Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

krebsonsecurity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 527 posts

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#111

Post by camillomiller »

dsacco wrote: post #4
tptacek wrote: post #2

The response to this this on Twitter would be beyond fucked- up if it weren't so completely predictable. People are posting direct links to the dump, screenshots of lists of emails, and statistics for classes of domains. The general reaction to the availability of the dump is reasonably characterized as "glee". But no matter what you think about Ashley Madison --- and I think A.M. is so comically scummy that I had tr…

This is a great comment, Thomas. I had an argument with my girlfriend about this. No matter what reasoning I used, no matter what I said, she could not agree that it was wrong that Ashley Madison (A.M.) was hacked. Her position was that marital infidelity is such a pubishable offense that the participants on A.M. deserve to be publicly outed. In her view, it was not even up for debate. She felt so powerfully about in…

The elevation of monogamy and closed relationships as the God-given natural status of a couple is the source of too many problems.

Same for not living our own sexuality in the open. By acting like this (that is: like you are supposed to) you are constantly prone to blackmail.

If you happen to have a wife that is entitled in her social-induced belief that even thinking about other women is good ground for the termination of a marriage, then external forces will have a great power over you.

If you live with a person that accepts external affairs, sex with other people and who is ok with your true sexuality (e.g. If you're bisexual or happen to like transgenders) you will always have someone on your side no matter what, and your relationship to that person can't be menaced by any eventual disclosure.

Social stigma might still have a leverage on you, but if you're open with your intimate circle of friends and business acquaintances it would be virtually impossible to use a sex-related scandal against you.

The Ashley Madison leak is interesting because of this, too. It's a breakthrough because it exposes behaviors that society still considers immoral and punishable. People that left behind this archaic way of thinking and built their life together with someone that shares more open sexual values are totally immune to this scandal.

This is certainly something that would have tickled Sir Bertrand Russell's mind.

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#112

Post by technomancy »

geofft wrote: post #53
ougachooga wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious why so many are downvoting. Do you disagree that the business model is disgusting, or just think it's inappropriate to say so about a peer's startup? I'm very curious to know what HNers think about this.

I happen to agree that the business model is awful, but it's also sort of off-topic. The way in which I am displeased with someone who chooses to cheat on their spouse is very different from the way I am displeased with a company who makes money off of getting large numbers of people to cheat on their spouses, and this hack victimizes individuals more than the company. It's also very different from the way I am displ…

> this hack victimizes individuals more than the company

Hm; do you really think there's a chance the company will survive this? It seems unlikely.

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#113

Post by brerlapn »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #86
brerlapn wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO, you're getting downvoted because your judgment of people on AM assumes facts not in evidence (i.e., that users of AM are there to cheat on their unknowing spouses), and then judges those people based on those facts that only exist in your head. It's self-aggrandizing, and the tone doesn't come off as participation in a discourse about morality as much as a narcissistic statement about the identity you'd like peo…

you're getting downvoted because your judgment of people on AM assumes facts not in evidence (i.e., that users of AM are there to cheat on their unknowing spouses This is all text from the homepage of Ashley Madison: "Ashley Madison is the world's leading married dating service for discreet encounters" Their tagline, a registered trademark is, "Life is short. Have an affair.®" "Ashley Madison is the most famous name…

I've been known to drink Budweiser. Does that mean that I believe that women will suddenly find me sexy and the Swedish bikini team will appear as I pop off the bottlecap to lavish me with scantily-clad attention?

You are conflating the marketing copy of the company with the intentions and motivations of the users. Just because something confirms your most cynical expectations doesn't make it true.

Ashley Madison has absolutely no idea whether any particular user, if they are married, is on there to do anything with their profile other than browse, or whether their spouse knows they are on there, or for that matter if a couple is browsing the site together as part of their joint fantasy life, or if they are in an open relationship, or a number of other scenarios that have no impact on you and really provide no basis for you to cast judgment about their motivations--especially in an absence of evidence.

See again, my cite to David Brin's article on addiction to outrage.

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#114

Post by nitrogen »

dang wrote: post #16
tedunangst wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are never the infidels. Only "they" can be infidels.

Is there a word for things that only other people can be? The one that always comes to mind is "tourist".

One could always coin a new one or borrow an existing word. I like xenonym, but it's current definitions seem inapropos.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenonym

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/xenonym

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#115

Post by lambkins »

warkdarrior wrote: post #91
WillPostForFood wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you're getting downvoted because your judgment of people on AM assumes facts not in evidence (i.e., that users of AM are there to cheat on their unknowing spouses This is all text from the homepage of Ashley Madison: "Ashley Madison is the world's leading married dating service for discreet encounters" Their tagline, a registered trademark is, "Life is short. Have an affair.®" "Ashley Madison is the most famous name…

You are confusing marketing with actual use. Cf "to serve and protect".

Not surprised to see the overlap between the anti-cop and pro-adultery crowd.

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#116

Post by nitrogen »

in3d wrote: post #93

I'm not sure if people realize how significant this hack is. We just might have seen the first public hack that will cause people to die or be physically hurt. Homosexuality is illegal in certain countries (like Saudi Arabia) and this hack might expose people to harm in these countries. Some reactions of spouses might also be violent. It looks like the reaction of most commenters is very different compared to when Ga…

I don't know of any other hack that had such an impact in the past.

The US OPM hack is probably of a similar impact due to its larger scale.

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#117

Post by chinathrow »

tajano wrote: post #105
princeb wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

barack.obama@whitehouse.gov is in there (and verified, whatever that means), as is tblair@labour.gov.uk (unverified), pointed out by zerohedge.

I assume "verified" means that Ashley Madison's server sent a verification email to that address, and the user at that address clicked on the verification link included in that email. Certainly, someone might enter in barack.obama@whitehouse.gov for fun. Presumably, emails to that address (and the official public email address, president@whitehouse.gov) get routed somewhere. But who is checking the emails sent to the…

Verification links gets clicked by mail scanning software (for malware, I suppose) all the time - if the GET isn't followed by a POST - the account is flagged valid.

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#118

Post by wl »

tajano wrote: post #105
princeb wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

barack.obama@whitehouse.gov is in there (and verified, whatever that means), as is tblair@labour.gov.uk (unverified), pointed out by zerohedge.

I assume "verified" means that Ashley Madison's server sent a verification email to that address, and the user at that address clicked on the verification link included in that email. Certainly, someone might enter in barack.obama@whitehouse.gov for fun. Presumably, emails to that address (and the official public email address, president@whitehouse.gov) get routed somewhere. But who is checking the emails sent to the…

As another data point, one of my gmail addresses is in the dump (Cf. https://xkcd.com/1279/ ) and listed as verified, despite me never clicking any verification link. Then again, I did contact support asking for them to remove my email address from the account (their response was to ask for money) and perhaps that did something.

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#119

Post by in3d »

nitrogen wrote: post #116
in3d wrote: post #93

I'm not sure if people realize how significant this hack is. We just might have seen the first public hack that will cause people to die or be physically hurt. Homosexuality is illegal in certain countries (like Saudi Arabia) and this hack might expose people to harm in these countries. Some reactions of spouses might also be violent. It looks like the reaction of most commenters is very different compared to when Ga…

I don't know of any other hack that had such an impact in the past. The US OPM hack is probably of a similar impact due to its larger scale.

True, this OPM hack might have a huge national security impact.

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#120

Post by yummybear »

tptacek wrote: post #2

The response to this this on Twitter would be beyond fucked- up if it weren't so completely predictable. People are posting direct links to the dump, screenshots of lists of emails, and statistics for classes of domains. The general reaction to the availability of the dump is reasonably characterized as "glee". But no matter what you think about Ashley Madison --- and I think A.M. is so comically scummy that I had tr…

Most people in here (I assume) think Snowden's leaks were ethic, though illegal.

The reaction to The Fappening was likewise equal parts glee and disgust.

Almost nobody would blink an eye at revealing a doxxing dump from a terrorist sympathizer or CP forum.

Ethics are a subjective thing, and lines are hard to place.

Post reply on HN