They're stating they have a partial DB leak. https://twitter.com/1775Sec/status/421842856748126208
See http://pastebin.com/64PAAV1c
Same data, one month old.
41–50 of 66 posts
They're stating they have a partial DB leak. https://twitter.com/1775Sec/status/421842856748126208
See http://pastebin.com/64PAAV1c
Same data, one month old.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems like just names and email addresses.
Yeah, this is terribly easy to fake. Also, if you look closely, they repeat a lot of the same e-mail addresses with different "real" names attached to them. e.g., flyman@gmail.com and kidrock@msn.com (which appears right next to each other...)
Apparently the website has been compromised: https://twitter.com/1775Sec/status/421820685766250496 The hackers are also threatening a database leak: https://twitter.com/1775Sec/status/421822727331131392 EDIT: Dropbox's statement is that it's maintainance issues: https://tech.dropbox.com/2014/01/dropbox-status-update/ EDIT2: There is a high probability that the Twitter account is faking the hack, due to the "proof" of…
They say they're doing it in honor of Aaron Swartz[0]. (It's the eve of his death). [0]: https://twitter.com/1775Sec/status/421831664239509504
[0]: No.
Either hackers took it down and Dropbox is lying on their status page, or Dropbox did routine maintenance and Anonymous is taking false credit. Unfortunately, I find option #1 to be more likely.
The Twitter account is lying. This is almost always the case (especially when there is some sort of Anonymous affiliation). Anyone can make a Pastebin of fake emails.
(If Dropbox actually gets hacked, it's more likely to be by a state-sponsored organization, and definitely not by someone who is going to brag about it on Twitter)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does this honor Aaron? Aaron wouldn't have done something like this.
Honestly, I'm not sure, and I definitely don't think it's some Aaron would have done.
See: http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/10/dropbox-offline-hacker-grou...
and also see dropbox's blog post, explicitly stating that it "was caused during routine internal maintenance, and was not caused by external factors"