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.

(CNN)   FBI reports they have successfully destroyed all evidence of being hacked   (cnn.com) divider line 54
    More: Followup, Apple ID, FBI, Graham Cluley, President Vladimir Putin, organizational structure, programming languages  
•       •       •

8960 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Sep 2012 at 12:29 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



54 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-05 12:33:03 PM  
No shiat sherlock
 
2012-09-05 12:33:06 PM  
It's almost game time!
 
2012-09-05 12:36:05 PM  
It's all about the Pentiums WHAT!
 
2012-09-05 12:38:16 PM  
"The release, if authentic, sparked a flurry of headlines Tuesday and raised questions about both FBI security and why the bureau would have collected that information about people in the first place."

So... if it turns out not to be authentic, then those headlines and questions never happened? How is that kind of ret-conning handled? Mass hypnosis and reboot the internet?

/you can be honest... it's not like i'll remember
 
2012-09-05 12:39:34 PM  
an offer to grant interviews about their hack if Adrian Chen, a Gawker reporter who has written about Anonymous, is portrayed on the main page of Gawker for a full day wearing a ballet tutu and a shoe on his head.

Not the worst idea
 
2012-09-05 12:44:21 PM  
Does the FBI have any serious suggestions as to just where Antisec came across a file containing 12 million valid UDIDs, if not from Supervisor Special Agent Christopher K. Stangl's laptop?
 
2012-09-05 12:46:59 PM  
Adrien Chen in a tutu with a shoe on his head.

Looks like he decided to do it, after all. (Link opens in new window)
 
2012-09-05 12:47:15 PM  

LewDux: an offer to grant interviews about their hack if Adrian Chen, a Gawker reporter who has written about Anonymous, is portrayed on the main page of Gawker for a full day wearing a ballet tutu and a shoe on his head.

Not the worst idea


Seriously. I'd actually give Gawker a page click to see that.
 
2012-09-05 12:48:55 PM  
Not that Anonymous is a bastion of saintly truth telling angels or anything, but frankly their exaggerated claims are often rooted in fact and presenting 1 Million UDID's along with a specified target and attack vector is a fair bit of information to be released from a hack.

The FBI is going to have to do a bit more than say "nuh uh". To convince me it didn't happen. Maybe something like "The FBI does issue requests for this type of information but categorically denies retaining and storing this information." You know, something that a disgruntled anonymous leaker could possibly discredit by sending an anonymous fax or something.

Also, as it stands, having no evidence that the hack took place is not the same as having evidence that the hack did not take place.
 
2012-09-05 12:51:05 PM  

Hypothetical Imperative: Does the FBI have any serious suggestions as to just where Antisec came across a file containing 12 million valid UDIDs, if not from Supervisor Special Agent Christopher K. Stangl's laptop?


i45.tinypic.com
 
2012-09-05 12:51:58 PM  
In other hacking news:

An Anonymous group allegedly hacked Romney tax records via Franklin firm

The deal is quite simple. Convert $1,000,000 USD to Bitcoins (Google if if you need a lesson on what Bitcoin is) using the various markets available out in the world for buying. Transfer the Bitcoins gathered to the Bitcoin address listed below. It does not matter if small amounts or one large amount is transferred, as long as the final value of the Bitcoins is equal to $1,000,000 USD at the time when it is finished. The keys to unlock the data will be purged and what ever is inside the documents will remain a secret forever.

Failure to do this before September 28, the entire world will be allowed to view the documents with a publicly released key to unlock everything.
 
2012-09-05 12:52:27 PM  

hungryhungryhorus: Not that Anonymous is a bastion of saintly truth telling angels or anything, but frankly their exaggerated claims are often rooted in fact and presenting 1 Million UDID's along with a specified target and attack vector is a fair bit of information to be released from a hack.

The FBI is going to have to do a bit more than say "nuh uh". To convince me it didn't happen. Maybe something like "The FBI does issue requests for this type of information but categorically denies retaining and storing this information." You know, something that a disgruntled anonymous leaker could possibly discredit by sending an anonymous fax or something.

Also, as it stands, having no evidence that the hack took place is not the same as having evidence that the hack did not take place.


I just hacked your email account, and you do gross things.
 
2012-09-05 12:55:55 PM  
In other news: We've always been at war with Eastasia!
 
2012-09-05 12:58:42 PM  
Isn't it strange that the farther away were get from the Cold War, the more the US government acts like the Soviet government?
 
2012-09-05 01:01:01 PM  
Nuttin to see here, move along, Citizen.

A Politician is a fellow willing to spend your money on his country.
 
2012-09-05 01:07:01 PM  

neversubmit: In other hacking news:

An Anonymous group allegedly hacked Romney tax records via Franklin firm

The deal is quite simple. Convert $1,000,000 USD to Bitcoins (Google if if you need a lesson on what Bitcoin is) using the various markets available out in the world for buying. Transfer the Bitcoins gathered to the Bitcoin address listed below. It does not matter if small amounts or one large amount is transferred, as long as the final value of the Bitcoins is equal to $1,000,000 USD at the time when it is finished. The keys to unlock the data will be purged and what ever is inside the documents will remain a secret forever.

Failure to do this before September 28, the entire world will be allowed to view the documents with a publicly released key to unlock everything.



If Mitt Romney files a 1040 I'll eat the shoe off Adrian Chen's head. That is frankly retarded.
 
2012-09-05 01:19:28 PM  

Tim Tebow: It's almost game time!


Not quite.
 
2012-09-05 01:29:12 PM  

hungryhungryhorus: Not that Anonymous is a bastion of saintly truth telling angels or anything, but frankly their exaggerated claims are often rooted in fact and presenting 1 Million UDID's along with a specified target and attack vector is a fair bit of information to be released from a hack.

The FBI is going to have to do a bit more than say "nuh uh". To convince me it didn't happen. Maybe something like "The FBI does issue requests for this type of information but categorically denies retaining and storing this information." You know, something that a disgruntled anonymous leaker could possibly discredit by sending an anonymous fax or something.

Also, as it stands, having no evidence that the hack took place is not the same as having evidence that the hack did not take place.


Anyone can SAY they hacked all this information, and point allegedly shocked fingers at the FBI; but where is that information? I can say I broke into the FBI last night and stole 15 billion names and addresses and why do they have this intel, and dare the FBI to prove I didn't; but if I'm going to make that kind of statement I should at least have something to back myself up when the FBI comes knocking at my door. Otherwise, all I've done is made a crazy claim.

This is why nobody really takes Anonymous and Antisec seriously: They SAY they've done all this stuff and people like you agree that absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence; but it's also not PROOF of anything. If they release some of the information to back up their claims, then I'll be impressed and possibly alarmed, but till then, I take their claims of a hack no more seriously than the FBI's denials.
 
2012-09-05 01:30:49 PM  
Hypothetical Imperative: "Does the FBI have any serious suggestions as to just where Antisec came across a file containing 12 million valid UDIDs"

Like any developer of a fairly popular iOS app (or service) that features Facebook integration or ties to another billing/shipping system?
Prior to iOS5, the UDID was freely available for apps to ask for. And once the user logged into Facebook (or any other social networking site with a laughable privacy policy) the rest of the data would be right there. Similarly if you ran a service that offered an iOS app that connected devices to users of your service. Say, Valve's mobile steam client, Amazon's shopping client, Blizzard's authenticator/mobile armory stuff, etc. If those phoned home with a UDID on setup and were subsequently hacked, all the same information would be available to the hackers.

I personally have more trouble believing that the FBI would be compiling such data on such an odd scope. If they were maintaining a list of "persons of interest", I'd expect a more tractable scope. And if they were using their nefarious means to gather as much as possible, I'm thinking they could get well more than 12 of the hundreds of millions of UDIDs floating around out there.
 
2012-09-05 01:31:49 PM  

neversubmit: In other hacking news:

An Anonymous group allegedly hacked Romney tax records via Franklin firm

The deal is quite simple. Convert $1,000,000 USD to Bitcoins (Google if if you need a lesson on what Bitcoin is) using the various markets available out in the world for buying. Transfer the Bitcoins gathered to the Bitcoin address listed below. It does not matter if small amounts or one large amount is transferred, as long as the final value of the Bitcoins is equal to $1,000,000 USD at the time when it is finished. The keys to unlock the data will be purged and what ever is inside the documents will remain a secret forever.

Failure to do this before September 28, the entire world will be allowed to view the documents with a publicly released key to unlock everything.


I did not know Anonymous had branched out to extortion.
 
2012-09-05 01:33:02 PM  

Hypothetical Imperative: Does the FBI have any serious suggestions as to just where Antisec came across a file containing 12 million valid UDIDs, if not from Supervisor Special Agent Christopher K. Stangl's laptop?


Most likely the UDIDs are from a app developer not the FBI. Up until IOS5 - vendors were allowed access that information on the device. Apple started restricting it as of IOS5 and fully revoking it in IOS6.
 
2012-09-05 01:35:47 PM  
Unfortuantely, "Special Agent Christopher K. Stangl, who specializes in cybersecurity" is no longer with us to verify the breach....
 
2012-09-05 01:36:00 PM  
Well, anonymous isn't reporting this, and also that isn't their style. It's BS

neversubmit: In other hacking news:

An Anonymous group allegedly hacked Romney tax records via Franklin firm

The deal is quite simple. Convert $1,000,000 USD to Bitcoins (Google if if you need a lesson on what Bitcoin is) using the various markets available out in the world for buying. Transfer the Bitcoins gathered to the Bitcoin address listed below. It does not matter if small amounts or one large amount is transferred, as long as the final value of the Bitcoins is equal to $1,000,000 USD at the time when it is finished. The keys to unlock the data will be purged and what ever is inside the documents will remain a secret forever.

Failure to do this before September 28, the entire world will be allowed to view the documents with a publicly released key to unlock everything.

 
2012-09-05 01:46:50 PM  

davidphogan: I did not know Anonymous had branched out to extortion.


Unless something has changed since I last looked at them, Anon isn't an organization and doesn't have any mechanism in place to call someone out as not being one of them. So for all practical purposes, they're into whatever anyone who claims to be one of them is into.
 
2012-09-05 01:48:58 PM  

enricofermi: Well, anonymous isn't reporting this, and also that isn't their style. It's BS

neversubmit: In other hacking news:

An Anonymous group allegedly hacked Romney tax records via Franklin firm

The deal is quite simple. Convert $1,000,000 USD to Bitcoins (Google if if you need a lesson on what Bitcoin is) using the various markets available out in the world for buying. Transfer the Bitcoins gathered to the Bitcoin address listed below. It does not matter if small amounts or one large amount is transferred, as long as the final value of the Bitcoins is equal to $1,000,000 USD at the time when it is finished. The keys to unlock the data will be purged and what ever is inside the documents will remain a secret forever.

Failure to do this before September 28, the entire world will be allowed to view the documents with a publicly released key to unlock everything.


What is their style?
 
2012-09-05 01:51:47 PM  

davidphogan: neversubmit: In other hacking news:

An Anonymous group allegedly hacked Romney tax records via Franklin firm

The deal is quite simple. Convert $1,000,000 USD to Bitcoins (Google if if you need a lesson on what Bitcoin is) using the various markets available out in the world for buying. Transfer the Bitcoins gathered to the Bitcoin address listed below. It does not matter if small amounts or one large amount is transferred, as long as the final value of the Bitcoins is equal to $1,000,000 USD at the time when it is finished. The keys to unlock the data will be purged and what ever is inside the documents will remain a secret forever.

Failure to do this before September 28, the entire world will be allowed to view the documents with a publicly released key to unlock everything.

I did not know Anonymous had branched out to extortion.


I noticed the address to send the money to has been redacted already. Welcome to Communist China.
 
obl
2012-09-05 01:56:08 PM  
This whole story is a shining example of how piss poor people's critical thinking skills are and how quickly news media outlets rush to publish "news" before they know anything about anything.

How do we know AntiSec grabbed 12 million UDID records? BECAUSE THEY SAID SO. After all, only 1 million have been released.

How do we know AntiSec lifted these records from a laptop owned by a particular FBI agent? BECAUSE THEY SAID SO.(After all how else would they know the name of an agent who is ID'd in numerous news articles about cases against Anonymous and their ilk?)

How do we know AntiSec used a particular Java exploit to gain access to said laptop? BECAUSE THEY SAID SO.

How do we know that the file AntiSec lifted is called "NCFTA_iOS_devices_intel.csv"? BECAUSE THEY SAID SO. Oh wait, you mean these cyber geniuses now have the power to name or rename files? We'll never stop them now!

So AntiSec or whoever posted claiming to be affiliated with AntiSec has all the credibility here in so many people's eyes because...someone posted an anonymous text file to a pastebin with some ASCII graphics in it and l33t speak about government spies.

Yes, at least some of the UDID's are apparently real. Do people have any idea how leaky UDID's were before Apple deprecated their use? This data could have easily come from one or more iOS apps. It could have been stolen from iOS developers with poor security, it could have been collected through breached servers, or, yes, it could have been shared with the FBI for all kinds of reasons (evidence in a criminal investigation, etc.)

DESPITE ALL OF THIS 95% of the Internet is going all herpaderp about a giant government conspiracy, all because some anonymous hacker dickheads posted something they got from somewhere embellished with grandiose claims.

Is it possible that everything claimed in the supposed AntiSec leak is true? Yes maybe and no. The point is, nobody has any farking clue whether its true or not, despite numerous solid reasons why it is suspicious, and yet the Internet is jizzing itself over this story.

Meanwhile, while your friendly do-gooder benevolent hackers are not exposing the government's dark secrets for your benefit, they are actively buying and selling your paypal accounts and credit card accounts and bank accounts and bitcoins all over the goddamn Internet right under your noses.
 
2012-09-05 02:06:32 PM  
And here's the latest release from Anon, the MAC addresses of the machines in the office they compromised.

http://yfrog.com/z/oboljfp

Chris's machine is 0004F201DE27
 
2012-09-05 02:17:41 PM  

professor_tom: http://yfrog.com/z/oboljfp


VOIP extension setup list.
 
2012-09-05 02:20:33 PM  

DeathByGeekSquad: enricofermi: Well, anonymous isn't reporting this, and also that isn't their style. It's BS

neversubmit: In other hacking news:

An Anonymous group allegedly hacked Romney tax records via Franklin firm

The deal is quite simple. Convert $1,000,000 USD to Bitcoins (Google if if you need a lesson on what Bitcoin is) using the various markets available out in the world for buying. Transfer the Bitcoins gathered to the Bitcoin address listed below. It does not matter if small amounts or one large amount is transferred, as long as the final value of the Bitcoins is equal to $1,000,000 USD at the time when it is finished. The keys to unlock the data will be purged and what ever is inside the documents will remain a secret forever.

Failure to do this before September 28, the entire world will be allowed to view the documents with a publicly released key to unlock everything.

What is their style?


For the lulz?
 
2012-09-05 02:21:02 PM  

Lethargic_Apathy: professor_tom: http://yfrog.com/z/oboljfp

VOIP extension setup list.


To be more specific, Telephones made by Polycom (used to be Circa Communications).
I R sMrT
 
2012-09-05 02:29:57 PM  
Land Ark


Isn't it strange that the farther away were get from the Cold War, the more the US government acts like the Soviet government?


Troubling? Yes. Strange? No.

Democrats and republicans alike want a totalitarian state. Having to make choices is terrifying. Being held responsible for your actions repugnant.


When faced with the pains of freedom, men beg for their chains.
 
2012-09-05 02:33:55 PM  

davidphogan: neversubmit: In other hacking news:

An Anonymous group allegedly hacked Romney tax records via Franklin firm

The deal is quite simple. Convert $1,000,000 USD to Bitcoins (Google if if you need a lesson on what Bitcoin is) using the various markets available out in the world for buying. Transfer the Bitcoins gathered to the Bitcoin address listed below. It does not matter if small amounts or one large amount is transferred, as long as the final value of the Bitcoins is equal to $1,000,000 USD at the time when it is finished. The keys to unlock the data will be purged and what ever is inside the documents will remain a secret forever.

Failure to do this before September 28, the entire world will be allowed to view the documents with a publicly released key to unlock everything.

I did not know Anonymous had branched out to extortion.


They haven't; see wilfullyobscure's post
 
2012-09-05 03:01:53 PM  

obl: This whole story is a shining example of how piss poor people's critical thinking skills are and how quickly news media outlets rush to publish "news" before they know anything about anything.

How do we know AntiSec grabbed 12 million UDID records? BECAUSE THEY SAID SO. After all, only 1 million have been released.

How do we know AntiSec lifted these records from a laptop owned by a particular FBI agent? BECAUSE THEY SAID SO.(After all how else would they know the name of an agent who is ID'd in numerous news articles about cases against Anonymous and their ilk?)

How do we know AntiSec used a particular Java exploit to gain access to said laptop? BECAUSE THEY SAID SO.

How do we know that the file AntiSec lifted is called "NCFTA_iOS_devices_intel.csv"? BECAUSE THEY SAID SO. Oh wait, you mean these cyber geniuses now have the power to name or rename files? We'll never stop them now!

So AntiSec or whoever posted claiming to be affiliated with AntiSec has all the credibility here in so many people's eyes because...someone posted an anonymous text file to a pastebin with some ASCII graphics in it and l33t speak about government spies.

Yes, at least some of the UDID's are apparently real. Do people have any idea how leaky UDID's were before Apple deprecated their use? This data could have easily come from one or more iOS apps. It could have been stolen from iOS developers with poor security, it could have been collected through breached servers, or, yes, it could have been shared with the FBI for all kinds of reasons (evidence in a criminal investigation, etc.)

DESPITE ALL OF THIS 95% of the Internet is going all herpaderp about a giant government conspiracy, all because some anonymous hacker dickheads posted something they got from somewhere embellished with grandiose claims.

Is it possible that everything claimed in the supposed AntiSec leak is true? Yes maybe and no. The point is, nobody has any farking clue whether its true or not, despite numerous solid reasons why it is suspicious, and yet the Internet is jizzing itself over this story.

Meanwhile, while your friendly do-gooder benevolent hackers are not exposing the government's dark secrets for your benefit, they are actively buying and selling your paypal accounts and credit card accounts and bank accounts and bitcoins all over the goddamn Internet right under your noses.


I think you're missing something very obvious and simple. While you are logically correct that there is no actual proof that what these hackers are saying is true, it IS consistent with FBI (and federal government) actions of recent years. People believe it because it is both plausible and likely to be true that the FBI has data like this. Very, very, very few people in our government give any shiat whatsoever about the privacy or civil liberties of the citizenry anymore and they are constantly caught casting ever wider and more indescriminate nets through the population.

Could they be lying? Sure. Is it pretty likely that the FBI is amassing all sorts of data on us all that they should not be? Absolutely.
 
2012-09-05 03:24:33 PM  

mongbiohazard: Could they be lying?


This is the modern FBI's only real function; covering up gaffes, leaks, and illegal activity. When was the last time you heard about them saving a kidnapped baby?
 
2012-09-05 03:42:24 PM  

macadamnut: mongbiohazard: Could they be lying?

This is the modern FBI's only real function; covering up gaffes, leaks, and illegal activity. When was the last time you heard about them saving a kidnapped baby?


They saved a kidnapped baby just 3 weeks ago, Mac. Of course, they then shot that baby 7 times because he wouldn't stop crying...I mean saw a document with the real names and aliases of several deep cover operatives.
 
2012-09-05 04:13:05 PM  

gingerjet: Most likely the UDIDs are from a app developer not the FBI. Up until IOS5 - vendors were allowed access that information on the device. Apple started restricting it as of IOS5 and fully revoking it in IOS6.


ringersol: Like any developer of a fairly popular iOS app (or service) that features Facebook integration or ties to another billing/shipping system?


Totally valid suggestions. I would agree with either or both but I am so massively entertained by the FBI finding itself unable to discredit a claim made by a group of technooligans that I'd much rather just stir the pot on this one. I don't care where the data came from and I don't think the simple fact that it exists is particularly scary in any way. Stories about Antisec and Anon simply amuse me.

Sometimes all the way up to sentencing.
 
2012-09-05 04:23:18 PM  

Jonny Ninja: DeathByGeekSquad: enricofermi: Well, anonymous isn't reporting this, and also that isn't their style. It's BS

neversubmit: In other hacking news:

An Anonymous group allegedly hacked Romney tax records via Franklin firm

The deal is quite simple. Convert $1,000,000 USD to Bitcoins (Google if if you need a lesson on what Bitcoin is) using the various markets available out in the world for buying. Transfer the Bitcoins gathered to the Bitcoin address listed below. It does not matter if small amounts or one large amount is transferred, as long as the final value of the Bitcoins is equal to $1,000,000 USD at the time when it is finished. The keys to unlock the data will be purged and what ever is inside the documents will remain a secret forever.

Failure to do this before September 28, the entire world will be allowed to view the documents with a publicly released key to unlock everything.

What is their style?

For the lulz?


No, that's their fallback excuse when something goes wrong.

"I'm going to say something shocking and offend someone" *says something shocking*
"HAHAHAHAHA"
"That's alright, I totally did it for the lulz"
 
2012-09-05 04:40:45 PM  
Christopher K. Stangl, the agent whose laptop this data was supposedly lifted from, was a participant in the conference call that AntiSec hacked earlier in the year. He was also the star of a video called "Wanted by the FBI: Cyber Security experts" that the FBI had posted to Facebook.

I don't believe the FBI's denial here. They've been caught with their pants down.
 
2012-09-05 05:18:59 PM  

obl: This whole story is a shining example of how piss poor people's critical thinking skills are and how quickly news media outlets rush to publish "news" before they know anything about anything.

How do we know AntiSec grabbed 12 million UDID records? BECAUSE THEY SAID SO. After all, only 1 million have been released.

How do we know AntiSec lifted these records from a laptop owned by a particular FBI agent? BECAUSE THEY SAID SO.(After all how else would they know the name of an agent who is ID'd in numerous news articles about cases against Anonymous and their ilk?)

How do we know AntiSec used a particular Java exploit to gain access to said laptop? BECAUSE THEY SAID SO.

How do we know that the file AntiSec lifted is called "NCFTA_iOS_devices_intel.csv"? BECAUSE THEY SAID SO. Oh wait, you mean these cyber geniuses now have the power to name or rename files? We'll never stop them now!

So AntiSec or whoever posted claiming to be affiliated with AntiSec has all the credibility here in so many people's eyes because...someone posted an anonymous text file to a pastebin with some ASCII graphics in it and l33t speak about government spies.

Yes, at least some of the UDID's are apparently real. Do people have any idea how leaky UDID's were before Apple deprecated their use? This data could have easily come from one or more iOS apps. It could have been stolen from iOS developers with poor security, it could have been collected through breached servers, or, yes, it could have been shared with the FBI for all kinds of reasons (evidence in a criminal investigation, etc.)

DESPITE ALL OF THIS 95% of the Internet is going all herpaderp about a giant government conspiracy, all because some anonymous hacker dickheads posted something they got from somewhere embellished with grandiose claims.

Is it possible that everything claimed in the supposed AntiSec leak is true? Yes maybe and no. The point is, nobody has any farking clue whether its true or not, despite numerous solid reasons why it is suspicious, and yet the Internet is jizzing itself over this story.

Meanwhile, while your friendly do-gooder benevolent hackers are not exposing the government's dark secrets for your benefit, they are actively buying and selling your paypal accounts and credit card accounts and bank accounts and bitcoins all over the goddamn Internet right under your noses.


Assuming the breach is legit for a second, you honestly think they would confirm it?
 
2012-09-05 05:33:58 PM  

Gyrfalcon: hungryhungryhorus: Not that Anonymous is a bastion of saintly truth telling angels or anything, but frankly their exaggerated claims are often rooted in fact and presenting 1 Million UDID's along with a specified target and attack vector is a fair bit of information to be released from a hack.

The FBI is going to have to do a bit more than say "nuh uh". To convince me it didn't happen. Maybe something like "The FBI does issue requests for this type of information but categorically denies retaining and storing this information." You know, something that a disgruntled anonymous leaker could possibly discredit by sending an anonymous fax or something.

Also, as it stands, having no evidence that the hack took place is not the same as having evidence that the hack did not take place.

Anyone can SAY they hacked all this information, and point allegedly shocked fingers at the FBI; but where is that information? I can say I broke into the FBI last night and stole 15 billion names and addresses and why do they have this intel, and dare the FBI to prove I didn't; but if I'm going to make that kind of statement I should at least have something to back myself up when the FBI comes knocking at my door. Otherwise, all I've done is made a crazy claim.

This is why nobody really takes Anonymous and Antisec seriously: They SAY they've done all this stuff and people like you agree that absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence; but it's also not PROOF of anything. If they release some of the information to back up their claims, then I'll be impressed and possibly alarmed, but till then, I take their claims of a hack no more seriously than the FBI's denials.


So... out of the 12 million records "hacked", the 1,000,001 records actually released by Anon don't count as evidence of anything?

You are farking retarded.
 
2012-09-05 07:02:28 PM  

Kahabut: Gyrfalcon: hungryhungryhorus: Not that Anonymous is a bastion of saintly truth telling angels or anything, but frankly their exaggerated claims are often rooted in fact and presenting 1 Million UDID's along with a specified target and attack vector is a fair bit of information to be released from a hack.

The FBI is going to have to do a bit more than say "nuh uh". To convince me it didn't happen. Maybe something like "The FBI does issue requests for this type of information but categorically denies retaining and storing this information." You know, something that a disgruntled anonymous leaker could possibly discredit by sending an anonymous fax or something.

Also, as it stands, having no evidence that the hack took place is not the same as having evidence that the hack did not take place.

Anyone can SAY they hacked all this information, and point allegedly shocked fingers at the FBI; but where is that information? I can say I broke into the FBI last night and stole 15 billion names and addresses and why do they have this intel, and dare the FBI to prove I didn't; but if I'm going to make that kind of statement I should at least have something to back myself up when the FBI comes knocking at my door. Otherwise, all I've done is made a crazy claim.

This is why nobody really takes Anonymous and Antisec seriously: They SAY they've done all this stuff and people like you agree that absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence; but it's also not PROOF of anything. If they release some of the information to back up their claims, then I'll be impressed and possibly alarmed, but till then, I take their claims of a hack no more seriously than the FBI's denials.

So... out of the 12 million records "hacked", the 1,000,001 records actually released by Anon don't count as evidence of anything?

You are farking retarded.


He is retarded actually. But in honestly, how do they just ignore one million and one records? There's no evidence? WTF? What about the note that says, "hey we got these one million out of twelve million we got from this specific special agent's computer with this mac address?" Doesn't get anymore specific than that. Either that's exactly what happened, or it's not. But there's plenty of evidence.
 
obl
2012-09-05 07:09:53 PM  

DORMAMU: Assuming the breach is legit for a second, you honestly think they would confirm it?


The FBI's response to the claim is completely irrelevant. People keep missing this point and are fixated on the FBI aspect of this situation. It doesn't matter whether the claimed source of the breached data is the FBI or KFC or your mom. The point is, the word of anonymous people posting as AntiSec in a single pastebin dump is not compelling evidence of anything and the burden is on them to prove their claims, not on the target to disprove them.

I could go post an anonymous message on pastebin right now claiming I breached your mom's computer using a known Java exploit and I grabbed a dump of photos she took pleasuring herself with an electric toothbrush in the bathroom mirror. I found them all in a folder named "nakedme"! post the photos but I blur out her face. I guess everyone on the Internet will assume this is all legit. All these photos really are your naked mom! But wait, what does your mom have to say?

She could say yes these are pictures of her self spelunking. Now that would be embarrassing!

She could say no, these pictures are not her and she never took those kind of pictures. Why would anyone believe her? I mean, if they really were her, why would she admit it? That would be embarrassing!

Of course I have posted no proof that I did anything I claimed but apparently 98% of people on the Internet will believe it, no matter what your mom says.

The fact that the leaked UDID's contain at least some legitimate numbers does not prove any of the claims that accompanied it. There are SO MANY sources of potentially compromised machines where that UDID data could have been obtained from, it proves absolutely nothing. If AntiSec had file access to this agent's machine than surely they can provide more damning evidence to back up their claims of origin. Until they do, all we know is that they posted a file with some legitimate UDID's. Just like all you know is that I posted naked photos of some old lady who may or may not be your mom.
 
2012-09-05 08:20:18 PM  

obl: DORMAMU: Assuming the breach is legit for a second, you honestly think they would confirm it?

The FBI's response to the claim is completely irrelevant. People keep missing this point and are fixated on the FBI aspect of this situation. It doesn't matter whether the claimed source of the breached data is the FBI or KFC or your mom. The point is, the word of anonymous people posting as AntiSec in a single pastebin dump is not compelling evidence of anything and the burden is on them to prove their claims, not on the target to disprove them.

I could go post an anonymous message on pastebin right now claiming I breached your mom's computer using a known Java exploit and I grabbed a dump of photos she took pleasuring herself with an electric toothbrush in the bathroom mirror. I found them all in a folder named "nakedme"! post the photos but I blur out her face. I guess everyone on the Internet will assume this is all legit. All these photos really are your naked mom! But wait, what does your mom have to say?

She could say yes these are pictures of her self spelunking. Now that would be embarrassing!

She could say no, these pictures are not her and she never took those kind of pictures. Why would anyone believe her? I mean, if they really were her, why would she admit it? That would be embarrassing!

Of course I have posted no proof that I did anything I claimed but apparently 98% of people on the Internet will believe it, no matter what your mom says.

The fact that the leaked UDID's contain at least some legitimate numbers does not prove any of the claims that accompanied it. There are SO MANY sources of potentially compromised machines where that UDID data could have been obtained from, it proves absolutely nothing. If AntiSec had file access to this agent's machine than surely they can provide more damning evidence to back up their claims of origin. Until they do, all we know is that they posted a file with some legitimate UDID's. Just like all you know is that I ...


I don't know if you're trolling or not, but if you are I'll bite.

As you say, it's difficult to prove that Antisec pulled off the hack they're claiming just based on what's been released, although they have given circumstantial evidence. On the other hand, the FBI are less than convincing in their denial of it, and the entire situation itself is barely relevant in the case that the purpose was not to get this specific data, or anything specific for that matter, but to discredit what is supposed to be an airtight intelligence agency by pantsing them in front of the entire world.
 
2012-09-05 08:56:41 PM  
"At this time there is no evidence"

Code for prove it or it didn't happen. It is a standard tactic.

The nice thing is, if things are as Anon says they are, then the FBI will have got their hands caught in the cookie jar AND caught for lying about it.

One they can blame on Anon (and their own sloppiness)
The other is of their own making.

They don't understand that the game isn't like the old days. Information wants to be free and that door swings both ways.
It will all come out and it won't take long.
 
2012-09-05 11:05:51 PM  

obl: The FBI's response to the claim is completely irrelevant. People keep missing this point and are fixated on the FBI aspect of this situation. It doesn't matter whether the claimed source of the breached data is the FBI or KFC or your mom. The point is, the word of anonymous people posting as AntiSec in a single pastebin dump is not compelling evidence of anything and the burden is on them to prove their claims, not on the target to disprove them.



You're acting like the dump of a million people's information is not evidence. It IS evidence. It's simply not irrefutable and conclusive evidence. But there's no denying they got a large amount of legitimate personal information from somewhere and their explanation is in no way implausible or improbable.

Maybe they, as you seem to be asserting, haxored it from somewhere else and then sat on it for months waiting to cook up some story to embarrass a third party.

OR, maybe they're simply telling the truth. The feds try not to draw attention to it, but government computers with sensitive information do get hacked/stolen/compromised on a fairly regular basis, you know. There are LOTS of government employees with lots of computers out there, so it's pretty much bound to happen occasionally. The FBI doesn't use magic, they use the same technology as everyone else.

Personally when I look at this situation and try and think which explanation is the simplest - and therefore the most likely - that they're simply telling the truth seems to be more plausible.
 
2012-09-06 12:03:36 AM  

mongbiohazard: But there's no denying ... their explanation is in no way implausible or improbable.


Actually, that is what he's denying. That every explanation offered by anyone affiliated with any group like Anonymous is automatically implausible and improbable.


But that's just bias. If you extend the same kind of skepticism: The FBI may honestly have never had "sought or obtained" that data but they may have had full access to the database in which is was stored.

The file name implies that the document was created/compiled by the National Cyber-Forensics & Training Alliance, which serves as a conduit between private groups (ISPs, MPAA/RIAA, etc) and government bodies (FBI, NSA, etc).

It is entirely possible that the document in question was hosted on an NCFTA server which was accessed using Stengl's credentials (user/pass on a post-it note) or a VPN through his laptop - either of which, depending on your definition, may not comprise a "compromise."


So the FBI can be 100% factually correct in their denials and AntiSec is still 100% telling the truth.
 
2012-09-06 12:30:13 AM  
Alternatively if you go war driving and find any WEP connections, chances are you can use backtrack to crack the password, go to the router ip and find out what type of router it is then look up the default password. Most of the WEP connections I've logged in to had default admin accounts. Instead of screwing with the router you can also look at the network and be amazed at the documents some businesses keep on shared drives with no restrictions when they think that they have a closed network.


WTP 2: i was getting "free" internet so were many kids in the neighborhood until i changed the network name (it was unsecured) TO "LOOKING AT YOU" then they left. then i guess the owner noticed oh well.


You could also inject paranoia in to your neighborhood with this old joke.

nerd.co.ke

/amusing if the neighbors start chatting about the supposed van wifi
 
2012-09-06 12:33:43 AM  
ooops wrong topic
 
2012-09-06 01:22:56 AM  
It seems like owning a "smart" phone and using it for anything other than phone calls, using public/unsecured internet, and using weak passwords for very important applications, account for the majority of info dumps from hackers.

Who does that stupid stuff anyways? Right? Right?
 
Displayed 50 of 54 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report