Live data from Hacker News

No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

medium.com

701–710 of 783 posts

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#701
post #697

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's not "the only thing strange" about this. Perhaps you're unfamiliar with American history, but this is wildly without any remote precedent. Not to say that previous Presidents haven't done bad things, abused laws, etc, (shit, even launched disinfo campaigns, used the press to attack enemies, etc) but this is just gobsmackingly different from what has come before. Obviously caveat "if this is true" blah blah…

You should probably read about J. Edgar Hoover... He was arguably more powerful than the Presidents he supposedly served.

See my reply to a sibling comment; I'm not unaware of history, though there's an incredible amount I am ignorant of, certainly.

But I'm familiar with Hoover; this is wildly different. For one thing, unless I'm mistaken, he was never actually President. "Arguably more powerful than the Presidents he supposedly served" is a neat line and not unreasonable, but doesn't really approach what I'm arguing: that this moment is without precedent in American (world?) history.

That's because the story here likely goes beyond simply AMI going after Bezos at the White House's direction - that would be a hell of a story but also hardly original.

A President conspiring with two separate foreign powers to undermine our elections in order to enrich himself is just one part of the overall story that I contend is novel here. It may not even be the seediest part, depending on what comes of, say, the Seychelles meeting.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#702

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently Bezos's mistress's password is in haveibeenpwned.com so this very likely didn't require a government entity. https://blog.erratasec.com/2019/02/how-bezos-dick-pics-might...

These sorts of things are always NP problems. If you know the answer, in hindsight it was obvious, because all the signs line up. But to think to look at the answer, to search the entire space of how to discredit someone, that takes resources.

Everything Bezos tells about seems to have happened very recently, after the divorce announcement, making Lauren Sanchez a very obvious hacking target for which password leaks are a very obvious easy strategy.

Taking on Amazon cybersecurity could be a job for the likes of the NSA, but accessing a cracked phone without being caught is almost amateur level hacking.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#703

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only thing strange about it is how much easier it is to learn about these conspiracies now that we have the Internet. People are acting all shocked like this is a new state of affairs. It's not. We are just far more empowered now to actually learn about these things.

> People are acting all shocked like this is a new state of affairs. Wait, they are? Who?

Me. I would say that this is an entirely novel state of affairs, without precedent in American history. As others have pointed out to me in this thread, "American history" contains lots of pretty salacious and wild stories of governmental abuse of authority.

Yet all the jaded Hacker News historians around here haven't really pointed out any actual incidents in history that approach this story. "You should read about Hoover" or "Abraham Lincoln did some bad shit during the Civil War" doesn't really approach the level of "President conspiring with two separate foreign adversaries/frenemies to undermine American elections, enrich himself and blackmail his enemies" to say nothing of all the juicy details we don't yet know.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#704
What’s kind of weird about this move by National Enquirer is that it seems so poorly thought out. Bezos’ “affair” was known to his wife and they parted amicably; sending genital photos is probably the least embarrassing thing you could catch a billionaire doing, and in fact it kind of humanizes him.

In the age of privacy conversations, I can’t see how this is supposed to end up positive for the paper. They oversold it here and seem to have opened themselves up to some tough questions in the process.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#705
post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if Mohammed Bone Saw is behind this also, then wow, just wow. His Highness is really dumber than a saw handle.

Can't you just picture him being on a call with Trump and casually saying this was something he could do, and Trump being like yes please thus creating yet another Putin-esque blackmail situation. My gut says that's what this is.

Even crazier still...

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#706

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"hacked" by either the US or Saudi government You think the U.S./Saudi government can remotely grab pics from an iPhone? Apple has disclosed lots of security info saying even they cannot do this. The iPhone/iOS wasn't built in that way. I think the leak likely comes from someone close to Ms. Sanchez, or she fell victim to a phishing attack (or account recovery hack).

There was mention of Michael Sanchez: https://www.thedailybeast.com/bezos-investigators-question-t... (Link at bottom of the medium post) So it may have been his mistress' phone that was compromised.

Thus my theory stands. It was someone close to them.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#707

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"hacked" by either the US or Saudi government You think the U.S./Saudi government can remotely grab pics from an iPhone? Apple has disclosed lots of security info saying even they cannot do this. The iPhone/iOS wasn't built in that way. I think the leak likely comes from someone close to Ms. Sanchez, or she fell victim to a phishing attack (or account recovery hack).

Remember the fappening? It doesnt need to be remote grabbing, people just upload their nudes to the icloud. Maybe jeff did as well. While apple says they are end to end encrypted, I also assume they work with the FBI/whoever to catch owners of illegal content, so they probably would have a way to get the unencrypted content.

Please read my post again, my theory covers that: "or she fell victim to a phishing attack (or account recovery hack)."

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#708

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"hacked" by either the US or Saudi government You think the U.S./Saudi government can remotely grab pics from an iPhone? Apple has disclosed lots of security info saying even they cannot do this. The iPhone/iOS wasn't built in that way. I think the leak likely comes from someone close to Ms. Sanchez, or she fell victim to a phishing attack (or account recovery hack).

A hack is a hack

Forgot password is not a hack.

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#709
post #566
post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why Saudis? Why not the Russians in this context?

Kashoggi was an employee of the Washington Post, which Bezos owns. The WaPo have been highly critical of the Saudi response to the Kashoggi murder. It would stand to reason the Saudis are likely using AMI as a proxy for their campaign to blackmail Bezos and silence the WaPo. Trump protecting the Saudis, and Russia protecting Trump would be quite an analytical leap I'd think.

> quite an analytical leap I'd think.

Reality can be stranger than fiction. With all the new revelations that come out about all these entities on a regular basis - what is to be believed anymore?

Re: No Thank You, Mr. Pecker

#710
post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, I don't think leaning on WaPo would have helped him here (and I did not suggest that). Plenty of other papers he doesn't own publish random letters to the editor.

But what's the advantage of that over a Medium post?

I'm not the one who suggested it was better, either. Just an option.
Post reply on HN