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

SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

krebsonsecurity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 231 posts

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#81

Post by mirimir »

rndgermandude wrote: post #30
tptacek wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's the definition of "dox" you're using, that doesn't appear to be what Krebs did. He posted names, and a public LinkedIn profile.

No, that's my response to your question about how you could dox a journalist. Now, Krebs doxed people in the past who didn't want their true identities revealed. Often because those people were up to no good, but sometimes Krebs went a bit overboard in my opinion. More in general, and I am not saying Krebs ever did this, there are valid reasons why people might not want their true identities widely revealed. Think wh…

Krebs does indeed habitually doxx alleged criminals. There's a perfect example just a ways down from TFA: "Meet the World’s Biggest ‘Bulletproof’ Hoster".[0]

And he doesn't just rely on public sources:

> KrebsOnSecurity uncovered strong evidence to support a similar conclusion. In 2010, this author received a massive data dump from a source that had hacked into or otherwise absconded with more than four years of email records from ChronoPay — at the time a major Russian online payment provider whose CEO and co-founders were the chief subjects of my 2014 book, Spam Nation: The Inside Story of Organized Cybercrime.

> Querying those records on Yalishanda’s primary email address — stas_vl@mail.ru — reveal that this individual in 2010 sought payment processing services from ChronoPay for a business he was running which sold counterfeit designer watches.

And he posted a copy of the guy's passport!

0) https://krebsonsecurity.com/2019/07/meet-the-worlds-biggest-...

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#82

Post by jancsika »

penagwin wrote: post #43
donatj wrote: post #24

The heart of the problem is that SWAT-ing is possible. You shouldn't be able to make an anonymous phone call and have the police bust down someone else's door guns drawn. An unverified phone call alone should not amount to probable cause. That's not civilization.

To play devils advocate a little - If I'm a 911 operator and the person calling says "They have gun next door - there's shouting, I'm really scared WHAT DO I DO?!" What do we do? Turn them down? Ask for proof? From the police perspective - they're entering a potentially dangerous environment, which means gun drawn until the environment is cleared. To your point though - the fact that the swatting has resulted in inno…

Your last sentence doesn't follow.

For the moment, replace "swatting" with bona fide criminals behind the door. If the swat teams ended up killing some of those criminals that wouldn't be evidence of over-aggression on the part of law enforcement.

Since you posit that "gun drawn" is the reasonable response to swatting, then the same logic applies. You're obligated to continue wearing your devil mask for that sentence, so you have to explicitly argue why that isn't the case. :)

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#83

Post by [deleted] »

kybernetikos wrote: post #65
stcredzero wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is true, though for awhile in the past few years, the Far Left was catching up, though the Far Right surged ahead in this year. However, in terms of numbers of events of violence, intimidation, and minor assault, the Far Left has been quite busy. The left leaning media just shows an extreme bias in discussing these events. All of that stuff is bad, and bad for us.

> This is true, though for awhile in the past few years, the Far Left was catching up, though the Far Right surged ahead in this year. According to https://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/START_IdeologicalMotivationsO... there have been no deaths from left wing terrorism in the USA for nearly 40 years. You can read the same information here: https://www.gao.gov/assets/690/683984.pdf > Specifically, tables 1 and 2 show a descr…

[deleted]

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#84

Post by mcantelon »

tomlock wrote: post #39
mcantelon wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And a left wing extremist problem, given the recent Antifa beating of journalist Andy Ngo and, fortunately unsuccessful, attempt by Antifa to ignite a large propane tank next to a migrant center.

Right wing extremists have killed more people in the last ten years than any other political group.

Islamism seems to still be the number one source of terrorism fatalities:

https://www.newamerica.org/in-depth/terrorism-in-america/wha...

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#85

Post by Mirioron »

tptacek wrote: post #4
npiht wrote: post #3

This is bold coming from someone who doxxes people publicly. https://hacked.wtf/2019/04/26/dear-brian-krebs-no-more-doxxi...

Exactly what obligation does Brian Krebs have to maintain the anonymity of random people on the Internet?

But it's not like he leaked or mentioned it accidentally. Brian's intention was to out them and likely maliciously. It's an asshole thing to do.

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#86

Post by mcantelon »

jmull wrote: post #64
mcantelon wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And a left wing extremist problem, given the recent Antifa beating of journalist Andy Ngo and, fortunately unsuccessful, attempt by Antifa to ignite a large propane tank next to a migrant center.

Here’s some data: https://www.gao.gov/assets/690/683984.pdf

Does the data show that left wing extremism should be ignored because there's not as much or it's lower intensity? Why do many people seem to have a hard time condemning political violence in all forms and by all parties?

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#87

Post by TeMPOraL »

Mirioron wrote: post #67
AmericanChopper wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Caller: “hi 911, I’m being held hostage by an armed and violent individual at this address, this is the only opportunity I’ve had to use a phone” 911 call taker: “Thanks for your report. We’ll work on verifying this and might be able to get out there in 2-3 weeks.”

Or maybe the police can still go check, but just not do it guns blazing? They can ring the door bell and ask to check around. If they're afraid of being fired upon they could even use a police robot or something.

Or even stand some distance from the door and shout "THIS IS THE POLICE, EVERYONE GET OUT WITH YOUR HANDS UP" through a bullhorn; it's going to be much less disruptive to everyone than a flashbang through the window, and the officers can still be hidden behind cover in case of actual criminals wielding guns being present.

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#88

Post by 4ntonius8lock »

penagwin wrote: post #43
donatj wrote: post #24

The heart of the problem is that SWAT-ing is possible. You shouldn't be able to make an anonymous phone call and have the police bust down someone else's door guns drawn. An unverified phone call alone should not amount to probable cause. That's not civilization.

To play devils advocate a little - If I'm a 911 operator and the person calling says "They have gun next door - there's shouting, I'm really scared WHAT DO I DO?!" What do we do? Turn them down? Ask for proof? From the police perspective - they're entering a potentially dangerous environment, which means gun drawn until the environment is cleared. To your point though - the fact that the swatting has resulted in inno…

What to do?

I'd suggest... you know... following the rule of law.

Basically, the whole presumption of innocence thing.

A call is a great reason to respond... with inquiry.

Guns ready sure IN the event and inquiry leads to life and death situation... but that should be after the fact of an inquiry: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

It's not up to me to find solutions that don't violate peoples rights. It's up to the people wanting solutions. Just because you have a problem doesn't put you above the law.

Same goes for everyone under the concept of rule of law. As someone who is dealing with a US Naturalization, the rule of law as a concept is drilled in hard. Shame people born with the right don't understand it.

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#89

Post by microtherion »

Mirioron wrote: post #61
davidw wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I understand police in the US has to adapt to the assumption that everyone has a gun That might be a big part of the 'root cause' of this issue.

But many other countries have guns too, eg Switzerland. They don't seem to suffer from the same issue though.

This week an armed man was shot by police in Switzerland. One detail in the newspaper reports that stood out for me was that the investigation of the shooting was immediately transferred to an out of state police department, and that this is apparently standard practice for police use of weapons.

In contrast to this, in the US, there appears to be practically no accountability for the police: https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksibilla/2019/07/18/cop-who-...

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#90

Post by JustSomeNobody »

rhcom2 wrote: post #69
jonnycomputer wrote: post #63

I might be wrong, but a whole bunch of heavily armed guys busting down doors in response to an anonymous phone call is not in the spirit of prioritizing de-escalation over violent resolutions. I want cops de-escalating situations, not shooting up the neighborhood, or going on high-speed chases on neighborhood streets. Now, I imagine swat teams don't like doxxing either. Sounds like a business opportunity.

Unfortunately in our world of active shooters the thinking is now that the police should enter the situation to try to engage the shooter as fast as possible as research shows this is what saves the most lives.

What world is that? I don’t believe that happens often enough in my world for police to come in guns blazing.
Post reply on HN