Took your time
Bit slow posting this story, did it take you that long to download the list and make sure you're not on it?
Who pays for pron anyway, they deserve to get shamed for that alone?
LulzSec pwns pron site
Hacktivist pranksters LulzSec have struck again with the release of 26,000 email addresses and passwords from members of internet smut site Pron.com. Relying on the frequent mistake of using the same login combination on multiple sites, LulzSec called on its followers to try and use the credentials to log into Facebook, before …
-
-
Monday 13th June 2011 17:02 GMT Scorchio!!
Re: Took your time
"Bit slow posting this story, did it take you that long to download the list and make sure you're not on it?
Who pays for pron anyway, they deserve to get shamed for that alone?"
Classically laws apply to other regarding behaviours. Self regarding behaviours, such as appearing in or watching pornography are not the domain of the law, unless of course there is a conflict with another law, for example the laws on protecting children, animals, and so on.
So here we have another specimen of that fine Orwellian phenomenon, thought crime; you've decided it's wrong (someone paid for their porn rather than downloading it for free), and that this makes it OK to release these people's personal data. So where do we draw the line? Someone who banks at a given bank should undergo the same experience perhaps?
I cannot wait to hear you squeak when your turn comes, when whatever secrets you have are tipped out into public view.
-
-
Monday 13th June 2011 16:01 GMT Cameron Colley
Plausible deniability?
How hard would it be for the security firm to add a few .mil and .gov addresses to the list to create a few problems for people? If anyone gets into trouble for this then there better be more evidence against them than their name appearing on a list that the site owners will probably neither confirm or deny is genuine in its entirety.
-
Monday 13th June 2011 17:03 GMT exnil
sympathy for the lulz boat?
This article definitely lists to port. Breaking into someone else's computer and stealing their information is illegal. It isn't the action of "hacktivist pranksters". I wonder if Mr. Leyden would still refer to LulzSec as "gray hats" if they broke into theregister.co.uk and distributed user names and passwords?
-
-
Monday 13th June 2011 20:29 GMT Matt Bryant
RE: Something fishy about this
"Teenage hacktivists who disapprove of pr0n?....." You assume firstly that they are teenagers, when it is more likely they're just socially-inept thirty-something attention-seekers. Secondly, that they disprove of pr0n, when it seems more likely they just want to embarrass people. This is the internet equivalent of ringing someone's doorbell and leaving a flaming bag of dog poop on their porch, nothing highbrow or moralistic.
-
-
Monday 13th June 2011 17:04 GMT adnim
Explain what?
"Email addresses in the batch reportedly included .mil and .gov users, some of who may have some serious explaining to do."
I don't think they should have to explain anything. Which holier than thou asshole has decided that an interest in pornography should be something to be ashamed of?
To me buying product from a company that exploits and abuses it's workforce is a far more heinous act.
Oh, wait a minute, I guess the two aren't exactly mutually exclusive...
-
Monday 13th June 2011 19:22 GMT Anonymous Coward
Explain...
... the misuse of gov and mil computer ressources maybe?
I know that when I out a cache of torrented movies on our network the culprit is usually very happy to hear the sentence "I won't report it this time but you need to stop".
Never found any porn though, only useless crap (usually the latest crappy blockbusters).
-
-
-
Monday 13th June 2011 17:26 GMT nozafc
Freebie DB
Given that one of the email addresses is a US gov email address for reporting dodgy health care reform info and the password is karlmarx I very much doubt that this is a subscriber DB. Probably more likely the type of freebie accounts that you can sign up to that never actually validate your email address.; Of course that doesn't mean that some, probably most, didn't use the same email address and password as elsewhere
-
Monday 13th June 2011 19:15 GMT Anonymous Coward
People keep going on about using the same password
but so many web sites insist on you signing up for no good reason apart, presumably, from passing it on to marketing companies and Our Christian Brothers, so what does it matter? If people want to go around hacking accounts on gardening sites, bicycle sites and similar, how sad are they? And does anyone, anywhere, care even slightly? As long as you used a throw-away email address to sign up, of course.
I hope I never end up stuck in a lift with any LulzSec activists. They seem less fun than New Labour :(
-
Tuesday 14th June 2011 00:02 GMT Oninoshiko
Amen
I have been playing around with a site and was putting together a signup component and realized "why am I collecting people's email addresses? There isn't any reason for me to need to contact them, most of them will be invalid or one-off accounts, the only thing they could ever be useful for is to sell to spammers. Highlight. Delete."
-
-
Tuesday 14th June 2011 08:29 GMT Anonymous Coward
twats & knobs
hypocritical bunch of wankers. I'm sure no members of lulzsec have ever looked at porn.
It's fair enough that you shouldn't use your employers resources to porn cruise, however they didn't ask people to only go for .gov or .mil addresses did they?
Then again if society in general had a more reasoned view out about pornography, sex or just general nudity it wouldn't be a problem would it.
"Put away those jizz mags johnny! Now go and do something healthy like watch a few violent action movies or kill video sprites"
This topic is closed for new posts.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
