-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 It proves peoplesoft is a piece of shit.
oshwm: > > > On 01/11/15 18:17, intelemetry wrote: >> Where is the OPM link in .7z format? >> > > Didn't Barrett Brown end up in Solitary Confinement for giving out > links to data? > > As for the real question, my ethical argument still stands:- > > Those people in the OPM leak who were using personal resources to > conduct government business got what they deserved (leaked). > > Those who were being honest and kept business dealing to the > appropriate and democratically accountable systems did not deserve > their details to be leaked. > > Then there is another group who work to deceive the public and > preserve the state at any cost, those also deserve to be leaked > (NSA, CIA, FBI etc etc). > > The hack on OPM also proves another thing that Governments (or > indeed anyone) should not create large databases of personal > information because they become huge and irresistable targets for > crackers. > > >> - intelemetry >> >> oshwm: >> >> >>> On 01/11/15 03:53, coderman wrote: >>>> http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-rise-of-political-doxing >>>> >>>> >>>> Last week, CIA director John O. Brennan became the latest victim >>>> of what's become a popular way to embarrass and harass people >>>> on the internet. A hacker allegedly broke into his AOL >>>> account and published emails and documents found inside, many >>>> of them personal and sensitive. >>>> >>>> It's called doxing—sometimes doxxing—from the word >>>> "documents." It emerged in the 1990s as a hacker revenge >>>> tactic, and has since been as a tool to harass and intimidate >>>> people on the internet. Someone would threaten a woman with >>>> physical harm, or try to incite others to harm her, and >>>> publish her personal information as a way of saying "I know a >>>> lot about you—like where you live and work." Victims of >>>> doxing talk about the fear that this tactic instills. It's >>>> very effective, by which I mean that it's horrible. >>>> >>>> Brennan's doxing was slightly different. Here, the attacker >>>> had a more political motive. He wasn't out to intimidate >>>> Brennan; he simply wanted to embarrass him. His personal >>>> papers were dumped indiscriminately, fodder for an eager >>>> press. This doxing was a political act, and we're seeing this >>>> kind of thing more and more. >>>> >>>> Lots of people will have to face the publication of personal >>>> correspondence, documents, and information they would rather >>>> be private >>>> >>>> Last year, the government of North Korea allegedly did this >>>> to Sony. Hackers the FBI believes were working for North >>>> Korea broke into the company's networks, stole a huge amount >>>> of corporate data, and published it. This included unreleased >>>> movies, financial information, company plans, and personal >>>> emails. The reputational damage to the company was enormous; >>>> the company estimated the cost at $41 million. >>>> >>>> In July, hackers stole and published sensitive documents >>>> from the cyberweapons arms manufacturer Hacking Team. That >>>> same month, different hackers did the same thing to the >>>> infidelity website Ashley Madison. In 2014, hackers broke >>>> into the iCloud accounts of over 100 celebrities and >>>> published personal photographs, most containing some nudity. >>>> In 2013, Edward Snowden doxed the NSA. >>>> >>>> These aren't the first instances of politically motivated >>>> doxing, but there's a clear trend. As people realize what an >>>> effective attack this can be, and how an individual can use >>>> the tactic to do considerable damage to powerful people and >>>> institutions, we're going to see a lot more of it. >>>> >>>> On the internet, attack is easier than defense. We're living >>>> in a world where a sufficiently skilled and motivated >>>> attacker will circumvent network security. Even worse, most >>>> internet security assumes it needs to defend against an >>>> opportunistic attacker who will attack the weakest network in >>>> order to get—for example—a pile of credit card numbers. The >>>> notion of a targeted attacker, who wants Sony or Ashley >>>> Madison or John Brennan because of what they stand for, is >>>> still new. And it's even harder to defend against. >>>> >>>> What this means is that we're going to see more political >>>> doxing in the future, against both people and institutions. >>>> It's going to be a factor in elections. It's going to be a >>>> factor in anti-corporate activism. More people will find >>>> their personal information exposed to the world: politicians, >>>> corporate executives, celebrities, divisive and outspoken >>>> individuals. >>>> >>>> Of course they won't all be doxed, but some of them will. >>>> Some of them will be doxed directly, like Brennan. Some of >>>> them will be inadvertent victims of a doxing attack aimed at >>>> a company where their information is stored, like those >>>> celebrities with iPhone accounts and every customer of Ashley >>>> Madison. Regardless of the method, lots of people will have >>>> to face the publication of personal correspondence, >>>> documents, and information they would rather be private. >>>> >>>> In the end, doxing is a tactic that the powerless can >>>> effectively use against the powerful. It can be used for >>>> whistleblowing. It can be used as a vehicle for social >>>> change. And it can be used to embarrass, harass, and >>>> intimidate. Its popularity will rise and fall on this >>>> effectiveness, especially in a world where prosecuting the >>>> doxers is so difficult. >>>> >>>> There's no good solution for this right now. We all have the >>>> right to privacy, and we should be free from doxing. But >>>> we're not, and those of us who are in the public eye have no >>>> choice but to rethink our online data shadows. >>>> >> >>> Political figures in most countries have been using their >>> personal email accounts to conduct business 'under the radar' >>> in order to avoid information being subject to oversight, most >>> probably because its illegal, unconstitutional or at the very >>> least not good for the image of governments. >> >>> When they started to do this, they threw the book on ethics in >>> the bin and opened themselves up to any abuse of their personal >>> life that may happen. >> >>> If people in power act properly in their professional dealings >>> then their is an argument against d0xing their personal >>> information but once they start to try to hide information then >>> it's open season on every aspect of their life. >> >> >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQGcBAEBCgAGBQJWNmjwAAoJEEN278Ja4tg+nW8MAIY0FdT9O08i/lEjTx6PuZIo kaPwFve8vsTbK4zSC5KDh9aBaLdTkMqmSl2sVAIyCtDXA/pfbhq2gbT4NzwEzOcy FldFdRlU6pQcKLEfyA5R+bnvRepB6htciJznGdnknTtd0p97F6eugkMF/ifV5XpC qicLWLucLPo4lRaLIIk6OXruaMGxnpQOwRMPMFFv4h2zxDMIbfNFsibRQJXnp0QL FaXKCQh5+v/YAYWUp0SmK5XaDxyK//8Y3FkPUa+bXwHP/w48txJ0ljZXxtsrsWAF qj/HO0wT4P6hlyiizmxFWJ6AxI3yx9c4RqaqG/kRvU6fp13yHqRfytBUGKQJqbyY zmjsGp6IyX8k0GChqp/57pwmuaUNwFo7mX4Be9HyDMh+kZQdDlcSpFjCbnPooR8j UE9KKpp4ggOpa5RO75sFtJamiW/bT6uBRdGrcvIP9JxXIV/ZAczQt2/Ev3Kok6Ib FC79SnjV11QGUj5qgM9zK9Z6L9S4dtLvBSZkOKQgCw== =FLPZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
