Slashdot Mirror


Palin Email Hacker Found

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.

30 of 767 comments (clear)

  1. This Just In by TheSpoom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Cracker is an idiot. Ever hear of Tor? Or better yet, post the information on something like Freenet 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!

    --
    It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
    - E. Debs
    1. Re:This Just In by Elektroschock · · Score: 4, 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.

    2. Re:This Just In by Hadlock · · 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.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    3. Re:This Just In by Greyfox · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I have yet to see anyone ask Cheney or Palin if they feel they are above the law. Their actions seem to indicate they do.

      I have trouble understanding why we put people with such obvious contempt for the law in positions that are in charge of it.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    4. Re:This Just In by Hadlock · · 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.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    5. Re:This Just In by L0rdJedi · · Score: 4, 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.

      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?).

    6. Re:This Just In by _KiTA_ · · Score: 4, 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.

    7. Re:This Just In by billcopc · · Score: 4, 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.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    8. Re:This Just In by jadavis · · 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.

      --
      Social scientists are inspired by theories; scientists are humbled by facts.
    9. Re:This Just In by jadavis · · 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.

      --
      Social scientists are inspired by theories; scientists are humbled by facts.
    10. Re:This Just In by Main+Gauche · · Score: 4, 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's propaganda. I guess they're screwed either way!

    11. Re:This Just In by calmofthestorm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You use that evidence to track him, other evidence to prove guilt.

      --
      93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
    12. Re:This Just In by jabithew · · 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.

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    13. Re:This Just In by flyingsquid · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Personally, I'm fed up with all this "sexist" bullshit that's surrounded her nomination. Sure, nominating a female VP is historic (kinda sorta, since the Dems did it 24 years ago). Are we suddenly supposed to stop asking questions about whether this woman is experienced enough or capable enough to assume the leadership of the United States of America? We are, after all, engaged in two major wars.

      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.

    14. Re:This Just In by jadavis · · 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.

      --
      Social scientists are inspired by theories; scientists are humbled by facts.
    15. Re:This Just In by daemonenwind · · 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.

    16. Re:This Just In by Sabz5150 · · 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?

      --
      "Who modded this informative? Whoever it is must've been smokin' some of that martian pot!"
  2. Shame on you Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · 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.

  3. Re:"Hacker" by Helios1182 · · 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.

  4. Re:Important by zippthorne · · Score: 4, 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.

    Regardless of the politics involved, if there's no charges then any online email service is essentially useless for private communication.

    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.

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  5. Re:"Hacker" by Shihar · · Score: 4, 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".

  6. Re:Public Records -- The Catch-22 by Anonymous Coward · · 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

  7. Re:"Hacker" by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, 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
    Even the Associated Press went down that road.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  8. You can't conduct state buisness. by Tatarize · · Score: 4, 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.

    --

    It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon.
  9. Re:Equal punishment? by Hal_Porter · · 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.

    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  10. Because Yahoo is not for gov business. by drerwk · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Do you know that she seems to have been using the account for gov business? No matter what the kid said or saw there is more to it than you seem to know.

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/17/palins_yahoo_account_hacked.html

    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.

  11. Re:Public Records -- The Catch-22 by jadavis · · Score: 4, 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.

    --
    Social scientists are inspired by theories; scientists are humbled by facts.
  12. Re:Why can't a government employee use Yahoo? by atraintocry · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let's say that hypothetically, she was discussing government business on a Yahoo! account. One later crime committed against her does not mean she gets a pass on her own. Plus, she might be Vice President. Hell, maybe even President. So it does matter a bit more than what some punk does.

  13. Re:Seems != Guilty Even for a Republican by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 4, 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.

    --
    I am not a crackpot.
  14. Re:Why can't a government employee use Yahoo? by db32 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can't believe this shit is modded insightful. The judge even admonished the Palins for trying to destroy this guys life. Most of the claims are pretty much hearsay, and at least two of them you cite have been explained. Wooten may not be a great guy, but the shit her family has spewed is a gross over exaggeration. All of her claims of "being tough on corruption" are bullshit. She took tons of money from the bridge to nowhere project. McCain HIMSELF even called her projects out specifically when he was attacking pork spending (wonder why the sudden change of heart...God damned sellout used to have at least some ethics and purpose). She has a tremendous history of abuse of power with this, her dear ol "shadow governor" hubby who seems terribly involved in state business, and then there is the numerous other cases of her firing everyone in her path that didn't do her bidding. She is right in line with the Bush/Cheney method of 0 accountability, above the law, I do what I want style government.

    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.

    --
    The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.