Ashley Madison... hacked

[LaRascasse]

http://www.vox.com/2015/7/20/9007039/ashley-madison-hack-explained

Here's the full story.

There has to be potential for an LW story in there somewhere. Semi-decent hacker, embittered by his wife walking out on him, decides to expose all cheaters on AM.

 

[Bramblethorn]

http://www.vox.com/2015/7/20/9007039/ashley-madison-hack-explained

Here's the full story.

There has to be potential for an LW story in there somewhere. Semi-decent hacker, embittered by his wife walking out on him, decides to expose all cheaters on AM.

As mentioned here, even before the hack, there was a very easy way to test whether a given email was associated with Ashley Madison - their "lost password" function gave different results depending on whether or not the email you entered was attached to an account on their database.

 

[SusanJillParker]

It's amazing to me that one woman, this Ashley Madison, can sexually service so very man men.

She must have a velvet pussy and some skilled, cock sucking mouth on her.

Who the Hell is she? A witch? A bitch? Definitely, she's a whore. With a name like that, she sounds like a woman's clothing line.

"Hey who are you wearing?"

"Ashley Madison."

As they did in Salem, Massachusetts in the 17th century, they should strip her naked, cut off her hair, stone her, and then hang her. Especially if she survives, that will teach her.

Yet for her to have so very many affairs with married men, being that I've never seen her on Oprah or on Doctor Phil, I wonder what she looks like.

She must have big tits. Yeah, I imagine her having at least a C cup maybe even a D cup.

She must be tall, probably 5'9" tall.

She must be shapely and probably weighs no less than 120 and no more than 130.

She must be blonde, a natural blonde.

She must have big, beautiful, blue eyes.

Geez, holy shit. She must look like me.

When will people learn that if they post naked photos to the Cloud, one day, they'll be a rainstorm.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

I think this is one of the funnier hacks around. I mean, what did people expect? Join a public adultery site and expect that with all the hackers and jealous spouses in the world that they'd remain 'secret' forever? Gimme a break!

 

[HandsInTheDark]

Glad they went down. Obnoxious ads, obnoxious business model. I hope they are permanently ruined, though that's far too much to ask.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

There will always be those who look for something different, exotic, forbidden.

That being said...it was stupid, especially if you used a traceable email. Also, if you used your real name???? Stupid.

But then again, people, on the internet, as a whole are not the most intelligent in the world.

 

[CeasarBoobage]

Only half bothered

From a few places I read this story, there's a chance that it was an inside job. Like a disgruntled former worker. Yikes. That makes the 'hack' that much easier, as well as getting more specific info and having full access to everyone's history and data. I mean, how hard would it be to stick a backup tape or three into your backpack when you leave the office one day?

As much as I'm not a fan of the website or business model, it does bother me that it was done. No, people shouldn't be cheating on their spouses, but this seems like a pretty good way to very openly and brutally ruin the marriage of many folks. I'm sure the kids of the site's members won't appreciate it much either. Won't it be fun for that kid in school to find out his/her while school has nude pics of mom/dad as well as their 'love note' chat sessions? Lovely.

I would like to think that AM will do the right thing for its millions of members and cave to the hacker's demand to shut the site down.

 

[Learin]

There will always be those who look for something different, exotic, forbidden.

That being said...it was stupid, especially if you used a traceable email. Also, if you used your real name???? Stupid.

But then again, people, on the internet, as a whole are not the most intelligent in the world.

This.

I don't mind people wanting and looking for "Forbidden Pleasures", but they should do it at their own risk.

And have the decency to suck it up if shit hits the fan.

 

[masterandmargarita]

This article gets it right, in my opinion: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...e-internet-turn-into-the-monogamy-police.html

The mob mentality about "cheaters" would be funny if it wasn't so puritan, so medieval. Before condemning the alleged cheaters, consider the possibility of a similar hack on this very forum. Some people are up to no good here, some are squeaky clean. How would you like to be lumped together?

 

[CyranoJ]

Are any media outlets talking about the hacker claim that EstablishedMen.com was engaged in prostitution and trafficking? I haven't seen much about it.

 

[DirtyAllie]

This article gets it right, in my opinion: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...e-internet-turn-into-the-monogamy-police.html

The mob mentality about "cheaters" would be funny if it wasn't so puritan, so medieval. Before condemning the alleged cheaters, consider the possibility of a similar hack on this very forum. Some people are up to no good here, some are squeaky clean. How would you like to be lumped together?

I understand your point on the how would we like it. But when you accurately state some people here are up to no good and some are not, that is where the comparison fails.

The entire premise of Ashley Madison is for the "no good" the site is for married people looking for discreet affairs in other words everyone there is sneaking around their partners back and hurting them

They all get what they deserve out of this and I hope that the men and women who find their spouse on there make them pay the price because that site is their ticket to a very easy divorce with proof of infidelity.

Live by the sword die by the sword.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Right. Any lawyer who managed to get half the couple's investments for the caught party would have to be a genius. I believe 'take you to the cleaners, buddy/sister' is the operating phrase here.

 

[Bramblethorn]

From a few places I read this story, there's a chance that it was an inside job. Like a disgruntled former worker. Yikes. That makes the 'hack' that much easier, as well as getting more specific info and having full access to everyone's history and data. I mean, how hard would it be to stick a backup tape or three into your backpack when you leave the office one day?

There are precautions that an organisation can take against that sort of attack if they're serious about security. Physical and electronic access restrictions (with periodic audits to make sure access gets revoked when no longer needed), two-factor authentication, encrypted storage, etc etc.

Needless to say, most organisations aren't really serious about security, especially when it's "only" their clients' privacy...

As much as I'm not a fan of the website or business model, it does bother me that it was done. No, people shouldn't be cheating on their spouses, but this seems like a pretty good way to very openly and brutally ruin the marriage of many folks. I'm sure the kids of the site's members won't appreciate it much either. Won't it be fun for that kid in school to find out his/her while school has nude pics of mom/dad as well as their 'love note' chat sessions? Lovely.

Agreed. I'm no fan of cheating but I'm not going to judge millions of strangers without knowing the specifics of their situation, and publicly exposing a cheater isn't doing a lot of favours for their partner; I think many who've been wronged that way would rather sort it out behind closed doors than have it broadcast to the world. Plus, this sort of shit can get people killed.

 

[sr71plt]

I don't have any trouble judging anyone who goes to an online service for what was offered here. I judge them as not being very bright, among other negative values. Doesn't mean I carry torches to their house. But I have no trouble judging them for what they're doing and not being sorry for them when it goes south on them.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Are any media outlets talking about the hacker claim that EstablishedMen.com was engaged in prostitution and trafficking? I haven't seen much about it.

I'm always a little wary about that sort of stuff because... yeah, sex trafficking is a real and horrible thing*, but "trafficking" is also invoked as an excuse to justify cracking down on consensual sex work.

"We're going to shut down this awful prostitution!" often translates to "we're going to remove something that people are using because it's their safest/best/least-bad option, and leave them with a worse set of choices".

*as are things like domestic servitude and trafficking for agricultural work - but they're not sexy enough to get the same sort of coverage.

 

[sr71plt]

This has the dimension of being too dumb to notice that everything around you is being hacked into left and right. And to assume that those who run such a site are honest folks giving you everything they claim they provide.

 

[masterandmargarita]

I understand your point on the how would we like it. But when you accurately state some people here are up to no good and some are not, that is where the comparison fails.

The entire premise of Ashley Madison is for the "no good" the site is for married people looking for discreet affairs in other words everyone there is sneaking around their partners back and hurting them

They all get what they deserve out of this and I hope that the men and women who find their spouse on there make them pay the price because that site is their ticket to a very easy divorce with proof of infidelity.

Live by the sword die by the sword.

I don't believe that 37 million people are up to no good, but it makes no difference to me. I will still defend their, and your, right to privacy.

 

[TxRad]

Chapter one: Wife finds out Husband was on the site and cheated three times.

Chapter two: Husband finds out wife was on the site and cheated a dozen times.

Chapter three: They become swingers and live happily ever after.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

I would like to think that AM will do the right thing for its millions of members and cave to the hacker's demand to shut the site down.

Sure. And if they were profitable, they'll reopen tomorrow under a different name with better security. Shutting down the site changes very little; and it makes me think the hacker isn't attempting to effect social change. If they want to have a real impact, they'll distribute the data via pirate bay or any other file sharing site, guaranteeing the data is permanently public. The resulting divorces and other messy ramifications would have real and lasting impact.

So I suspect a vengeful ex-employee here, not a social crusader.

37 million users? Seriously? There are that many people willing to expose incredibly sensitive and damaging personal information to a business predicated on breaking promises? Here's hoping they all had protected sex because there's a segment of the population you don't want reproducing...

 

[HandsInTheDark]

I don't believe that 37 million people are up to no good

What a bizarre statement. How many million people WOULD you estimate are up to no good?

(My own estimate is roughly 200 times higher).

 

[LaRascasse]

This article gets it right, in my opinion: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...e-internet-turn-into-the-monogamy-police.html

The mob mentality about "cheaters" would be funny if it wasn't so puritan, so medieval. Before condemning the alleged cheaters, consider the possibility of a similar hack on this very forum. Some people are up to no good here, some are squeaky clean. How would you like to be lumped together?

No one here has linked their credit card numbers and other personally identifiable info to this site. Say if someone does hack it to discover a username called toogood4mycock and a throwaway email id like toogood4mycock@randommail.com, it won't come back to bite you in the ass. If someone however, has added their personal details etc here, then it was a problem with or without a hack.

As much as a warm feeling of Schadenfreude we might derive from this, nobody was actually breaking a law. If this was a kiddie porn site (or worse things that abound on the Deep Net), then I would say get all the members and hand them over to the cops. Doxxing is never the answer to something lesser than that like infidelity.

 

[sr71plt]

If they want to have a real impact, they'll distribute the data via pirate bay or any other file sharing site, guaranteeing the data is permanently public. The resulting divorces and other messy ramifications would have real and lasting impact.

I'd say that if they wanted to make a real impact they would have refrained from announcing the hack and started to blackmail the ones coming up with real good credit matched with real juicy profiles and large, religious or high-political-profile families.

I expect to see some Lit. stories along these lines.

 

[Cruel2BKind]

This article gets it right, in my opinion: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...e-internet-turn-into-the-monogamy-police.html

The mob mentality about "cheaters" would be funny if it wasn't so puritan, so medieval. Before condemning the alleged cheaters, consider the possibility of a similar hack on this very forum. Some people are up to no good here, some are squeaky clean. How would you like to be lumped together?

I was on Jezebel and a commenter said that she used the site because she and her husband were in an open relationship. I think we should fight the 'hackers' because they threatened to release a few more names to the public for every day the site stayed up. I could totally imagine somebody doing the same thing to Lit.

Now that I think about it, probably the strongest evidence in favor of a kind and righteous god is that at least the puritanical sex-hating right-wing bigots don't have even a tenth of say, Anonymous's, collective internet know-how.

 

[sr71plt]

Oh, God. I don't think it's puritanical at all. HandsIntheDark said it correctly that Lit. isn't anything like that Web site in what the user had to reveal to be there. I think they had to be a little bit more than stupid--certainly following a dishonest obsession--to reveal and trust so much for the pleasure of cheating on their spouse. And, no, I don't think it's puritanical to not agree with the "OKness" of adultery.

I can have fun with it as a fantasy, but don't think it's the least bit puritanical or medieval not to approve of it in real life. It's selfish and hurts someone you have made a commitment to. Be honest and sever the ties or at least separate before stepping out on them.

 

[masterandmargarita]

What a bizarre statement. How many million people WOULD you estimate are up to no good?

(My own estimate is roughly 200 times higher).

It is bizarre out of context, isn't it?