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

Anonymous Hacks Epik

4chan.partyvan.epikfail.win

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 284 posts

Re: Anonymous Hacks Epik

#31

Post by commoner »

r721 wrote: post #4
ryan29 wrote: post #2

Did anyone download it and look? This is huge if it's true isn't it? I don't want to download it because I don't know what the laws are, but I'm really interested to know if it's true. Rob Monster is a really big domain investor, right? This is really big news if it's true. Edit: I looked it up. Rob started Epik [1]. I wonder if that's really his password. Lol. Edit 2: I wasn't aware of Epik's reputation either. I ju…

From Emma Best (DDoSecrets)'s tweets it looks like it's unavailable at the moment (6h ago): >There don't seem to be any active seeds and just under 0.5% seems to be available ATM, so... we'll see what happens! https://twitter.com/NatSecGeek/status/1437827363505573896

It's possible that the source sharded the torrent payload and then distributed the shards among multiple "seeds" that are brought online/offline on a rolling schedule, to avoid being identified as the lone seed. Since none of the "seeds" have the entire payload, they are identified as peers (specifically, leechers) in the torrent client.

Re: Anonymous Hacks Epik

#34

Post by dreadlordbone »

heyitsguay wrote: post #16
gfodor wrote: post #11

Eventually the cloud is going to burst and everyone’s data will be public. The motive will be similar to this one, where a huge blast radius of collateral damage is accepted in the name of harming bad people. Seeing people eagerly download this data that surely includes countless amounts of personal info of non-Nazis shows this clearly.

Fortunately, given the purported scope of the hack, it seems we'll be able to actually quantify that. How many of the websites weren't hosting violent or extremist content? If this is real, we should be able to get an exact percentage.

I sure hope people don't jump to conclusions re what is violent or extremist.

Re: Anonymous Hacks Epik

#35

Post by pletsch »

dreadlordbone wrote: post #34
heyitsguay wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately, given the purported scope of the hack, it seems we'll be able to actually quantify that. How many of the websites weren't hosting violent or extremist content? If this is real, we should be able to get an exact percentage.

I sure hope people don't jump to conclusions re what is violent or extremist.

People jump to conclusions? On the internet? No, I don't think that likely

Re: Anonymous Hacks Epik

#37

Post by Syonyk »

burkaman wrote: post #29
Syonyk wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I intend to for future domain registration. - Register.com is an annoying cesspool of value-add upsells and is extremely expensive in the process, with added cost to not have your personal info attached directly to your domain whois. - GoDaddy, other than the creepy ads, has shown plenty of willingness to remove domains hosting content that they don't like, even if it's legal. - I think Google is a registrar, but I'm…

Epik "ended its relationship" with The Daily Stormer because of content hosted on the site and the "entanglement" (meaning PR issues). If you're not ok with that, then I don't think Epik is what you're looking for. If you are ok with it, then you can accept service providers disassociating themselves with "distasteful" clients, it's just a matter of exactly how distasteful they have to be. Source: https://www.npr.org…

If the only ethical way to engage with modern consumer tech is to do a full analysis of the positives and negatives of every aspect of it (which is a position I think has some merit), then the only reasonable conclusion is to simply avoid all of it, because it's all corrupted, at some point or some level, by something someone will find distasteful or worse.

I honestly haven't delved deeply into the list of domains each registrar has removed, decided if I agree or disagree with it, sat down to evaluate the severity of each violation, etc. And I fundamentally don't want to, either.

If you've got a better domain registrar suggestion that isn't full on "bulletproof hosting Bitcoin only" stuff ending in .ru, I'm open to it, but... otherwise, at the end of the day, my goal is to register a domain.

Though, don't get me wrong, I'm seriously considering ending my entire involvement in modern consumer tech and going back to a 1900s tech level once I retire...

Re: Anonymous Hacks Epik

#38

Post by smoldesu »

vmception wrote: post #13

> OFFICIAL ANONYMOUS (not to be confused with 'Anonymous Official' grifters) They should sign an ethereum address to reduce ambiguity (Any crypto asset address is fine, even PGP is good enough for this but PGP had 25 years to make that user friendly and common but failed, and cryptocurrencies made signing software more prevalent and uniform wayyyyy faster)

Trust me, nobody wants to make crypto any easier to use either. What kind of company has interests in maintaining a zero-profit moneypit?

Re: Anonymous Hacks Epik

#39

Post by hellbannedguy »

Syonyk wrote: post #27
kadoban wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many just regular folks would actually pick Epik? Why?

I intend to for future domain registration. - Register.com is an annoying cesspool of value-add upsells and is extremely expensive in the process, with added cost to not have your personal info attached directly to your domain whois. - GoDaddy, other than the creepy ads, has shown plenty of willingness to remove domains hosting content that they don't like, even if it's legal. - I think Google is a registrar, but I'm…

Google is safe, simple, and they never bother you. I'm cheap, but will pay $13 just for piece of mind.

Re: Anonymous Hacks Epik

#40

Post by nebula8804 »

commoner wrote: post #31
r721 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From Emma Best (DDoSecrets)'s tweets it looks like it's unavailable at the moment (6h ago): >There don't seem to be any active seeds and just under 0.5% seems to be available ATM, so... we'll see what happens! https://twitter.com/NatSecGeek/status/1437827363505573896

It's possible that the source sharded the torrent payload and then distributed the shards among multiple "seeds" that are brought online/offline on a rolling schedule, to avoid being identified as the lone seed. Since none of the "seeds" have the entire payload, they are identified as peers (specifically, leechers) in the torrent client.

This 30+ MB torrent file is choking ruTorrent and Deluge clients on my seedbox. Not sure how to fix it. Do you know of some alternative way to process such a large file? I have never seen such a large torrent file like this before.
Post reply on HN