Sarah Palin: hacked by Anonymous

[Thorn]

Re: Sarah Palin: hacked by Anonymous

Most "Good Samaritan" laws are specific to rendering aid to someone injured in a accident.

As to the person who reset the account to protect it for Pallin, technically that is also an illegal access of the account. However, there is defense that used in criminal law of committing one crime it prevent a greater crime or evil from occurring. This defense not used often and rarely works, but it might apply here if the person who rest the account is charged with a computer crime.

[converge]

Re: Sarah Palin: hacked by Anonymous

He bit, jump him!

[TheCotMan]

Re: Sarah Palin: hacked by Anonymous

Everything political aside, why am I the only one that's concerned that the media saying hackers did this to Palin is a bad thing? This has been my point the entire time.

Why no comment from me on this topic of the thtread until now?

The super-condensed version of The Art of War: "Choose your battles wisely."

[streaker69]

Re: Sarah Palin: hacked by Anonymous

admittedly im not 100% up to date with what the feds are doing about the situation as a whole (ive only herd the ss, the feds, and the doj are looking into the hack) i know the issue was being discussed by the government, and had already become a small source of controversy before she was even announced as running for vice president.

http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/story/526281.html
http://gawker.com/5051599/why-did-pa...-account-again

in all seriousness, id think about bringing what information you have on Nancy Pelosi to light depending on how passionately you feel about the situation.

To use the gawker as a reference, IMO is not really valid. After reading through the ADN article, there's an awful lot of 'shoulds' and 'coulds' but not a lot of fact. So if there is an investigation, I will stand behind whatever it reveals.

I happen to work for a public entity, I have three email accounts there, I have three through my ISP, I have a yahoo and gmail accounts, and I probably have some that I've forgotten about. So I can understand what was said about attempting to reduce the number of communication devices one has to carry. I don't even carry my personal cell phone anymore and do everything through my Blackberry (yes it's permitted by my entity).

But I do make it a point that whomever I'm corresponding with goes through the proper email account and my emails are properly segregated. I make it a point that anything that goes to work related people never goes through my personal accounts. Is it so unreasonable to believe that others could be doing the same thing?

[Vyrus]

Re: Sarah Palin: hacked by Anonymous

Problem is, 'nothing' wasn't happening. This thread got started, and she was pretty much ridiculed for using a yahoo account. Instead of people being upset that her privacy was invaded and the entire hacker community looks bad because of it. If nothing was done, this thread wouldn't exist.

ahh, i thought your angel was "why are we not speaking up" not "who cares cus it's a yahoo acount."

my mistake apparently ;)

If you have a source says there is an investigation I'd be interested in reading it. So far, everything that I have read have been nothing but accusation and hearsay.

IMO, if she is being investigated for such, then probably any public official with a private email address should be as well. Like I said, I suspect Nancy Pelosi has been using hers as well. The proof that I have is probably about as strong as any proof that the people that started accusing Palin have.

admittedly im not 100% up to date with what the feds are doing about the situation as a whole (ive only herd the ss, the feds, and the doj are looking into the hack) i know the issue was being discussed by the government, and had already become a small source of controversy before she was even announced as running for vice president.

http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/story/526281.html
http://gawker.com/5051599/why-did-pa...-account-again

in all seriousness, id think about bringing what information you have on Nancy Pelosi to light depending on how passionately you feel about the situation.

[streaker69]

Re: Sarah Palin: hacked by Anonymous

https://forum.defcon.org/showthread....hlight=privacy

I didn't think I was crazy when I thought this community didn't like to have hackers portrayed in a bad light.

Everything political aside, why am I the only one that's concerned that the media saying hackers did this to Palin is a bad thing? This has been my point the entire time.

[streaker69]

Re: Sarah Palin: hacked by Anonymous

Palin a side what about if I get your phone number and do a full blown credit/back ground check on you. I go to say Intellisearch, buy this information legally and then in turn post it to Usenet do I go to jail? Have I done anything wrong?

I'm not sure that I can actually give an answer on that. It's possible that you may have violated the TOS of Intellisearch, but since I haven't read their TOS, I don't know. I'd think that you could possibly be held liable in a Civil matter for such activity.

Back to Palin, what about the "good Samaritan" that went onto her account and re-changed the password in an attempt to notify & protect her; should they go to jail?

Again, I don't know. Some states have Good Samaritan laws on the books, I don't know if they would apply to this or not. Generally, those laws apply to someone helping someone in a crash or such and that they cannot be sued if they made an honest effort help but ended up hurting instead. Like pulling some from a burning car, but they had an injured spine. The injured technically could not sue because the Good Samaritan may have caused greater injury while at the same time saving their life.

Does it apply to computer crime? I don't know.

I also just wanted to say that if my attempt at satire offended anyone, I'm sorry. I often try and use humor to bring up serious subjects and get people talking. One of the things I like about the Defcon community is that you can have a Fed and a guy with tattoos all over his body get together without trying to kill one another. In fact they actually get a long,

I hope that I'm not offending anyone either. But we've talked before about how computer crimes make us all look bad, that's why I've been so staunchly pressing this, because I don't think we should be blaming her for being the victim. It's easy for us (as a group of knowledgeable IT people) to say that she shouldn't be using Yahoo for her personal account. But I'm fairly certain there are millions of average people that don't realize that.

Accusations of improper use aside, this isn't her fault. Especially now that we know it wasn't a weak password that did it, but it was Yahoo's lame password recovery tool. You cannot expect someone that isn't up on computer security to know that those things aren't safe. After all, if you read Yahoo's documents on the password recovery tool, they lead you to believe it is. She probably never gave it a thought that someone would/could use that to get into her account.

I believe there was something released a few weeks ago on Security Focus regarding many sites using the same personal questions for password recovery, and how easily it could be to crack multiple account using that information. I'm fairly sure that Sarah Palin isn't reading Security Focus on a weekly basis.

[streaker69]

Re: Sarah Palin: hacked by Anonymous

im not so sure that doing nothing is "relishing in the breach of privacy", at what point is it just none of our business? i may have an opinion on the situation but that doesn't mean the world wants or needs to hear it.

Problem is, 'nothing' wasn't happening. This thread got started, and she was pretty much ridiculed for using a yahoo account. Instead of people being upset that her privacy was invaded and the entire hacker community looks bad because of it. If nothing was done, this thread wouldn't exist.

i think black people "not speaking the kings English" when asked there opinions publicly "makes us look bad", am i a hypocrite because i choose to keep my opinions to myself?

You're by all means free to keep your opinions to yourself. I'm not exactly sure what your first statement has to do with any part of this discussion.

as i understand it there IS an investigation being launched to determine if she was indeed using a yahoo email address to conduct state business

If you have a source says there is an investigation I'd be interested in reading it. So far, everything that I have read have been nothing but accusation and hearsay.

IMO, if she is being investigated for such, then probably any public official with a private email address should be as well. Like I said, I suspect Nancy Pelosi has been using hers as well. The proof that I have is probably about as strong as any proof that the people that started accusing Palin have.

[Vyrus]

Re: Sarah Palin: hacked by Anonymous

I don't believe I stated nor alluded that people should go about beating people over anything. My point was that it's been repeated many times that when the media proclaims a hacker has done something it makes all people who consider themselves hackers look bad. Defcon, generally being a the forefront of the hacker community, shouldn't be relishing in the breach of privacy, no matter who's privacy was breached.

im not so sure that doing nothing is "relishing in the breach of privacy", at what point is it just none of our business? i may have an opinion on the situation but that doesn't mean the world wants or needs to hear it.

If you feel the need to take your cue to react from others that's your choice. But when I go to hacker conference and hear people decrying the invasion of privacy and hackers looking bad in the media, it seems rather hypocritical of them not to be saying anything about this. But instead blaming the victim, as I stated before, do we blame a scantily clad woman for being raped?

i think black people "not speaking the kings English" when asked there opinions publicly "makes us look bad", am i a hypocrite because i choose to keep my opinions to myself?

The ends does not justify the means. The person that did this is no better than a vigilante. If there really was sufficient evidence to show that she was improperly using her email, then there should be an investigation opened. But, it isn't up to someone out there to break into her email and attempt to expose outside of proper channels. You're right, there are means to disseminate information, and if you think this was the proper method...

i was only commenting that there are those people out there who believe in the "i don't have a problem disclosing my personal info because i don't have anything to hide"
whom aren't "bullshitting"

Again, it's been accusations of such, with no solid evidence, and no formal investigation into the matter. I stand by my previous statement, that it isn't up to someone other than the proper authorities to investigate the matter.

as i understand it there IS an investigation being launched to determine if she was indeed using a yahoo email address to conduct state business

[xor]

Re: Sarah Palin: hacked by Anonymous

If someone steals your credit card number, expiration and security code and gives it to me and I post it everywhere, should I go to jail? After all, it's just information, it's just a bunch of numbers.

Palin a side what about if I get your phone number and do a full blown credit/back ground check on you. I go to say Intellisearch, buy this information legally and then in turn post it to Usenet do I go to jail? Have I done anything wrong?


xor

Back to Palin, what about the "good Samaritan" that went onto her account and re-changed the password in an attempt to notify & protect her; should they go to jail?

Ps. The pic of the her daughter and the baby is very cute. I'm surprised she didn't release that to the public anyway.

I also just wanted to say that if my attempt at satire offended anyone, I'm sorry. I often try and use humor to bring up serious subjects and get people talking. One of the things I like about the Defcon community is that you can have a Fed and a guy with tattoos all over his body get together without trying to kill one another. In fact they actually get a long,

[xor]

Re: Sarah Palin: hacked by Anonymous

Just watched the Bill O'Reilly arguing about whether the operators of Wikileaks should go to jail:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpndIvUGPwA

The guy is so out of touch its hilarious. STOLEN INFORMATION! It's like if someone stole your car!

Actually and sadly enough I had a little bird tell me that his site was in the process of being hacked if not already. These guys are going for the gold when it comes to jail and civil charges.

xor

[Thorn]

Re: Sarah Palin: hacked by Anonymous

i take offense when the term "African American" is used to describe black American citizens because it insinuates that i am "less of an American" by definition than my white counter parts, that doesn't mean im about to walk the street with a large blunt object and go beating people in the head who refuse to use the term how "I" see it.

It's off the general topic, but it's interesting to hear you say that. Vyrus, because the lords of Political Correctness would seem to disagree. For the last ten years or so, "African-American" has certainly been pushed as THE correct term. While I don't feel that it diminishes you in any way -any more than calling me an "Irish-American" diminishes me- I do feel that it is unwieldy for everyday use. As an indicator of heritage such terms are fine, but for general conversation, words like "black" or "white" make a hell of a lot more sense in my opinion.

In the case of Wikileaks, their goal is to act as an information clearing house for the press, allowing reporters/bloggers/etc free access to information that the government or corporations wish to suppress.

The "press" status should be clear for sites like that. I was just making a general point that the status of some sites/blogs may not be as clear cut, and that case law will shape this into a better definition as time goes on.

[bascule]

Re: Sarah Palin: hacked by Anonymous

Of course, the question of what constitutes a "news organization" is less clear. So far, everyone is treating things like 'Big Bob's Bilious Blog' like they are in the same class as the New York Times. Some civil suits and case law will no doubt help define that in the coming years.

You posting it as an individual, may or may not be going to jail, depending on the state and your intent, as the criminal laws vary that much. Under the civil law in most places, you would almost certainly still be liable.

In the case of Wikileaks, their goal is to act as an information clearing house for the press, allowing reporters/bloggers/etc free access to information that the government or corporations wish to suppress.

[streaker69]

Re: Sarah Palin: hacked by Anonymous

i take offense when the term "African American" is used to describe black American citizens because it insinuates that i am "less of an American" by definition than my white counter parts, that doesn't mean im about to walk the street with a large blunt object and go beating people in the head who refuse to use the term how "I" see it.

language to a degree, in every context, is relative.

I don't believe I stated nor alluded that people should go about beating people over anything. My point was that it's been repeated many times that when the media proclaims a hacker has done something it makes all people who consider themselves hackers look bad. Defcon, generally being a the forefront of the hacker community, shouldn't be relishing in the breach of privacy, no matter who's privacy was breached.

regardless of what i think i SHOULD think a certain way? sounds a bit hypocritical to me -_-

You are free to think whatever you want, I was making a statement that it shouldn't matter what your political beliefs are, if you feel that this gives hackers a bad name, then you should be upset about it.

i have to say as a "hacker" im rather apposed to the idea of somebody telling me who i "should" be condemning and why. If anything id say that not seeing any "riots" in the streets over this provides evidence to me that I should observe the reactions of others in the community and find out why they have also chosen to remain silent, rather than brow beat them because they don't feel the need to speak up.

If you feel the need to take your cue to react from others that's your choice. But when I go to hacker conference and hear people decrying the invasion of privacy and hackers looking bad in the media, it seems rather hypocritical of them not to be saying anything about this. But instead blaming the victim, as I stated before, do we blame a scantily clad woman for being raped?

again, playing devil's advocate here but some would disagree, and there ARE laws defining what information you can and can't disseminate, as well as under what circumstances.

The ends does not justify the means. The person that did this is no better than a vigilante. If there really was sufficient evidence to show that she was improperly using her email, then there should be an investigation opened. But, it isn't up to someone out there to break into her email and attempt to expose outside of proper channels. You're right, there are means to disseminate information, and if you think this was the proper method...

i don't see anything wrong with somebody having a yahoo or an msn, etc account ether but if the company i work for has a strict policy dictating what i can and can not do with my email, breaching that policy would subject me to termination i would imagine, i see no reason why the same rules would not apply in this situation.

Again, it's been accusations of such, with no solid evidence, and no formal investigation into the matter. I stand by my previous statement, that it isn't up to someone other than the proper authorities to investigate the matter.

*disclaimer* i posted this in the attempts to further productive and thought provoking discussion, not start a flame war... plz don't hurt me

Always enjoy the discourse.

[Vyrus]

Re: Sarah Palin: hacked by Anonymous

ok old quote is old but better late than never yea?

Question:

Where is the outrage from the supposed hacker community that criminals are being called hackers giving all of us bad names.

i take offense when the term "African American" is used to describe black American citizens because it insinuates that i am "less of an American" by definition than my white counter parts, that doesn't mean im about to walk the street with a large blunt object and go beating people in the head who refuse to use the term how "I" see it.

language to a degree, in every context, is relative.

Regardless of your political belief's you should be angry that someone would invade someone's privacy (this was her private account, not her actual governor account) and posted the information publicly.

regardless of what i think i SHOULD think a certain way? sounds a bit hypocritical to me -_-

How would you feel if your private email account was raided in such a manner, private photos, phone numbers and information was posted for all to see?

I expect some to say that you have nothing to hide, to that I say bullshit. Everyone has things that they don't want the public to see.

id be inclined to agree with you, but that's an assumption

You guys should be condemning the people that did this and correcting the reporters that call them hackers and pointing out that they're criminals, plain and simple.

i have to say as a "hacker" im rather apposed to the idea of somebody telling me who i "should" be condemning and why. If anything id say that not seeing any "riots" in the streets over this provides evidence to me that I should observe the reactions of others in the community and find out why they have also chosen to remain silent, rather than brow beat them because they don't feel the need to speak up.

Nobody deserves to have their information posted like this.

again, playing devil's advocate here but some would disagree, and there ARE laws defining what information you can and can't disseminate, as well as under what circumstances.

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with her having a yahoo account, how many of us here have yahoo accounts, gmail, hotmail, and I'm sure some here even have the odd aol account. I guess she isn't allowed to have a personal email account, since it hasn't been proven as fact that she's used it for official business.

as i understand it, the argument is that via the "security breach" there IS evidence linking her to the prospect of using a separate yahoo account for official business.

i don't see anything wrong with somebody having a yahoo or an msn, etc account ether but if the company i work for has a strict policy dictating what i can and can not do with my email, breaching that policy would subject me to termination i would imagine, i see no reason why the same rules would not apply in this situation.


*disclaimer* i posted this in the attempts to further productive and thought provoking discussion, not start a flame war... plz don't hurt me