Online Cheating Site AshleyMadison Hacked • Hacker News Board

Re: Online Cheating Site AshleyMadison Hacked

#261

Post by copsarebastards » Mon, Jul 20, 2015, 5:47 PM UTC

jdalgetty wrote: post #141

It get's me that so many people are basically saying it serves these people right for using the service. I don't think that it matters that this is a "cheating" site, your privacy should still be guarded and it's not fair that all these people are being exposed. Secondly, I'd wager that many of the users sign up to use Ashley Madison for the thrill of the idea and probably aren't actually cheaters themselves or hooki…

Yeah, releasing all the data paints with pretty broad strokes, and has more implications than just outing cheaters to their partners.

1. It releases the data to everyone, not just to a cheater's partner. I'll buy that a cheater deserves to be outed to their partner, but to their boss? Their psycho ex? And that's not even thinking of the person who was cheated on: do you really think you would want everyone to know that your spouse was cheating on you?

2. Not all the users of the site are cheaters. Some are just role playing, some were just curious, some were probably trying to catch their partners cheating. Ashley Madison's database doesn't make any of these distinctions: everyone gets the scarlet letter.

Re: Online Cheating Site AshleyMadison Hacked

#262

Post by fnordfnordfnord » Mon, Jul 20, 2015, 5:48 PM UTC

Miner49er wrote: post #250

tptacek wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False equivalence. Adultery is not a crime. Trafficking in child pornography is. Nobody has a right to private criminality.

Adultery is a crime in some states.

21 states! Since Lawrence v. Texas though, there is some doubt that a conviction for adultery would withstand a constitutional challenge.

Re: Online Cheating Site AshleyMadison Hacked

#263

Post by josinalvo » Mon, Jul 20, 2015, 5:49 PM UTC

john_b wrote: post #245

jessriedel wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All parties involved can be at fault. And lots of people will think that privacy, while very important, is not quite at the same level as marital fidelity. It's like hearing that a vicious murderous mob boss had his leg shot off. Yes, the person who took his leg ought to be sent to jail, but we might not have much sympathy for the mob boss since his terrible actions led directly to those consequences.

Except that shooting someone is generally illegal, whereas having an affair is not. Allocate your sympathy as you wish, but don't pretend that a person deserves to be the victim of a crime because you or anyone else find their behavior distasteful.

To cheat, to break your word given to a life partner, is not just distasteful. It is wrong. It makes the world a darker place, and not only to you and your partner (and that is what wrong means)

I know this kind of statement is viewed with distrust. And I see why this is so. But I think some moral discussion might be good (rather than just the bland 'lets not judge')

First, I am not saying that I think all marriages need to be monogamical or 'till death'. Both ideas are probably bad on average (i.e.: make the world a darker place as well, cause needless suffering). I, for one, think that promissing monogamy is a bad idea.

But to break the promice of monogamy is, indeed, bad. First, it is inherently unfair: One partner (Pa) might be resisting temptations, to the benefit of the other (Pb). Pb gets benefits from increased marriage security, increase sexual availability from Pa, increased emotional availability... But does not offer the same.

I mean, it would be clear that withdrawing all the money from a joint savings account is bad, right? That is the same thing... One side is doing a lot of effort to keep a mutual benefit working...

To cheat is a form of exploitation.

Re: Online Cheating Site AshleyMadison Hacked

#264

Post by wl » Mon, Jul 20, 2015, 5:51 PM UTC

mdip wrote: post #101

ulrikrasmussen wrote: post #70

I see a few comments sympathizing with the vigilantes behind this, implying that the exposed users had it coming. I am a bit sickened by this attitude, for several reasons. First of all, adultery is not illegal in the countries where most users of AshleyMadison are presumably residing, and even if it were, people could have used fake names which could implicate someone not actually associated with the site. This coul…

My only concern is for those who's credit card information was used illegally. If I were an employer, I'd be concerned about hiring someone who joined this site. Most jobs put people in a position where they could "get away" with theft or other illegal activities that could deeply harm the company and I can see employers being very concerned about hiring someone associated with the site. Those folks just had their li…

Someone signed up for an account and mistakenly used my first initial + last name @ gmail address. Support refused to purge my address from their system unless I paid them, something I refused to do.

I guess one of my email addresses is in this dump.

Re: Online Cheating Site AshleyMadison Hacked

#265

Post by Flimm » Mon, Jul 20, 2015, 5:53 PM UTC

TimJRobinson wrote: post #216

netcan wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Liberalism is an idea that has a lot of weight on this site. For some, it's libertarian kind of liberalism where people should be left to make their won economic decisions. For others its the social liberalism kind where people should be allowed to decide for themselves what is a valid marriage, or what drugs they will or won't put in their bodies. Most flavors of liberalism have at their heart the idea that "The Sta…

Your style of marriage, your religion and what drugs you take are all victimless crimes. Cheating on your spouse definitely has a victim which is why it's much more of an issue than the others you've listed. Most liberals are not anti state, but pro freedom as long as it doesn't affect anyone else's life.

Style of marriage, religion, drugs and cheating all do affect other people's life, even harm, to varying degrees and definitions. There is no freedom that doesn't affect anyone else's life.

Re: Online Cheating Site AshleyMadison Hacked

#266

Post by dublinben » Mon, Jul 20, 2015, 5:56 PM UTC

eropple wrote: post #259

dublinben wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You didn't ask me, but the correct answer is 'none.'

Cool, so it's alright for me to air your dirtiest of laundry? I'll remember that.

Even if I took umbrage to that, how is censorship legislation going to stop you?

Re: Online Cheating Site AshleyMadison Hacked

#267

Post by someDevOrOther » Mon, Jul 20, 2015, 5:56 PM UTC

MeNotMe wrote: post #157

Two points: 1. Encrypt all database data, decrypt in application. 2. If you only do perimeter defense, you're doing it wrong.

Regarding the first point, how would that help? The password has to be stored in the clear on the server. If an adversary got control of the box, then the adversary would get the password. And secondly, how would you search a database full of encrypted data? Homomorphic encryption isn't ready for prime time as I understand it.

Re: Online Cheating Site AshleyMadison Hacked

#268

Post by dublinben » Mon, Jul 20, 2015, 5:58 PM UTC

Retra wrote: post #260

dublinben wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You didn't ask me, but the correct answer is 'none.'

You realize that you are advocating for single-point-of-failure, right? That if I learn anything at all about you, that I should be free to share it with whomever I like in any way I want, and for any reason? Do you honestly believe that you are so good at guarding information that you have nothing to fear from it's free propagation? And that this is not only true for you, but for everyone ?

Would censorship legislation prevent you from doing so, if you really wanted to?

We should spend more effort removing the potential harm that unwanted information disclosure can cause, rather than running around plugging leaks and jailing whistleblowers.

Re: Online Cheating Site AshleyMadison Hacked

#269

Post by josinalvo » Mon, Jul 20, 2015, 5:59 PM UTC

netcan wrote: post #194

aetherson wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of people who use the site may be "innocent" (because they didn't actually do anything, or because they're in an open marriage or whatever). And even people who are to one degree or other "guilty" are not as a class to be declared guilty and given all the same punishment. That said, while I can't necessarily judge any given user of the site, I'm pretty confident that the people running the site are contributing…

Liberalism is an idea that has a lot of weight on this site. For some, it's libertarian kind of liberalism where people should be left to make their won economic decisions. For others its the social liberalism kind where people should be allowed to decide for themselves what is a valid marriage, or what drugs they will or won't put in their bodies. Most flavors of liberalism have at their heart the idea that "The Sta…

I don't prefer this method to bring AM down.

Put I would not mind a law that forces AM to search and notify the spouses of their users (and that would certainly bring the site down)

Re: Online Cheating Site AshleyMadison Hacked

#270

Post by jasonlotito » Mon, Jul 20, 2015, 5:59 PM UTC

unprepare wrote: post #228

anotherangrydev wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Typical. Free speech! (Until I hear something I don't like!) Equal rights! (Except for people that are not like me!)

Typical. Free Speech! (has nothing to do with government censorship or banning of speech of any kind) Equal rights! (has nothing to do with people being granted rights equally by the government, or those rights being applied unevenly) Is someone here promoting censorship or banning of a type of speech? Is someone of Class B being persecuted for a crime Class A would not be persecuted for? If the answer to both questi…

Oh, I can play "snarky HN comment" too! Ahem...

Typical.

Privacy! (until people I disagree with have their privacy taken).

The Free Speech/Equal Rights remarks weren't about this case. The GP's comment was alluding to them and comparing them to Privacy, which was what was being discussed. Your remarks about Free Speech and Equal Rights are pointless and immaterial.

> Having a lack of sympathy for someone who committed a crime (in this case a contract violation)

Just curious, what crime did they commit in signing up for AM? What proof do you have that they did sign up? What proof do you have that the released data will be accurate? What contract did they violate by signing up for AM?

I'm curious to know what proof you have besides assumptions to make a bold statement that anyone mentioned in the released data is immediately guilty of something.

> Do you think it would be better for us to feel more empathy for contract breakers than for those whose marriages have been adversely affected?

Do you think it would be better for us to find people guilty until proven innocent, or innocent until proven guilty?