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

How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

maia.crimew.gay

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 677 posts

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#21

Post by JonathonW »

Waterluvian wrote: post #12
googlryas wrote: post #11

[flagged]

I’m curious to learn: if “they” is being added to style guides as a way to refer to a singular human without implying any gender, is “it” the same or is there a somewhat different meaning behind the usage?

"It" is not generally used in English to refer to people, and generally carries a dehumanizing or even pejorative connotation when used to refer to a person (it's not unheard of to see "it" used as a slur against binary trans people, for example-- using "it" in place of preferred pronouns).

Use "it" if someone specifically requests that "it" be used to refer to them. Don't if they do not.

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#22

Post by toss1 »

_yb2s wrote: post #9
ericpauley wrote: post #7

This is clearly on the darker side of gray-hat. Hate to be preachy but anyone seeking to emulate this sort of attack-finding should consider their ethical obligations as a computer scientist and follow best practices for responsible disclosure. It appears this was completely ignored here, including sharing stolen sensitive data of normal people with whoever can plead a case.

Am I missing something? It seems Maia didn't share the data at all, and only offers to if someone can demonstrate they will use it responsibly. Moreover, depending on the contents of the list, this likely offers proof of what is generally suspected, that the no fly list is a form of discrimination and authoritarian overreach, targeting people that haven't been convicted of a crime but are "suspected" due to race, rel…

>>demonstrate they will use it responsibly.

The problem is to define "demonstrate" and the criteria. Remember the gatekeeper is now an unemployed gal who "know lot's of things about cyber security" according to her main page. Seems likely a competent bad actor could easily impersonate a well-meaning reporter...

Yes, security through obscurity isn't security, but this also seems incredibly irresponsible for any "security researcher". AFAIK, just basic standard good practice is to report the flaws and allow a reasonable interval before publishing, and there seems to be no hint of this.

Modern society really is held together with duct tape, baling twine, and a few pieces of bubble gum...

[EDIT: pronouns]

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#24

Post by mrsuprawsm »

jkingsman wrote: post #5
personjerry wrote: post #3

> with pretty much no skill required Seriously? I know like none of the tools or terms they used, like wtf is shodan? In general the author doesn't seem to follow the white hat guidelines, and I'd be worried what they've done is quite illegal (possibly on a federal level if the nofly list is so secret)

maia[0] (it/she pronouns) is almost certainly aware of that this is illegal, and has been indicted by a grand jury for other government hacks. shodan[1] is a search engine that deals in hosts and ip addresses rather than web pages, and is a goldmine for finding everything from exposed ip webcams to jenkins instances. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maia_arson_crimew [1]: https://www.shodan.io/

US law is neither a universal law nor an international one.

Accessing computer systems owned by a US company based in the US might constitute a violation of US law, but the hacker is based in Switzerland - where US law does not apply.

As you can see in the linked Wikipedia article, accessing these systems is probably not illegal in Switzerland, thus, for all intents and purposes, no crime was committed.

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#25

Post by throwntoday »

a_t48 wrote: post #18
Waterluvian wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m curious to learn: if “they” is being added to style guides as a way to refer to a singular human without implying any gender, is “it” the same or is there a somewhat different meaning behind the usage?

No - please do not use "it" as a catch-all pronoun for an unknown person. "It" is generally a dehumanizing term for a transgender person - though a minority use it as a pronoun (in those cases, go for it).

I can't even remember people's names after they introduce themselves how am I meant to remember their pronouns as well.

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#26

Post by [deleted] »

a_t48 wrote: post #18
Waterluvian wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m curious to learn: if “they” is being added to style guides as a way to refer to a singular human without implying any gender, is “it” the same or is there a somewhat different meaning behind the usage?

No - please do not use "it" as a catch-all pronoun for an unknown person. "It" is generally a dehumanizing term for a transgender person - though a minority use it as a pronoun (in those cases, go for it).

[deleted]

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#27

Post by mrsuprawsm »

codetrotter wrote: post #17
Waterluvian wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m curious to learn: if “they” is being added to style guides as a way to refer to a singular human without implying any gender, is “it” the same or is there a somewhat different meaning behind the usage?

> if “they” is being added to style guides as a way to refer to a singular human without implying any gender Hasn’t it always been the case that you could use “they” as a way to refer to a singular human without implying any gender? I seem to recall that “they” has been in use in that manner long before non-binary arguments were something I’d heard about.

>Hasn’t it always been the case that you could use “they” as a way to refer to a singular human without implying any gender?

Yes, since Shakespearean times.

For example: "I saw someone walking down the street the other day, they were carrying a guitar" -> a normal use of they as the 3rd person singular pronoun.

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#28

Post by Rhinozz »

Waterluvian wrote: post #12
googlryas wrote: post #11

[flagged]

I’m curious to learn: if “they” is being added to style guides as a way to refer to a singular human without implying any gender, is “it” the same or is there a somewhat different meaning behind the usage?

No, 'it' is not the same as 'they' here. To refer to a person of unknown pronouns, they/them/their/theirs/themself should be used. However, if one's pronouns are specified to be either they/them/their/theirs/themself or it/it/its/its/itself, use those preferred.

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#29

Post by Rhinozz »

ryandrake wrote: post #14
thrtythreeforty wrote: post #2

Headline buries the real lede a bit in my opinion; the author has gotten a snapshot of the no-fly list from 2019. Presumably the system under attack processes more up-to-date versions of it regularly. Corresponding news story: https://www.dailydot.com/debug/no-fly-list-us-tsa-unprotecte...

I wonder which no-fly list it is. Is it a government no-fly list that would contain suspected international criminals and terrorists, or an airline's private no-fly list that would contain people who cause a ruckus on flights, drunks, anti-maskers, and so on. Maybe one shared between airlines? I would imagine that second list has grown substantially since 2020 given all the craziness airlines have had to deal with si…

The Daily Dot article specifies that it's the United States' (the Terrorist Screening Center's).

Re: How to own an airline in 3 easy steps and grab the TSA nofly list along the way

#30

Post by ben_w »

calvinmorrison wrote: post #13
ericpauley wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe we should or shouldn't, but the potential victims of this aren't just some greedy corporation. Leaking the no fly list could cause irreparable harm to individuals whose names are on it or even similar, causing discrimination by employers and other organizations.

Top secret stazi lists should absolutely be shared. It's why we have 'we have right to know' laws, so the government can't just lock people up in a jail and disappear them.

While this is true, it is also true that many people think "where there's smoke, there's fire".

Or, to put it another way, governments can make people disappear by publishing such lists and having the police be busy somewhere else when a mob happens.

Post reply on HN