized devices, account data and the authorized scope of searches.

Digital-Evidence Analysis

Work with technical specialists to review provider records, logins, devices, metadata and account attribution.

Financial and Loss Analysis

Review of payments, refunds, transfers, legitimate value, alleged victim losses and restitution calculations.

International Internet Fraud Defense

Coordination of U.S. representation with foreign evidence, international clients and extradition proceedings.

Federal Court Representation

Defense during indictment, arraignment, detention proceedings, pretrial motions, negotiations, trial and sentencing.

Restitution and Forfeiture Defense

Representation concerning alleged losses, frozen accounts, seized property and forfeiture claims.

Related Case Result

Vladislav Horohorin

Arkady Bukh represented Vladislav Horohorin in federal matters involving online financial activity, stolen credit and debit card information, access-device fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud.

According to the Department of Justice, Horohorin used online forums to advertise and sell stolen payment-card information to purchasers in several countries. He was arrested in France and extradited to the United States.

The cases pending in two federal districts were consolidated. Horohorin pleaded guilty to access-device fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud.

He was sentenced to 88 months in federal prison, two years of supervised release and $125,739 in restitution.

This result should not be understood as a guarantee in another case. Every internet fraud prosecution depends on the charges, electronic evidence, financial records and role of the individual client.

What to Do During an Internet Fraud Investigation

Do not destroy, alter, conceal or remotely delete potentially relevant records.

Preserve:

Emails and messages
Computers and mobile devices
Online account information
Login and recovery records
Payment-platform records
Bank statements
Cryptocurrency records
Customer and vendor communications
Domain and hosting documents
Contracts and invoices
Records of refunds and repayments
Documents showing legitimate products or services
Evidence of compromised accounts
Information showing who had access to each system

Before speaking with federal agents or producing documents, determine:

Which agencies are involved
Whether you are considered a witness, subject or target
Which communications and transactions are under review
Whether accounts or property have been frozen
Whether devices have been seized
Whether the business and its employees have different interests
Whether another participant is cooperating
Whether foreign evidence or extradition is involved

Arkady Bukh represents clients before and after federal computer and internet fraud charges are filed, including during investigations, subpoenas, account restraints, indictments, federal trials and sentencing.

Computer and Internet Fraud Defense FAQ

Is Arkady Bukh an internet crime lawyer?

Yes. Arkady Bukh represents individuals and businesses in federal investigations and prosecutions involving online fraud schemes, electronic communications, account activity and digital payments.

Does the firm handle cyber fraud cases?

Yes. Representation includes phishing allegations, business email compromise, account takeover, payment fraud, online banking activity and related federal charges.

What is the difference between internet fraud and cybercrime?

Internet fraud generally focuses on schemes to obtain money or property through electronic communications and online accounts. Cybercrime more broadly includes unauthorized computer access, hacking, malware, botnets and system damage. A single case may include both.

Is every false online statement wire fraud?

No. Prosecutors generally must prove a scheme directed at money or property, fraudulent intent and use of interstate or foreign electronic communications. An isolated mistake or disputed commercial promise is not automatically a federal crime.

Can an email lead to a wire fraud charge?

Yes. An email may support a charge when prosecutors claim it was transmitted in interstate or foreign commerce to advance a fraudulent scheme. The content, purpose, sender and technical transmission should be examined.

Does an IP address prove who used an online account?

Not by itself. An IP address usually identifies a network connection. Several people may use the same network, account or device.

Can receiving money make someone part of an internet fraud scheme?

Not automatically. The government must prove the person’s knowledge and participation. An account holder may have received money for a legitimate purpose or acted as an unwitting intermediary.

What is business email compromise?

It generally refers to a scheme in which an email account or a similar-looking address is used to send false payment instructions or impersonate a trusted person or business.

Can a website developer be charged for a client’s fraudulent business?

A developer may be investigated, but the government must prove the required knowledge and participation. Providing ordinary design or hosting services does not automatically establish membership in a fraud scheme.

What evidence is used in internet fraud cases?

Evidence may include emails, messages, provider records, account logins, IP addresses, payment histories, bank records, devices, websites, domain information and witness testimony.

Can federal agents freeze online or bank accounts before trial?

Federal authorities may seek to restrain or seize property they claim is connected with fraud. The response depends on the procedure, account ownership and source of the funds.

How is financial loss calculated?

The government may examine transferred funds, unauthorized purchases, chargebacks and attempted transactions. The defense may seek credit for refunds, returned money, legitimate value and amounts not caused by the client.

Can internet fraud charges include identity theft?

Yes. Prosecutors may add identity-theft or aggravated identity-theft charges when they allege that another person’s identifying information was knowingly used without lawful authority.

Can a foreign citizen face internet fraud charges in the United States?

Yes. Federal prosecutors may bring charges against a person outside the United States when they claim the conduct has the necessary connection to U.S. communications, property, accounts or victims. Jurisdiction and extradition should be reviewed separately.

Does an indictment prove guilt?

No. An indictment is a formal accusation approved by a grand jury. The prosecution must prove every count beyond a reasonable doubt unless the case is resolved in another way.