AntiSec and Anonymous release 860,000 Accounts and 75,000 stolen Credit Cards from STRATFOR hack

reply to post by K1771gnorance


it was more than just emails and passwords. It was also EVERY email ever sent on the current email server going back years. Also, a majority of people use the same password everywhere (bad idea, have about 10 and rotate them with variations at least once a month). You dont think that all of these email addresses are already being tested to see that? one step at a time, more information will be dropped because of this. believe it.

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
It looks like SOPA will pass with flying colors......

Yeah, pretty good timing for them... Funny, that!

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst

If you protest in the streets, you get pepper sprayed and ignored. The CorpMedia only tells the story that fits the status quo.

A rich person doesn't go to jail like you or I any more.

Wasn't it ever so?

In a thousand years time democratisation may seem a blip in history that TPTB veiled around themselves until they were ready to drop the veil. I'd guess that they foresaw the online revolution and its utilisation by the rebel factions and so this would've been prepared for, if not in fact initiated by TPTB in order to control the outcry of the mob like a dog guides his owners sheep into the pen.

This will have the mobilised among you running and leaping into the detention camps without a hint of tyrannical manipulation ever darkening the MSN.

Originally posted by K1771gnorance
Honestly, I don't see the big deal. E-mail addresses and passwords? If you dont know where to input the e-mail addresses and passwords in order to read the e-mails, then they are useless. Passwords can be changed anyway. Credit card numbers? One call and they can be cancled and a new number reissued. Without the security code on the back they are mostly useless online. Also, any money stolen can be reimbursed with one phone call.

So, what is the big deal?

edit on 31-12-2011 by K1771gnorance because: (no reason given)

Can anyone refute K1771gnorance's enlightening claims, here, that this release is not as damaging as it would at first appear???

If not, then it's apparent that such a release is more about sensational, shallow media headlines about the dangers of internet freedom, than it is of actual use to The People…. !

And this is good in... which way?
Because, honestly, for me at least, it stinks from 100 miles.
If you can break a wall and show it, THEY will use this to build another one, taller and thicker, making sure that it will be impenetrable. Or maybe more than one.

But there's a thought: call me stupid, ignorant, crazy or paranoid, I won't mind, but there's no benefit in this for us, not a single one; instead, there's a HUGE reason for THEM to try and control the Internet even more.
So forgive me if I dare to doubt Anonymous', but if I would want to convince people to accept losing their freedom, I would create a problem first...
...but wait! isn't this a well known scenario already?

Well done, Anonymous. I guess, in the end, you'll be the one(s) with full access to information because 99% of the people have no idea how to pass a firewall...

reply to post by McGinty


I already did above. top of page 7. EVERY EMAIL. EVER. YEARS WORTH. everything that came/went through the mail spool is had. EVERYTHING. Think. What is this company involved in? Who is its client list? Just wait for the database to be done. I think we are going to find a few surprises.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
As a counter-argument to the "they will censor the internet" crowd... that's not going to happen. Ever. They need the internet to be open 24/7 for commerce and they need the internet to collect your data ie "spy on you".

They won't turn it off, they won't censor it, they can't do it. The internet was designed with open architectures and survivability which is the optimum in network design.

If they really wanted to "turn it off" they'd have to drop EMP's across every major node in the world which would be an act of terrorism. It is also way beyond their logistical capabilities to do it.

Like the elite care about that - it is all about control. No one is saying the internet will be shut off, it will just be regulated. Certain sites will be allowed to exist, while most of the net will be terminated. Yes, some sort of free net will still exist, but for the most part most people will not have the knowledge to be able to view it.

Anonymous, like every other movement that started to promote freedom, has been infiltrated by agents of the elite.

I wish I knew how to use this data.
I would put $1 billion in my bank.
then disepear. or more!
its about time this happend.

reply to post by buddha

then disepear. or more!
its about time this happend.

What? why is it about time this happened? do you know the people effected? can you give a good reason for this attack? or are you still following the bandwagon.

This is only the beginning.

People's rights have been trampled on for so long, The Government (not just the USA, let's be real here, every decision is global these days) has finally awoken the dragon.

And there is only so much The Government can do about it. Remember OP HBGary? People thought the government would crack down after that...

Realize, the internet is not going anywhere. There are enough privately-owned routers that if they hit the kill-switch tomorrow, the internet would be reborn on the 3rd (need to take a day off after the New Year to recuperate)... and it would be the uncontrolled internet that The Government truly fears. They are happy with their pseudo-control.

The simplicity of the internet is in its chaos. Nothing can be truly controlled on-line.

There are too many activists in too many countries around the globe to ever be stopped completely. You also have to keep in mind, who would The Government use to track down these people? It takes a certain mind-set to want to learn how to hack into a system (and let's face it, that's how nine-out-of-ten people get into the IS/ISS/CS fields). Would a hacker ever hunt down a fellow hacker? Sure, the hunt for information is what drives most of us to do what we do in the first place. But would he turn them over to the authorities? Highly doubtful...

In short, The Government DOES NOT WANT to shut-down the internet, as they know what it would then turn into. -Insert Obi-Wan joke here-

In other news... I hear an info bomb of epic proportions is due to be dropped on the 1st?

To be fair, at least SpecialForces.com DID store their customers’ credit card information using blowfish encryption (unlike the global intelligence and security industry "professionals" at Stratfor, who apparently remain confused as to whether their customers’ information was even encrypted or not). Nevertheless, our voodoo prevailed and we were quickly able to break back into the military supplier’s server and steal their encryption keys. We then wrote a few simple functions to recover the cleartext passwords, credit card numbers, and expiration dates to all their customers’ cards. That’s how we roll.

So why was stratfor hacked again? couldn't of just been for the CC details untill someone reminded the group of how they work, do attack work out BS reason afterwards to sway the sheep (you guys are getting dumber and dumber)

Originally posted by rival
So what? ...The government has illegal access to ALL OF MY DATA, thanks
to the (sic)Patriot Act

This just seems fair and right.

The government has nothing to hide, they always act legally, so why should they care....
That IS the popular sheeple argument isn't it?

Turn this up to 11!


In a Democracy, the CIA isn't involved in assassinating leaders who don't want to have sweat shops or sell off resources and the price the multinational wants to pay -- they are merely intelligence gathering and have nothing to hide. No rendition camps -- no selling off state secrets for a Senator like Dennis Hastert -- no poker and prostitutes at the Watergate Hotel to entrap politicians.

We could talk all day about what people in our secret services aren't doing, because NONE of it would have any use to an actual Democracy that had principles.

The "realists" would argue that these things are necessary. Jimmy Carter was NOT a realist and if we'd stayed with the Carter doctrine, we wouldn't have blowback in a dozen countries to REQUIRE all this cloak and dagger. We would be on the path to getting off fossil fuels, and we wouldn't have had the S&L Crisis and 2008 TARP (plus trillions behind the scenes) because the Banks and Oil companies wouldn't be calling the shots. The economic crisis and OPEC embargo were ENGINEERED by people who now call the shots at the CIA and Washington. That "economic prosperity" you thought you got with Reagan was a capitulation to all the forces who were trying to force Carter's hand. The tough talkers caved and sold out.

Today -- there isn't any real external enemy, because any country with enough money can simply bribe / rent /own the person who makes the decisions in this country. That's what Sibel Edmonds found out just by translating Turkey's communications and that's why she had to be silenced. If Dennis Hastert was selling EVERYTHING to Turkey, and others in the Bush administration were selling nuclear weapons secrets to A Q Khan (why do you think he's still alive?) -- and the FBI didn't care about it other than shutting her up. Then is stands to reason that the Saudis and Israel have as good or better deal. And who else?

Hastert is now a high 7 figure "consultant" for Turkey. We have plenty of ex politicos who are now high paid consultants as rewards.

So -- why would China need to invade or attack USA -- or anyone else? They just call up their rented capitalist, who will gladly sell them the rope to hang him with. The only reason China needs to build air craft carriers, when they've been defeating us with WalMart and merely opening doors to our most advanced manufacturers of airplanes, rockets, and satellites, is because they are corrupt and need to spend the money that would have gone to schools and hospitals on a paper tiger enemy.

The Cold War is good for keeping people in line, contractors well fed, and having excuses to deny anything that the public wants.

While we spend billions to procure the last drops of oil -- which COULD have been used to make oil and wars in the Middle East irrelevant. The Uber Patriots have done nothing but undermine our own Democracy and "win" for the USA while destroying anything of value to defend.

>> The Nazis were Realists and so was Stalin. God save us from people who don't even believe in the ideals they pretend to be defending. Al Qaeda or Green Peace isn't going to take away your gun, but Goldman Sacks will get your house and the Pentagon will supply the drone the police use to wipe out your little militia group in the woods from two miles away in the middle of the night.

There are many who argue that we don't have a Police State -- but they don't see the ground work -- they don't see the velvet glove. There is no need for mass arrests because we are too complacent to fight for our rights and liberty. Wikipedia gets called a traitor for releasing things that would have been common knowledge in a REAL Democracy -- things that Journalists used to actually investigate, rather than having brunch with all the "movers and shakers" to get access for a sound bite and a softball question.

Everything is just so dang corrupt, that everybody thinks things are OK as long as they are fed.

Okay, let's get this straight:

STRATFOR gets hacked...

STRATFOR is hosted by CORENAP.COM who happens to host Austin, TX SXSW film festival.

STRATFOR had all this "juicy" info on a web-server, they had HTTPS but that's all it seems that they had in-place for security. BIG no no in network security. Ya don't put trade secrets or hackable credit card numbers on a web-server just asking to be "honey-potted."

Seems too perfect to me.

STRATFOR's domain name registrar is GoDaddy, but is hosted by a web-host which hosts SXSW.

There is an alleged "list" of "clients emails," on the internet which people can check and see if their names are listed. No top-level domains of .GOV or .MIL are listed. A few .EDU's but that's it. The rest are third-party.

Strategic Forecasting? Politics? Sounds fishy.

Now the famous or infamous CARE2 site gets hacked, who happens to be a very popular political petition grass-roots site. (Got an email myself informing me of the hack.)

Sounds like someone is "DIGGING," and blaming it on ANONYMOUS.

I don't believe this scenario or whatever you choose to call it. STRATFOR seems to be a honey-pot or has a chimpanzee with a gerbil running IT / Network Security. OR it is just plainly ran by idiots or amateurs and is a pawn in a larger scheme.

That's my .02 cents.

Oh, and don't worry about the "INTERNET" being shut-off. The internet is already regulated and compartmentalized in a way which information is already controlled and censored; and you don't know it because you never see it in the first-place. There are already high-speed fiber inter-networks in-place which the "average joe" cannot access or will never be allowed access unless you work for a Research Educational Institution or Gov't Agency.

If those folks at STRATFOR were really this lax at network security, they were a liability and somebody out-there took them out before something major blew-up. I smell politics like a rat. I see this as loose-ends being tied-up and if it serves an agenda for regulation, then that's gravy, too. Kill two birds with one stone. Whatever this is, they KNOW the information already, but are plugging holes or digging away to see who else knows. Who knows what kind of "front" this is for what or whom-ever.

It doesn't add up.

Trek,

One of the most simple explanations covers every question you have.

Anonymous is not some grandiose corporation with 30 people on the payroll ready to act when they are called on. Everyone acts separately towards whatever goal they deem worthy. This means you may see 200,000 people protesting $cientology, or it may mean you see 3 people hacking a server. The reasons are still the same in either case, it's done because someone wants to.

People want to control the flow of information, and they would lead you to believe it is actually possible to have ownership of an idea (patents, etc).

Salk didn't believe in using his vaccine to make money and instead focused his researching on saving lives around this planet.

On the other hand you have the AIDS virus killing off millions, and then you have Magic Johnson's old ass on SportsCenter THIRTY YEARS after testing positive for HIV. And he looks pretty healthy to me, how about everyone else? I have known people who have kept HIV from going full-blown AIDS, and they still look like crap half the time from the amount of meds they have to take.

When is the last time you heard of a -insert family name here- (Rockefeller) dying from cancer or AIDS? Anyone? Nope.

This is the type of ## that just won't be tolerated anymore by some people, and for some it's other reasons... piracy laws, illegal tax-free organizations that are allowed to buy politicians and cover-up known homicides ($cientology), or any other number of things.

We all have that one subject that makes our blood boil. Everyone just reacts differently...

Oh and as for the lax security on the server, it isn't really that uncommon. Granted, it usually has a better encryption, but "Network Security" is more of a term than a reality. The ignorance of some companies in this department is hilarious.

It's the same as every time I hear someone that got hacked or got a virus say, "But I was using -insert security suite here-!"

Newsflash folks, I used to play Lineage II with Peter Norton and he would tell you straight-up that they would program back-doors into the security suites for people to find just so they could close them in the next version and make people buy it all over again.

It's not illegal at all. Maybe slightly unethical, but you have to admit, it's a great business plan.

And for the notion it might have been an attack done in the "name of Anonymous"... doubtful. Had they not donated millions to charities... I might be more inclined to agree. But the donations just scream Anon.

Remember, they would rather ignore a problem and see if it goes away before it gets any larger or gets any more attention. They wouldn't make bigger news out of it.

Originally posted by YouAreLiedTo
Trek,

One of the most simple explanations covers every question you have.

Anonymous is not some grandiose corporation with 30 people on the payroll ready to act when they are called on. Everyone acts separately towards whatever goal they deem worthy. This means you may see 200,000 people protesting $cientology, or it may mean you see 3 people hacking a server. The reasons are still the same in either case, it's done because someone wants to.

People want to control the flow of information, and they would lead you to believe it is actually possible to have ownership of an idea (patents, etc).

Salk didn't believe in using his vaccine to make money and instead focused his researching on saving lives around this planet.

On the other hand you have the AIDS virus killing off millions, and then you have Magic Johnson's old ass on SportsCenter THIRTY YEARS after testing positive for HIV. And he looks pretty healthy to me, how about everyone else? I have known people who have kept HIV from going full-blown AIDS, and they still look like crap half the time from the amount of meds they have to take.

When is the last time you heard of a -insert family name here- (Rockefeller) dying from cancer or AIDS? Anyone? Nope.

This is the type of ## that just won't be tolerated anymore by some people, and for some it's other reasons... piracy laws, illegal tax-free organizations that are allowed to buy politicians and cover-up known homicides ($cientology), or any other number of things.

We all have that one subject that makes our blood boil. Everyone just reacts differently...

REPLY:

Actually, a Rockefeller had of some form of cancer in Arkansas, and a huge research wing at University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, in Little Rock, named a Cancer Institute after him. See this link: ROCKEFELLER CANCER INSTITUTE

For the other commentary, I can agree that money plays a huge part in corruption in government and should be scrutinized publicly, in the spirit of democracy and freedoms we have such strong ideals of and about. If we can all admit everything isn't perfect and there will be mistakes, it's easier to "over-look," or be more compassionate about when the situation arises.

I agree everyone sees things differently, but in the end, everything "IS" what it is and truth is the truth. There's not much we can do except deny.

Originally posted by YouAreLiedTo
Oh and as for the lax security on the server, it isn't really that uncommon. Granted, it usually has a better encryption, but "Network Security" is more of a term than a reality. The ignorance of some companies in this department is hilarious.

It's the same as every time I hear someone that got hacked or got a virus say, "But I was using -insert security suite here-!"

Newsflash folks, I used to play Lineage II with Peter Norton and he would tell you straight-up that they would program back-doors into the security suites for people to find just so they could close them in the next version and make people buy it all over again.

It's not illegal at all. Maybe slightly unethical, but you have to admit, it's a great business plan.

And for the notion it might have been an attack done in the "name of Anonymous"... doubtful. Had they not donated millions to charities... I might be more inclined to agree. But the donations just scream Anon.

Remember, they would rather ignore a problem and see if it goes away before it gets any larger or gets any more attention. They wouldn't make bigger news out of it.

REPLY:

I agree about "network security," or even the acknowledgement of the concept, which those not trained in the field will not discern a DHCP server from a server at a restaurant, which is unfortunate. You'd assume if you administered almost a million user-accounts, you'd have some better network topology and security, unless you outsourced the entire thing to an outside source or host. You're right about that aspect. Most are ignorant.

As for excuses, there's no magic bullet to protect a network from a multi-prong attack, if they want it bad enough, there's a will and there's a way to get the information, and there's nothing strategic to being hacked unless you are the one who did the hacking.

I really don't know who did it, but what's done is done, but the more I study the method of attack and the generated public perspective, there's an agenda somewhere. On one-side, I'm thinking: "How can people be that stupid, vs. That's too-damned easy, something's not right," which makes me study it even-more. But the alleged fact that .MIL and .GOV emails were on that list, is a HUGE RED FLAG, especially on one on-line database of the emails, no .MIL or .GOV TLD's exist at all. Is it edited or dis-info? It's too easily produced and it was on the internet within seconds of the news breaking.

But, it is what it is. We'll have our transparency either now or later, but if it's later, when people want to know information, they usually obtain it one way or the other, when it is not forthcoming, in the first-place.

My ideal is that people have an ascribed right to be free from all that seeks to diminish and that includes information and access to information.

Trek:

Stars for a non-confrontational response and well-thought arguments...

I can get used to this site...

reply to post by YouAreLiedTo


No problem, I didn't assume your reply was confrontational to begin with, and try to weed-out bias in the process I might have. Being able to come to a consensus is a good pragmatic approach to solving any "mystery."

Navigating the fallacies which exist in our modern time, is critical to arriving at the truth or the outskirts of it, don't you think?

Thank you for a most-excellent vigorous discussion.

reply to post by zeeon


Leaking information about ANYTHING personal, and naturally credit card stuff is blatantly illegal. As in criminal. As far as I'm concerned personal data is sacred cow stuff to me. To paraphrase an old add by the American Dental Association, "Ignore your freedoms and the'll go away..." Needless to say this has often never stopped people from pulling such stunts.