Palin Email Hacker Found 767
mortonda writes to tell us that the person responsible for breaching Sarah Palin's private email account has been found. We discussed the breach last Wednesday, shortly before the hacker, a University of Tennessee-Knoxville student, posted a message detailing his methods. Wired has a story examining the potential legal consequences for the hacker.
This Just In (Score:5, Insightful)
Cracker is an idiot. Ever hear of Tor [wikipedia.org]? Or better yet, post the information on something like Freenet [wikipedia.org] and just advertise it on Freenet somehow and let other people get the information out to the main web.
Of course, the fact that he posted his nick on /b/ when it's usually forced-anon anyway means he basically confessed. Not to mention that he said which proxy service he used -- note to criminals: if you want to get away with something, don't brag about how you did it!
Re:This Just In (Score:4, Funny)
The cracker is a /b/tard, don't think that you need to go into it any deeper than that.
I'm happy that some of that information came out. If it came down to it, I'd put in 10bux for his legal defense.
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Insightful)
Nah, he's far below /b/tard level. /b/tards at least know to post Anon.
This kid is your typical attention-whoring suburban fuckup. He's probably going to grow up to be a nice little volvo-driving banker.
Re:This Just In (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Funny)
I'd rather see him work in a bank, than have him screw up my Big Mac.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If it came down to it, I'd put in 10bux for his legal defense.
Why? Whether or not you approve of what he did, the most expensive lawyers in the world can't change the fact that he did something illegal.
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Interesting)
Good to know that you don't care about people doing illegal things just to TRY to get some dirt (even if they fail). So when we send covert operatives in to dumpster dive and hack into bank records to find out how Joe Biden is owned by the credit card companies (As one of my friends puts it, "You mean the Senator from MBNA?") Or when we dig to find out exactly HOW his house was paid for? Or perhaps dig into personal emails and such to find out exactly how linked Obama and Ayers are? Or Rezko? Will you put some cash in for those operatives as well?
You like this guy because he tried to "get" Sarah Palin. And as I have noted further down, didn't. If this would have been the other way around, you would have been bleating bloody murder about how horrible it was that a Republican would stoop to doing something illegal. Why you might even call it a Watergate! Perhaps this should be called YahooGate? After all, breaking in to email is to me the equivalent of breaking into a private office in a hotel.
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Funny)
Unless someone just compromised that forum account and framed him.
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Informative)
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Informative)
He put a name he uses elsewhere in the name field. That name was then connected to an email account.
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Insightful)
You use that evidence to track him, other evidence to prove guilt.
Re:This Just In (Score:4, Funny)
He's about as Jewish as he is a f****** monkey./quote>
What about a regular one? [xkcd.com]
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's say it like this: He or she is no hacker or cracker. It is just a usual internet user who did not obtain great skill.
Lessons:
* government users should not take yahoo (who ever came to that idea?)
* Anonymous communication matters
* Activities of governments should be transparent.
* It may help a person to become vice president who appears to be a nightmare and encourage anti-hacking regulations. Fortunately S. Palin has close affiliations with witch hunters. [youtube.com]
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Insightful)
The whole reason Palin is using Yahoo instead of government sponsored email is that any email sent through those channels is archived for a Very Long Time as a matter of public record. Wondering what the clerk at the DMV is REALLY emailing about? Put in a freedom of information act request and it's all yours.
By Palin using yahoo, it's not closely watched and she can conduct official business off the record. It's very poor form to do so and is the real story here.
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Insightful)
I have trouble understanding why we put people with such obvious contempt for the law in positions that are in charge of it.
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Insightful)
I have trouble understanding why we put people with such obvious contempt for the law in positions that are in charge of it.
Brilliant marketing, and the general public's desire to believe what they're told in hopes that it will come true. If the general public were half as smart as we give them credit for the world would have never seen Napoleian, Cesar (well actually the Romans solved that problem on their own), Castro, Hugo Chavez and more. But as the protestants like to point out, people are like sheep and will head in whatever direction the man who speaks softly but carries a big stick says.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
If the general public were half as smart as we give them credit for the world would have never seen Napoleian, Cesar (well actually the Romans solved that problem on their own), Castro, Hugo Chavez and more.
The others are fair enough, but what's dog food got to do with it?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Napoleon wasn't all bad, though. Thanks to him our Belgian courts (among others) don't suck as bad as the Americans'!
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Informative)
Ever heard of Hans-Martin Tillack? His office was raided and his equipment seized by Belgian police because he had the audacity to protect a whistle-blower in a fraud case. He eventually got compensation, but as far as I'm aware he hasn't re-gained his possessions. I would bet money on the whistle-blower having been sacked by now. The whole sorry saga is here [euobserver.com]. In the mean time the accounts have not been signed off for the thirteenth year running [bbc.co.uk] (the Tories are reporting a fourteenth).
I hate it when we Europeans pretend to be so vastly superior to those ghastly Americans out of sheer ignorance.
p.s. I am a Europhile, I just don't think this kind of thing should be covered up out of misguided solidarity with the European Project.
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Insightful)
Belgium uses the civil law system, otherwise known as the Napoleonic code. The majority of American states use English common law system*, which relies a lot more on judicial judgement and precedent (which have the same force as law itself, effectively allowing courts to legislate). Our common law actually has a lot in common with Shari'a in terms of how it works.
*CA, for example, doesn't. Neither does Scotland, hence English.
Re:This Just In (Score:4, Informative)
Louisiana uses Napoleonic law....things can get really strange down here legally sometimes due to that. Really different when you come from a common law state.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
While they may both feel that way, Gov. Palin's use of yahoo email provides zero insight regarding that mentality. No one has identified a single email from her yahoo account that was of an official nature. Yes, there were plenty of emails to officials, but merely talking to a public office holder doesn't make the communication official and a matter of public record. In fact there were a number of emails of a political nature w
Re:This Just In (Score:4, Informative)
One of the e-mails was entitled: "Draft letter to Governor Schwartzenegger / Container Tax" [gawker.com]. Another was "Fw: veep talking pts". There's also an e-mail between Palin and Sean Parnell [gawker.com] regarding Sean's campaign for Congress. Parnell is the Lt. Governor of Alaska.
Anonymous wasn't smart enough to download all the e-mails but what do you think was in that draft letter e-mail?! No one is accusing her of anything wrong only because there is ACTUAL proof because Anonymous didn't download the messages, and because it's slimy to use stolen info to attack your political foes. But if you asked her under oath, Palin would probably have to admit that she's using her personal e-mail for at least some work-related e-mails.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
All you need to know, is that Cheney, Rumsfield, and whole lot are throwbacks from the Nixon administration, and want to "restore" the presidency to Nixon level. Now this would all seem relatively innocuous, or at least inane, until remember Nixon's famous quote from his Robert Frost interview:
"When the president does it, that means it's not illegal."
Interestingly enough, the Republicans like to talk big about the rule of law, but then turn around and have no problem with, and in fact argue that they are d
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Insightful)
Absolute tripe.
Do you have a job?
Do you have an e-mail account you use which is not associated with your job?
All these assumptions about what goes on in private e-mail accounts have not been substantiated. In fact, the cracker responsible said he went through Palin's e-mail, and found absolutely nothing.
Furthermore, since this cracker is the son of a Democrat, he would have known what to look for. Instead, he freely admits it's just stuff like communications with friends, casual conversations with other Republicans, and pictures of her kids.
There's nothing there - as the opposition party fully admits - but it sure doesn't stop the idiot conspiracy theorists from foaming at the mouth.
And one last thing: if you consider this to be a politically-used account, then what _exactly_ is the difference between this and Watergate?
Answer: nothing.
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Insightful)
You cannot attack her because that would make her a victim and she makes you appear rude.
Someone violated her privacy, broke the law, and distracted from other issues during the presidential election.
That's a little more than "rude".
As far as the usual political back-and-forth (the legal kind), every politician uses rhetorical shields to hide from legitimate criticism. Ultimately, the people decide what's a legitimate criticism and what is not.
Many people have decided that, yes, it is rude to criticize Palin for the actions of her daughter, or to question the parents of her youngest child.
But it's not rude to criticize her for supporting the bridge to nowhere, or some policy position you disagree with. If she tries to hide behind the "underdog" persona to avoid these charges she will be unsuccessful.
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Insightful)
Palin wants to continue the policies of the current White House administration where everyones privacy can be violated by the White House without any consequences even though it breakes federal law.
Even if that's true, it's unrelated to the matter at hand. It's illegal for government to read your email without a warrant, and illegal for private citizens to do so without your permission.
It's hypocritical of you to stand for privacy rights when it suits your needs, but then act as an apologist for people who violate the privacy laws already on the books.
used a non-governmental email account to hide how she uses the powers given her by her office.
I still have seen no evidence that she used the Yahoo account for the specific purpose of hiding communications.
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Interesting)
In the emails that the investigating commission DID get, there are exchanges between Palin and her subordinates discussing whether they can evade subpoenas by using Yahoo, and other exchanges reminding people to use the Yahoo account, not the official governors one.
IOW, the ENTIRE purpose of her office using the Yahoo account was to obstruct justice.
Re:This Just In (Score:4, Insightful)
Palin was using her personal account for government work, which is illegal.
Reference, please. Be specific: what kinds of email are required under the law to send using a government account, and what did a specific email contain that fell under that requirement?
And she's telling her staff to ignore subpoenas about whether she campaigned with state resources.
Reference, please.
Re:This Just In (Score:4, Informative)
> Reference, please.
http://www.adn.com/palin/story/530493.html [adn.com]
"Alaska Attorney General Talis Colberg said the governor, who was not subpoenaed, declined to participate in the investigation and said Palin administration employees who have been subpoenaed would not appear."
Palin's staff is ignoring supoenas, but parent has misstated what the subpoenas are about. They pertain to "Troopergate," not campaign financing.
Re:This Just In (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually you can. Clinton has done this, so has Bush and Cheney. The problem is that while any other person may be legally required to answer a subpoena, Certain political oriented people aren't necessarily those people.
The problem is when the move is politically motivated and extends past the collection of evidence. In Clinton's case, he defied subpoenas from congress and even got the Supreme Court to back him up. He refused to let his staff testify and so on. This also happened with the independent council and White Water where they wanted to subpoena white house attorneys to see if he discussed the mess with them. Of course the white house attorneys work for the government and lose a lot of the client privileges but it stuck here because the president needs the confidence that he can confide in advisers and counsel as a part of doing his job.
Palin has cooperated until this turned into a political witch hunt and then refused to do so. There is good reason to believe that the purpose went from investigating her actions and attempting to find a reason other then the stated one and I'm not sure what the employees could offer that would add much more then what has already been supplied. They haven't even determined that the reasons for the firings were shaky yet. Are we seriously supposed to believe that if the reasons he was fired was sound that just because there was a conflict where he refused to fire a trooper is reason not to fire him for the already sound reasons?
That's the problem I have. From what I can tell, the guy should have been fired anyways. Who cares what he thinks the motivation was, he deserved to be fired. When you fuck up, your not safe just because someone who might have been out to get you was there to catch it and do something they already wanted to do. But some how, Palin is Evil because she points this out and shows that the investigation has turned political. Either way, I support her just like I supported Clinton during the witch hunt on him. Now don't get me wrong, he did some bad things and got away with them, but they were looking under every rock he had ever cast a shadow on and that was wrong.
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean look at her statements. I mean for instance when she talks about her son beeing deployed in Iraq. Isn't it frightening to see an aspiring political leader buy into peasants propaganda?
When an elected official's son goes to Iraq, it's "peasant propaganda"? Well, when he doesn't, it's someone else [michaelmoore.com]'s propaganda. I guess they're screwed either way!
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Informative)
He is not right:
1. U.S. military service disproportionately attracts enlisted personnel and officerswho do not come from disadvantaged backgrounds. Previous HerÂitage Foundation research demonstrated that the quality of enlisted troops has increased since the start of the Iraq war. This report demonÂstrates that the same is true of the officer corps.
2. Members of the all-volunteer military are sigÂnificantly more likely to come from high-income neighborhoods than from low-income neighborhoods. Only 11 percent of enlisted recruits in 2007 came from the poorest one-fifth (quintile) of neighborhoods, while 25 perÂcent came from the wealthiest quintile. These trends are even more pronounced in the Army Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) proÂgram, in which 40 percent of enrollees come from the wealthiest neighborhoodsâ"a number that has increased substantially over the past four years.
3. American soldiers are more educated than their peers. A little more than 1 percent of enlisted perÂsonnel lack a high school degree, compared to 21 percent of men 18â"24 years old, and 95 percent of officer accessions have at least a bachelorâ(TM)s degree.
4. Contrary to conventional wisdom, minorities are not overrepresented in military service. Enlisted troops are somewhat more likely to be white or black than their non-military peers. Whites are proportionately represented in the officer corps, and blacks are overrepresented, but their rate of overrepresentation has declined each year from 2004 to 2007. New recruits are also disproportionately likely to come from the South, which is in line with the history of SouthÂern military tradition.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/cda08-05.cfm [heritage.org]
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Insightful)
And yes, small-town hockey mom becomes vice presidential candidate, that's a good story. It's like a Hollywood script, or a fairy tale where the girl raised on a farm suddenly discovers she's really a princess. Yeah, it's a cute story, and I hate to see a good story spoiled, but our economy is facing the biggest crisis since the crash of 1929. I want somebody smart and experienced ready to take over if anything happens to McCain.
But Palin simply isn't qualified. Her performance during the ABC interview revealed that she had virtually no understanding of American foreign policy. Anyone who regularly reads a serious news magazine like The Economist or a major newspaper like the New York Times or Washington Post would be familiar with the questions that Gibson brought up- the Bush Doctrine, the right of America to strike in Pakistan- but Palin didn't seem to have ever thought about either before. Palin argued, in all seriousness, than being able to see Russia from Alaska somehow gave her some sort of experience. That's like arguing that you're ready to engage in negotiations with Putin because you saw Rocky Balboa fight Ivan Drago in "Rocky IV".
After the ABC interview- watch it on YouTube, if you haven't seen it already- only way you can argue that Palin can be taken seriously is to lower the bar. The only way you can argue that she is qualified is to argue that as a woman, she can't be expected to have the same understanding of foreign policy as the men. Now thatis sexist.
You don't have to lower the bar.... (Score:4, Insightful)
We lowered the bar 8 years ago. She is, frankly, almost as qualified to be President as the current President. About the only differences are that she's governor of a smaller state (but it's closer to Russia), while Bush co-owned a sports team Palin just talked about sports teams, Palin is even MORE of a religious conservative than Bush, and Bush's parents had the political clout to get him through Yale instead of community college.
Of course, we haven't exactly been doing well with the current President....
That should be the message. "Sarah Palin: Even less qualified than George Bush."
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Informative)
Sorry, that's just not true.
Palin's Yahoo account contained emails with subject lines like "Court of Appeals / Executive Director Parole Board / Boards and Commissions", and "FW: DPS Personnel and Budget Issues", and "Draft letter to Governor Schwarzenegger / Container Tax". Check the wikileaks site, it's all laid out for anyone to see.
Palin's account does contain emails that relate to government business. Saying "there was no government business on her account" over, and over, and over, as people seem to be doing in this forum, doesn't change the facts. Although that seems to be a common tactic for their campaign these days: repeat the lie so many times that it starts to sound true, like Palin's "I told them thanks but no thanks" lie about the Bridge to Nowhere.
Why can't a government employee use Yahoo? (Score:3, Insightful)
By Palin using yahoo, it's not closely watched and she can conduct official business off the record.
Or you know, she could in fact SEND PERSONAL EMAIL. Are you saying that no government employee should be able to have a personal email account? Then I guess you're OK with AT&T recording phone conversations without a warrant, because if government employees should not be able to have any private life why should you?
The kid even said there were NO incriminating emails in the account (see: Wired story).
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I haven't read her email, but what I've heard was she was corresponding with heir aides about how to handle PR on several negative issues. It's a blurry line but I suppose that could be considered personal. Probably best to have made a phone call instead.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why can't a government employee use Yahoo? (Score:5, Informative)
Most of the newsbits explicitly mention that "Governor Palin has come under media criticism in the past week for using private email accounts to avoid Alaskan freedom of information laws." Neither of you seem to have even read the original story?!
Re:Why can't a government employee use Yahoo? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why can't a government employee use Yahoo? (Score:5, Insightful)
Then there is the issue of her being against teaching evolution. Or the issue of her refusing to fund sex ed classes and demanding abstinance only education (I bet her daughter would have prefered to know how to use a condom about now). We also have her silly "ebay" jet crap...which didn't sell on ebay and was prompty sold to another of her Republican cohorts in a no bid sale for less than market value.
That crazy double talking bitch has no place in our government. And for all you who think Obama's minister was a wackjob, you should check out Palin's. I think the crap Obama's pastor said was pretty bad, but chasing witches out of town just takes the fucking cake.
It is on the news because she is a stark raving mad, clueless, and evil bitch of a woman who will do anything to get her way and dodge any kind of accountability. To include the SAME GOD DAMNED STUNT that this administration pulled by illegally outsourcing emails on government business to avoid the archival requirements. All of this from the party that expects me to believe "if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to hide" applies to everyone but them.
Because Yahoo is not for gov business. (Score:5, Insightful)
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/17/palins_yahoo_account_hacked.html [washingtonpost.com]
Among the e-mails released as part of the records request in June were several from Frye asking a state official whether private e-mail accounts and messages sent to BlackBerry devices are immune to subpoena, then reporting the answer to the governor and her husband, Todd, who also uses a Yahoo! mail address.
Asking if Yahoo accounts are subject to subpoena and relaying the answer to the governor suggests to me that the accounts were not simple private email accounts.
Re:Seems != Guilty Even for a Republican (Score:5, Insightful)
Please have the courtesy of reserving judgement (sic) until such a time all the facts are in
Request denied. Slashdot is not a court of law, and judgments and opinions expressed by its membership are not binding on anyone. As such they may be made and expressed with too few, just the right amount, or too many facts.
Re:Why can't a government employee use Yahoo? (Score:5, Informative)
Actually she was using her yahoo email accounts to conduct state business. [adn.com]
Re:Actually No (Score:4, Funny)
. . . the ACTUAL GUY WHO READ THE EMAILS said there was nothing incriminating.
And if you can't trust the legal opinion of the guy who cracked her account, who can you trust?
Re:Actually No (Score:5, Informative)
Heh.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
OR, she could be obeying a governmental policy that says government accounts are not to be used for personal or campaign purposes. Did any of sample emails that were posted fall into the category of official business?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The whole reason Palin is using Yahoo instead of government sponsored email...
Do you have any evidence of this, other than a few isolated emails?
People use a variety of communication systems. They talk on the phone, talk in person, email from various accounts, etc.
Most people make some attempt to organize this: a work phone number, a work email address, etc., but there is almost always some spillover. People socialize with other people they work with, and so there is bound to be some mixing among all of the
Re:This Just In (Score:4, Insightful)
Do you have any evidence of this, other than a few isolated emails?
"Other than a few isolated emails"? Isn't that all that is needed? That's like saying "You say he's a murderer? Do you have any evidence of this, other than a few isolated killings?" If you break the rules even once or twice, is it not still breaking the rules?
Re:This Just In (Score:4, Insightful)
Palin's nomination as the Republican candidate for VP seems to bear this out.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Oh, you mean like the White House e-mails?
Now, before I get anyone confused, let me point out that White House e-mails were lost during the Clinton administration too. (People just seem to have conveniently forgotten about that one).
Is the issue one of "Open Government"? Fine, I believe in that too.
Sorry, but I don't buy the
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Informative)
Email is a lot easier to record? There's always been a divide between the written and spoken word, from business deals (oral contract is only binding up to $500 in Florida), to courtroom hearings (hearsay, your word vs. mine, etc). You can request copies of government memos; email is electronic mail; it stands to reason that any official written communication should be kept. Lots of meetings are held behind closed doors because there's no written record for public consumption.
There's lots of other cases where emails are available for public consumption; for instance emails back to 1996 for the Seattle metro service are all available for review. On the flip side you have a matter of public record, historical records for data mining, and more. Imagine how boring history would have been if we didn't have access to Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln's personal letters today?
Governors aren't required to record their telephone conversations, although I know Nixon was a fan of doing so - which is partially what got him in trouble in the first place. I'm not sure what the outcome was in court about whether those are considered personal or not. I know in most states both parties have to be aware of the conversation being recorded. In Virginia(?) only one party is required to know that the conversation is being recorded.
Re:This Just In (Score:4, Interesting)
Oh I definitely lean to the left and feel Palin would be grossly unqualified should the qualified (but very old) McCain were to have health issues requiring him to leave office. I missed the part on slashdot where I have to register my political bias! This isn't a newspaper I'm entitled to my opinion on the facts available to me. Also keep reading additional posts to see what else I have to say and why I came to that conclusion (i.e. recieving and responding to emails from Aides of politicalrelevance is activity I would consider official).
Which way do you lean? Left or right? Do you feel it in any way biases your thoughts/comments?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So how do the presidential candidates themselves run? They're getting paid their Senate salary while they travel around the country campaigning, aren't they?
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Informative)
But she didn't conduct any official business with the yahoo account! All that was in it were family pictures and emails to her friends.
Really? How do you know that?
Do these sound like personal emails [wikileaks.org] to you?
Subject: Draft letter to Governor Schwarzenegger / Container Tax
From: Ruaro, Randall P (Deputy Chief of Staff)
Subject: FW: Motor Fuel Tax Suspension
From: Meghan Stapleton (Press Secretary)
Subject: RE: Using Royalty Oil to Lower the Cost of Fuel for Alaskans
From: Nizich, Michael A (Chief of Staff)
Subject: Court of Appeals / Executive Director Parole Board / Boards and Commissions
From: Ruaro, Randall P (Deputy Chief of Staff)
Subject: RE: Please approve
From: Ruaro, Randall P (Deputy Chief of Staff)
Subject: Rural Wireless Service
From: McBride, Rhonda (Rural Advisor)
Subject: FW: DPS Employee Draft
From: Ruaro, Randall P (Deputy Chief of Staff)
Subject: Re: DPS Personnel and Budget Issues
From: McAllister, William D (Communciations Director)
Subject: FW: DPS Personnel and Budget Issues
From: Ruaro, Randall P (Deputy Chief of Staff)
Subject: Court of Appeals Nominations
From: Ruaro, Randall P (Deputy Chief of Staff)
Subject: another records request
From: Nizich, Michael A (Chief of Staff)
Subject: RE: Scheduling - Week of 08.10.08
From: Mason, Janice L (Scheduling Assistant
Subject: FW: Capitalizing on coal reserves, Crow Tribe strikes deal for $7B
From: Nizich, Michael A (Chief of Staff)
Subject: Status report
From: Ruaro, Randall P (Deputy Chief of Staff)
Subject: FW: Special session press release
From: Nizich, Michael A (Chief of Staff)
Subject: Followup.
From: Colberg, Talis J (Alaska Attorney General)
Subject: FW: CONFIDENTIAL Ethics Matter
From: Nizich, Michael A (Chief of Staff)
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Informative)
"But she didn't conduct any official business with the yahoo account! All that was in it were family pictures and emails to her friends. IMO, she did the correct thing by not using a govt.-paid for email account for personal communications."
This is incorrect. She specifically set up two Yahoo accounts, one for personal email (gov.sarah@yahoo.com) and another (gov.palin@yahoo.com). The latter was specifically set up because she could avoid Alaska's Sunshine Laws that require all government business to be archived and (with very narrow exceptions) available to the public. In the email archive is a discussion where she and her staff confirm that the use of the yahoo accounts hides their emails from court subpoena's, and she even reprimands one staffer for using her official email instead of the yahoo account.
So while Yahoo email accounts do have a legitimate expectation of privacy, I'd argue that Palin lost her claim to privacy when she engaged in illegal evasion of Alaska's Sunshine Laws.
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Insightful)
She wasn't using the account for gov business, at least not based on what was posted on wikileaks, or according to the purported "Hacker". It was personal e-mail, in some cases about how she and others were being treated personally in the political arena, but not anything related to official government business.
As Officer Bar Brady says "Nothin to see here, move along now".
Yeah, the emails with "CONFIDENTIAL" in the subject line from other officials in her administration really screamed "Not official government business" to me, too.
Re:This Just In (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe she was using her personal email for her personal political career, and there is good reason for that to be marked "CONFIDENTIAL" without being official government business.
In fact, there may be laws preventing her from using government networks to discuss a political career.
You should really provide some specific evidence that she did something wrong, because I haven't seen any yet.
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Informative)
That's actually not true. If you take the time to look at the information posted on wikileaks, you'll notice a number of emails have titles such as "Draft letter to Governor Schwarzenegger / Container Tax", "Court of Appeals / Executive Director Parole Board / Boards and Commissions", "Re: DPS Personnel and Budget Issues", "Court of Appeals Nominations", "FW: CONFIDENTIAL Ethics Matter". Those definitely sound like official state business, although it's impossible to know now that the account has been deleted.
As for the lack of any sort of incriminating information, what does that prove? It's not an official email account. There's no requirement that the information is archived; if any of the emails did contain information that would provide evidence of wrongdoing, Palin can simply delete them at any time. That's the issue: Palin promised transparency in government, but she's done the opposite, and has made herself unaccountable for her actions as Governor.
For the complete list of emails, see: http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin_Yahoo_inbox_2008i [wikileaks.org]
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Funny)
That's actually not true. If you take the time to look at the information posted on wikileaks, you'll notice a number of emails have titles such as "Draft letter to Governor Schwarzenegger / Container Tax", "Court of Appeals / Executive Director Parole Board / Boards and Commissions", "Re: DPS Personnel and Budget Issues", "Court of Appeals Nominations", "FW: CONFIDENTIAL Ethics Matter".
No, no, no...
Those weren't actual messages about government business.
They were just spam messages with misleading subject lines crafted to trick a politician into reading them.
Governors on yahoo get them ALL the time!
You should see the spam she gets now that she is a vp candidate - lots of messages that appear to be from Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz and Jerry Falwell and Bob Dole.
But open them up, and they are just advertisements for viagra. Wait a second, the ones from Bob Dole probably really are from him.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Well first off this hacker is stupid, no surprise he got caught. To do this right he would have downloaded the entire mailbox, not just made a few "I made it" screenshots. We really only got to see a couple of messages, and they are not particularly interesting.
Second, Palin has *two* Yahoo accounts. The one she is suspected of using inappropriately wasn't hacked. If the hacker was a bit more subtle--some social engineering, perhaps? I'll be the other one could have been breached also. By now she is pro
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Makes you wonder which side of her mouth tells the truth doesn't it?
She's a Republican Neo-Con. Her mouth isn't what side that noise is coming from.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Obviously it would inadmissible in court
Why? IANAL, but as I understand it, the "fruits-of-poison-tree" argument only holds if it were the police (or investigative government body) who had accessed her account without her authorization or a warrant.
Anyone who IAAL: care to clear this up?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Even if that was true, you would need some evidence *first* and then get access (by getting a warrant) to the email account.
Let me put it another way: Suppose this "hacker" got illegal access to another 15 email accounts and found nothing there - he was a bit lucky with Palin. If he didn't find anything useful, there wouldn't be a story about his break-in...
Re:This Just In (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's say it like this: He or she is no hacker or cracker. It is just a usual internet user who did not obtain great skill.
Lessons:
* government users should not take yahoo (who ever came to that idea?)
* Anonymous communication matters
* Activities of governments should be transparent.
* It may help a person to become vice president who appears to be a nightmare and encourage anti-hacking regulations. Fortunately S. Palin has close affiliations with witch hunters. [youtube.com]
Oh please. Here's the real lessons learned:
1. Don't make your security question anything that can be found online or don't discuss anything about it online (hers was where she and her husband met).
2. Don't enter your real birthdate anywhere online. Again, what places really need this for an online account except "social networking" sites? Even then, anyone you know is probably going to know when your birthday is anyway.
3. Don't use your real zip code.
All of the above would have completely prevented this "hack". It's not difficult to make up a birth date and use that instead. Same goes for a zip code (12345 anyone?).
Would they mobilize the whole CIA for me...? (Score:4, Interesting)
If somebody hacked my email would they start a huge investigation or is justice only for the privileged few.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
/b/ is the center of the internets.
OK, OK. /b/ [4chan.org] is an image board on 4chan [4chan.org] where many memes originate, and where a lot of actions by Anonymous are talked about. Anonymous pretty much originated from 4chan (among a few other sites) because of their "forced-anon" rule, which basically forces everyone to post anonymously.
Encyclopedia Dramatica has more [encycloped...matica.com] but fair warning, it's definitely NSFW (as is /b/ itself).
"Hacker" (Score:3, Insightful)
So "hacking" now includes password guessing?
Re:"Hacker" (Score:5, Insightful)
It is usually the easiest way for a lot of systems; that, or just ask the user and they will tell you.
Re:"Hacker" (Score:5, Informative)
If you have followed the story, he didn't guess the password. He used publicly available information to fool Yahoo's password recovery tool to give it up.
As simple as it may sound, it is a bit more involved than 'guessing' a password.
Re:"Hacker" (Score:5, Insightful)
If you have followed the story, he didn't guess the password. He used publicly available information to fool Yahoo's password recovery tool to give it up.
And somehow that turned into headlines that say:
Palin Email Hacker Impersonated Her, Stole Password
http://www.google.com/search?q=palin+impersonated [google.com]
Even the Associated Press went down that road.
Re:"Hacker" (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd say it's less involved, not more. Answering a question which is a matter of public record is much easier than trying to guess someone's password.
I've always thought that those "security questions" were a giant security hole. This just goes to show that it's true.
Re:"Hacker" (Score:5, Interesting)
Not even password guessing. He apparently took public information about her and reset the password.
If anyone wondered if demanding date of birth, home town, etc. was a BAD way of determining identity, this should resolve that for them.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yahoo lets you answer the backup questions and then reset the password to one of your choice? I didn't know it was that insecure. Normally a system would email you a reset link, but I guess Yahoo users might not have another email address. Sounds like Y should give you the option of disabling this cracking feature. Either you have a it send the reset link to a backup email or to a registered phone number for SMS text. How does Gmail do it?
Re:"Hacker" (Score:5, Insightful)
First, it wasn't password guessing. He exploited Yahoo's password recovery system to get it to reset her password. He basically used public information to pose as Palin and convince Yahoo's password recovery system that he needed the password reset. Exploiting such a weakness in the system is, by any standards, "hacking".
Second, after he got in, he than went through all of her e-mail. Breaking into a system, even if it had been a password guess, and then going through its contents is again, by any standard standard, hacking.
I loath Palin, but this guy is going to get what he has coming. Even shitty and crazy humans who think the world is a few thousand years old and much to my horror might be president one day, get legal protection. It isn't like the police can go, "Yeah, he hacked in, but Palin kinda sucks, so I think we will let this one slide".
Shame on you Slashdot (Score:4, Insightful)
There's no evidence that we know of that this kid was indeed the hacker other than a post on /b/. And accepting a post on /b/ to be reliable information is like... trusting /.'s front page.
Re:Shame on you Slashdot (Score:4, Informative)
This is the OP but apparently the FBI served a search warrant at Mr. Kernell's residence at UT. Link [wbir.com]. I hope the FBI had more evidence to go on than some posting on /b/.
Equal punishment? (Score:3, Interesting)
Not that, you know, I have a hotmail account...
Re:Equal punishment? (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, just like the punishment to the Watergate burglars was the same as that meted out to regular burglars.
Fact is bugging your political opponents is Serious Business legally.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If I remember my US History correctly all of the watergate burglars were charged with obstruction of justice, illegal campaign activities and purjury.
I don't remember any "burglary charges" being brought.
If this kid were an Obama staffer then he might face some sort of illegal campaign activity. But seeing as this was a simple account 'hack' it should be treated like my Steam Account being stolen.
Re:Equal punishment? (Score:5, Informative)
Important (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Important (Score:5, Insightful)
If he's a student, I hope Palin opts not to press charges, or pushes for a slap-on-the-wrist. Some kind of punishment that will sting, but won't be career ending.
No, they are *already* useless for private communication. Email is sent in plaintext across networks, and regardless of prosecution, the attack vector used here is a pretty easy one. If your email is unencrypted, or you're using easily looked-up information as passwords or recovery questions, then it's not private. period.
It would almost be better not to prosecute at all, if it has the effect of making people aware of, and take precautions against, the complete lack of privacy already extant.
Not much of a "hack" (Score:3, Informative)
step to step guide how not to get caught (Score:5, Funny)
2) Find open wifi network, choose a place far from where you live
3) Connect to TOR and do your dirty deeds
4) Clean finger prints from PC and trash it, far from where you live
OR
1) Goto internet cafe, ensure cafe has no security cameras
2) Pay with cash
3) Connect to TOR and do your dirty deeds
4) Clean finger prints from computer
Profit?
Re:step to step guide how not to get caught (Score:4, Informative)
Trashing the PC is absurdly paranoid. This would be more than sufficient:
1) Live in a large-ish city. Go to a popular cafe with free wifi and find a corner where nobody can see your screen.
2) Reset your MAC address to something random and connect. Bonus points for hacking into a WEP network accessible from the cafe.
3) Tunnel through Tor and do exactly what you need to do and nothing else.
4) Disconnect, reset your MAC. Stay a little while, finish your drink, and leave.
Even that's a little overly careful. Do that and there's no conceivable way to be caught. In this age of ubiquitous wireless networks, anyone who hacks from their own account richly deserves to be caught.
Even easier (Score:4, Informative)
Hacker (Score:3, Insightful)
Using this label gives this guy far too much credit.
Nail Him To The Wall (Score:4, Insightful)
I believe this man, who has illegally spied on a member of the government, should face the full and certain penalty that those who illegal spy at the /behest/ of the government should face.
No penalty for this unconscionable breach of privacy is too harsh or severe, no fine too large, no jail term too great. He should face them---
Oh? Really? I guess that does change things, doesn't it.
Re:Public Records (Score:5, Informative)
Why is Sarah Palin using a private account when she is Governor?
Because there are laws in place that say what you can and cannot do with government services and equipment. What you do not seem to get is she was abiding by these laws. Thats why she has 2 (or more) email accounts. The hacker ought to be prosecuted, he even said he did it with malicious intent
I really wanted to get something incriminating which I was sure there would be
but guess what? he found squat and diddly.
I read though the emails... ALL OF THEM... before I posted, and what I concluded was anticlimactic, there was nothing there, nothing incriminating, nothing that would derail her campaign as I had hoped, all I saw was personal stuff, some clerical stuff from when she was governor.... And pictures of her family
You can't conduct state buisness. (Score:5, Insightful)
A number of those emails seem to be very state-businessy looking at who they are all from. And apparently they were using those accounts in order to have the ability to quickly delete any email they wanted rather than be subject to maintaining them for FOIA requests.
Re:Public Records (Score:5, Informative)
Why is Sarah Palin using a private account when she is Governor?
Because there are laws in place that say what you can and cannot do with government services and equipment. What you do not seem to get is she was abiding by these laws. Thats why she has 2 (or more) email accounts. The hacker ought to be prosecuted, he even said he did it with malicious intent
That's not why she uses personal e-mail accounts for state business. [nytimes.com]
Interviews show that Ms. Palin runs an administration that puts a premium on loyalty and secrecy. The governor and her top officials sometimes use personal e-mail accounts for state business; dozens of e-mail messages obtained by The New York Times show that her staff members studied whether that could allow them to circumvent subpoenas seeking public records.
Re:Public Records (Score:4, Insightful)
Why is Sarah Palin using a private account when she is Governor?
Because there are laws in place that say what you can and cannot do with government services and equipment. What you do not seem to get is she was abiding by these laws. Thats why she has 2 (or more) email accounts. The hacker ought to be prosecuted, he even said he did it with malicious intent
I really wanted to get something incriminating which I was sure there would be
but guess what? he found squat and diddly.
I read though the emails... ALL OF THEM... before I posted, and what I concluded was anticlimactic, there was nothing there, nothing incriminating, nothing that would derail her campaign as I had hoped, all I saw was personal stuff, some clerical stuff from when she was governor.... And pictures of her family
I'm sure I'll get modded down to non-existence for this reply, but I've got tons of karma to burn.
Burn, baby, burn!
You know that the fact that no state business was being conducted through those email accounts means diddly and squat to the haters. They'll just say "well she has other accounts we don't know about, or she deleted them" and despite all the evidence to the contrary, maintain that somehow she's a criminal because she doesn't bow to the lefts' agenda.
Truth doesn't matter to the haters on the left, only their rabid hate and their wish to silence and destroy anyone who dares disagree with them. Laws, rights, and freedoms should only protect *their* guys, because *they're* the "good guys". She's a conservative Republican, which to the haters on the left makes her not-human, so she doesn't get to have rights or enjoy the protections of law and due process. Since she's a conservative Republican, any methods used to injure or destroy the woman and anyone close to her, including handicapped children, are perfectly fine and justified tactics to the haters.
The level of hypocrisy, douche-baggery, outright denial of reality, and visceral hatred by many on the left is beyond the pale. They even hacked Bill O'Reilleys' website and grabbed user registration information and email addresses because he dared have an opinion they don't like about the obtaining and subsequent publishing of the Palin personal emails.
Maybe Obamas' and/or Bidens' personal email accounts should be hacked, if hacking Palins' personal account is ok. I wonder if the haters would be fine with *their* guys' personal emails being published? I'd be willing to lay strong odds that there would be a lot more red meat there than anything found in Palins' emails.
Cheers!
Strat
Re:Public Records -- The Catch-22 (Score:4, Insightful)
You're posting here, using racist codespeak (Bubba?), advocating for the physical and/or sexual abuse of someone who hacked a Yahoo account?
Fucking fascist.
- The Big Lebowski
Re:Public Records -- The Catch-22 (Score:5, Insightful)
As for the hacker, hopefully the Feds will give him a nice long stay in a real PMITA prison with a guy named Bubba.
Your post was great until you said this. People should be punished according to sentences under the law, not subjected to the arbitrary abuse of other prisoners.
Re:Public Records -- The Catch-22 (Score:5, Informative)
What I've seen here is that Palin properly followed the demarcation line between "official business" which is done via official state systems, and "private communications" which may NOT be done via state systems.
Then you've seen only what you've wanted to see. Palin thoughout her time in office has consistently blurred the official with the personal.
For starters, if she wished to keep the line clearly marked, she should have chosen an email handle other than gov.sarah.
Then there's this from the New York Times:
While Ms. Palin took office promising a more open government, her administration has battled to keep information secret. Her inner circle discussed the benefit of using private e-mail addresses. An assistant told her it appeared that such e-mail messages sent to a private address on a "personal device" like a BlackBerry "would be confidential and not subject to subpoena."
Ms. Palin and aides use their private e-mail addresses for state business. A campaign spokesman said the governor copied e-mail messages to her state account "when there was significant state business."
On Feb. 7, Frank Bailey, a high-level aide, wrote to Ms. Palin's state e-mail address to discuss appointments. Another aide fired back: "Frank, this is not the governor's personal account."
Mr. Bailey responded: "Whoops~!"
Whoops, indeed. I wouldn't consider this a distraction from the issues, especially given the Bush Administration's record. I find it among the scariest aspects of her prospective election.
The Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?pagewanted=all [nytimes.com]
And Links To Others... (Score:4, Interesting)
They might give the kid a partial immunity deal if he gives up someone in office or the Obama campaign.
It's been reported that his father is an ultra-liberal Democrat in state office - who does have some serious connections with the Obama campaign.
IF (big "if") there is any link to any campaign, then we have almost the exact same thing as Watergate going on here. This would then be the first "-gate" scandal since the original that actually deserves the name.
Can anyone say "what did they know and when did they know it?"
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm glad to see Wikileaks is back up, along with the Palin article. For a while I thought it was being censored by the thugs in charge.
What a shame the media is focusing on the hacking angle rather than on Palin's inappropriate use of personal communications channels for government business.
Re:just tell me (Score:4, Insightful)
it is not only permissible, but mandatory to make its contents accessible to public.