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.'"
Hilarious (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm sorry, I keeled over laughing from that part. They really had him strung along with the whole thing. Although, I think he started to catch on after the "bust":
Honestly, the more I see of this stuff, the more I wonder if it isn't time for a congress reform rather than any of the billion other little "reforms" that congress proposes. The original intent of the founding fathers was that regular people would run for office and represent the best interests of their constituents; in the tradition of Cincinnatus [wikipedia.org] They certainly never intended for the "career" politicians we see today. Too much money, organized crime, and generally dispicable people getting into office.
The only question is, what is the best approach to encourage more honorable folks to run for office? Perhaps the terms of office should be limited? That would certainly help discourage careering. Limits on advertising budgets would be good, but difficult to police. Any other ideas?
Re:Hilarious (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah, how about congressional salary caps that bring them down to the median income in the US? That way, if they want a raise, they have to improve the quality of life for all people. Mind you, you have to include the unemployed, so that there's a bunch of zeroes in there to bring the average down - to give them motivation to combat unemployment.
They say that democracies fail when people realize that they can vote themselves entitlements. What about congress? They've been voting themselves entitlements continually, while the minimum wage hasn't kept up with inflation in more than a decade...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's definitely fair, as long as you allow for various congressional expenses to be charged back to the congressional budget. Expenses such as travel and running their office are too expensive to come out of pocket, and we wouldn't want them running to outside money at the first opportunity. Of course, such an expense account
Re:Hilarious (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Hilarious (Score:5, Insightful)
That is a good theory, but in the US every 2 or 6 years our parliamentarians are hit with a multi-million dollar liability, known as a "Campaign." The legislators are up to themselves to raise the money for these, and there are no caps on how much they or their opponent can spend.
If you want to make legislators bribe-proof, you have to make it so that they need for no money in the course of their work, which means paying them well, enough to maintain a domicile in the capital, and strictly capping campaign spending (capping fundraising, and all the exceptions and codicils on that, and the attendant free-expression issues, gets more and more unworkable all the time).
I would say all campaigns should be publicly funded, private donations forbidden, and equal money to the top 3 primary victors, but most Americans consider a campaign donation a form a free speech, and thus beyond legitimate restraint. (I think this is bullshit, but there we are.)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think that this is as simple as you think it is. Lots of those people are very smart. They just have agendas that force them to say things that aren't true, which makes people think they are stupid.
Not that some of them aren't.
But more seriously, people are motivated to join Congress by two things, money and power. Control the money and you hel
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There's a lot of gray between unemployed, and where people ought to be employed. Unfortunately, when you want a quick statistic, it's going to show y
Re: (Score:2)
That's easy. Make it a more honorable calling. Lessen the position's power and profitability, and the sharks will find other waters in which to swim, leaving room for the civic-minded Mr. Smiths. Sadly, that's never going to happen. Tyrants don't yield power willingly.
In the old days, people had to hire armies and intimidate peasants in order to be major-league thugs with their own little fiefdoms. Now they
Approval voting (Score:2)
Yep, approval voting [wikipedia.org], so that voters can select the dark-horse candidate without feeling that their votes are going to waste.
-b.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why the common folk were all sitting in Philadelphia writing the Constitution, right?
It's easy (Score:2)
Yeah, it'll never happen, but it's a nice though.
Re: (Score:2)
My opinion is t
Re: (Score:2)
Which is not such a bad thing. The market already has plenty of solutions, checks, and balances for just about every ill facing our country. When congress gets involved, all they do is pass laws that f**k up the solutions already in place.
Ever play SimCity? Did you ever notice that things seem to go best when you're not trying to make major changes to your city ev
Re:Hilarious (Score:5, Interesting)
Perhaps this is testament to what regular people are truly like.
Re: (Score:2)
Thuffering Thuccotash
Republican Aide? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Republican Aide? (Score:5, Insightful)
If a guy gets busted for BBQ'ing a bald eagle, would it make it more, or less, of a story if he worked for PETA?
Although the last 12 years have made the whole concept into something of a joke, the Republicans tout themselves as the "party of reform". And we just keep seeing scandal after unethical scandal from them.
No worries, though, in another 12 years we can say the same thing about the Democrats, who apparently didn't learn from the Republicans error and now want to position themselves as the Party-O'-Reform. But, having the same complete and utter lack of ethics as all politicians, they'll start making the same egotistical blunders as the Republicans did, once they take their new seats in January.
Meet the new boss...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Give the Guy a break - he was just trying to "reform" his grades.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
As a hard-core liberal, I agree (Score:4, Insightful)
Until I read the summary, I was hoping this was some kind of political hack attempt that would put another big black eye on the Repugnicans, but no such luck, it's just some dumbass trying to get his grades changed. The story is funny enough to warrant being on Slashdot's front page without mentioning the word "Republican" at all.
Re:As a hard-core liberal, I agree (Score:5, Funny)
Hoho! The anarcho-communists spit in your general direction, bourgeoisie scum!
Re:As a hard-core liberal, I agree (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Republican Aide? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't worry. When Fox News reports this story the closed captioning will reveal he's become a Democrat overnight.
I only wish I were joking.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Mentioning this guy's Republican-ness in the OP's title was nothing more than a
Pure comedy gold. (Score:2, Interesting)
An entertaining read.
The Real Mystery Is... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
You are forgetting that he's a communications director - you couldn't possibly expect him to understand how email and public forums work.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, so well put. If I had mod points, I wouldn't be sure whether I should give you a "Funny" or an "Insightful".
(Remarkably, it appears that some of the folks who responded to your post may also fit the description you provided. How proud I am to be a member of such an intellectually gifted community.)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
A friend of ours needs to have his grades revised (Score:2, Interesting)
Of course, you'd have to bounce your connexion through InterNIC, hack into the International Academic Database, disable the proxy and clear your logs afterwards...
Re:A friend of ours needs to have his grades revis (Score:5, Funny)
Then it would have been complete!
Re: (Score:2)
Don't mess with TCU network security! (Score:2)
Those guys even logged lyger's rot-26 hack!
I tell people all the time though that double rot-13 is much harder to detect than rot-26.
Re: (Score:2)
I tell people all the time though that double rot-13 is much harder to detect than rot-26.
Ernyyl? V guvax ebg guvegrra vf fhssvpvrag. Cresbezvat n qbhoyr ebg guvegrra whfg qrpelcgf vg.
You've gotta read the entire email trail! (Score:5, Interesting)
When they tell him that the Feds may have busted the operation by cracking their rot-26 encryption I nearly choked on my breakfast (cold pizza of course)! This is a classic.
On one of the linked sites, the guy is claiming that he was 'under the influence' for the whole exchange and is 'seeking treatment'. So he's claiming he was blind drunk for the entire two weeks? Wow - the Republicans either have better parties than I ever suspected - or they truly are drowning their sorrows after recent election defeats!
He needs to go to jail for a few years.
Re:You've gotta read the entire email trail! (Score:4, Insightful)
"Few years" - that's a bit harsh considering nothing illegal was actually accomplished. Keep in mind that for a lot of violent crimes short of murder, the prison time isn't even a "few years." More like *a* year. The best punishment is exposing this guy for a fraud and making sure that he'll lose his job and be a laughingstock boob.
One more thing: who's to say that this was actually him not a prank designed to discredit the guy? It's not like they check ID before you surf the 'net. Maybe the article has more info, but it's currently slashdotted!
-b.
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?
Re:Yet another. . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Politicians are politicians. Tis part of what makes me tire of our system. Remember the Dem that had the Nat'l Guard load up his private stuff during Katrina, asking them to defer food, troop, and rescue transport?
Lord Acton was right, will be right... forever.
That's why I would traditionally vote for Republicans, at least they are/were for smaller federal gov't more state/local control. However, this last group has hosed that whole concept up.
Professional politicians are power hungry sociopaths. How do we solve that problem?
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: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.
As a Montanan... (Score:3, Funny)
You guys will believe anything... (Score:4, Funny)
West Wing Obligatory (Score:5, Funny)
[CJ is mad at Josh for posting to the message board of a Josh Lyman fansite]
C.J. Cregg: If you ever post anything on that website again, I will shove a motherboard so far up your ass... What?
Josh Lyman: You DO know I outrank you, right?
C.J. Cregg: SO FAR UP YOUR ASS...
B people hire C people, and so on down the chain.. (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a classic comment that A people hire A people, but B people hire C people. Bush has not exactly been known for great job appointments. If you actually follow his appointments, it's embarrassing, even if you're a Republican. They're loyal, but often not very good. (It's not just that lightweight at FEMA, "Mr. Torture" at Justice, and the economic advisers from Enron; there's a long, painful list of bad high level hires.)
Once you get the institutional idea that each level hires dumber people below them, a few steps down the food chain, people like this turkey are getting jobs.
Bush's views (Score:2)
Punishment, Web 2.0 style (Score:5, Insightful)
Todd's punishment is going to be uniquely modern... or will it?
The punishment is that this is going to go viral. It's just too darn interesting seeing people doing something they shouldn't. For the rest of his life people will be reading about this. It's not yet mentioned in Denny Rehberg's Wikipedia page [wikipedia.org], but it will. Todd will probably get his own Wikipedia page [wikipedia.org] [dead link as of this moment but we'll see how long that lasts]. There will probably be a Snopes article too.
In other words, Todd will be publicy humiliated. It'll be like having to wear a big red letter...
extension of school cheating (Score:2)
RFC 1149 (Score:3, Funny)
Predictable update on this story (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/100
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
-R
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Honestly, what is the propper slur to use here, anyway?
Re:What the? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What the? (Score:5, Funny)
Actually, their inability to be photoshopped has nothing to do with it. Pigeons are protected under whistle-blower laws.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What the? (Score:5, Funny)
Nevermind, jokes on me I guess (Score:3, Informative)
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: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.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
(not a troll, simply poking fun)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What the? (Score:4, Insightful)
They were just messing with him. They were playing on the whole "hacker movie" stereotypes of being able to do anything with even the slightest bit of information*. The request to get a sign or buildings in the background was to solidify the idea that they wanted this information for verification purposes. They probably wanted him to believe they could zoom in from a live satellite and see the location he photographed.
They continued to jerk his chain with email exchanges like this one:
It sounds good (lots'o techno-jargon), but it's obviously nonsense to anyone who knows better.
* I don't watch 24, but I've heard some rather amusing takes on their entire "hacker" philosophy. In particular, they seem to be able to do the impossible without blinking an eye, just by wrapping it up in some techno-babble that's intended to sound good to the average joe.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I don't watch 24, but I've heard some rather amusing takes on their entire "hacker" philosophy. In particular, they seem to be able to do the impossible without blinking an eye, just by wrapping it up in some techno-babble that's intended to sound good to the average joe.
It's exactly the same technique as Star Trek:TNG technobabble, where plausible-sounding nonsense is strung together to magically create the "particle of the week"/Polarity Reversal that will, in classic deus ex machina form, save the day. They use a more toned-down (but no less impossible) form of the same thing on CSI. I've dealt with many TV writers. They're largely technologically illiterate. It's all they can do to get their PowerBooks to turn on.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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: (Score:2)
Anyone with a half a clue would have twigged to it...The request is so clearly useless.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It's just like rot-13, but twice as secure!
Re: (Score:2)
In Soviet Russia, we use only ROT-33.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Both squirrels and pigeons have a genetic fear of authority and an inate ability to spot federal agents. Hence by examining the expressions on their faces, someone experienced in such
Re:This begs the question (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Server must be running on a box in someone's bedroom or something, 'cuz it's off line now... And what's with having the domain registered at NetSol? I guess pretentious "security researchers" need their domain registered with equally pretentious domain registrars... Oh yeah, we got some quality hackers, er, I mean "security researchers" here!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Attrition.org has been around since long before multiple
No, it doesn't (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
To you. Meanwhile, to a vast majority of the rest of the english speaking world, it means something different. The language has changed. Get over it and move on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Slashdot's petty partisanship. (Score:4, Insightful)
We see Democratic boobs do all sorts of stupid, venal stuff. But when it comes to craven, cynical behavior, you have to hand it to the Republican for the no-holds-barred, down-and-dirty politicking.
Keep up the pressure on the bad guys.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Unless he's a Republican Congressman hitting up underage teenage boys for information on their masturbatory habits, then he's referred to as a "Democrat"...
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And yet, here you are. (Score:2)
I wonder why there aren't any good technology sites with a non-liberal bias....you'd think the free market would 'provide' one if there were enough no-liberal technical people...
Re:Slashdot's petty partisanship. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
First of all, slashdot has to protect only one reputation: "news for nerds". Now, granted, lots of what is posted on slashdot is neither news nor for nerds, but THIS story is. It's hilarious.
Second, slashdot isn't making this a partisan issue. The fact that the guy works for the republican party is what makes this a partisan issue. In this case slashdot is
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:posting the emails was illegal and unproductive (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Just telling them they cant disclose it is not enough, they must acknowledge they wont before you tell them the information
Re:posting the emails was irrelevant and funny (Score:2)
If they had reported this promptly to the FBI, it would have had the same result.
The chances of an investigation: 0 (retarded things happen everyday)
The chances of a fair investigation: 0 (fairness is irrelevant)
The chances of a trial: 0 (no crime, no charges, no trial)
The chances of a fair trial: 0 (In the U
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I love the smell of napalm in December.
Re: (Score:2)
Even if your lawyer or doctor (who has confidential laws on their side) decides to give information to the authorities they can.
The way confidentiality laws work is that the authorities or police can't force other parties you've entered into disclosure agreements (such as your lawyer) to give them incriminating evidence.
Even if you email me and say "The following is private information not t
Re: (Score:2)
Instead of attrition.org, let's assume the senator contacted a "hacker" group either composed of, or infiltrated by government agents. Such a "reasonable expectation of privacy" does not protect against a criminal conviction.
Likewise, any upstanding citizen would forward such letters to the local police department.
Why should a reasonable expectation of privacy prevent the public posting of criminal soli
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Though I have only found one http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2006_11.php#00501 7 [eff.org]article that is directly on point (after a quick google search). The article specifically mentions a 2006 reversal by the California Supreme Court, (original case Barrett v. Rosenthal http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/Barrett_v_Rosenthal
Re:Would we be reading this if he were a democrat? (Score:5, Insightful)
a) The republican party claims to be the party of morality and "family values".
b) There's been a rash of republican political gaffs in the last few months which, in the face of 'a', are really pretty funny.
So laugh, ffs. 'cuz, lets face it... it really is funny.
Re:Would we be reading this if he were a democrat? (Score:5, Insightful)
The question isn't whether or not there are idiots on one side or the other. The question is how many idiots there are on one side or the other, to what extent are those idiots informing policy and decision making, and most of all, how many of those idiots happen to be President right now.
Me am Republican! Me am victim of everybody! (Score:5, Insightful)
This guy made Slashdot because he was especially stupid, not simply because he was caught, and not because he was a Republican. He tried to commit a crime, but went about it in a very idiotic way - made contact with someone he had no logical reason to trust and requested an illegal job, discussed details that were way out of his depth and technical expertise, freely gave away his personal information, went outside to take a picture of some pigeons (I guess to prove that he is one himself) - the whole story just shows an incredible lack of intelligence and sophistication - any kind of subtlety or careful discretion in how he sought criminal help - and he got completely suckered as a result. A tale like this is great "News For Nerds" fodder - dope who knows nothing about computers tries to contract for a system intrusion goes in over his head with someone who actually knows a thing or two, and gets exposed.
Stealing national security documents isn't "News for Nerds", it's just "News". Go watch some Fox News if you want to see that story, I'm sure they'll rattle their sabers and go on about it for weeks - because they are not part of the conspiracy. They are not biased. They will give you the straight story, just the facts, and let you draw your own conclusion. England Prevails!