Republican Aide Tries to Hire Hackers

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.'"

Comments

Nevermind, jokes on me I guess

[suso]

I read the email correspondence before reading the network world article. They were just leading him on.

Re:This begs the question

[SatanicPuppy]

They had the whole exchange posted for a while, but it was only recently that anyone in the media bothered to track down the actual guy.

Re:What the?

[Mr. Flibble]

Um, I'm sure I won't be the only one to ask this. But how in the hell does this prove that you are not the FBI, Secret Service, Police or whoever? Even if he was on campus at the time, I'm sure any authority that you'd want to fear could get to wherever they needed to be to take that picture in the same day that he asks for it.

In case you are wondering, what they are doing is a variant of the 419 eater 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

[SuperBanana]

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...

Re:posting the emails was illegal and unproductive

[shrdlu]

The folks at attrition have *always* had a policy of posting email to them. It's usually a great read (and this one started back in September, ISTR). It was only when Mr. Bright Guy was outed as a congressional aide that it hit the big time.

I love the smell of napalm in December.

Re:posting the emails was illegal and unproductive

[valdezjuan]

Can you site a case, or an actual law that prohibits forwarding of emails?

Though I have only found one http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2006_11.php#00501 7article 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 /ruling.pdf) which upholds that blogs, websites, listservs, etc. are protected under the Communications Decency Act (CDA 1996) Section 230. This section explicitly states that "[n]o provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."

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:posting the emails was illegal and unproductive

[Tweekster]

You have absolutely no expectation for the average person to keep your communication a secret. They are the reciepent and can now do whatever they feel like unless they are bound by certain cases of privilege (lawyers for instance), or signed an NDA.

Just telling them they cant disclose it is not enough, they must acknowledge they wont before you tell them the information

Yet another. . .

[smooth wombat]

shining example of the intelligence of people in my party. It's not bad enough we have this yahoo blocking phones to Democratic numbers used for providing people rides to polls on election day, or this putz who embezzled state money, let alone the chimp in charge who has flip-flopped every which way on Iraq, but now this incompetent asshole.

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. . .

[funwithBSD]

You forgot this one:

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/1/24 /213349.shtml

Slashing tires to keep people from voting.

Or John Murtha:

http://news.netscape.com/story/2006/11/15/democrat ic-culture-of-corruption-john-murtha-bribe-video

Or William Jefferson:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/21/jefferson.s earch/

Or Teddy Kennedy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chappaquiddick

Or "Voted for the War before I voted against it" :

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/29/politics /main646435.shtml

Or Hiz Honor,Richard Daley:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_J._Daley

Or Boss Tweed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boss_Tweed

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. . .

[stonedown]

It's pretty unfair to tar Democrats with the actions of Boss Tweed in the 1800's. I suggest you drop him from your list in the future. ;)

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

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

I like that the sheriff from Eureka is in the video. He's a real law-and-order type of guy. ;)

Re:Yet another. . .

[slamb]

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.

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.

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.

Mirror

[suso]

To make up for that, I've created a mirror:

http://suso.suso.org/attrition1.html
http://suso.suso.org/attrition2.html (Page 2)

Re:What the?

[Dun Malg]

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:Hilarious

[dlt074]

"to give them motivation to combat unemployment."

do you even realize what the current unemployment rate is? it's considered full employment.

http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServle t

Re:This begs the question

[Phroggy]

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!

Attrition.org has been around since long before multiple .com registrars existed. I still have a domain hosted with Network Solutions myself for the same reason (although they did open up the market for testing with five competing registrars shortly after I registered mine). For awhile I was afraid if I tried to transfer it to a new registrar they'd botch the transfer and I'd end up losing the domain (I've heard of that sort of thing happening, and the rightful owner having no recourse), but now it's mostly laziness.

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.

Predictable update on this story

[netbuzz]

Press aide who tried to hire hackers has been fired.
http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/1001 5

Re:What the?

[budgenator]

A name, hell it's practically an official internet sport! Some people live for a 419 Email, and a chance to play! The idea is to scam the scammer into performing stupid and demeaning tasks, you start slow, build them up.

Re:What the?

[Em Adespoton]

I take it you missed the MythBusters episode where they successfully recorded audio on to a clay pot using nothing but a turntable, the pot and some straw?

Of course, the length of the audio was less than 1 second (the time it takes to rotate the pot once) but hey...