Slashdot Mirror
Palin Email Snoop Found Guilty On 2 Charges
netbuzz writes "A federal jury in Knoxville today has convicted David Kernell, 22, of two charges — misdemeanor computer fraud and felony obstruction of justice — in connection with the 2008 episode where he accessed the personal Yahoo email account of Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and then initiated a worldwide rummaging of its contents. The obstruction charge carries a maximum prison term of 20 years."
They also hung on the count of Identity Theft; The DA can retry that later if he so chooses.
My question is: Why is going through someone else's email different than going through their regular mail? What makes the addition of a computer so special?
I understand (and agree) that the guy should be punished for hacking this account, but how come nothing ever happend about Palin conducting official State business using her personal email account? Is it because the information was technically obtained illegaly? Or did something happen and I just missed it...?
Living With a Nerd
About as stupid as Obama?
"A Frenchman who police say hacked Twitter accounts belonging to US President Barack Obama and celebrities could face jail."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8586269.stm
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
but you do this, and you get 20 years on average.
it seems like u.s. justice system is so fucked up.
Read radical news here
What did he do that qualifies as obstruction of justice?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
if he's a first time offender I hope he doesn't do prison time, but rather gets put on probation with any violation resulting in a long sentence.
Citation needed.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
The obstruction of justice charge stems from an allegation by the FBI that Kernell attempted to erase evidence of the crime from his hard drive
"He gained access to Twitter accounts by simply working out the answers to password reminder questions on targets' e-mail accounts, according to investigators. " Seriously, I hate those things. When it used to be allowed, I always just retyped my password into the answers for those security questions. It's always really easy stuff to socially engineer or, in the case of a public figure, look up on google... Did he figure out the name of Obama's first pet, where he went to school, his first job, his mother's maiden name, or what? All of those things have got to be fairly easy to work out.
If you're going to do this, at least become a telecom company first. When they pull this kind of shit, they get a pat on the back.
...that Palin will ask the judge and the prosecutor to not give the guy any jail time, but maybe a few years probation and some community service.
I doubt throwing the guy in jail was a goal in this action.
Mark my words on this.
Joe Dougherty, Florida, USA
The words I thought I brought, I left behind. So, never mind.
You mean, people put honest answers in those fields??? [boggles]
Similar to the upcoming US election results
Things like this make me sad. Not just because I feel bad for the person, but also because frankly I don't want my taxes spent on keeping this man imprisoned for up to twenty years. Cost of imprisonment is on average 22,650 per year, at 20 years that's $453,000. In my opinion it's not worth that much to keep a man behind bars for guessing a password.
An Alaska judge has sided with former Gov. Sarah Palin in a lawsuit over e-mail, finding that state law doesn't forbid the use of private e-mail accounts to conduct state business.
Just because you want it to be illegal doesn't make it illegal; i.e. laws have to be passed by legislature first.
Kernell was found guilty of computer fraud - a misdemeanor subject to a prison term of up to one year -- and obstruction of justice, which carries a maximum 20-year sentence.
Don't lie to the feds. They get all bent out of shape about that. Frankly, even if they were to question me about someone else's crime, I would give serious consideration to refusing to speak to them, out of concern that my version of events might not be the same as someone else's, and they might decide that I was the one "misremembering".
Disclaimer: Evolution comes with NO WARRANTY, except for the IMPLIED WARRANTY of FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
To be fair, I'm sure Obama has never posted to his "own" Twitter page (I remember a published statement to that effect about his Facebook account, at least). It is actually some minor staffer who is the guilty party here: Obama is maybe only transitively guilty for trusting Rahm Emmanuel, who trusted the staffer (or the staffer's immediate boss). That stands in contrast to Sarah Palin's personal email account and the personal Twitter accounts of the celebrities involved in the other incident, the obvious passwords of which reflect much more directly on the intelligence (or lack thereof) of the account owners.
This is why I never seriously answer password reminder questions. Unfortunately there seem to be two uses: the first, where it is used in lieu of a valid email address to reset a password, and the second, where (mostly) banks decide that asking for what amounts to two passwords constitutes "two factor" authentication. Both methods have little upside (for the user) if the questions are answered with personal information.
From the article:
You can't retry a deadlocked kernel. The only way out is a hard reset.
You need a citation? How about, the purloined emails themselves.
And yes, sometimes they decided to stay within the law, and other times they didn't. Frankly, they should have always kept a big bold line between the work and personal.
Did he figure out the name of Obama's first pet, where he went to school, his first job, his mother's maiden name, or what? All of those things have got to be fairly easy to work out.
You'd think so, given the vetting which is supposed to go into establishing a person's qualifications for the Office of the President but there's been substantial research into each of those things, and each of them bring up non-trivial questions of the veracity of so-called "established fact". Kinda odd considering the public scrutiny - in the media, government, and otherwise - of every other President to date.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
If you're President Obama? Probably. Nobody would ever be able to figure it out, after all.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
And if you put something in that's neither an honest answer nor a random phrase: the universe explodes.
"They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
are upheld in Court. Personal email really IS private, and people should be held accountable if they cross the line. Jail time sounds a bit extreme, given the youthful age of the accused, but I'm glad the legal precedents are being followed correctly.
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
I wonder if wiping your fingerprints after a robbery constitutes obstruction of justice?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Except it wasn't the 'obvious password' which did them in, it was the lame drop-box security questions. Make it so all security questions are chosen when the account is created, and not selected from some stupid list, and your problem is solved.
An Alaska judge has sided with former Gov. Sarah Palin in a lawsuit over e-mail, finding that state law doesn't forbid the use of private e-mail accounts to conduct state business.
By the way, that was from back in January. Didn't your copt of Palin Haters Weekly include that news? Gee, I wonder why not?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It was not his fault, it was a Kernell Panic.
I don't think anyone thinks I really had a pet Vulcan, Dragon or a Dalek as a kid as my first pet.
Oh wait I need to change a bunch of secret questions now.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
Somehow, I missed the original story. Must have been on travels at the time. Would someone help me with these basic questions? (I can't help being interested in the trivia. I love Sarah Palin stories. US politics would be so dull without her...)
- How did he hack the account? Guess the password? Do we know what the password was?
- Were funny email bits published on the net? Are they still available somewhere?
- How did the guy actually get caught?
I just use password strength answer and I keep a file of them. I had a great conversation with an online bank. Security had detected a pattern that was unusual and called me. They asked me what high school I went to. I told them UMc9vdX0QLOH (not really, but you get the idea.)
The guy was flabbergasted.
I told him that although I appreciated their security, I didn't trust them, say, to not sell a used laptop on ebay.
He thought it was a great idea.
Of course if I loose my file, I'm screwed, but that's what backups are for.
My bank now requires me to answer a security question *and* input my password in order to log in. And it picks a random one of my security questions (of which I was required to have 5 or so), which means I have to remember 6 distinct passwords for my bank. Shoot me.
"A Frenchman who police say hacked Twitter accounts belonging to US President Barack Obama and celebrities could face jail."
That seems somewhat redundant. Shouldn't all Frenchmen be in jail, regardless of whatever hacking they've done?
... and then they built the supercollider.
The big deal with the Obama case is that the question was "Where were you born?" and Obama filled it in honestly. They're trying to cover it up! This is all part of the conspiracy, man.
There are two stupid people at the heart of this story, David Kernell and Sarah Palin.
Huh? How was Palin stupid in the context of this incident? Was she stupid to use email, as she should have known the extremists on the Left would hack it? Or just stupid because she disagrees with your views?
Apparently, Palin must not have used that account in any way that seriously violated any ethics rules and/or laws in any meaningful way or she would have been tarred, feathered, pilloried, and publicly horse-whipped on the Senate and/or House floors before being jailed by those who were (and still are) out to personally destroy the woman.
If there had been anything that could have even remotely made even the most shaky, thin case against Palin in the emails, you don't think it would have been the subject of a special Congressional committee and/or special prosecutor? You don't think that was *exactly* the intent behind the account cracking?
I don't care about "R" or "D", as both have been for larger government & larger national debt, but this was a really sleazy dirty trick and those behind anything like it, regardless of party/ideology, should be aggressively prosecuted and sentenced severely if found guilty.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
I just use password strength answer and I keep a file of them. I had a great conversation with an online bank. Security had detected a pattern that was unusual and called me. They asked me what high school I went to. I told them UMc9vdX0QLOH (not really, but you get the idea.)
The guy was flabbergasted.
I told him that although I appreciated their security, I didn't trust them, say, to not sell a used laptop on ebay.
He thought it was a great idea.
Of course if I loose my file, I'm screwed, but that's what backups are for.
If you loose your file, you can just tighten it back up again with a bit-wrench.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Whoosh. You did not cite anything indicating her use of personal mail for state business was illegal.
http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/012510/sta_554316966.shtml
Citation you gave doesn't prove a crime. The citation I give explicitly says it wasn't a crime.
Care to try again?
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
This is one of the things I try to get across to so many people, but most just don't realize what a security threat their reminders are. I generally tell everyone "unless you have to put your credit card in, never use your real name." Anymore usually confuses them and they start defending their actions.
Avoiding names and dates etc will keep the majority of people out of your things. Of course, someone who has experience and knowledge of gaining access to unauthorized systems will of course still be able to do so, but the random kid won't be able to.
My abilities are only limited by my imagination
Even safer, is to use a safe to store the passwords.
Safest: safety deposit box :)
not so much...
Many years ago, a friend of mine worked in a bank and told me that they were actually cataloging all items in safety deposit boxs! Having worked at a bank and been blown away but so many lapses of security issues, this didn't surprise me. He gleefully went over various items they encountered - including womens underwear! Mostly papers, not as much jewelry one would expect and some cash.
So, if you really want to be safe, encrypt a file on a storage medium that requires a password and that'll only work on your host at home? Nah I'll just carry my ATM PIN on the back of the card! (That way I can find it in case I forget it!)
My abilities are only limited by my imagination
I believe a lot of those are insensitive to case, so does that mean that are stored as text and not as a hash (is hash the right word)? If so, would typing your password in those fields make your password more vulnerable?
While I think he should be punished, online account hacking happens all the time (probably hundreds or thousands of times per day).
And even with moderately higher profile hacking, not one normally gets charged.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
i'll one better you.. wearing gloves to prevent fingerprints from being left is obstruction!
http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
It is still considered theft if someone enters my house and takes some of my belongings even if I leave my door is unlocked. Ditto for leaving the keys in my car and someone takes it or leaving the car running unattended while I go into a store or something.
For some reason a lot of /. people seem to think that not securing your property suddenly makes it fair game for anyone who wants to take it. The crime occurs when someone takes something that doesn't belong to them regardless of how well or how poorly it is secured.
Personally, I lock my doors, don't leave my keys in my car, set up a RADIUS server for my wireless authentication, etc. I'd rather my stuff not get stolen or my network get broken into in the first place. There was a time when people respected other people's privacy and property. That doesn't seem to happen any more.
Cheers,
Dave
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
Ben
Except it wasn't the 'obvious password' which did them in, it was the lame drop-box security questions. Make it so all security questions are chosen when the account is created, and not selected from some stupid list, and your problem is solved.
Please answer your security question: "What country were you born in ?"
> "Kenya"
*ducks*
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
If there had been anything that could have even remotely made even the most shaky, thin case against Palin in the emails, you don't think it would have been the subject of a special Congressional committee and/or special prosecutor? You don't think that was *exactly* the intent behind the account cracking?
Actually, I was on ebaumsworld when the account was "hacked" and the first screenshots were posted and I can assure you it was done for the lulz and not some some diabolical political purpose.
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
i'll one better you.. wearing gloves to prevent fingerprints from being left is obstruction!
Hah! Not committing robbery in the first place is obstruction since that would leave them without anything with which to charge you!
Was she stupid to use email, as she should have known the extremists on the Left would hack it?
Umm... what?
This guy wasn't an extremist anything, I was there reading the thread when he posted it, he mentioned in his thread that there wasn't anything interesting in it. [Apparently this somehow gets construed as him being an evil liberal socialist hippie extremist out to overthrow the government...] Then some whiteknight went and changed the password so that nobody could access the account.
The dude was just doing what any average person in his position would be doing if they got to look at Obama's emails or Dick Cheney's emails or Bush's emails.
As a Canadian, I've got to say, this Republican vs Democrat stuff is really really getting out of hand. Are you people children or adults, FFS.
So, I guess if you wanted to screw with them, you could forge some fake documents that implicate you or, perhaps better, someone important, in a crime and keep them in a safety deposit box. Hell, you could probably pull off some pretty nifty grifts with that as the hook, because the guy is surely going to assume that you didn't *intend* for it to be seen :)
This is just for vengeance, not for making a better society - but then such is the legal system of US - hence a greater and greater percentage of the population go to jail. In a hundred years the entire country will have locked itself up.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Personally, I don't see the idea of either of them having their accounts hacked as a sign of stupidity. We all know that sites like that aren't 100% secure (not that any system ever is and to say nothing of the fact that Obama, almost certainly, has never, personally, handled the management of his twitter account) and that both of them are prime targets to be hacked by hackers who aren't bright enough to think about how stupid it is to hack the e-mail account of someone protected by the FBI/Secret Service/NSA/CIA/etc. just "4 t3h lulz". For that reason, I completely agree with suggesting that David Kernell is a moron. Sarah Paling, on the other hand, has more than ample evidence compiled against her to condemn her as a complete imbecile long before the issue of having her e-mail account hacked comes into the picture.
Rules of Conduct:
#1 - The DM is always right.
#2 - If the DM is wrong, see rule #1
As popular as it is to bash Palin, this isn't about Slashdots users estimate of her acumen, but about David Kernell breaking the law. Seems pretty cut and dry to me.
At this point, with the vast majority of people being hacked by someone half a world away, I think you might be better of forgoing password remonders all-together (just type a long string of letters, numbers, and symbols into the answer line and forget about it) and just keeping a pen-and-paper list of sites you are registered with along with you username/password). Unless you have reason to think someone you live with might care enough to mess with you (you live in a dorm/apartment with asshole roommates; you have an older/younger sibling you don't get along with; you have a paranoid/jealous significant other; etc.) you should be fine just keeping it in a drawer somewhere.
Rules of Conduct:
#1 - The DM is always right.
#2 - If the DM is wrong, see rule #1
It's very surprising to a lot of us how many people come through the IT dept with laptops for 'repairs' (they f'd them up) and have plain text files with user names and passwords for various things! Mind blowing to me.
But the real question is: how paranoid do you want and have to be?
I would ~LOVE~ to tell everyone exactly what I would do, but then that would negate it's usefulness as I get attacked all the time lol. Maybe on my next iteration of security improvements I'll disclose what I do.
My abilities are only limited by my imagination
It's easy enough to deal with that. Read their policies before hand. If their policy doesn't, explicitly, state that they will inventory the safe deposit box (and, especially, if their policy clearly states that they won't) then just buy a separate box just small enough to fit in the safe deposit box. Then, purchase a roll of tamper-proof stickers and use them to seal the box every time you're done messing with the contents of the box. If you ever go to check the box and find that the seal has been tampered with, raise bloody murder with the bank management, corporate, Better Business Bureau, and the state's attorney's general office.
Rules of Conduct:
#1 - The DM is always right.
#2 - If the DM is wrong, see rule #1
If there had been anything that could have even remotely made even the most shaky, thin case against Palin in the emails, you don't think it would have been the subject of a special Congressional committee and/or special prosecutor? You don't think that was *exactly* the intent behind the account cracking?
Actually, I was on ebaumsworld when the account was "hacked" and the first screenshots were posted and I can assure you it was done for the lulz [encycloped...matica.com] and not some some diabolical political purpose.
Sure, and I'm certain that if the son/daughter of a Republican politician had cracked Obama's or Hillary's email accounts that all those claiming the Palin email crack was the equivalent of a random prank would feel the same.
If it were for laughs, why did he not try cracking email accounts of Hillary or Obama and instead chose Palin? Just because the politically-motivated cracker was incompetent at exploiting the data politically or even at hiding his tracks doesn't affect the fact that Palin was a target because she was (and remains) a threat to the Progressive social & political agenda.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
Grow up.
What? Why the response? Is Obama sacrosanct?
Then some whiteknight went and changed the password so that nobody could access the account.
Damn, I hate this attitude. No, it wasn't a whiteknight. It was simply a better person than you.
You could have a semi-secure way of doing it by answering from the perspective of someone else. If all your security questions are answered as if you were Monty Hall, who would guess THAT?
The nice thing about keeping a pen-and-paper copy of all your passwords is that it doesn't matter if you tell people about it online. Even in the, unlikely, event that someone who tries to hack your account happens to live in the same geographic region as you, it's unlikely that they'd be willing to escalate their criminal activity from hacking accounts to full-blown breaking-and-entering (especially if they're just hacking e-mail accounts to grief random stranger on the internet). If they're trying to make money doing identity theft, then they'll just move on to other low hanging fruit that's easier to hack.
Rules of Conduct:
#1 - The DM is always right.
#2 - If the DM is wrong, see rule #1
As a Canadian, I've got to say, this Republican vs Democrat stuff is really really getting out of hand. Are you people children or adults, FFS.
Can this Onion Ring get more fans than Stephen Harper?
Stephen Harper is a doo-doo head.
Loose lips lose spit.
"The dude was just doing what any average person in his position would be doing if they got to look at Obama's emails or Dick Cheney's emails or Bush's emails. "
What the hell kind of world do you live in where it is socially acceptable to just paw through other people's private email accounts for the lulz? What if you find communication between a lawyer about criminal cases, about taxes? What about communication with a doctor about a medical condition? What about communication with members of the clergy about person issues?
The motivation behind the attack does not change the fact that there WAS an unauthorized security breach.
That no sensitive data was found does not eliminate the legal consequences of that illegal act.
If there had been anything that could have even remotely made even the most shaky, thin case against Palin in the emails, you don't think it would have been the subject of a special Congressional committee and/or special prosecutor?
No. No I don't. When there has not been a single indictment for any of the well documented crimes of the Bush administration, I don't trust the justice system to prosecute any government official no matter how obvious their crimes. Was Sarah Palin absolved because she was not guilty, or because she was well connected and powerful? Given what I know about the justice system, the latter seems more likely.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Of course if I loose my file, I'm screwed, but that's what backups are for.
Store them all in a TrueCrypt volume and email it to yourself in a public email periodically. That way you only have to memorize one strong password, and not worry about losing it.
And even if someone gets into your email, good luck cracking a AES-Twofish-Serpent volume with a 30 character password.
Remember folks, slashdot doesn't have a -1 "disagree" moderation!
If they're trying to make money doing identity theft, then they'll just move on to other low hanging fruit that's easier to hack.
Like dumpster diving! A co-worker recently told me he had an acquaintance that confessed to him one day that's what his profession was. And then used found information to scam money lol.
I think that's what it really comes down to, not to have the so called 'common sense' because it's not that common after all, but just make it somewhat more difficult for the opportunist to take advantage.
As for the person referring to the rape victims, are you for real? Who can compare rape (physical, violent, life-changing) to guessing what my dogs name is, what my mom's maiden name is and what color I like.
My abilities are only limited by my imagination
But my password is 12345
If it were for laughs, why did he not try cracking email accounts of Hillary or Obama and instead chose Palin?
Palin was already the butt of jokes, she was the most in the public eye and she's a MILF. To put it bluntly she's more interesting than either Obama or Hillary.
Palin was a target because she was (and remains) a threat to the Progressive social & political agenda.
I'm a european so take this with appropriate quantities of salt but from where I'm standing Palin, Beck, the teabaggers, et al seem more of a threat to the internal cohesion of the Republican party than to the "progressive agenda" (whatever that means.)
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
Seriously, is it possible to commit a crime these days without being charged with 10 crimes? Isn't there supposed to be a constitutional amendment against that sort of thing?
If only someone would hack her Facebook account too. She's so annoying and she just won't go away.
You could have a semi-secure way of doing it by answering from the perspective of someone else. If all your security questions are answered as if you were Monty Hall, who would guess THAT?
*Breaks into gknoy's email w/ Monty Hall info*
$ make available
If it were for laughs, why did he not try cracking email accounts of Hillary or Obama and instead chose Palin?
What bizarre alternate universe did you come from?
Just because the politically-motivated cracker was incompetent at exploiting the data politically or even at hiding his tracks doesn't affect the fact that Palin was a target because she was (and remains) a threat to the Progressive social & political agenda.
Palin is/was a threat to anyone? Really?
$ make available
Who is going to destroy their career to drag Palin into court on some petty charge of abusing procedure when they know they are going to be [...] vilified in the press?
Is this the same press that Bill O'Reilly is continually "calling out" for being too "liberal"?
$ make available
I'm starting to think Rush is going to be the new Godwin law.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
... I didn't think it was possible... an HONEST politician?
//TODO: create a signature
I'm a european so take this with appropriate quantities of salt but from where I'm standing Palin, Beck, the teabaggers, et al seem more of a threat to the internal cohesion of the Republican party than to the "progressive agenda" (whatever that means.)
The Republican Party and the Democratic Party have both been infiltrated by Progressives. Examples of Republican Progressives include (but aren't limited to) Lindsey Graham(sp?) and John McCain.
The political struggles in Europe have ranged mainly between royalty and a parliamentary body, Socialism, Fascism, and Communism with most European governments being some compromise between them. Where America has differed fundamentally is that the debate was changed from what form, to *how much* government there should be. The Founders believed that the only way to contain government expansion and thus prevent loss of individual freedom was to restrict government. They (rightly, IMHO) viewed all government as a necessary evil that should be kept at the very minimums of size and power possible while still performing the minimal duties it must.
This is the struggle America faces once again. Those that want to sacrifice our individual freedoms in exchange for power through cradle-to-grave entitlements and thus government involvement & control in every facet of life, versus those that do not wish to sacrifice their freedoms for an intrusive nanny-state.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
Actually in Rehberg v. Paulk, the Eleventh Circuit held that sending “emails to third parties constitute[s] a voluntary relinquishment of the right to privacy in that information.” In this case, the investigators subpoenaed the emails directly from the Internet Service Provider (ISP) through which Rehberg transmitted his messages. The Court held that he did not have a valid expectation of privacy in the email information, so he failed to state a Fourth Amendment violation.
Here is a link to the brief: http://www.georgiafederalcriminallawyerblog.com/Rehberg.pdf
Plus how can covering up a misdemeanor be a felony? I could understand the obstruction being a felony if he hurt or killed someone to cover up the crime. But non-violent resisting arrest and formatting your personal hard drive are hardly felonies. Guess I should read the case...
I prefer the hot-librarian-looking women to actually be literate. Kind of ruins the fantasy if they're not.
And good luck finding it. Most of the time I can't find paper documents myself!
Talk to student politicians who haven't learnt how to lie properly yet and you'll hear some call one paper a "commie rag" and another call the same thing "fascist fishwrap". The true answer is the press goes after soft targets if there is a story in it. If you take on someone with a reputation you become a soft target.
Amen. And wasn't Kernell's dad a bigwig in the local Democratic party? Wonder if he was put up to it and hung out to dry afterwards. "No problem, if he's caught, they'll just let him go because he's a kid.." Going through other folk's emails is dirty business - I know, I had to do it as a sysadmin many moons ago and about barfed on what I found.
Organization? You must be joking..
The perp here is the son of Mike Kernell, a long-serving Democrat in the Tennessee state legislature.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Kernell
Young David wasn't just looking around for any old account to break into, he was actively working on the account of a political opponent of his father's.
This also implies that David, despite claims that it was for "lulz", was almost certainly conducting a targeted search of her email. There would be no other reason for the son of a prominent Democrat to do what he did.
This is Watergate. The only difference is the desire of the American media to tar and feather those involved.
"The dude was just doing what any average person in his position would be doing if they got to look at Obama's emails or Dick Cheney's emails or Bush's emails."
Except he didn't "got to look" at it. He HACKED it.
There are two stupid people at the heart of this story, David Kernell and Sarah Palin.
Huh? How was Palin stupid in the context of this incident? Was she stupid to use email, as she should have known the extremists on the Left would hack it?
Yes!
Yes. Yes He is. It is racist to suggest otherwise. Remember, dissent is no longer patriotic, paying as much in taxes as possible is, Republicans are fascists, and only the Federal Government cares about you.
By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
Middle class pays less in federal taxes than it has in the last 50 years. The top 1% hold more of the national wealth than at any time since 1929, just before the Great Depression. And fascism is by definition an extreme right-wing political philosophy.
That was funny.
BTW, I really like your signature. Most of what people want to claim to want as freedom today is actually license for licentiousness.
"while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." de Tocqueville
He didn't break in to anything.
This sounds like the defense of "No, your honor, she didn't say no. By that time she was already passed out."
You know, it's so bullshit that people have to defend themselves against any little asshat who thinks he has the right to do something simply because he can. I know it's a fact of modern society (that people are total assholes, that is) but it doesn't excuse the person who violated the rights of another in any way.
If you're going to be a member of our civilization, you're going to live by our collective rules. Don't like that? You have two choices: try to bend them, pray you don't get caught and accept your punishment if you get caught or get the fuck out. Seems pretty simple to me.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
They believe Palin is an idiot. Period.
They believe what they have been fed according to their beliefs.
Any amount of factual evidence will not change this.
Especially when the evidence shows that they themselves are the idiots.
The funny thing is that this doesn't really make things any more secure, but the illusion of additional security is all the banks care about.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?