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

SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

krebsonsecurity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 231 posts

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#61

Post by Mirioron »

davidw wrote: post #57
wongarsu wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here in Germany you can anonymously call the police (using a pay phone or whatever), but it's not an issue because the police use the door bell and politely take a look instead of busting the door open and storming the place with drawn guns. I understand police in the US has to adapt to the assumption that everyone has a gun, but even when you suspect a hostage situation what's the problem with politely knocking and…

> I understand police in the US has to adapt to the assumption that everyone has a gun That might be a big part of the 'root cause' of this issue.

But many other countries have guns too, eg Switzerland. They don't seem to suffer from the same issue though.

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#62

Post by bcoates »

penagwin wrote: post #43
donatj wrote: post #24

The heart of the problem is that SWAT-ing is possible. You shouldn't be able to make an anonymous phone call and have the police bust down someone else's door guns drawn. An unverified phone call alone should not amount to probable cause. That's not civilization.

To play devils advocate a little - If I'm a 911 operator and the person calling says "They have gun next door - there's shouting, I'm really scared WHAT DO I DO?!" What do we do? Turn them down? Ask for proof? From the police perspective - they're entering a potentially dangerous environment, which means gun drawn until the environment is cleared. To your point though - the fact that the swatting has resulted in inno…

"They have gun next door - there's shouting, I'm really scared WHAT DO I DO?!"

"Is something on fire?" "Is someone injured?" "I'm sorry, 911 is for emergencies only, not personal therapy"

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#63

Post by jonnycomputer »

I might be wrong, but a whole bunch of heavily armed guys busting down doors in response to an anonymous phone call is not in the spirit of prioritizing de-escalation over violent resolutions. I want cops de-escalating situations, not shooting up the neighborhood, or going on high-speed chases on neighborhood streets.

Now, I imagine swat teams don't like doxxing either. Sounds like a business opportunity.

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#64

Post by jmull »

mcantelon wrote: post #33
tomlock wrote: post #23

[flagged]

And a left wing extremist problem, given the recent Antifa beating of journalist Andy Ngo and, fortunately unsuccessful, attempt by Antifa to ignite a large propane tank next to a migrant center.

Here’s some data: https://www.gao.gov/assets/690/683984.pdf

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#65

Post by kybernetikos »

stcredzero wrote: post #55
tomlock wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right wing extremists have killed more people in the last ten years than any other political group.

This is true, though for awhile in the past few years, the Far Left was catching up, though the Far Right surged ahead in this year. However, in terms of numbers of events of violence, intimidation, and minor assault, the Far Left has been quite busy. The left leaning media just shows an extreme bias in discussing these events. All of that stuff is bad, and bad for us.

> This is true, though for awhile in the past few years, the Far Left was catching up, though the Far Right surged ahead in this year.

According to https://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/START_IdeologicalMotivationsO... there have been no deaths from left wing terrorism in the USA for nearly 40 years.

You can read the same information here: https://www.gao.gov/assets/690/683984.pdf

> Specifically, tables 1 and 2 show a description, date, location and number of victim fatalities for each far right [106] and radical Islamist [119] attack between September 12, 2001 and December 31, 2016. During this period, no persons in the United States were killed in attacks carried out by persons believed to be motivated by extremist environmental beliefs, extremist “animal liberation”beliefs, or extremist far left beliefs.

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#66

Post by rndgermandude »

tptacek wrote: post #41
rndgermandude wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's my response to your question about how you could dox a journalist. Now, Krebs doxed people in the past who didn't want their true identities revealed. Often because those people were up to no good, but sometimes Krebs went a bit overboard in my opinion. More in general, and I am not saying Krebs ever did this, there are valid reasons why people might not want their true identities widely revealed. Think wh…

I'm sorry, but you're confusing two different concepts. In one instance, Brian Krebs uses public, open sources to discover the true names behind pseudonymous Twitter users; in another, people post home addresses and phone numbers. I'm not asking why it would violate a norm to post home addresses or phone numbers; it's clear to me why that's problematic. I'm asking what obligation Krebs has to pretend he doesn't know…

Most doxers use public, open sources to discover the true names behind pseudonymous users. And their addresses. People make mistakes, sometimes even about other people's data. Sometimes people have no choice because a lot of the information is public record.

That isn't an excuse for compiling this information and publishing it as wide a possible. You still have to consider the implications if you want to act morally and in good faith.

Think of the stupid pseudonymous twitter user who made a really abhorrent, ill-considered joke and the people used "public information from public sources" to first get to their real identity and then crawl further until they find their employer and get the person fired. The person who did the research and then started the witchburning by publishing the information so that every other bored twitter user could write easily write a mean email to the employer should have considered what compiling and publicizing that dox could do.

Also, I think Krebs does take this into consideration, and is generally acting in good faith and with consideration, it's just that I disagree with his conclusion sometimes.

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#67

Post by Mirioron »

AmericanChopper wrote: post #58
mcantelon wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Might take a lot of lawsuits to get them to verify info before acting on it.

Caller: “hi 911, I’m being held hostage by an armed and violent individual at this address, this is the only opportunity I’ve had to use a phone” 911 call taker: “Thanks for your report. We’ll work on verifying this and might be able to get out there in 2-3 weeks.”

Or maybe the police can still go check, but just not do it guns blazing? They can ring the door bell and ask to check around. If they're afraid of being fired upon they could even use a police robot or something.

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#68

Post by [deleted] »

tomlock wrote: post #39
mcantelon wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And a left wing extremist problem, given the recent Antifa beating of journalist Andy Ngo and, fortunately unsuccessful, attempt by Antifa to ignite a large propane tank next to a migrant center.

Right wing extremists have killed more people in the last ten years than any other political group.

[deleted]

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#69

Post by rhcom2 »

jonnycomputer wrote: post #63

I might be wrong, but a whole bunch of heavily armed guys busting down doors in response to an anonymous phone call is not in the spirit of prioritizing de-escalation over violent resolutions. I want cops de-escalating situations, not shooting up the neighborhood, or going on high-speed chases on neighborhood streets. Now, I imagine swat teams don't like doxxing either. Sounds like a business opportunity.

Unfortunately in our world of active shooters the thinking is now that the police should enter the situation to try to engage the shooter as fast as possible as research shows this is what saves the most lives.

Re: SWATters Target Dozens of Journalists

#70

Post by stcredzero »

wongarsu wrote: post #51
jonny_eh wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then what do you propose, people give their names? But then they'll give fake names. So ask for proof of identity? Is that even possible, let alone expedient in an emergency? The solution is to take these reports seriously, but with a grain of salt. i.e. don't just shoot a guy that walks out of his house while confused.

Here in Germany you can anonymously call the police (using a pay phone or whatever), but it's not an issue because the police use the door bell and politely take a look instead of busting the door open and storming the place with drawn guns. I understand police in the US has to adapt to the assumption that everyone has a gun, but even when you suspect a hostage situation what's the problem with politely knocking and…

even when you suspect a hostage situation what's the problem with politely knocking and waiting if you get a friendly response?

I once pulled over a few blocks from a friend's house, so I could call her and get a few final directions. A man from the house I had parked in front of instantly started talking ominously and yelling at me. I think that guy was a meth head crazed out of his mind. In the back of my mind was the possibility that he'd bring out a shotgun and start blazing away at me. (Yes, my friend didn't live in a great neighborhood.) The police here have to be prepared to deal with people like that.

I think friendly looking police androids are going to be quite helpful.

Post reply on HN