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

Who’s behind Wednesday’s epic Twitter hack?

krebsonsecurity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 536 posts

Re: Who’s behind Wednesday’s epic Twitter hack?

#161

Post by ZachPruckowski »

brown9-2 wrote: post #113
blisseyGo wrote: post #69

I think people are still severely under-estimating how dangerous this was. Back in 2013 when The Associated Press was hacked with a tweet of "Breaking: Two Explosions in the White House and Barack Obama is injured" and erased $136 billion in equity market value: Archive: http://archive.is/8lCMV https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/04/23... This twitter hack could have literally destroyed economies,…

Yes it was dangerous, but nothing is “erased” if that market valuation is restored a few minutes later

In the aggregate sense, it eventually netted out. But a lot of people who sold when it looked like prices were collapsing sure got a pretty decent chunk of their bank accounts "erased".

Re: Who’s behind Wednesday’s epic Twitter hack?

#162

Post by mc32 »

phs318u wrote: post #123
djmetzle wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. We've entered a world where the lowest common denominator of information is being used as primary source for current events. That's asinine.

But is that really new? Other than scale and reach (quantitative difference), how is that any different qualitatively from the old grapevine/gossip network? "My dad's co-worker's, girlfriend's uncle works at ... and said..."

That didn't get disseminated and diffused to tens of millions. If something was published they'd look for official sources or corroborating sources and or secondary evidence. If AP, EFE, UPI, Kyodo, Interfax etc all get their news from one source [Twitter] that's just laziness.

Re: Who’s behind Wednesday’s epic Twitter hack?

#163

Post by AnotherGoodName »

malwarebytess wrote: post #132
christoph wrote: post #54

I don’t really think he should be naming who his unnamed sources “think” is behind an attack on this scale, especially with full name, city of origin, Instagram, suggested current location, age, etc. It feels a very, very small step away from doxxing to me. Added to which he has somebody in the comments essentially calling for the death penalty over this. If he has this personal information and evidence, pass it to t…

It's doxxing. My question is why is that a bad thing in this case? Zero tolerance policies don't make any sense to me.

Because it leads to harassment and harm. Which gets particularly bad when it's likely a false accusation at this point.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunil_Tripathi for an example that should make your blood boil

Re: Who’s behind Wednesday’s epic Twitter hack?

#164

Post by hoppelhase »

Forbo wrote: post #101
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It feels a very, very small step away from doxxing to me. What small step is that? Looks like a textbook case of doxxing to me.

This isn't his first time doing it, either. https://itwire.com/security/infosec-researchers-slam-ex-wapo...

Some people claim that the coinhive story had some unnecessary doxxing aswell:

https://krebsonsecurity.com/2020/03/annual-protest-to-fight-... (see comments)

The users of said image board do a yearly fundraiser to protest against the unnecessary doxxing. The first one was started by a random user.

Re: Who’s behind Wednesday’s epic Twitter hack?

#165

Post by nuclearnice1 »

scubbo wrote: post #153
malwarebytess wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's doxxing. My question is why is that a bad thing in this case? Zero tolerance policies don't make any sense to me.

On the off-chance that you're serious - doxxing someone who is suspected to be linked to a crime is staggeringly irresponsible, because you are then effectively convicting them in the court of public opinion. If they are innocent, but you have not only levelled accusations at them, but provided ways to access them, then you are partially responsible for what others choose to do with that information.

Isn’t most crime journalism the same?

Three examples from the front page of the NY post right now.

I am having a hard time figuring out how to distinguish this and the OP doxxing. The organizationS fact-checking process? Solidness of the evidence?

> Allegations were made against longtime radio broadcaster Larry Michael (retired Wednesday), director of pro personnel Alex Santos (fired last week), assistant director of pro personnel Richard Mann II (fired last week), former COO Mitch Gershman (left in 2015) and former president of business operations Dennis Greene (left in 2018).

> Chanice Reyes, 24, was busted around 5 a.m. Thursday, sources said, when cops investigated a strong smell of marijuana coming from a car near City Hall, where anti-police activists have been gathering in recent weeks.

> Tory Lanez, whose real name is Daystar Peterson, was the person who allegedly shot Megan Thee Stallion following a dispute inside his vehicle Sunday morning, Page Six has learned.

Re: Who’s behind Wednesday’s epic Twitter hack?

#166

Post by ziddoap »

Forbo wrote: post #101
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It feels a very, very small step away from doxxing to me. What small step is that? Looks like a textbook case of doxxing to me.

This isn't his first time doing it, either. https://itwire.com/security/infosec-researchers-slam-ex-wapo...

I was personally unaware of these stories, and am slightly disgusted by the fact that I used to think Krebs was a fairly stand-up guy.

Doxxing someone because of a bad book review? I guess I shouldn't be surprised he's now doxxing someone based on a loose thread with no evidence.

I would have thought someone who has been swatted before would realize the dangers of releasing someones personal address to outrage-hungry vigilantes.

Re: Who’s behind Wednesday’s epic Twitter hack?

#167

Post by dcow »

christoph wrote: post #54

I don’t really think he should be naming who his unnamed sources “think” is behind an attack on this scale, especially with full name, city of origin, Instagram, suggested current location, age, etc. It feels a very, very small step away from doxxing to me. Added to which he has somebody in the comments essentially calling for the death penalty over this. If he has this personal information and evidence, pass it to t…

I never understood the whole doxing thing... the actions you take in this world are real. You can't take them back. You don't get to be anonymous just because you wish to be or because you frequent hacker sub-cults where doxing is some holy transgression. Bad op sec is bad op sec. Nothing more, nothing less.

If Krebs got it wrong, well, he can suffer the consequences of that, too.

Re: Who’s behind Wednesday’s epic Twitter hack?

#168

Post by ziddoap »

nuclearnice1 wrote: post #165
scubbo wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the off-chance that you're serious - doxxing someone who is suspected to be linked to a crime is staggeringly irresponsible, because you are then effectively convicting them in the court of public opinion. If they are innocent, but you have not only levelled accusations at them, but provided ways to access them, then you are partially responsible for what others choose to do with that information.

Isn’t most crime journalism the same? Three examples from the front page of the NY post right now. I am having a hard time figuring out how to distinguish this and the OP doxxing. The organizationS fact-checking process? Solidness of the evidence? > Allegations were made against longtime radio broadcaster Larry Michael (retired Wednesday), director of pro personnel Alex Santos (fired last week), assistant director of…

There isn't a difference. Newspapers seem to dox people with impunity. It doesn't make it right, nor desirable, nor an excuse for others to follow suit.

The number of lives ruined by false allegations that have been amplified through press/journalists is disgusting.

Re: Who’s behind Wednesday’s epic Twitter hack?

#170

Post by squarefoot »

scubbo wrote: post #153
malwarebytess wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's doxxing. My question is why is that a bad thing in this case? Zero tolerance policies don't make any sense to me.

On the off-chance that you're serious - doxxing someone who is suspected to be linked to a crime is staggeringly irresponsible, because you are then effectively convicting them in the court of public opinion. If they are innocent, but you have not only levelled accusations at them, but provided ways to access them, then you are partially responsible for what others choose to do with that information.

And by the way, even if the suspect is guilty, he/she might be a small cog in a much bigger engine, and by doxxing him/her the minds behind the fraud would be alerted then enter lowest profile mode, shutting everything down and making them extremely difficult to capture.

Doxxing can be a good thing only when authorities can't be trusted, which is the case for example of police violence and racism, where they're clearly protected by a corrupt system; in this case making their actions public becomes a public service. But in the above and other similar cases, think twice before publishing information that could undermine an investigation, even though they're properly checked and accurate.

Post reply on HN