If it is genuine, I don't know why they think they'll get away with it. Also $1M is way too low of an amount to blackmail Romney for. Talk about selling yourself short.
Yes, the low amount is what makes me suspect that it's fake. If this were real, and the true aim was extortion, we would have never heard about it.
Perhaps the blackmailers assume they are more likely to get money from people who want the records revealed. 1 million people could pay $1 each, Kickstarter-style.
Can this be considered terrorism? Surely, blackmail, but also terrorism? Just curious. edit: Since I received record fast downvotes, I'll clarify that this is not meant to be a political comment, jesus.
What I find interesting is the future(or current) possibility of political opponents hacking each other and then blaming it on "Anonymous" or entrepreneurial hackers. Or heck, infiltrate companies that do business with the political opponent and then blame "hackers" who don't exist.
Or media outlets, given the whole "celebrity cell/email hacking scandal". Or even rival companies that find dirt.
What I find interesting is the future(or current) possibility of political opponents hacking each other and then blaming it on "Anonymous" or entrepreneurial hackers. Or heck, infiltrate companies that do business with the political opponent and then blame "hackers" who don't exist.
Pastebin: http://pastebin.com/1j1yzQ9S I'm not very familiar with the Bitcoin protocol: Can all users view the values of these two bitcoin accounts -- or BTC in transit?
Yes, the transactions to and from these accounts are available here:
Can this be considered terrorism? Surely, blackmail, but also terrorism? Just curious. edit: Since I received record fast downvotes, I'll clarify that this is not meant to be a political comment, jesus.
Only if they stretched a couple of the rules. They can use the wire fraud rules quite a lot easier and put them in jail for a long, long time.
Can this be considered terrorism? Surely, blackmail, but also terrorism? Just curious. edit: Since I received record fast downvotes, I'll clarify that this is not meant to be a political comment, jesus.
If you want to dilute what the words means to the point it can mean just about any crime, sure. But if you're referring to the strict term, then no.
There's no actual strict definition of terrorism; just a bunch of disparate attempts at one by various government agencies. The reason this is, is because it's so painfully, obviously subjective. If we use the definition provided by drivebyacct2, the use of the term itself is the best example of its definition. Most accounts of terrorism are merely just criminal acts that a certain party wants to paint as extranormative. It's interesting to bring up the question of whether this hack could be considered terrorism, as I'm sure if it's real, some Republicans will have interest in calling it that. That's the nature of the illusive concept of "terrorism". Sorry for the off topic discussion!
title didn't convey the content of the article, or why it would be of interest to HN. I thought it was political stuff at first vs tech news. A better title might be: Anonymous' steals Romney's tax return for blackmail extortion
Actually, I think the thieves are anonymous in that they aren't known yet, not "Anonymous" the hacker group.
If that's the case then "anonymous" shouldn't be used as a noun.