Republican Aide Tries to Hire Hackers 427
Noryungi writes "It seems as though a Republican Communications Director contacted Attrition.org, trying to hire hackers to improve his educational records. I don't know what is his dumbest move: (a) contacting Attrition in the first place, (b) using a real name Yahoo email address or (c) speaking at length about what he needed? Kudos to the Attrition crew for posting the whole email dialogue online! A sample from the conversation: 'Jericho: First, let's be clear. You are soliciting me to break the law and hack into a computer across state lines. That is a federal offense and multiple felonies. Obviously I can't trust anyone and everyone that mails such a request, you might be an FBI agent, right? So, I need three things to make this happen: 1. A picture of a squirrel or pigeon on your campus. One close-up, one with background that shows buildings, a sign, or something to indicate you are standing on the campus. 2. The information I mentioned so I can find the records once I get into the database. 3. Some idea of what I get for all my trouble.'"
Nevermind, jokes on me I guess (Score:3, Informative)
Re:This begs the question (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What the? (Score:5, Informative)
In case you are wondering, what they are doing is a variant of the 419 eater [419eater.com] technique. They had no intent of following through, but they had every intent of making the guy look like a fool as they strung him along.
posting the emails was illegal and unproductive (Score:1, Informative)
Kudos to the Attrition crew for posting the whole email dialogue online!
Not really. It's great grounds for them getting sued. It was a private communication and one could (probably) argue he had a reasonable expectation of privacy. It may come as a shock to slashdotters, but you can't just forward any old email that drifts into your inbox.
Also, it would have been far more effective to have brought the emails to the attention of federal authorities. Now, the chances of a fair investigation (and trial) are pretty much blown to hell.
Instead of actually helping, they just grandstanded...
Yet another. . . (Score:5, Informative)
I know that Sandy Berger (just so no one thinks I'm biased) is a real moron but come on, how much lack of intelligence does one have to have to think that they could get away with this?
Mirror (Score:5, Informative)
http://suso.suso.org/attrition1.html [suso.org]
http://suso.suso.org/attrition2.html [suso.org] (Page 2)
Re:What the? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:posting the emails was illegal and unproductive (Score:3, Informative)
I love the smell of napalm in December.
Re:posting the emails was illegal and unproductive (Score:3, Informative)
Though I have only found one http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2006_11.php#0050
Other relevant portions of the article:
"The issue raised in Barrett v. Rosenthal was whether Section 230's protection applies to individuals who frequently use the internet to pass on information obtained elsewhere, whether by forwarding an email written by someone else or, as was the case in Barrett, posting an email from someone else to a newsgroup."
The CDA basically covers anyone from being sued, prosecuted {in my non-legal opinion) for posting forwarding emails from other sources. It is unclear from the article, and I don't have time to reread the CDA at the moment, if this also covers emails that include the 'privacy' footer. However, email is a public method of passing data around, there isn't any expectation of privacy in this form of communication. Finding and ferreting out a private email, either from a mail server, or while it is traveling through a network, isn't a very tough thing to do. You just have to know where to look.
Re:Yet another. . . (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/1/2
Slashing tires to keep people from voting.
Or John Murtha:
http://news.netscape.com/story/2006/11/15/democra
Or William Jefferson:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/21/jefferson.
Or Teddy Kennedy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chappaquiddick [wikipedia.org]
Or "Voted for the War before I voted against it" :
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/29/politic
Or Hiz Honor,Richard Daley:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_J._Daley [wikipedia.org]
Or Boss Tweed:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boss_Tweed [wikipedia.org]
Please, politicians by default are dishonest, not just Republicans. So just remember who's dog food you are eating when shilling for one side or the other.
Re:Hilarious (Score:2, Informative)
do you even realize what the current unemployment rate is? it's considered full employment.
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServl
Re:This begs the question (Score:3, Informative)
Attrition.org has been around since long before multiple
As for the the server, I don't know where it's hosted now, but I saw it in about 1999. It was the only server in the colo room covered in bumper stickers.
Re:posting the emails was illegal and unproductive (Score:3, Informative)
Just telling them they cant disclose it is not enough, they must acknowledge they wont before you tell them the information
Predictable update on this story (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/100
Re:What the? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Yet another. . . (Score:2, Informative)
Today's Republican corruption is unprecedented, except maybe in the days of the old political machines.
Here's a nice list of corrupt and scandalized Republicans in the Bush administration, from TPMmuckracker. Note that this list doesn't include convicted (now ex-) Congressman Bob Ney, Jack Abramoff, or other non-administration Republicans, but it's a loooong list nonetheless.
Our Great List of Scandalized Administration Officials [tpmmuckraker.com]
Here is a nice YouTube video listing Republicans who have been indicted or are currently under criminal investigation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6yeUYBIbGU [youtube.com]
I like that the sheriff from Eureka is in the video. He's a real law-and-order type of guy.
Re:What the? (Score:4, Informative)
Of course, the length of the audio was less than 1 second (the time it takes to rotate the pot once) but hey...
Re:Yet another. . . (Score:5, Informative)
Oh, please. Does Kerry's "I voted for the war before I voted against it" really belong in that list? Keep in mind that if "inarticulate moments" are in the same league as bribery, voter suppression, and manslaughter (the other items on your list), Bush is a much worse president than I ever realized... a few examples [about.com].
You're as much in denial as those who claim there's no corruption at all, and your beliefs are just as harmful. There's been political corruption in all parties throughout history, but not all politicians are corrupt, and not all parties are equal. Voters have recently realized that they can exert control by voting out the more corrupt party. Maybe in 20 years the Republican party will reform and the Democratic party will regress. Until then, I'm voting for Democrats.