If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy) Obvious Anonymous hacked Stratfor using account Information stolen from porn sites -- expert says If you're going to sign up for a porn site, use a throwaway email account like everybody else   (nextgov.com) divider line 34
More: Obvious  
•       •       •

2693 clicks; posted to Geek » on 30 Dec 2011 at 12:40 PM   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»   |    Get this fabulous T-Shirt and impress the methane out of your friends! shirt it!



34 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2011-12-30 09:32:31 AM
People still pay for pr0n?
 
2011-12-30 12:36:38 PM
It's illicit activities, not elicit.
 
2011-12-30 12:59:20 PM
I can think of few things dumber than giving a cc number to a porn site.
 
2011-12-30 01:03:25 PM
SphericalTime: It's illicit activities, not elicit.

Elitist.
 
2011-12-30 01:04:05 PM
Misleading headline, logins to government agencies were obtained and sent to Stratfor.

Who cares if anyone hacks Stratfor? They're just a news site.
 
2011-12-30 01:06:14 PM
1. register your own domain.
2. write a catch-all mail script.
3. hand out customized email addresses to people.
4. know who sells your info and who spams you.

If you sign up for something with taco bell, give them t­acobe­ll[nospam-﹫-backwards]n­ia­mo­d­ym*com
When you get spam addressed to t­acobe­ll[nospam-﹫-backwards]n­ia­mo­d­ym*com, redirect mail to null.
 
2011-12-30 01:06:31 PM
Maybe that is why it was down lately.
 
2011-12-30 01:10:03 PM
what's a stratfor?
 
2011-12-30 01:14:01 PM
also - should someone really be charged for breaching a system if the people who run it are dumbasses?
 
2011-12-30 01:17:44 PM
SphericalTime: It's illicit erect activities, not elicit.

Sorry, pet peeve.
 
2011-12-30 01:18:46 PM
Djkb: People still pay for pr0n?

This, besides evrything is free on thhe internet.
 
2011-12-30 01:26:14 PM
sherkaner: Misleading headline

That's required here.
 
2011-12-30 01:30:02 PM
Djkb: People still pay for pr0n?

Somebody's got to
 
TJT
2011-12-30 01:40:56 PM
acronym: what's a stratfor?

Making music. Just ask Eric Clapton.
 
2011-12-30 01:43:23 PM
There's porn on the Internet?
 
2011-12-30 01:47:55 PM
Masso: There's porn on the Internet?

The Internet...is that something I can get on my computer?
 
2011-12-30 01:53:14 PM
Feds give porn sites their work emails, standard passwords, and credit card numbers, and they still think they understand the internet well enough to police and regulate it.

What a farking world.
 
2011-12-30 01:53:53 PM
Wasn't that one of Kevin Mitnick's tricks? Set up a competition website, post up something at a company about it, get people to register with their email address and password to win. Most of those people will use their work password. You then just need to find out their work login (generally based on a pattern) and you're sorted.

KeePass (or KeepassDroid) FTW
 
2011-12-30 02:31:57 PM
Honest Bender: 1. register your own domain.
2. write a catch-all mail script.
3. hand out customized email addresses to people.
4. know who sells your info and who spams you.

If you sign up for something with taco bell, give them tacobell[[nospam-﹫-backwards] image 7x13]niamodym[* image 7x13]com
When you get spam addressed to tacobell[[nospam-﹫-backwards] image 7x13]niamodym[* image 7x13]com, redirect mail to null.


I do that, and I don't even have to write a script, i guess my domain provider did already. It's just a checkbox on my catchall account.

If any email address suddenly starts getting spam, I can either block anything with a To for that, or set up the account for real if I want to call out the original jerk for selling it.

I buy a lot of stuff online and shockingly I've never had a site violate their 'we won't sell your email' pledge in over five years of using this approach.
 
2011-12-30 02:32:50 PM
Shakes999: I can think of few things dumber than giving a cc number to a porn site. paying for porn.


FTFY
 
2011-12-30 02:57:50 PM
Life imitates art
 
2011-12-30 02:58:33 PM
grrr

imgs.xkcd.com
 
2011-12-30 03:19:50 PM
LDM90: Masso: There's porn on the Internet?

The Internet...is that something I can get on my computer?


Only if you have AOL installed.
 
2011-12-30 03:24:14 PM
Ed Finnerty: LDM90: Masso: There's porn on the Internet?

The Internet...is that something I can get on my computer?

Only if you have AOL installed.


Do you need this AOL thing to use ICQ?
 
2011-12-30 05:18:57 PM
acronym: what's a stratfor?

It's for holding your Wormdo.
 
2011-12-30 06:19:27 PM
Yeah, this was a farking fun email to wake up to the other day. At least the low-limit credit card I used then has since expired, that address is no longer valid for me since I've moved, and I'm pretty sure I gave them a throwaway password. Either way, all passwords to all sites that I can remember have been reset over the past few days, and alerts placed on all my bank/credit card information.

Still not happy. I don't understand why Stratfor was a target, rather than the Koch Brothers, Governor Walker, BP, any number of large financial institutions, etc. Unbiased intelligent/analysis is like media just like whatshisface from Anon said after the fact, right?

Or if they WERE going to target Stratfor, why not go for some of the secret analysis that were commissioned by private or governamental entities - and release those along with who ordered the report?

Way to go, guys. I hope the lulz and the few hundred bucks you donated (which has surely already been returned) was worth it. You didn't even Robin Hood correctly, seeing as how some of us Stratfor subscribers are definitely in the lower part of the 99%. I've supported Anonymous in various ways and forms for years - but screwing me over as collateral damage for a stupid stunt was dumb. . :(

Or, does anyone believe that this was someone trying to make Anon look bad, rather than a rogue faction?
 
2011-12-30 09:22:26 PM
I don't know what's more obnoxious, the self-satisfied smugness of the Anonymous clique, those ridiculous Guy Fawkes masks, or that the Federal government isn't taking these cyber-terrorists seriously, going after them with every weapon in our arsenal, while throwing the full weight of the law onto them?
 
2011-12-30 10:15:32 PM
You must read what ed has too say about Mrs. Emick--the dimbulb behind Backtrace Security(Honestly, shouldn't Gene Leonhardt's estate be suing her for theft of intellectual property, hope they take her for every penny she has). Its three best ed read i've had in a while. Who the hell would would purchase the opinions of an insane woman--mother of three--that names her company after fiasco that left a poor florida girl in foster care and no doubt contributed to her father's early demise.
 
2011-12-30 10:20:05 PM
CitizensUnited: I don't know what's more obnoxious, the self-satisfied smugness of the Anonymous clique, those ridiculous Guy Fawkes masks, or that the Federal government isn't taking these cyber-terrorists seriously, going after them with every weapon in our arsenal, while throwing the full weight of the law onto them?

Um, so, prank calls, ddos incidents (site is farked, buddy), and unsolicited pizza deliveries are terrorism? Are you retarded or just lonely?
 
2011-12-30 11:18:51 PM
Its Emick trying to make anonymous look bad. After being laughed out of every forum from ask.com to zoosex.net and being fired from her job, losing her house to foreclosure, moving to michigan, and being quite possibly being the real life inspiration for the mockumentary catfish shes finally found someone credulous enough to buy her theories, which range from half-baked to guano-insane.

Who is buying? The federal government. Government money hasn't been wasted this frivolously since Lincoln's wife's seances.

You ought to write a letter to the editor admonishing them for siting someone so dubious as an expert. I wonder if they're going to have Bernie Madoff giving investment advice next week.

Jesus people, consider the source.

She's been reported to be notoriously heavy handed towards her detractors. She monitors fark, has no doubt seen this, and is attempting to dox me with intent to sue and report me to the authorities for questioning the veracity of her expertise.

I suspect she's mentally ill.
'
Brought to you by the letter 'A' and the number "one,"
--Aleph

P.S.--If anyone who reads this is using her services, cut her loose. If anything she has is true it its because it was easily obtained.
 
2011-12-31 12:05:51 AM
Aleph: You must read what ed has too say about Mrs. Emick--the dimbulb behind Backtrace Security(Honestly, shouldn't Gene Leonhardt's estate be suing her for theft of intellectual property, hope they take her for every penny she has). Its three best ed read i've had in a while. Who the hell would would purchase the opinions of an insane woman--mother of three--that names her company after fiasco that left a poor florida girl in foster care and no doubt contributed to her father's early demise.

Jesus Christ. I didn't know that.

Mark a death for 4chan.

Why can't they go after the Koch brothers or the zeta people?!
 
2011-12-31 12:49:40 AM
To be fair, anons did not kill Gene Leonhardt, nor did it put his daughter in foster care--punching his daughter in the mouth put her there just sad sure as a bad ticker put him in the ground--but its clear that these were simple people too naieve to change their phone number and regulate their daughter's internet access.

Truthfully, every parent that wishes to let their child use the internet should be forced to watch this story. Why someone would be so sick as to exploit the tragedy for profit defies simple explanation.

Well, not really, its what you do when you have no real talents.
 
2011-12-31 10:41:43 AM
Stratfor had an article or two discussing Annoynomous (sp?). I wonder if that is why it was hit.
 
2011-12-31 01:11:38 PM
Witchydiva: Or, does anyone believe that this was someone trying to make Anon look bad, rather than a rogue faction?

Yes. The "real" Anonymous (whoever that is) had nothing to gain by taking down Stratfor, and would have absolutely known that it would piss off a lot of people who either don't normally care about them or were on their side. There was no political or social upside for them. This isn't like taking down the C0S where you get no sympathy because everyone _outside_ the church thinks you're a loon.
 
Displayed 34 of 34 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »