Def Con, one of the world’s largest hacking conferences, has barred three well-known figures after organizers said their names appeared in newly released Department of Justice materials related to Jeffrey Epstein and in email correspondence reported by Politico. The conference added Pablos Holman, Vincenzo Iozzo, and Joichi Ito to its public list of banned individuals, saying the action was taken to maintain community trust and safety.
The decision underscores how tech and security gatherings are increasingly formalizing conduct policies and reputational risk assessments. Founded in 1993, Def Con regularly draws tens of thousands of hackers, engineers, academics, and policymakers, and its organizers have sharpened rules and enforcement as the event scaled from a niche meetup to a sprawling, citywide convergence.
Who Was Barred from Def Con and the Reasons Cited
Joichi Ito, who led the MIT Media Lab until his resignation in the wake of revelations that the lab accepted donations from Epstein, is among those banned. Ito previously acknowledged accepting funds and apologized, and his departure followed extensive reporting by investigative journalists and internal reviews at MIT that examined the lab’s ties to Epstein.
Vincenzo Iozzo, a security entrepreneur and former research affiliate at the MIT Media Lab during Ito’s tenure, also appears on the ban list after being named in emails cited by Politico and referenced in Justice Department materials. A spokesperson for Iozzo criticized Def Con’s action as premature and not based on any finding of misconduct, arguing that mere inclusion in emails or files does not demonstrate wrongdoing.
Pablos Holman, an inventor and venture investor at Deep Future, is the third person barred. Emails reported elsewhere describe Holman corresponding with Epstein as early as 2010, discussing potential travel, and exploring ways to mitigate negative online coverage about Epstein. Organizers said these references, combined with official records, were sufficient to trigger a ban under their policies.
Evidence Cited by Def Con Organizers for the Bans
Def Con pointed to a recent Justice Department document release tied to the government’s Epstein investigation, along with a Politico article that analyzed email exchanges among the three men and Epstein. While those materials do not allege crimes by the three, conference staff said their appearance in official files and contemporaneous communications cleared the bar for a conference ban intended to protect attendees and the event’s integrity.
Def Con’s founder, Jeff Moss, has previously said there is no evidence Epstein ever attended the conference. Still, the organizers maintain a public ban list and reserve discretion to add names when credible documentation, legal filings, or corroborated reporting raises substantial concerns.
Why This Matters For The Security Community
Large security conferences now operate with the scrutiny typically reserved for major public institutions. With attendance reaching well into the tens of thousands and sessions that touch critical infrastructure, healthcare, and democratic processes, organizers face pressure to vet speakers and participants beyond technical credentials.
In recent years, high-profile events across technology have adopted more explicit codes of conduct, background checks for featured participants, and transparent escalation paths for complaints. Industry advocates say this trend reduces risk to attendees and sponsors, while critics warn about overreach and the potential for reputational penalties absent due process. Def Con’s move sits squarely in that debate, prioritizing community standards while acknowledging that inclusion in documents is not the same as a legal judgment.
Context On Epstein’s Ties To Tech And Academia
Epstein pleaded guilty in 2008 to sex-related charges and later faced federal accusations involving trafficking and abuse before his death in custody. Afterward, multiple institutions reassessed connections to his funding and network. The MIT Media Lab underwent internal reviews after reporting revealed donations routed through intermediaries, and Ito resigned, citing regret over those relationships. The current Def Con bans reference that broader historical record, as well as email traffic described by journalists.
For conference organizers, this backdrop translates into concrete policy: when reputable organizations such as the Department of Justice and established newsrooms publish materials tying individuals to figures at the center of serious criminal investigations, events may choose to err on the side of caution. Def Con signaled exactly that calculus, emphasizing attendee safety and institutional credibility.
What Comes Next for Def Con and Its Public Ban List
Def Con indicated it will continue to update its public ban list as new information surfaces. Those challenging a ban typically seek to present additional context or clarifications to conference staff, though organizers did not outline any specific reconsideration timeline. For now, the three men remain prohibited from attending, and the decision adds momentum to a wider conversation about how security events navigate ethics, sponsorship, and accountability in an era of heightened transparency.