Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE! Buy now
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Hacking, Morality, Crime and Stupidity.

CaloNordCaloNord Member Posts: 1,807
edited August 2015 in Off-Topic
An interesting topic has arisen recently regarding the alleged hacking of the infidelity website 'Ashley Maddison' that has raised some interesting thoughts.

It turns out that in Australia over 800 of the user profiles who's details were leaked were @Defence or @Gov email addresses. This is a concern from several standpoints, namely the idea that defence and government officials, not just here but in dozens of other countries could be subject to blackmail if they have been using their government email addresses for other things they probably shouldn't be and that information is compromised. Naturally they're being investigated. No doubt hundreds of thousands of others in many countries will be as well. My thought here is HOW can people, trained professionals in the case of defence personal, be so STUPID as to use their government emails for this sort of thing? What the hell is wrong with people?

On another front, a small part of me that isn't horrified by the breach in privacy is amused, I'm a little ashamed to admit this but it's true none the less. The fact that people tried to cheat on their partners on a website that turned out to be largely fake, with many profiles being fakes created by the company and that the information was then hacked and released is at least a little funny.

But there is the flip side of the coin that people are entitled to do whatever they want within the law and while illegal in some countries infidelity is not in most. It's just a dick move. But so is the fact that the sites owners had faked a vast majority of it in order to lure people onto the site and make a horrendous profit from them, so I wouldn't be sad to see them financially ruined, which won't take long by the look of the massive list of HUGE class actions that have been filed.

Two other things should also be mentioned, firstly that the site DID NOT verify email addresses. Meaning anyone could sign up with any address they wanted. So many of the celebrity and high ranking politician profiles could be fakes. The second is that many experts think it's an inside job, which is entirely possible given it wasn't just databases of usernames and credit card info but also HUGE amounts of internal emails, memos and business reports that also surfaced.

So yea, a little conflicted on this. I don't like the idea of hacking private information, it is ILLEGAL and damn right that it should be. But at the same time if it was an internal job and many of the profiles were in fact being faked to make money from morons aren't they committing a crime promising a service, albeit a morally dubious one, that they probably couldn't deliver? Is it right that children are starving to death and disease and war are rampant but people who tried to cheat on the wives or husbands, got caught and are now suing for millions?

Granted there are going to be a lot caught in the cross fire but there are probably a great many legitimate asses on there as well. Food for thought.

Opinions and thoughts are welcome.

Reading Materials Here:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/ashley-madison-transactions-traced-to-house-of-commons-defence-department/article26064699/

http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/digital-life-news/ashley-madison-made-a-lot-of-money-and-created-very-few-affairs-20150824-gj6er7.html

http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/consumer-security/extortionists-are-targeting-ashley-madison-users-20150823-gj5ynb.html

Any flaming will result in the IMMEDIATE closing of the thread. Keep it civil if you would be so kind! :)

Post edited by CaloNord on
JuliusBorisovBelgarathMTHBlackravenTeflonlolien

Comments

  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 21,449
    CaloNord said:

    HOW can people, trained professionals in the case of defence personal, be so STUPID as to use their government emails for this sort of thing? What the hell is wrong with people?

    From D&D FAQ, Version 3.5: A character with an Intelligence score of 3 is smarter than most animals, but only barely... Ten points of IQ per point of Intelligence is a good rule of thumb.

    As for the questions you ask, Calo, it's too pity the world doesn't have such heroes as Minsc and Boo. They will leave no crevice untouched! Evil would have no chance then. No cheating and in the same time no leaking.

    CaloNordTeflonDJKajuru
  • CaloNordCaloNord Member Posts: 1,807
    bengoshi said:

    CaloNord said:

    HOW can people, trained professionals in the case of defence personal, be so STUPID as to use their government emails for this sort of thing? What the hell is wrong with people?

    From D&D FAQ, Version 3.5: A character with an Intelligence score of 3 is smarter than most animals, but only barely... Ten points of IQ per point of Intelligence is a good rule of thumb.

    As for the questions you ask, Calo, it's too pity the world doesn't have such heroes as Minsc and Boo. They will leave no crevice untouched! Evil would have no chance then. No cheating and in the same time no leaking.
    Hahaha! :D It really does make you wonder. 32 million users, although a lot may well have been multiple accounts and jokes, no doubt they didn't have email validation so they could say 'Look we have 32 million users'. But still, that is A LOT of people with dubious moral compasses. . .

    JuliusBorisov
  • WowoWowo Member Posts: 2,058
    edited August 2015
    A friend showed me this YouTube video after I had an encounter with her (she has a boyfriend):

    Video removed; see my note below.
    --Dee

    Post edited by Dee on
  • iKrivetkoiKrivetko Member Posts: 934
    It's just a dick move
    I see what you did there.

    NaveenCaloNordNimran
  • DeeDee Member Posts: 10,447
    @Wowo Dan Savage is a great speaker with a lot of very progressive ideas (and I think anyone looking to expand their world-view should listen to his podcast or read his blog), but that video's content and use of language aren't PG-13.

    That doesn't mean people shouldn't watch it--his ideas about monogamy are important, even if you don't agree with them--but it shouldn't be embedded on this site.

    (Long story short: Here's a link to the video on YouTube - I'm removing the embedded video from your post.)

    deltagoCaloNord
  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 7,724
    Ok, so I briefly posted something on the activity page in response to this first, but lets see if I can break down this post as well, attempting to answer any questions and giving my opinion.
    CaloNord said:

    An interesting topic has arisen recently regarding the alleged hacking of the infidelity website 'Ashley Maddison' that has raised some interesting thoughts.

    It turns out that in Australia over 800 of the user profiles who's details were leaked were @Defence or @Gov email addresses. This is a concern from several standpoints, namely the idea that defence and government officials, not just here but in dozens of other countries could be subject to blackmail if they have been using their government email addresses for other things they probably shouldn't be and that information is compromised. Naturally they're being investigated. No doubt hundreds of thousands of others in many countries will be as well. My thought here is HOW can people, trained professionals in the case of defence personal, be so STUPID as to use their government emails for this sort of thing? What the hell is wrong with people?

    As you mentioned later, there are no email verification system with Ashley Madison. This allows a person to use any email address to sign up for an intial account to access other people's accounts on the site. Emails that are made public (such as governmrnt emails) are easy targets for this purpose as thr high volume of emails they generate. A email from Ashley Madison can easily be tagged as spam and sent to a different folder without it ever being read.

    Sure, there maybe a small handful of government officials who actually used their work email for the site, bit I highly doubt it is as dire as mainstream media is presenting.
    On another front, a small part of me that isn't horrified by the breach in privacy is amused, I'm a little ashamed to admit this but it's true none the less. The fact that people tried to cheat on their partners on a website that turned out to be largely fake, with many profiles being fakes created by the company and that the information was then hacked and released is at least a little funny.

    But there is the flip side of the coin that people are entitled to do whatever they want within the law and while illegal in some countries infidelity is not in most. It's just a dick move. But so is the fact that the sites owners had faked a vast majority of it in order to lure people onto the site and make a horrendous profit from them, so I wouldn't be sad to see them financially ruined, which won't take long by the look of the massive list of HUGE class actions that have been filed.
    So as I mentioned in my Activity response, I am on the flip side. Is it immoral or unethical to cheat on your significant other? Sure, but it isn't illigal and this company was working on a tightly niched market to exploit this. One would assume a company that promotes secret affairs would protect ones identity better than other sites that are tailored to online dating like plenty of fish.

    This false sense of security is the underlining issue with them being sued. They were promised, and some even paid for discretion and deletion of accounts but the company did not provide that service regardless of where the leak or hack was generated from.

    This breach of contract has he possibility of large financial loss to the users that were exposed (through divorce or other pre nip arrangements) as well as socially and mentally.

    Even though society deems their actions immoral, they shouldn't suffer hardships because of it. Liberty does and should exist in free countries.

    Two other things should also be mentioned, firstly that the site DID NOT verify email addresses. Meaning anyone could sign up with any address they wanted. So many of the celebrity and high ranking politician profiles could be fakes. The second is that many experts think it's an inside job, which is entirely possible given it wasn't just databases of usernames and credit card info but also HUGE amounts of internal emails, memos and business reports that also surfaced.
    So yea, a little conflicted on this. I don't like the idea of hacking private information, it is ILLEGAL and damn right that it should be. But at the same time if it was an internal job and many of the profiles were in fact being faked to make money from morons aren't they committing a crime promising a service, albeit a morally dubious one, that they probably couldn't deliver? Is it right that children are starving to death and disease and war are rampant but people who tried to cheat on the wives or husbands, got caught and are now suing for millions?
    So you have two separate questions here, lets start with the first:
    If it was an internal job and they can prove it was done internally, that employee can suffer immense prosecution and all financial lost done to Ashley Madison can be brought to civil court against them, regardless of the reason for the leak. This person wasn't blowing the whistle on fraudulent behaviour, they were taking what they thought was immortal wrong and attempting to out all those involved.

    Second question:
    Starving children is another can of worms different from what is presented. But as I stated earlier, a person can be effected financially due to the leak of this information. But just because they are ask on for millions, does not mean that is what they are going to get. You will see most of these cases settled out of court with the financial details remaining private and attached to NDA.

    CaloNord
  • WowoWowo Member Posts: 2,058
    Dee said:

    @Wowo Dan Savage is a great speaker with a lot of very progressive ideas (and I think anyone looking to expand their world-view should listen to his podcast or read his blog), but that video's content and use of language aren't PG-13.

    That doesn't mean people shouldn't watch it--his ideas about monogamy are important, even if you don't agree with them--but it shouldn't be embedded on this site.

    (Long story short: Here's a link to the video on YouTube - I'm removing the embedded video from your post.)

    Thanks @Dee, sorry about that.

    CaloNord
  • CaloNordCaloNord Member Posts: 1,807
    deltago said:

    Ok, so I briefly posted something on the activity page in response to this first, but lets see if I can break down this post as well, attempting to answer any questions and giving my opinion.

    CaloNord said:

    An interesting topic has arisen recently regarding the alleged hacking of the infidelity website 'Ashley Maddison' that has raised some interesting thoughts.

    It turns out that in Australia over 800 of the user profiles who's details were leaked were @Defence or @Gov email addresses. This is a concern from several standpoints, namely the idea that defence and government officials, not just here but in dozens of other countries could be subject to blackmail if they have been using their government email addresses for other things they probably shouldn't be and that information is compromised. Naturally they're being investigated. No doubt hundreds of thousands of others in many countries will be as well. My thought here is HOW can people, trained professionals in the case of defence personal, be so STUPID as to use their government emails for this sort of thing? What the hell is wrong with people?

    As you mentioned later, there are no email verification system with Ashley Madison. This allows a person to use any email address to sign up for an intial account to access other people's accounts on the site. Emails that are made public (such as governmrnt emails) are easy targets for this purpose as thr high volume of emails they generate. A email from Ashley Madison can easily be tagged as spam and sent to a different folder without it ever being read.

    Sure, there maybe a small handful of government officials who actually used their work email for the site, bit I highly doubt it is as dire as mainstream media is presenting.
    On another front, a small part of me that isn't horrified by the breach in privacy is amused, I'm a little ashamed to admit this but it's true none the less. The fact that people tried to cheat on their partners on a website that turned out to be largely fake, with many profiles being fakes created by the company and that the information was then hacked and released is at least a little funny.

    But there is the flip side of the coin that people are entitled to do whatever they want within the law and while illegal in some countries infidelity is not in most. It's just a dick move. But so is the fact that the sites owners had faked a vast majority of it in order to lure people onto the site and make a horrendous profit from them, so I wouldn't be sad to see them financially ruined, which won't take long by the look of the massive list of HUGE class actions that have been filed.
    So as I mentioned in my Activity response, I am on the flip side. Is it immoral or unethical to cheat on your significant other? Sure, but it isn't illigal and this company was working on a tightly niched market to exploit this. One would assume a company that promotes secret affairs would protect ones identity better than other sites that are tailored to online dating like plenty of fish.

    This false sense of security is the underlining issue with them being sued. They were promised, and some even paid for discretion and deletion of accounts but the company did not provide that service regardless of where the leak or hack was generated from.

    This breach of contract has he possibility of large financial loss to the users that were exposed (through divorce or other pre nip arrangements) as well as socially and mentally.

    Even though society deems their actions immoral, they shouldn't suffer hardships because of it. Liberty does and should exist in free countries.

    Two other things should also be mentioned, firstly that the site DID NOT verify email addresses. Meaning anyone could sign up with any address they wanted. So many of the celebrity and high ranking politician profiles could be fakes. The second is that many experts think it's an inside job, which is entirely possible given it wasn't just databases of usernames and credit card info but also HUGE amounts of internal emails, memos and business reports that also surfaced.
    So yea, a little conflicted on this. I don't like the idea of hacking private information, it is ILLEGAL and damn right that it should be. But at the same time if it was an internal job and many of the profiles were in fact being faked to make money from morons aren't they committing a crime promising a service, albeit a morally dubious one, that they probably couldn't deliver? Is it right that children are starving to death and disease and war are rampant but people who tried to cheat on the wives or husbands, got caught and are now suing for millions?
    So you have two separate questions here, lets start with the first:
    If it was an internal job and they can prove it was done internally, that employee can suffer immense prosecution and all financial lost done to Ashley Madison can be brought to civil court against them, regardless of the reason for the leak. This person wasn't blowing the whistle on fraudulent behaviour, they were taking what they thought was immortal wrong and attempting to out all those involved.

    Second question:
    Starving children is another can of worms different from what is presented. But as I stated earlier, a person can be effected financially due to the leak of this information. But just because they are ask on for millions, does not mean that is what they are going to get. You will see most of these cases settled out of court with the financial details remaining private and attached to NDA.

    Am I just getting to cynical in my old age? I do not like what the world has become but I have no way to change it and no idea how I would do so even if I had such power. :(

  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 7,724
    CaloNord said:


    Am I just getting to cynical in my old age? I do not like what the world has become but I have no way to change it and no idea how I would do so even if I had such power. :(

    The world has always been like this.

    You're just more receptive to it now that you have responsibilities and duties and made sacrifices for the betterment of other people's lives. It's a small form of jealousy that you realize others do not take their commitments as seriously as you have. That doesn't mean you will stoop to their level, just means you will be more judgmental towards them. But you can never change someone's behavior, they need to change it themselves. You can only guide them and point them in the right direction.

    ronaldoCaloNord
  • the_spyderthe_spyder Member Posts: 5,018
    deltago said:


    The world has always been like this.

    You're just more receptive to it now that you have responsibilities and duties and made sacrifices for the betterment of other people's lives. It's a small form of jealousy that you realize others do not take their commitments as seriously as you have. That doesn't mean you will stoop to their level, just means you will be more judgmental towards them. But you can never change someone's behavior, they need to change it themselves. You can only guide them and point them in the right direction.

    Forgive me, but I think this is a bit overly cynical. I personally try not to judge another and their choices until and unless I know all of the facts involved. On the face of it, having an affair would seem to be abhorent. However, not knowing every circumstance I can't say with absolute certainty that there aren't perfectly valid (given the circumstances) reasons for it to be done. Nor do I think it is appropriate to arbitrarily and negatively blanketly label everyone in that circumstance without knowing what those particular circumstances are. Your "Right direction" may not be theirs.

  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 7,724

    deltago said:


    The world has always been like this.

    You're just more receptive to it now that you have responsibilities and duties and made sacrifices for the betterment of other people's lives. It's a small form of jealousy that you realize others do not take their commitments as seriously as you have. That doesn't mean you will stoop to their level, just means you will be more judgmental towards them. But you can never change someone's behavior, they need to change it themselves. You can only guide them and point them in the right direction.

    Forgive me, but I think this is a bit overly cynical. I personally try not to judge another and their choices until and unless I know all of the facts involved. On the face of it, having an affair would seem to be abhorent. However, not knowing every circumstance I can't say with absolute certainty that there aren't perfectly valid (given the circumstances) reasons for it to be done. Nor do I think it is appropriate to arbitrarily and negatively blanketly label everyone in that circumstance without knowing what those particular circumstances are. Your "Right direction" may not be theirs.
    Kinda what I meant.
    If a person's personal life and decisions don't affect you directly, why would you care?
    If they do affect you, you can't change their actions only attempt to sway them.

    the_spyder
Sign In or Register to comment.