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

The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

krebsonsecurity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 527 posts

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#211

Post by mattzito »

varjag wrote: post #203
mattzito wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or an SO who has an agreement with their spouse to let them quietly cheat has to now deal with strangers and friends alike "knowing" that the spouse sleeps around. Or person A is in a sexless but loving marriage with person B. They have kids, and don't want to get divorced because they love each other, but person B is just done with sex. Is it worse for person A to cheat on person B than it is for the two to get divo…

Look, I can make a bunch of similar sad puppy stories for the other side of coin as well. People holding it "for the kids" but who wouldn't really stay in case of infidelity. Unhappy people with orthodox religious beliefs who would alas divorce in case of adultery. People desperately trying to fix the relationship and improve themselves not realizing their partner is invested elsewhere and all their effort is wasted.…

> I don't have sympathy for people who make their SOs an unconsenting part of three-way sexual relationship

Do you have sympathy for people whose three-way sexual relationships are unconsentingly made public?

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#212

Post by antillean »

zamalek wrote: post #123
camillomiller wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The elevation of monogamy and closed relationships as the God-given natural status of a couple is the source of too many problems. Same for not living our own sexuality in the open. By acting like this (that is: like you are supposed to) you are constantly prone to blackmail. If you happen to have a wife that is entitled in her social-induced belief that even thinking about other women is good ground for the terminat…

> God-given natural status The "God reasoning" isn't the only reasoning. Just like polygamy is a choice, so is monogamy. It's a sexual choice. What is wrong is that people can't be open about that choice. People should be able to be open and honest about being polygamous or monogamous with their partner - yes, that might sometimes result in the relationship ending; but there's a good chance where there is a disagreem…

> "Either way, debate about polygamy vs. monogamy in this case-scenario is completely irrelevant. Someone was hacked, privacy was violated (it doesn't matter what privacy) and that is the end of that. There's no reason to attach another argument to the discussion because the hack was an outright violation in the first place."

Is it that simple? Would the outright violation of a hack be the end of the story if we were talking about something that we all agree is wrong and/or illegal? What if it was a hack on a website that connected child pornographers, or cocaine dealers, or human traffickers, or arms dealers, or planet-destroyers, or abortionists, or super-rich exploitative CEOs?

EDIT: That list started off in my head as stuff that I thought there might be agreement on, but I couldn't think of anything beyond child pornographers, so it turned into stuff that significant groups feel very strongly about but on which there is no general agreement. Hopefully both sets of stuff make my point.

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#213

Post by Cthulhu_ »

nota_bene wrote: post #186

Snowden has risked his life and will be forced to remain paranoid for the entire rest of his life. His cause is noble and 100% justified. He did it for society, for us . What did we do to thank him? We labelled him a traitor and showed no support. And most of all: Almost nobody listened, almost nobody changed habits accordingly. So what does it take to make people listen and understand that our privacy is about to be…

IIRC, Snowden has yet to be formally charged for treason; "we" didn't label or charge him for that, that's a gross generalization. I know what you mean, but you might want to tweak that wording a bit.

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#214

Post by varjag »

mattzito wrote: post #211
varjag wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look, I can make a bunch of similar sad puppy stories for the other side of coin as well. People holding it "for the kids" but who wouldn't really stay in case of infidelity. Unhappy people with orthodox religious beliefs who would alas divorce in case of adultery. People desperately trying to fix the relationship and improve themselves not realizing their partner is invested elsewhere and all their effort is wasted.…

> I don't have sympathy for people who make their SOs an unconsenting part of three-way sexual relationship Do you have sympathy for people whose three-way sexual relationships are unconsentingly made public?

Yes, and you'd see my statement to that effect if you haven't skipped most of my response.

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#216

Post by kalms »

antillean wrote: post #191
kalms wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can use a gun for killing, and it's marketed for that specific purpose. Does owning a gun make you a killer?

No, because I'm talking about intentions and motivations, not actions. I said it's reason to believe that someone has intentions/motivations to have an affair; I didn't say it's enough to believe that someone has had an affair. The reputation, marketing, and design of guns is a good bit more varied than Ashley Madison's. But yes, buying and learning to use a gun shows a certain intention or willingness to kill. It ma…

You're making a lot of false assumptions. You could be the owner of gun, intending to fire it against inanimate objects only. Like a paper target at the gun range.

One could even have bought it out of simple curiosity.

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#217

Post by nicolas_t »

What is worrying about this is that some people are in real physical danger because of this leak. It probably seemed like fun and "social justice" for the hackers but it's not.

There are people who live in countries where adultery is punishable by death. Likewise for being gay. There's already one person from Saudi Arabia who expressed his concerns on Reddit but there's likely to be a lot of other people affected.

And that's not counting unbalanced individuals that might act on the perceived knowledge that their SO cheated on them.

The people who released that leak are criminals and will have destroyed relationships, destroyed lives just for the sake of their ego.

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#218

Post by txdv »

regularfry wrote: post #87

Heh. If I were Ashley Madison, and I wanted to create plausible deniability for people in the real dataset, you know what I'd do? I'd create and "leak" a bunch of other datasets with generated data, and data pilfered from other hacks, to muddy the waters. "Oh, my name's in there? That must be faked up data from the Playstation Network hack years ago. Of course I'd never sign up to Ashley Madison, Mr Journalist."

They signed the real data set with a key, so if you want to release.

Whoever wants to release more, needs to get hands first on that private kye.

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#219

Post by lordsper »

regularfry wrote: post #87

Heh. If I were Ashley Madison, and I wanted to create plausible deniability for people in the real dataset, you know what I'd do? I'd create and "leak" a bunch of other datasets with generated data, and data pilfered from other hacks, to muddy the waters. "Oh, my name's in there? That must be faked up data from the Playstation Network hack years ago. Of course I'd never sign up to Ashley Madison, Mr Journalist."

Except there's already a verified dump out there:

40AE8A90DE40CA3AFA763C8EDB43FC1FC47D75F1

Sorry to burst your bubble, but it just won't work.

Re: The Ashley Madison Database Was Leaked

#220

Post by kalms »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #210
kalms wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who are you to judge how people live and should their lifes? How dull. There are so many different family structures — incl. open relationships. A family's structure and agreements is not public, nor should they be. Unless said family choose to disclose that fact by their own volition.

I'm not judging. People may live however they want. Institution of marriage is one of the choices, that is established in the society and carries with it some particular set of features. In particular, joining in marriage is somewhat public, even if it's much less public than it used to be. Also marriage comes with explicit (even if not legally binding) expectation you don't cheat. If you don't like those aspects, do…

Maybe you have that expectation about marriage, but that doesn't mean your expectations are shared by every married couple.

You're forcing your point-of-view upon others.

Post reply on HN