Slashdot Mirror
Contents of Leaked HBGary Emails Reveal Wrongdoing
chargersfan420 writes "Ars Technica has sifted through the contents of the HBGary emails leaked last week in the attack by Anonymous and posted an interesting story about some of the things they were up to (which include rootkit development, selling rootkits to the private sector, and an entire list of 0-day exploits in a variety of OSes and other software, among a variety of other devious plans). Today they are reporting a democratic push for a congressional investigation of HBGary Federal."
eventually anonymous would become a V for vendetta mask behind which vigilantes would do things that needed to be done, like this. Where are the people who were foaming at the mouth against Anonymous just a few weeks ago huh ? Here is anonymous justice, packed up and ready to go. The justice which was in no way delivered by the normal means you were speaking about that people should follow.
of course good guys, indifferent guys, and bad guys will do things by hiding behind such a mask. but, that doesnt make the presence of that mask, something bad.
Read radical news here
As an "Obama supporter" (if that even makes sense) I would like this investigation, so that this comes to light if it is true. Since my support of people is not axiomatic, I would like evidence supporting their trustworthiness. I understand this position may appear alien.
I've been occasionally hearing this argument lately. "Yeah, we know these guys are doing bad things, but what if you find out that your guys are doing bad things, too? That would prove that you're even more evil, now wouldn't it!" It sounds like an attempt to conflate a hypothetical situation with what's actually going on. You know, things that there are no evidence for yet do not deserve equal weight with things that are actually evident.
This is in no way to say that I think the Obama administration is completely blameless and angelic in all things. If we were to discover that this firm was working on some of the same hacking and propaganda techniques on behalf of the government, then I'd damned well like to know about that as well. If the Obama administration was using these tactics on American citizens, I hope the investigation uncovers it somehow. And if you, parent poster, murdered a bunch of people ten years ago, I would hope that you are sent to jail for it. You know, if you did that. But in the meantime, we've got documents pointing to fraud being done by this firm on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce, so why don't we start with that?
Libertarians somehow believe that private businesses should be stronger than governments but weaker than individuals.
Have you ever considered that we might like to know about government malfeasance even if it's done by people we voted for? (hell, especially in that case).
If this radical idea had occurred to the Republican voter base back in 2001, maybe they wouldn't have to deal with a Democratic President in the first place.
3. You are omniscient and avoid running afoul due to ignorance.
No matter how ethically you behave, if someone wants to nail you to the wall because they don't like you, they can probably dig up something you've failed to do -- some tax law you fail to meet, some paper you failed to sign before you did something, some place you happened to be that you didn't know you shouldn't be, etc.
Also, in some countries, you can get in trouble for failing to pay bribes. I consider bribes unethical. See the problem?
Of course, neither of these run afoul of the "actively hiding" clause -- they depend on the "ignorantly hiding" clause. But once you realize that the only reason you're not in trouble is because you failed to disclose something, do you disclose it (acting ethically) and pay the penalty (no longer being safe), or do you hide it (no longer acting ethically) and fly under the radar?
Ethics are social. This world has many societies, and they aren't all compatible.
Hey, for a historical example, Jesus was killed because he was condemning the unethical acts of the Jewish elite. They accused him of things he readily admitted to (as well as a bunch of lies) that were punishable by their law by death by stoning. Of course, if they'd followed that law (ethical to them) then they would have been guilty of murder under Roman law -- Romans considering stoning both unethical and illegal.
Those who are truly willing to live by their ethical code have to be willing to die by it. They are by no means "safe".
> i wonder what will the senate committee say to them, in regard to their dealings with this filthy outfit.
Here's my guess: "When Blackwater got caught doing evil shit, they had to split up into a bunch of shell companies with different names so we could keep paying them enormous sums of taxpayer money to keep doing business as usual. Now you are going to have to do the same. One of the contractors from one of the new Blackwater shells who works for the CIA just got caught shooting non-combatants in the back, and we are having a motherfucker of a time keeping people from making the connection. Like that guy, we'll give you diplomatic immunity or state secrets protection, or whatever we need to do to prevent justice from being served, but it is a pain in the ass. Don't get caught again."
Of course, that's not going to be the public part.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
I would have modded you up, but you're already at 5.
Evidence based support of politicians. Evidence based policy. Evidence based... stuff in general.
If it turns out that the folks I voted for are scumbags, I'd like to know so they can be kicked out, taken to court, discredited, whatever. It's not "my team" and "their team", this is not about tribes or who's dad can beat up who else's dad, this is about the governance of of the USA.
If more people thought like this we wouldn't have the ridiculous spectacle of politicians throughout the western world getting away with all sorts of dodgy behaviour because "if you don't vote for me the other tribe will win!" and we might actually get a government we want.