Anonymous hacker planned to publish details of women who had abortions
Source: Guardian
Anonymous hacker planned to publish details of women who had abortions
Court hears James Jeffery stole 10,000 database records of women registered with Britain's biggest abortion provider BPAS
Damien Pearse
guardian.co.uk, Saturday 10 March 2012 11.44 EST
A member of the hacking collective Anonymous broke into the website of Britain's biggest abortion provider and planned to publicly release the details of women who used the service.
James Jeffery, 27, stole around 10,000 database records containing the personal details of women who had registered with the site before "boasting" of his crime on Twitter.
Westminster magistrates court, London, heard that the hacker had also identified "vulnerabilities" on a string of websites including those for the FBI, the CIA and the Houses of Parliament.
~snip~
The court was told that Jeffery, who was arrested in a police swoop on his home during the early hours of Friday, intended to "release all the details" of those registered on the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) site. But he had a change of heart because he thought doing so would be "wrong", the court was told.
Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/mar/10/anonymous-hacker-women-abortion
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)Does this guy self proclaim himself to be a member of the hacking collective "anonymous" or do they just lump anyone caught hacking as part of the "anonymous" group?
MADem
(135,425 posts)He also managed to deface the BPAS website with the Anonymous logo and a statement.
It's all fun and games until someone gets hurt...
bitchkitty
(7,349 posts)How? Do you have inside information? Are you a feebie?
MADem
(135,425 posts)
Are you telling me, with a serious, no ha-ha, post, that a guy who uses the stupid logo and dorky electronic voice, and who participated with OTHER Anonymous members in coordinated DoS and other attacks against the FBI and other agencies, just happened to be some assclown who got lucky and decided to pretend to be a member of the group, even though he communicated with other Anon members on twitter, and had identified himself with the group in the past?
I mean, really--that's your assertion?
And your ONLY retort to me is make some stupid, snarkass "Are you a feebie?" accusation because I happen to have a deeply held moral objection to the theft of private, personal data, financial and otherwise, that has potential to be damaging to innocent victims in a personal and pecuniary fashion?
What hubris! Let me be clear, in the event you are a concrete thinker, and because concrete thinkers do so need concrete responses: I am not, nor have I ever been, a "feebie"-- I'm just a person who doesn't like thieves.
bitchkitty
(7,349 posts)absolutely certain of your facts. I just wondered if you have inside information.
I tend not to believe corporate media, but that's just me.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Some of that Anonymous drama played out over at Kos:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/02/how-one-security-firm-tracked-anonymousand-paid-a-heavy-price.ars
Generally speaking, I have found, when the media, corporate or otherwise, tells us about an arrest, or two, or five... they're usually not making that stuff up.
caseymoz
(5,763 posts)Considering prosecutors, who are the sources, can make their allegations any way they want before court adjudication and never be questioned before journalistic deadline, you shouldn't trust, nor tell others to presume details here are factual.
Skepticism is warranted here, though the specific question, "Are you FBI?" isn't. I have accused other people here of being feds when they seemed to be unusually well informed of seemingly, esoteric investigations and facts. One person did admit to me that he was former DoD intelligence but was now "retired." It was during the big WikiLeaks dump, and he was trying to refer people to a "more accurate" leak site than WikiLeaks, along with smearing Assange. He was also performing other monkey business, too complicated to describe here. So, infiltration does happen all over the left, including on this site.
Plus, Anonymous is such a loose collection of hackers. You have the friendly, well-meaning left-wing activists, then you have those of other political persuasions, and then you have the jerks and criminals, including, perhaps, a contingent of pedophiles. There's ideological or moral test to join. Except, I think opposition to Scientology might help.
MADem
(135,425 posts)You'll never see me telling people not to read shit. If I think something is crap, I'll say so, but that's just my opinion for anyone to disregard if they so desire.
Anonymous is not all that loose. Most of these indictments are coming out of the gold mine that "Sabu" (he, of 45000 "anon" associated twitter followers) has provided. Sabu, like it or not, was regarded as a "leader" and while he's not quite the Osama of the tribe, he was pretty substantial, and 'wired in' to most corners of the group. He was 'in' on the political shit, the "let's steal credit cards, sell the numbers, and use the money to buy stuff" crowd, AND the relatively tiny LULZSEC bunch--many of whom were just rounded up and tagged in Ireland.
I'm betting there's more to come. Plenty has come along already, and it's all from Sabu's mouth.
Background: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/07/donncha-o-cearbhaill-hacker-fbi-ireland_n_1326998.html
caseymoz
(5,763 posts)It allowed him to be as careless about what he said as he wanted to be. Again, they are all thieves?
No harm, just your opinion. Now, I've read that there's a certain percentage of pedophiles in Anonymous. I think it's true, but I would never be as presumptuous to say they were all pedophiles, no matter how much I read.
Forty-five thousand members, vast majority of which have never met, isn't loose? Sabu was "like it or not" the leader? Criminal organizations are not that informal, and their leadership tends to be far more protective of their position than "take it or leave it." If he's able to be like that about it, "loose" describes this outfit.
That many hackers, all stealing credit card numbers by the tens of thousands (because the take in these hacks and phishings aren't small) would seem to me that every credit card number on earth would be stolen in five years. And Anonymous is just one hackers group.
Hacking and cracking are real problems, but if they were that bad, the economy would now be unworkable. Right now: it would be unworkable.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I won't stop you.
I'll also betcha a donut that the odd altruists aren't the ones being arrested.
If you've read a lot of the backstory on this, as I have, you would learn that the 45,000 members thing is about as accurate as the number of Rush's listeners.
The hangers-on, the acolytes, the ones who were Sabu's twitter pals (which is where the number came from), which he and his cadre of insiders called "trolls" (odd name, that, used differently than the internet descriptor--it described people who were "glommers on" with no real talent, but who were useful for ginning up DoS attacks, or sowing other confusion, but who were not part of the "insider" cool crowd that planned these stupid shenanigans) aren't the ones who have the skillset to cause trouble.
They're just wannabees, mostly who associate themselves with the Warner Brothers Mask bunch because it's the "in" thing to do--makes them feel like rebels; the 21st Century equivalent of a leather jacket and a ducktail hairdo. Ooooh, WE ARE LEGION!!! EXPECT US! It's just pathetic. When you see the little shits in the back of a police car, they don't look so cool.
UPDATE on that dipshit in UK: http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2158752/pregnancy-advisory-service-hacker-pleads-guilty
James Jeffery, 27, was brought before Westminster Magistrates court in London, accused of stealing database records pertaining to women who had registered online with the BPAS, which provides services including abortion counseling. He was also accused of defacing the organisation's web site with an Anonymous image and a personal statement, the court was told.
...His arrest came after he boasted of breaking into the BPAS by tweeting details of the exploit, including the login for the BPAS sysadmin, under the name Pablo Escobar.
The BPAS web site was hacked and defaced on 8 March, 2012 in what looked like a sophisticated cyber attack by an anti-abortion extremist. "This incident appears to be the most extreme example of what is now a very concerning escalation in anti-abortion activity aimed at providers and the women who need their services," BPAS said in a statement after the attack was made public.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Yes, we have seen this movie before.....
- What makes anyone think these guys ever stopped??? They've gotten much stronger since the old days. Now our government can legally assassinate a citizen, and then lie about it on the news. For the country's security. Feel secure???
One day, a Navajo elder and his son came across the space crew walking among the rocks. The elder, who spoke only Navajo, asked a question. His son translated for the NASA people: "What are these guys in the big suits doing?"
One of the astronauts said that they were practicing for a trip to the moon. When his son relayed this comment the Navajo elder got all excited and asked if it would be possible to give to the astronauts a message to deliver to the moon.
Recognizing a promotional opportunity when he saw one, a NASA official accompanying the astronauts said, "Why certainly!" and told an underling to get a tape recorder.
The Navajo elder's comments into the microphone were brief. The NASA official asked the son if he would translate what his father had said. The son listened to the recording and laughed uproariously. But he refused to translate. So the NASA people took the tape to a nearby Navajo village and played it for other members of the tribe. They too laughed long and loudly but also refused to translate the elder's message to the moon.
Finally, an official government translator was summoned. After he finally stopped laughing the translator relayed the message:
"Watch out for these assholes. They have come to steal your land."
MADem
(135,425 posts)places, and burrow in to the Anon culture with a jazzy hacker "PabloEscobar" name? Is that what you are suggesting?
Or are you suggesting that elements of Anonymous are FBI? I've always wondered if that was the case, myself, that they'd integrated themselves into the organization--that they were either in there, fitting in with the teen and young adult hell-raisers, or they were in there via arrests of kids like that Sabu guy, who sold out to save his ass.
When I hear hoofbeats, I think horses. And what I think is that the fellow they arrested last June, that guy Sabu, has a voice that the FBI thinks is absolutely angelic...and they just love to hear him sing, sing, sing. And all these arrests of late? That's Sabu, saying get this one, and that one, and don't forget that one over there!
Every arrest and conviction gives him time off a very long sentence, and a good placement in Witness Protection--he is MOTIVATED to provide accurate and supportable "gets" for those guys if he wants to have a life for himself.
I think the Anonymous culture has reason to be concerned. Those chickens are coming home to roost.
bitchkitty
(7,349 posts)And it's not as far-fetched as you try to make it sound.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Which is what they did.
But sure, infiltration is possible--it just takes longer.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)
SkyDaddy7
(6,045 posts)"Those Assholes"! Excellent description!
appleannie1
(5,457 posts)I think it is dangerous that they can hack into any site they choose.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)They don't care who they hurt. Lives of allies were put at stake when they released some of the data concerning Iraq -- but they weren't concerned.
MADem
(135,425 posts)...which is always the case until they do something dickish, I suppose.
I think they're bullies, myself, and I have not been impressed with their antics in playing their dorky little threatening games, stealing credit card information, shutting down website cover pages for a second or two, and posting self-important videos.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)I'm glad they are showing their true stripes.
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)when they were going to expose Bank of America, they were hero's for sure. I have been anxiously waiting for them to do something big and exposing but they just started exposing lots of nothing.
I think from the trail of tapes I have seen, (different styles) that there are several different unrelated groups that have tagged onto the anonymous name. It is impossible to tell who is who. At least for us non hackers.
I have not yet given up that the original anonymous will resurface and expose some really good shit instead of like you said, taking down a site for a fraction of a second, and exposing unimportant info, and shit of the like.
This abortion thing does not sound like any of the original anonymous activities. I think it has just become a "see what you can hack into" exploration by a whole lot of young hackers.
But as far as the original anonymous and what it seemed to want to do, hell yeah, I'm for them.
MADem
(135,425 posts)black flag, playing the pirate, and fucking with people for pure sport--anyone can join, there is no "moral core" and they hack for the sake of hacking. No heroes there.
It's like OWS, in that it is leaderless, and some of the membership think that idiotic Warner Brothers copyrighted Guy Fawkes mask is cool, but that's pretty much the end of the similarity-- it has no requirement for consensus, and the members don't have to show up and show themselves.
These are not nice people. No accountability, no responsibility. All it takes is one asshole--and they've got more than one in their bunch. That's been obvious for awhile.
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)lol
IamK
(956 posts)
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)They are very different from whistleblowers who theoretically publish material that they believe shines a light on dishonesty or corruption.
MADem
(135,425 posts)They steal from people; they make a mess. It's not whistleblowing in lots of cases, it's just grabbing money and selling credit card numbers.
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)It was one lone wolf, who is a right wing prick. Most of the people in Anonymous wouldn't think of doing such a thing. When a cop commits a crime, and is outed, it's one thing, when something like this happens, Anonymous should out this prick, posing as a member. He could be a cop, trying to tarnish the reputation of Anonymous too.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I can just see the scenario playing out across homes across the world... "Jesus/By Allah Freddie/Achmed, I let you use my credit card to buy that stupid online game, and THIS is what I get? My card hacked, my details compromised--I'll have to get a new phone, a new card, a new email--and because I didn't report it soon enough, I'm liable for the first fifty bucks worth of charges...thanks a lot, kiddo!"
They are assholes. They are not heroes. They hack where the CREDIT CARDS are--be it Apple or Sony or You-Name-It. It's INDIVIDUALS who are harmed--not big banks, not big corporations. Enabling these shitheads is not "liberal." It's dumb.
Occulus
(20,599 posts)"Think of the children"?
"Homes across the world"?
Seriously??
You really expect us to buy that shit?
MADem
(135,425 posts)Which says a great deal about your maturity level. This has nothing to do with your childish accusations of "authoritarianism"--it has to do with assholes who take things that do not belong to them.
SERIOUSLY, "dude." Like, "uncool, man."
I don't give a flying fuck what you "buy"--I can see that you have a need to be one of those internet rebels, cooler than the rest of us "schmucks" who don't find thieves special in any way, shape or form--even if they make dorky YOUTUBE videos with quirky mechanical voices and silly Warner Brothers masks.
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)I know where your bread is buttered. They don't use the credit cards, they hack them so that the entities that have them on their site, use some sort of security to store credit cards, because in many instances they are using none, in others they are using faulty security measures.
Typically, when these credit cards are hacked, the site that was hacked, gives free identity theft protection for some amount of time, so the credit card holders, have rarely, if ever lost money on this. The only ones who lose money are the corporations who want to be cheap and put little or no security on their sites.
MADem
(135,425 posts)If you're trying to be "hip," it may be meaningful to you, but you're laying an egg when it comes to my old fogey perceptions. Poor spelling and a mystery acronym fail to impress.
I don't like thieves, that's where my "bread is buttered." Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, Sigmund.
Why is that such a difficult concept to grasp? Why must someone have an agenda, beyond despising amoral punkass thieves who sit on their raddled asses and steal from innocent people?
Just because the banks might -- and I said might-- "eventually" make good on most losses (if the hapless customer calls in "soon enough" to suit them), one way or another the customers will pay. And woe to the person who goes off hiking the Appalachian Trail (not a SC governor, just some fitness buff) who has all his shit set up on direct debit, plows off into the wilderness, gets his card ripped off by a hacker assclown, and then all his auto-payments go to shit along with his credit rating.
This hacking "fun" screws with real people who have enough shit to deal with, and it does not amuse. It's asinine, it's childish and it is grand theft.
Lock 'em up.
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)Fear, uncertainty, and doubt. A tip from an old fogey, when you come upon an acronym you don't understand, take a look see over at http://www.acronymfinder.com
Oh, so I guess, that you are stating that these places that sell things online should have NO security. And I was not saying that this sort of hacking is good, by any means. There are bad hackers, good hackers, and those in between. If I hack a site, and tell them that I can easily break into it, without their knowledge, then show them how I did it, and tell them what they have to do to stop it, am I a bad guy? Now if I break into an unprotected website, steal credit cards and money, don't tell the website's owner that I have broken in, and actually sell, or use the credit cards, THEN, it's at least larceny. If I go in, steal numbers, and post the names of the people whose numbers were stolen, and never use them, doesn't that send the message that the website owner doesn't care about security, and only cares about how much they can make?
Think about it, then tell me to get off your lawn.
MADem
(135,425 posts)But let's not forget what the OP was all about. That was not a "good" hacker. The ones being arrested in the last few weeks as a result of Sabu's finger pointing were not "good" hackers either--it's not the "good hackers" who are being rounded up and arrested.
See, the ones who mean well, like the Facebook Volunteers, who get PAID by that Zuckerschmuck to identify vulnerabilities, are not the issue here. No one is going to arrest anyone who is helping people close backdoors and seal up vulnerabilities. If someone does a good deed, they're more likely to be rewarded than punished.
This whole thread isn't about the good guys, it's about the WE ARE LEGION EXPECT US assholes. Why do they not just say "Be Very Afraid?" if they want to be hyperbolic? Such stupid drama.
It's about the immature assholes who do bad things and chortle about it, as if no consequences will accrue to them. And when those assholes take the card numbers, they sell 'em and use the money to do stupid things--as Sabu, and others, demonstrated (see his indictment to get an idea how he spent the money he stole--Robin Hood, no...more like a robbing hood).
You can hang out on my lawn if you'd like. I don't mind. I do remember what it was like to be young. I just didn't get into stupid mean shit as a kid. I don't understand those who get a charge out of fucking over others.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)that these guys are heroes.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Of course he couldn't be a "member". That would spoil the narrative.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)always will lead to some situations like this.
- That's why I always expect for my heroes to be as pure as the driven snow.
''Hypocrisy has its own elegant symmetry.'' ~Julie Metz
MADem
(135,425 posts)I just expect them to not hurt working people with their shenanigans...
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)when it comes to most social and personal freedom issues. EXCEPT he is pro-life. We should not assume that all participants in anti- conservative actions match our beliefs.
Amaril
(1,267 posts)........go after individuals? I thought the focus of their attacks were corrupt corporations & government entities -- or at those they deemed to be corrupt.
When did they start going after personal information about private citizens?
IamK
(956 posts)Amaril
(1,267 posts)From the article you posted:
Some victims confirmed unauthorised transactions linked to their credit cards. Anonymous boasted of stealing Stratfor's confidential client list, which includes entities ranging from Apple Inc. to the U.S. Air Force to the Miami Police Department, and mining it for more than 4,000 credit card numbers, passwords and home addresses.
Stratfor? Hmmmmmm (from Wikipedia):
Stratfor's subscribers list was confidential, and the company's publicity list includes Fortune 500 companies and international government agencies..........
Stratfor has been cited by media such as CNN, Bloomberg, the Associated Press, Reuters, The New York Times and the BBC as an authority on strategic and tactical intelligence issues. Barron's once referred to it as "The Shadow CIA".
"The Shadow CIA"? Yep, that totally sounds like something Anonymous would go after. And also from the Wiki article............
The hackers said they used the credit card data to make donations to various charities, including the Red Cross, Save the Children and CARE.
While it doesn't make their actions legal or even moral, I will admit that a small part of me had to smile at the "Robbing the rich to give to the poor" nature of their escapade.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Please--Anonymous doesn't care where they hack--they just look for easy pickins', and they will take your details and sell them if you happened to buy a game online at SONY and will not give a shit if you call yourself a liberal. They'll grab your Facebook details and screw with those, too, just for fun. They've hacked Apple and taken survey data, they go where they can.
They are amoral thieves. Their victims are individuals who don't deserve to have their information stolen and sold. When they steal information and cash from banks, everyone who is a customer at those banks ends up paying for their theft, one way or another. The bank doesn't suffer. See, they don't rob the "rich," they rob those poor bastards who end up with seven dollar a month fees on their bank accounts to pay for these losses. The bank will make damn sure their rich bastards collecting hefty salaries don't suffer a bit. The customers are the ones who end up getting screwed.
Did you maybe miss the part where I said what they did wasn't legal or moral?
Forgive me for musing in your vicinity.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I just don't want the point that these guys are assholes to be lost.
They pretend to rob the rich, but what they really do is rob from the poor. The rich just slap additional fees on the poor to pay for the havoc that Anonymous has wreaked.
And, ultimately, I agree..........but, there is a tiny, immature-anarchist side to my "inner child" that does grin at their antics from time-to-time.............BUT, you are absolutely right when you say that their activities end up harming all of us more than their "victims".
Here..........next round is on me. 
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)that's okay, just don't fart in my general direction
valerief
(53,235 posts)
Judi Lynn
(164,132 posts)Maybe the deeper motive is to try to smear the public's perception of Anonymous, to create suspicion, doubt, hostility toward them.
MADem
(135,425 posts)They'll take YOUR money, and YOUR information and sell it if it is in the wrong place at the wrong time.
They don't care about politics. They care about being assholes.
chrisa
(4,524 posts)Anon has a mixture of all of these.
Occulus
(20,599 posts)Authoritarian Follower personality types can't have THAT at ALL!
MADem
(135,425 posts)The guy who steals from the kids buying online games is....?
The hacker taking the credit card details from some academic who subscribes to Stratfor is....?
Black/White/Grey--the label THIEF fits them all to a T.
because robbery is just so funny....until they get you! Then you'll be ready to shove that "authoritarian absolutism" right up their asses!
DireStrike
(6,452 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)the bank will give them a new credit card. The little customers get fucked over, they have to re-do all their direct debit data, change their email accounts or deal with spam, and live with the fact that their information is "out there"--not just a dead credit card, but their name, address, phone number, etc.
Then, the banks, to make up for the fact that they've been gamed, don't lower the salaries of their corporate pigs, or make economies by streamlining operations--no, they hike up bank and ATM fees on poor people, maybe delay a pay raise for their tellers. Who gets screwed? The least among us.
They're assholes and thieves, these hackers--they aren't heroes. They have no moral center.
DireStrike
(6,452 posts)There are multiple things they could do with the information. If they do as you described, they're black hat hackers. If they hand the information back to the site owners and outline the weaknesses that allowed them to get the info, they're white hat.
But clearly you already know everything about the subject.
Gore1FL
(22,951 posts)They may be like Robin Hood. They may be like Capone.
Say what you want about either one's motives. Both are thieves.
You can applaud the outcome of neither, both , or one over the other. Both work outside the legal and ethical standard set by society. Both are criminals.
Anonymous is not a group of well-meaning people. Anonymous is a group of criminals who sometimes produce outcomes that are contrary to the goals of my political rivals. The enemy of my enemy is my friend is rubbish logic, and this situation brings that point forward.
Hackers are criminals.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Anonymous. All they do is threaten and bully from behind a Warner Brother's mask logo--it's very lame and childish, what they get up to.
AdHocSolver
(2,561 posts)Actually, corporations have had their computers hacked for DECADES, long before the Internet came along.
Corporations have been covering up the hacking and absorbing the losses to prevent their customers from finding out just how insecure their personal data is that is contained in corporate databases.
The Internet just makes the hacking that has been going on for decades public knowledge.
This awareness made widespread by Anonymous, whoever they are and whatever their motives, is in the public interest.
Now, if people would only extrapolate from these corporate hacks to become aware of how easy it is change the election results and cover up the changes where electronic voting machines are used (especially without a paper trail that can be audited), then the hacking they do would promote a public service.
MADem
(135,425 posts)It would be one thing if they didn't sell the info--but they DO. It would be one thing if they didn't release the info--but they DO. And often as not, they skim plenty off the top for THEMSELVES.
We aren't talking about people who are altruistically saying "Ooops, I see your cat is up a tree, let me get it down for you and saw off that old branch so Fluffy won't be harmed next time!"
These are guys who STEAL and disseminate private, personal, individual information. That is NOT in the "public interest." That's a "fuck the public, I will pursue my own interests" action.
You don't need someone stealing your credit card, revealing your phone numbers, address, bank accounts, email accounts, etc., to "know" that elections are stolen. Anyone over the age of ten in 2000 had that figured out 12 years ago and we had to live with it for eight long years.
And that Sabu guy? He's letting a lot of those hacking guys know that they are NOT 'Anonymous'--and they'd better Expect The Police. One would have to be very naive to not associate the recent spate of arrests with the news that they've had this guy in custody for three quarters of a year, now. That guy probably ain't gonna do a day in jail; he's been working overtime for the coppers, they're likely to bleed him dry, use him to create new identities and dig in once again to find out what's up with people, and then send him off to a happy life in Witness Protection:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-03-08/anonymous-hacker-sabu-worked-around-the-clock-to-aid-u-dot-s-dot-crime-probe
AdHocSolver
(2,561 posts)I wasn't excusing hackers. I was pointing out that your concern about having your personal information exposed and used against you by hackers was misplaced.
Corporations and various government agencies have been selling or swapping your personal information to other corporations and government agencies for years. Even when specific identifying information, such as a name and address, isn't included in a set of data, data mining software can be used to search and correlate information to determine who anyone listed in a group of datasets actually is.
from the Wikipedia article on data mining:
(snip)
**********
Data mining requires data preparation which can uncover information or patterns which may compromise confidentiality and privacy obligations. A common way for this to occur is through data aggregation. Data aggregation is when the data are accrued, possibly from various sources, and put together so that they can be analyzed.[49] This is not data mining per se, but a result of the preparation of data before and for the purposes of the analysis. The threat to an individual's privacy comes into play when the data, once compiled, cause the data miner, or anyone who has access to the newly compiled data set, to be able to identify specific individuals, especially when originally the data were anonymous.
It is recommended that an individual is made aware of the following before data are collected:
the purpose of the data collection and any data mining projects,
how the data will be used,
who will be able to mine the data and use them,
the security surrounding access to the data, and in addition,
how collected data can be updated.[49]
In the United States, privacy concerns have been somewhat addressed by their congress via the passage of regulatory controls such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The HIPAA requires individuals to be given "informed consent" regarding any information that they provide and its intended future uses by the facility receiving that information. According to an article in Biotech Business Week, "In practice, HIPAA may not offer any greater protection than the longstanding regulations in the research arena," says the AAHC. More importantly, the rule's goal of protection through informed consent is undermined by the complexity of consent forms that are required of patients and participants, which approach a level of incomprehensibility to average individuals."[50] This underscores the necessity for data anonymity in data aggregation practices.
One may additionally modify the data so that they are anonymous, so that individuals may not be readily identified.[49] However, even de-identified data sets can contain enough information to identify individuals, as occurred when journalists were able to find several individuals based on a set of search histories that were inadvertently released by AOL.[51]
**********
MADem
(135,425 posts)And they aren't selling your credit card numbers to thieves who will charge 'em up and buy crazy crap all over hell, either.
Corporations aren't compromising your credit or debit cards and causing people to have to cancel and re-set their direct debit payments, get new cards, sometimes even close and re-open bank accounts and email accounts.
It's just not the same. We're not talking some assholes handing over your name and address to a company that will grace your mailbox with irritating junk mail, we're talking about people stealing your MONEY.
I can tell when a corporation sells my details, usually because the few loyalty cards I have are in the names of my dogs and cats. They get the credit card solicitations--not me!
caseymoz
(5,763 posts)Not by those methods. But they fix their terms so that you're going to be paying higher and higher fees. Banks have practically the complete right to fail you at any time and you can't get a day in court with them due to arbitration clauses. They are bribing members of Congress and regulators to get more and more access to your money. At the rate things are going, the "cashless society" is going to be having them handling all the money circulating and dipping in at will.
And look at all the homeowners and innocent people, including taxpayers, who got "drained" by the banks. You don't notice your account gone yet because the bill hasn't come due, yet. Ultimately, your account will get drained because of it. Unlike Anonymous, nobody has gone to jail, and it was fraud and theft by definition.
Believe me, they are going to continue to press their advantages until you feel the same about them as the hacker who drained your account.
That being said, again, not all hackers are thieves. Not every one of them will steal your credit card numbers and sell them. And if you feel so paranoid that anyone who can is a thief, you really should take another look at the power and greed of banks to and ask yourself who possibly has the expertise to fight them.
MADem
(135,425 posts)personal and private information and account numbers doesn't ALSO wreak havoc.
One thing does not cancel or override the other. It's apples and oranges. Yes, big greedy banks are bad. Everyone gets that, it's not a surprise.
That doesn't make hackers who steal people's information, fuck up the finances of people who did nothing to them, create chaos and upset in the lives of innocent people, and use the stolen information for all sorts of amusements--to include theft of services-- "good."
Lock 'em up. They are thieves.
Response to MADem (Reply #70)
caseymoz This message was self-deleted by its author.
caseymoz
(5,763 posts)When referring to the banks. It seems the way you get around it is by just not counting some wrongs from some parties.
Mathematically speaking, two wrongs can make a right. Especially when side A, the banks, will continue to do two, three, four and infinite wrongs until you wrong them and show them they have something to lose by continuing. BTW, the banks have already reached that point. You're not going to moralize and platitude them back into behavior, especially when you yourself find "cause" to forgive them their "occasional" foibles.
Unfortunately, two or more opposing wrongs between parties also can mean that you have a fight or a war on your hands, where the wrongs come so fast you just stop counting.
And Sabu? If what he's doing doesn't bother you in the least, or you think he's a hero, you better watch your back your entire life, because you'll be inclined to trust the very person most likely to stick the knife in your back.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Simply put--just because the banks are assholes does not give Anonymous the right to screw the hapless customer/victims of those banks DOUBLY to make their stupid little points while ripping people off, to boot. Is that plain enough for you?
I also don't think you take any points I've made thus far, if you actually think I regard Sabu as a hero. Where do you get these impressions? That could not be further from the truth.
Here--let me give it to you simply once again. He's like Sammy The Bull Gravano--he's a fucking CRIMINAL who got bagged, who flipped to save his own scrawny and cowardly neck, and who ratted out his dumb little pals to get himself outta jail. That's not a hero, that's one practical SOB who has about as much of a moral center as his thieving little minions.
It sucks to be a thief, because there's no honor among 'em.
caseymoz
(5,763 posts)As they continue to squeeze all of us, you, too, will feel it financially.
I agree that plain theft and larceny, either stealing directly, or being an accessory by selling credit card numbers is immoral, should be punished. You're arguing that, but that's not what I'm disputing. The ones in Anonymous who have done this should be punished, especially since the banks turn around and hurt the customers, especially when the banks' security and credit cards' security isn't adequate.
I just not ready to believe that all Anonymous members have stolen, that they are all criminals. I was hoping some among them would use their expertise to fight the system, and would be terribly discouraged if they're all actually thieves and in it for gain. But even worse would be if some are true "hactivists" who don't steal were still brought up on charges that they did, as I'm afraid is going to happen. The presumption of guilt, here, makes that far easier prosecutors to do this.
Again, there's a big difference between stealing money online (or being an accessory to it), and replicating information and disseminating it. And there's a big difference to attacking people abusing power and attacking people with no power you disagree with, or preying on them for gain.
MADem
(135,425 posts)And that little Sabu puke who, like it or not, was indeed a defacto leader of that little Warner Brothers Mask Club, and who was directing, planning and participating in many of the activities that were causing havoc, calls the people who thought they were Anonymous "members," but who aren't involved in the real vicious shit "trolls." Such a team builder!
He's also very busy pointing the finger at his "pals" to save his own behind. No honor among thieves, as I said.
Apparently there are levels of "coolness" within the Anonymous hierarchy, and the ones who aren't involved in the destructive end of things were apparently regarded as useful tools and not much more. If people aren't feeling a bit used at this stage of the game, they've got to be in deep denial.
caseymoz
(5,763 posts)Just pointing out the weak link there. The corporation doing reactionary stealing is something other than thievery? When you say "cause" you seem to absolve one party in the chain of thievery above another. Why? Are you more or less right to steal your neighbor's car if your has been stolen? Did the car thief really "cause" you to do that? Why do you give the bank an excuse nobody else has?
"Thief" only fits the ones who steal, and that's stealing by the real-world definition where they not only gain property or cash, but they deprive their "victim" of the same cash or property. Simple theft of information, that is duplicating it and disclosing it, is not thievery by any definition. It may be immoral for other reasons, but it's not stealing. If stealing in the real world had every meant replicating what somebody else owns, leaving them in possession of it, and using the copy, would "stealing" ever have been considered wrong? Like if someone reproduces your car at will and then drives off with the copy, would you feel like they stole from you? That's "stealing" information. Morally, it's not the same act as real-world stealing.
To say they are all thieves regardless of whether they've stolen or been an assessory is simple bigotry.
MADem
(135,425 posts)There is no weak link, justification, or amelioration. These hackers are not cool. They aren't heroes. They're just an argument and an EXCUSE for nations to crack down on web freedom. They like to fuck around, take things that are not theirs, and think that makes them "cool." It doesn't--it makes them criminals.
You are totally wrong that "information" disclosed is not thievery. Say I manage to acquire your full name, DOB, social security number, license number, address, telephone numbers, email addresses, passwords, credit card numbers and security codes on the reverse, etc. Gosh, that's just silly old information--nothing to worry about, it doesn't have Dead Presidents printed on it. So what if I use your credit card, the "bank" will just give you money back, yeah? How about I hack into your private emails where you are talking trash about your boss and publish them far and wide (or I could WRITE emails that cause you to be fired or cause your significant other, your neighbor, or whomever to think you are the biggest jerk on the planet, a pervert, a despicable human being--but hey, it's just "information" yeah?).
You're actually telling me that this information has no value? Please. I'll bet it does to YOU. I could ruin your reputation, cause you to lose your job, or be off with your identity quick as a wink, and leave you so well screwed that you couldn't use your own damn passport because YOU would be perceived as the phony.
I have a friend who was a victim of identity theft, and who had to change their frigging name, not once, but twice, AND get a new social security number. Even those "repairs" raise suspicions--nothing is every easy for my old pal, ever again. Why should anyone have to put up with that shit?
It's not bigotry to call someone behaving in an illegal fashion a fucking criminal. There are no Robin Hoods, here--they are robbing hoods.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Hence, the popular love stories of Bonnie and Clyde on Hallmark...
MADem
(135,425 posts)caseymoz
(5,763 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)bitchkitty
(7,349 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)The fact is that this cretin was good for anon until he was bad.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)It's not funny when it is your email account, your credit card number, your bank account, your personal details....it's just awful in that case. These people are thugs and bullies. The ones they hurt are INDIVIDUALS. The ones who are the ultimate victims are PEOPLE. The banks, the hacked entities like STRATFOR or SONY or What-Have-You, go on. They reimburse as much as they have to (don't report it soon enough? Screw you!) and they reissue cards and jack up the banking rates to pay for it--in other words, the VICTIMS pay, and the fellow customers of the victims pay, too.
+ The people who have their information flung out onto the internet, some of which they can't get back to keep to themselves (name, address, phone, email, credit card numbers) are the ones who are violated. This is shitty conduct. It is theft. It's not heroic. It sucks.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/hacking-group-anonymous-vows-hit/story?id=15234349
Up to $1 million was reportedly stolen from Stratfor, in Austin, Texas, a leading provider of military, economic and political analysis for clients that include Apple and the U.S. Air Force.
http://www.informationweek.com/news/security/attacks/232200481
"In regards to the recent demonstrations and protests across the globe, we are going to turn the tables on the banks," according to a YouTube video uploaded on Saturday, which formally announced #OpRobinHood.
"Operation Robin Hood is going to return the money to those who have been cheated by our system and most importantly to those hurt by our banks," it said. "Operation Robin Hood will take credit cards and donate to the 99% as well as various charities around the globe. The banks will be forced to reimburse the people there (sic) money back."
According to c|net, Anonymous affiliate LulzSec said in a post on the PasteBin website said that it had hacked the website months ago and now it had got the time to post the stolen data, which includes emails, passwords and credit card information.
"Continuing the week long celebration of wreaking utter havoc on global financial systems, militaries, and governments, we are announcing our next target: the online piggie supply store SpecialForces.com," the hacker group said.
Read more: http://www.itproportal.com/2011/12/30/anonymous-hacks-online-military-gear-supplier-specialforcescom/#ixzz1okjKy4fg
The loose-knit international hacking collective posted a cache of data to the Web early yesterday, including e-mails stolen from officers, tips that appeared to come from members of the public, credit card numbers, and other sensitive information.
Anonymous said it had stolen 10 gigabytes worth of data.
http://articles.boston.com/2011-08-07/news/29862040_1_e-mails-hackers-credit-card-numbers
Couple more interesting NPR blog entries here: http://www.npr.org/templates/archives/archive.php?thingId=131968506
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)I just don't think you will convince the folks who put these people on a pedestal.
It's happened so many times on DU. Bev Harris comes to mind first, but there have been many others.
I just laugh when people make fun of the perceived hero worship of the President, when there are others who
worship false heroes.
MADem
(135,425 posts)She most certainly was up there on a pedestal, too--I remember she wasn't so cool anymore when she started shitting on poor Andy.
You're right--I know I won't convince many, but maybe I'll persuade a few to slow down with the adoration and maybe question motives. Just because someone is the enemy of one's enemy does not really make them one's friend--they can turn on us, and shit on US, steal our data, compromise our security, if the mood strikes them--and what can we do about it? Not a thing...!
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Bradical79
(4,490 posts)As individuals, these hackers do their own thing. If you're familiar with the board that these guys first sprung up on and the kind of posts that have been commonly made on such forums, it's not much of a stretch to imagine some of these people are the web's version of teen "anarchists" smashing store windows and throwing firebombs. Lots of these "hacktivists" likely started off just doing this for entertainment and causing trouble for laughs.
caseymoz
(5,763 posts)I mean, look at the name. If someone sold you something under the brand name "Generic" what would be guaranteed?
It's a very loose collection of hackers. The only qualification of being in Anonymous, as I understand, is hacking expertise. That's it. Their recent hactivism is but a small part of their history.
Which also means that a prosecutor can call someone a member of Anonymous if he or she has corresponded with somebody else who is allegedly a member of it, and never be questioned about it.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)my gawd, some privacy please - turd. This is something a crazed rightwinger would do, asshole.
Judi Lynn
(164,132 posts)chrisa
(4,524 posts)They always have to go brag about it too like total idiots. 
4saken
(152 posts)And it would be absurd to think that they would not inform their actions with those beliefs. When a primary identifying factor in the title is anonymity, the result is a whole range of mentalities and motivations.
LeftishBrit
(41,453 posts)Somehow this epitomizes for me the nastier wing of the 'pro-life' movement (which does not mean ALL who oppose abortion): vindictive, fanatical, and out to deny women the right to privacy. And this was in the UK too, on my doorstep, ugggghhh.
anti-alec
(420 posts)Look him up.
Judi Lynn
(164,132 posts)Hacker suspected of more offences
Published on Sunday 11 March 2012 00:00
A MEMBER of hacking group Anonymous who broke into the website of Britain’s biggest abortion provider may also have launched cyber attacks on the CIA, FBI and Houses of Parliament, a court heard.
James Jeffery, 27, targeted the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) because he “disagreed” with the decisions of two women he knew to terminate their pregnancies.
~snip~
Described as an “able” hacker, who boasted of his feat on Twitter, Jeffery also identified “vulnerabilities” on websites for major international organisations.
Police are investigating alleged hacking offences involving websites for the FBI, CIA, West Midlands Police, the Houses of Parliament, the US navy, Arizona police and Spanish police, London’s Westminster Magistrates’ Court was told.
More:
http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/uk/hacker-suspected-of-more-offences-1-2166004#
saras
(6,670 posts)...if the large majority of the knowledgeable public agrees that their actions represent the values of Anonymous, then they are.
...if the large majority of the knowledgeable public agrees that their actions do NOT represent the values of Anonymous, then they are not
...if they're in the middle, they may be affiliated with Anonymous but not representing them well.
It most certainly is NOT decided by the mass media, or by some individual ASSERTING that they are a representative. And for that matter, it isn't decided by the individual associating with others who claim or are claimed to be members.
Given that the guy is acting like a right-winger by both British and American standards, I'd say he's pretty much automatically excluded.
FreeBC
(403 posts)He exposed the poor security protecting this information and then did not release it.
Should a left-wing hacker ignore the security flaws and let someone more nefarious get those names?
LeftishBrit
(41,453 posts)not to expose the weakness of the security system.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)as do many who we call "liberals" who prescribe to the complete ideaology that no harm is brought to any life, amoeba, fetus, ant, whatever.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Let's invent yet another bullshit elitist meaningless little "club" that vets who's who in the "Anonymous" zoo! That's as silly as saying "Because I said so!"
This guy was part of the pack of asshole hackers who call themselves, collectively, Anonymous.
Jeffery later confessed to his crimes during interviews with detectives, telling police two friends had had abortions which he disagreed with, the court heard.
Officers who traced the BPAS breach to Jeffery's home found his computer "in the process of being wiped clean". They seized a number of items including an iPad, iPhone, three laptops, a hard drive and a notebook.
The court was told that police were investigating further alleged hacking by Jeffery, involving websites for the FBI, CIA, West Midlands police, the Houses of Parliament, the US navy, Arizona police and Spanish police.
Being an asshole hacker does not automatically make you a lefty OR pro-choice. It does make you a thief, more often than not.
BzaDem
(11,142 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)pnwmom
(110,261 posts)or libertarians.
Assange himself identifies as an anarchist.
The fact that this guy is anti-abortion doesn't mean he can't be part of anonymous. They don't have uniform political beliefs. Their credo is "transparency."
FreeBC
(403 posts)Stop worrying about this one person. There will always be people like him, though often they will be much worse. Start asking why this information was not protected better.
Hacking should not be a criminal justice system problem. It is a security issue.
No offense intended towards the non-technical (most) people in this thread, but you've been conditioned by movies and other entertainment to believe that hackers are some sort of omnipotent super-geniuses and once they want to hack you, there's not much you can do about it. This is not true.
Governments and private companies are not investing enough in information security. Why should they? They only lose your information so no skin off their backs. Then they get the police/feds/security services, etc to clean up the mess.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)I suppose, but a home invasion is a security issue too. It's still a "criminal justice system problem".
Excuses that it is the fault of the victim is just plain that... and excuse for wrong-doing.
FreeBC
(403 posts)If your local Banking or Credit Union reps decided to take your money home with them for the night where it was stolen do we say, "Oh well, that's on the thief, can't blame the bank reps" ?
Anytime you see hear a report of someone stealing data, you need to remind yourself that if it wasn't this person it would be someone else. When data can be stolen, it will be. Would you rather it be some kids or young adults in Anonymous, or some eastern European mobsters set up in a puppet state looking to profit from data?
BzaDem
(11,142 posts)That doesn't mean those responsible for storing the information are always blameless. (Though they also do not always share blame. One can easily update all their software and still be hit by an unknown security hole, or one that was known but not fixed.)
But whether or not to blame those storing the information really misses the point. That is a completely different conversation, with a completely different set of policy issues. Hacking is a crime, because society wants to disincentive hacking. Similarly, breaking and entering is a crime even if the door is left unlocked. The criminal is the person who broke in -- not the person who left their door unlocked.
Someone might take reasonable (but not perfect) steps to secure their systems. In doing so, it might make hacking harder (but not impossible). The prospect of a stay in federal prison might be exactly the disincentive required to stop some people from hacking that data, that otherwise might not have hacked.
That doesn't necessarily stop someone from a country that doesn't investigate hacking or extradite criminals to the United States. But there are many smaller sites whose data is simply of no interest to oversees hackers. It might only be of interest to someone in the United States (or a country that cooperates with the United States).
The point of making hacking a crime is to reduce hacking where possible -- not to eliminate it. We don't say "we can't stop all burglary, so let's make it legal."
AdHocSolver
(2,561 posts)It was less of a problem when mainframes ruled, although it still occurred.
With the proliferation of PC's and local networks, and their connection to the outside world via the Internet, successful hacking has become an epidemic.
The best defense against getting hacked is for the system owner to make the system as secure as possible. A corporation can afford to hire knowledgeable people and buy the best software to harden their computers against attack.
In fact, corporations and government agencies have a duty to their clients to protect their clients' personal data. Corporations could do a much better job than they have.
Practically every major business and government agency has been hacked including Microsoft and the Defense Department.
In fact, if you want to criticize anyone, go after Microsoft and their bug-ridden software. Their software is widespread on the Internet and is seriously vulnerable to thousands of viruses, worms, trojans, and similar attacks. This vulnerability makes hacking into computer systems much easier.
BzaDem
(11,142 posts)burglary is to ensure that your house has an 8-inch thick steel wall around it.
MADem
(135,425 posts)That's why he went after the information. He had an axe to grind.
I think people might want to pull the string between this guy, who used the Anonymous logo in defacing the website, and that Sabu guy who has been singing like a canary lately, particularly since this idiot was engaged in hacking some high profile US targets in addition to this little assault on the Brit abortion services.
I don't think this fellah was discovered in a vacuum. And I think governments are doing a lot more "investing" in tracking these guys down than many people seem to realize. Look what they got off that Sabu guy, who had tens of thousands of twitter followers and who was gaming those who trusted him all along--who wants to bet there's MUCH MORE to come? That guy will probably sing until he is hoarse:
http://articles.cnn.com/2012-03-06/us/us_new-york-hacker-arrests_1_denial-of-service-attacks-hacker-cyberattacks?_s=PM:US
Five of the suspects, considered by investigators among the "most sophisticated hackers in the world," were arrested in the United States and Europe and charged in a Manhattan federal court over their alleged role in high-profile cyberattacks against government agencies and large companies, according to an indictment.
... Ryan Ackroyd, 23; Jake Davis, 29; Darren Martyn, 25; and Donncha O'Cearrbhail, 19, have been charged with conspiracy regarding attacks against Fox Broadcasting Co., Sony Pictures Entertainment and the Public Broadcasting Service, or PBS.
O'Cearrbhail is also accused of hacking into the personal e-mail account of an Irish national police officer and eavesdropping on a conference call between Irish police, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies about ongoing investigations into Anonymous and other hacker groups. The suspect allegedly recorded the call and disseminated the recording to other hackers.
There are all sorts of flavors of tyranny, and these guys practiced one flavor of it.
chrisa
(4,524 posts)It's more of an internet subculture. It's not like they have meetings or something, or even structured leadership. They're spread out across various sites, and they're able to operate because they exploit the one thing the internet is good at - getting the word around about something extremely quickly.
Anonymous isn't anything new. They're just hackers, and there's been tons of hacker collectives - there were many before them, and there will be many after them. It's something that's impossible to get rid of.
The poster you replied to is correct. If a dam is leaking, you don't blame the water that is slowly carving away at it and leaking through - you seal the "dam" thing up so that no more water gets through, and try to prevent more cracks in the future. And if you can't stop the water from getting through, well, then your dam is a piece of sh*t and you brought it on yourself by not caring enough to keep the water out.
However, there's other organizations that don't give a crap and would continue to whine while they continue to not encrypt, use passwords like "password123," and wave their data out there like a giant steak in front of a pack of hungry wolves. Sony screwed themselves over because their security was sh*t. It's a solid, well-known fact. It's poor security like that that the poster is talking about.
The point is, such is the nature of humans. There will always be some of them who want to rip through your stuff to get to the prize, whether it be the gold inside the castle of the old days, or data now. I wish it weren't so, but wishing it not so doesn't make it a reality. Companies or people that doesn't protect private data are opening themselves up to have it stolen.
So, yeah, blame the hackers, but also blame the people who don't make their security strong enough to withstand hackers.
MADem
(135,425 posts)there were fewer of them at their core than we seem to think--that they create a Potemkin Virtual Village to make all of us think they are more formidable than they are. When they do "good" stuff, like, say, when they asked everyone on Twitter to change their hometown to Teheran so the Iranian security services couldn't figure out who was who in the zoo, they call the people who help them "trolls," i.e. not core members of the club.
I agree that there is plenty of 'blame' to go around, I just get angry when they make victims of people who don't deserve to get fucked with so they can make a point.
I take particular issue with their theft from individuals--I think that's just dreadful. I can't support it. If they want to point out to corporations that their security is shit, and get rewards, like Facebook handed out, that's fine and dandy. But these guys who call themselve Anonymous aren't behaving that way. They do the stupid little logo, with the We Are Legion Expect Us horseshit, and they act like bullies and sell/trade credit card numbers and use them to enrich themselves in many cases. It is one thing when they tweak the noses of some wingnut jerks, another thing when they fuck with the credit cards of working people who don't have time for that bullshit and have to fight with financial institutions to be made whole again.
Bradical79
(4,490 posts)The whole "Anonymous" meme that they used (including the imagery) originated on a public uncensored image board.
bongo_x
(49 posts)There’s a lot of ranting here telling us what "They" are like. I get uncomfortable with anyone telling how "They" are, and I need to watch out for "Them". I tend not to trust the bearer of the message.
And one guy does not make a "They".
MADem
(135,425 posts)I wouldn't be surprised if "they" are all among his 45,000 Twitter followers....all of whom should be shitting themselves, if they haven't yet.
alp227
(33,284 posts)Anonymous used to be a good second-tier WikiLeaks. Now sinking to super-offensive tactics like this? Not acceptable on any level unless you're a twisted-minded Republican.
bluedigger
(17,437 posts)Or everybody is. 
It's not a group, it's a culture which requires technical skills to participate in. Like any culture, it's individual adherents display a range of morality/amorality.
Throd
(7,208 posts)caseymoz
(5,763 posts)Saying he's with Anonymous says nothing about this guy or his political affiliation. You have the friendly, well-meaning left-wing hactivists, you have those of other political persuasions, and then you have the black hat jerks and criminals, including, perhaps, a contingent of pedophiles. There's ideological or moral test to join. Except, I think opposition to Scientology might help.
Anonymous is like having a brand called "Generic." There's no guarantee of anything.
tawadi
(2,110 posts)AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)
RainDog
(28,784 posts)for whatever it is they might do - this is how to do it.
anyone can claim to be a part of the anonymous collective.
if some of them are stupidly religious with no concept of the reality of women's health care, they will do stupid things like this.
even tho it's no one's business if a woman has had an abortion - it's not a crime and why would it be anyone else's business or why would anyone else care unless the female having an abortion was the daughter of someone who tried to work against it, or a woman who did or the female was the mistress of a man who used the abortion issue to win votes?
I don't see how this hurts any woman politically unless she is a hypocrite - even tho I think doctor-patient records obviously should be confidential.
however, this goes to the point that anti-women activists see women's bodies as political battlefields.
as usual, they can go fuck themselves.
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)you can most likely put this down as being a one off nutjob using anonymous to make a misguided statement.
unionworks
(3,574 posts)No longer have nice fat bank accounts and multiple credit cards to fret over via attacks by hackers. And, when Anonymous goes after the banksters and other 1% criminals when the "justice" department laughs at the suggestion, Anonymous indeed looks like heroes to many. This is the one and only instance I have heard of an Anonymous member being anti-choice. And he "confessed" after arrest, but never actually releaased the name of any women. It was revealed he hadd been poking into FBI - CIA files. Knowing that, I no longer believve a word MSM has to say about the case. This was an isolated incident, and using the abortion angle is a laughably transparent effort to divide the "left" and demonize Anonymous.
MADem
(135,425 posts)He has been singing like Maria Callas since he was arrested last June, and left in place to gather still more information. When "PabloEscobar" did his thing, they said "Who the fuck is this guy, Sabu?" and he told them. That's why they got him so quick. That Sabu guy knows who the "legions" are and where they live--and they had better "expect" a knock on the door if they've been hacking governmental or financial agencies. It's now their turn to Be Very Afraid.
I don't think you and your view of people fucking with our lousy little credit and debit cards is controlling here--maybe that's fine for YOU, but it's not fine for me or anyone I know. And we're not rich by a long shot--hell, I'm still driving an economy car I bought when that asshole Reagan was President.
unionworks
(3,574 posts)of any other Anonymous member hacking an abortion database and threatening to publish names. Ever. Anywhere. Please prove me wrong.
MADem
(135,425 posts)evil, thievery or mendacity? Says who? You? From what dark region did you pull THAT "requirement" pray tell? How about screwing with the debit card accounts of people, stealing their data, hacking SONY and fucking over little kids and gamers, hacking NINTENDO, being general asswipes who are destructive little shits...?
Stop trying to move the goalposts with bullshit throw-downs like that--it doesn't work. You don't get to make the rules as to what constitutes "good" or "bad" Anonymous members. If you followed this story at all, you'd know that he WAS a member of the group, and he's already entered two guilty pleas. He'll probably be joining Sabu in the Ratfink "No Honor Amongst Thieves" Brigade. Hell, Sabu probably pointed the way so that the authorities were able to find the little jerk so quickly.
I'm sure this guy and Sabu have lists a mile long and will keep selling out their Anonymous buddies until they have purchased their freedom or at least a shortened sentence, and a slot in the Witness Protection Program. Odds are good the rest of the little shits who got bagged and are looking at ten to twenty hard will also roll over and rat out their sleazy little pals, too.
"Expect us" indeed! That knock on the door isn't the UPS guy delivering that new computer...! Lock 'em up!!!
unionworks
(3,574 posts)... an example of another suspected "Anonymous member" who "broke into a database to post names of women recieving abortions. Just a single other example. Just one. Not asking for much. If there isn't another one - isolated incident.
MADem
(135,425 posts)How many hacked gaming sites? How many hacked Facebook accounts?
How many Anonymous members used the money they stole from hacking credit cards to buy computer equipment?
How many used the money to buy kilos of marijuana? Trips to Vegas?
Are you taking a census or something? Compiling data for a thesis?
Why in the world would you even think those numbers make any difference? Thieving, stealing assholes are thieving, stealling assholes--no matter if they are taking personal data, or cash, or emails and documents.
What's your point? Why does there need to be more than one? Why do you think that "Anonymous" equals "Left/Liberal." Wake up--it doesn't. Anonymous equals Assholes who are giving nations an excuse to crack down on internet freedom. They're self-important jerks who can't see past their own pimpled noses.
And they're being rounded up, by "legions" of police departments, aided by "Anonymous" ratfink pals.
unionworks
(3,574 posts)"
&feature=related""
Hacker group Anonymous takes down websites across the world for the greater good: peace, freedom of information and solidarity.
This article was coauthored with Wes Strong
Anonymous, which began as a movement in 2003 on a series of Internet chat boards, has gone from targeting small time hypocrites to large multinational corporations bringing it from the background of hacker culture to the forefront of global politics.
Anonymous is considered a “hacktivist” movement that became globally recognized in 2010 after shutting down Mastercard, Visa, and Paypal during what they called Operation Payback. These major corporations stopped providing their services to Wikileaks, which had been using them to accept donations into the Wikileaks defense fund. This action on the part of Visa, Mastercard and PayPal offended the Anonymous community as an affront to freedom and justice. Anonymous stated on Al Jazeera that they could have taken down the infrastructure of all three websites but didn’t because they wanted people to still be able to use them. Anonymous stands for “freedom of speech, freedom of information and freedom of information taken to a logical extreme” (1)
During the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt, Anonymous took down the government websites and continue to this day to help both movements. In Egypt, Tunsian hackers helped take down government websites because of the censorship which Mubarak’s regime was notoriously known for. “[Anonymous] takes down security barriers of Web sites so that people can enter and occupy the site and post their message to the Egyptian government,”... “So they know this Web site is ours now, and they can’t block freedom of expression.” reported Rawstory.com. Anonymous is showing us that the powerful media, from large corporations to government owned websites are all vulnerable to the will of the people for peace and justice. (2)(3)(4)
"
MADem
(135,425 posts)These people are a conglomeration of nitwits with a variety of motives. Some of those motives are ACTUALLY selfish.
That's why at least one Anonymous leader bought five pounds of weed with the money he stole.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Just want to say that. Have been following this thread since it started.
Thieves are thieves. When they screw with financial systems, they fuck us all.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I know some think I'm some kind of farty "establishment asshole," but nothing could be further from the truth. I just don't like people who steal--that is not how I was raised.
I do like social justice, I do like equality, I hate rich bastards who screw the poor, etc. I just don't think that screwing over the little guy to "make a point" is cool.
I just don't get this "values free" attitude of these hackers, and this assumption that the rest of us will go along with having our personal lives abused for some "greater good" that a chickenshit who won't even stand up and be named says is important. It's not like any of us get to vote on what these jerks are doing. This British Abortion Clinic thing shows that one asshole hiding behind a Guy Fawkes mask can do something that many people don't like. No accountability is not good.
Supposedly, these bozos are going to "shut down the internet" on 31 March. If it's anything like their stunts in the past, I suspect they will have the same degree of success as they had "shutting down the stock exchange" which was a big old lead balloon.
What's doubly interesting is that this Sabu guy looks to have been involved in an operation that was managed by the FBI aimed at "getting" Julian Assange. It looks like he may well be fucked. Remember that Stratfor "crack?" That is starting to look like it was rich bait to attract Wikileaks and entice them to have a peek, which would require communication, which would result in a conspiracy charge.... Democracy Now has it: http://www.democracynow.org/2012/3/7/lulzsec_cyber_activists_arrested_with_help
Everyone thought that "Anonymous" was so clever to get all that stuff. They may not have been "clever" at all. No wonder STRATFOR was just saying "No comment." It might well have been bullshit data anyway.
unionworks
(3,574 posts)You rock too! But I thought the. Goal of the Occupy movement was to fuck with the financial institutions. I mean, they fuckedwith us first....
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)talk to me.....
Have you considered that fucking with the structure is great in theory, but not so great in reality????
unionworks
(3,574 posts)Lost everything in the collapse. So now I say fuck the fucking fuckers. Sideways.
unionworks
(3,574 posts)Guessthat means I would suck as a hacker but seriously you sound like the no no donkey here. What does Mickey Mouse think? He too lives in an imaginary kingdom.