Lulzsec Exposed

#1

Post by Wickk » Sat, Jun 18, 2011, 12:50 PM UTC

Lulzsec Exposed
lulzsecexposed.blogspot.com

Re: Lulzsec Exposed

#2

Post by benwerd » Sat, Jun 18, 2011, 1:35 PM UTC

Huh. They're a little older than I thought they'd be - from their messages, I was convinced they were going to be about 15.

Re: Lulzsec Exposed

#3

Post by hugh3 » Sat, Jun 18, 2011, 1:38 PM UTC

Well, I don't know whether this is real or not, but they sure do look like I imagined 'em to.

Re: Lulzsec Exposed

#4

Post by citricsquid » Sat, Jun 18, 2011, 1:44 PM UTC

benwerd wrote: post #2

Huh. They're a little older than I thought they'd be - from their messages, I was convinced they were going to be about 15.

22 is the new 15

Re: Lulzsec Exposed

#5

Post by citricsquid » Sat, Jun 18, 2011, 1:44 PM UTC

hugh3 wrote: post #3

Well, I don't know whether this is real or not, but they sure do look like I imagined 'em to.

Yeah it's probably some reverse lulz

Re: Lulzsec Exposed

#6

Post by VMG » Sat, Jun 18, 2011, 1:45 PM UTC

what is the proof?

Re: Lulzsec Exposed

#7

Post by JoachimSchipper » Sat, Jun 18, 2011, 1:48 PM UTC

So... Googling some nicknames is now "dropping dox"? (E.g. http://twitter.com/#!/joepie91 lists "Sven Slootweg / Joepie91" and is the first hit for "Joepie91" - not exactly hard to find...)

Did I miss something?

Re: Lulzsec Exposed

#8

Post by BasDirks » Sat, Jun 18, 2011, 1:50 PM UTC

This would be an excellent tactic by lulzsec to have certain people harassed.

Re: Lulzsec Exposed

#9

Post by spdy » Sat, Jun 18, 2011, 1:53 PM UTC

VMG wrote: post #6

what is the proof?

someone on the internetz said it`s true ! These kind of "exposed" storys always reminds me of http://xkcd.com/386/

Re: Lulzsec Exposed

#10

Post by itg » Sat, Jun 18, 2011, 1:53 PM UTC

I think this info shouldn't be made public unless there is solid proof that those are the members of lulzsec. Considering the damage they have done, there are lots of angry people who would love to go after them.