Hackers Expose 26,000 Sex Website Passwords

An anonymous reader writes "Passwords and email addresses of almost 26,000 members of adult website Pron.com have been released on the internet by the notorious hacking group LulzSec. To add to the victims' humiliation, LulzSec called on its followers to try the email/password combinations against Facebook, and tell friends and family of the users that they were subscribers to a pornographic website. In addition LulzSec released passwords belonging to the administrators of dozens of other adult websites, and highlighted military and government email addresses that had signed up for the xxx-rated services."

Comments

I swear

[Anonymous Coward]

i only read it for the articles.

Re:I swear

[Anonymous Coward]

We're not Catholbanland here. Why would a mentally healthy human being have a problem with you watching porn?
The real shame is, that you paid for it.

I have to ask you, to hand in your geek card, sir
Also: Your man card, if you have one.

PROTIP: http://www.vidohe.com/sites.php (The red ones. :)

You're welcome. :)

Re:I swear

[hairyfeet]

Sorry MR AC but if someone was to want free porn the best place is myfreepaysite.com (purposely not linking as it is the site I hand out to those that have gotten a porn bug and would rather it not get /.ed). Just make up a single throwaway email (so they have a place to send a password to, you DO have a throwaway address, yes?) and they have over 10,000 DVDs worth all nicely sorted by category. My customers are happy, I'M happy I'm not having to clean nasty porn bugs, its a win/win.

As for TFA, military guys like to look at titties, they also like to drink beer. This description also works for roughly 90% of the males on the planet with a pulse. News at 11.

Re:I swear

[johnsnails]

why did u post as AC if there is nothing wrong with watching porn?

Re:I swear

[Anonymous Coward]

Because about two years ago, I did prove, that the moderation system is fundamentally broken, and about a year later, changed my password to one I didn’t know (copy/pasted random string with closed eyes), deleted my associated e-mail account, and logged out.

You can still have my nick:
I am hurricane78, and I love porn!
(Although I have no idea who to shock with this. Everyone I can think of who still lives either won't be surprised at all, or has done nastier shit than me. :)

Re:I swear

[Anonymous Coward]

So is anyone going to point out that Anonymous is basically an anti-sex fascist group that targets people for natural biological behavior because Anons are a bunch of religious moralist jerkwads?

Gimme, gimme

[petman]

Where can I find the passwords?

Re:Gimme, gimme

[zonky]

http://lulzsecurity.com/releases/pronz.txt

Re:Gimme, gimme

[Anonymous Coward]

fap, fap, fap, fap...

Re:Gimme, gimme

[Anonymous Coward]

Any Westborough Baptist Church email addresses in there?

Re:Gimme, gimme

[isama]

heheh, 79 people used the password 'password' or pasword* it's too easy.

Re:Gimme, gimme

[pandrijeczko]

Am I like everyone else who viewed that document?

Namely that even though I don't subscribe to any porn sites, I did just have to check that my email addresses weren't in there - just in case! :-)

Re:Gimme, gimme

[JavaBear]

None that I could see. I was sure Fred would be on it...

Re:Gimme, gimme

[Anonymous Coward]

Huge bummer, Facebook has already suspended accounts that are on the list. Sooo break straight into their email accounts, and reset FB from there...

Hah, captcha: provoke

Re:Gimme, gimme

[Anonymous Coward]

Sadly both pron.con and Facebook seem to have been alerted to the list, and blocked the accounts...

Re:Gimme, gimme

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank the gods!!!

I totally forgot my password for that site!!

Thanks LulzSec!! :-)

Re:Gimme, gimme

[arglebargle_xiv]

Where can I find the passwords?

You really are new around here aren't you? Don't you know that this type of request needs to be phrased as:

Plz email me the codez!

Re:Gimme, gimme

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, I was a little disappointed they weren't hashes...all the more better to keep my skills in shape.

Re:Gimme, gimme

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope. pron.com allows them still, but you can't use emails to log in at all -- you have to guess the username.

Or use the "forgot password" link, log in to their webmail (they use the same password, naturally), and read the username pron.com emails you.

And I don't think these guys are all paying -- at least one *@live.co.uk account (seemed to be a Brazilian spammer, from the sent mails, and bounce reports iin the inbox), I logged in to pron, and it was hitting me with ads to upgrade, so I think they may be free accounts...

Re:Gimme, gimme

[Opportunist]

And no comment on "12345" and its variants?

Re:Gimme, gimme

[Golddess]

Other than it being the same as on my luggage? Nope, no comment.

Re:Gimme, gimme

[citylivin]

its a text file genius.

Re:Gimme, gimme

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe it's this one: god_knows_@hotmail.com | ******

Re:Gimme, gimme

[Opportunist]

Ahhh, someone knows his movies. :)

Re:Gimme, gimme

[Seumas]

I wouldn't care if mine was. I'm a male under the age of 100. Guess what - I like naked chicks, porn, and all sorts of freaky sexual stuff. What a fucking shock!

Re:Gimme, gimme

[Anonymous Coward]

haha, they got you too. The URL ends in .txt and the style sheet makes it look as though it were one, but that's not the actual doctype, it's an html file with a lot of javascript going on in the background, including what i mentioned. it even has a 'view source' if you right-click, that will open a window that makes it look like a text file, like there's nothing there. you're fucked man.

Re:Gimme, gimme

[mrman18766]

Thanks, some interesting analysis (I added a header row):

logparser -i:TSV "select password,count(password) from pronz.txt group by password having count(password) > 10 order by count(password) desc" -headerRow:on -iSeparator:"|" -q

123456 670
123456789 212
12345 111
1234 75
12345678 72
1234567 65
password 63
1234567890 52
123 49
123123 41
111111 40
000000 36
jertoot 30
pussy 26
piehonkii 25
fuck 24
aamaax 23
987654321 22
112233 22
qwerty 20
upload 20
121212 19
666666 19
123321 18
654321 18
555555 18
pron 17
fuckme 16
sex 16
love 15
iloveyou 14
abc123 14
11111 13
asdfghjkl 13
fuckyou 12
101010 11
123654 11
xxxxxx 11
computer 11

Re:Gimme, gimme

[trout007]

That's cool. When I saved a copy it saved it as a text file. When I opened it with Notepad there was nothing in there.

Re:Gimme, gimme

[trout007]

Sorry. I meant to write there was nothing but the list of emails and passwords. No scripts.

Re:Gimme, gimme

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess "made ya look" then. and post about it. twice. waiting several minutes until it let you post again. muhahahahahaha!!!

Re:Gimme, gimme

[Kalriath]

You do realise that by logging into their email, you committed a crime, right? If you're in the US, I believe it may even be a federal crime.

To other readers, I'd strongly recommend not following those idiotic instructions.

Dumb

[Anonymous Coward]

Who signs up with a government issued email or even real info to a sex site? Who even pays for that? Amazing. So much free stuff to watch who would bother?

Re:Dumb

[Anonymous Coward]

Who even pays for that?

I used to work with a company which processed payments for such sites and took a very small share. Their profits were massive. Millions daily I mean.

Re:Dumb

[Anonymous Coward]

These idiots keep the porn 'industry' in business so we can download new content for free.

Re:Dumb

[zonky]

Before the tube sites came along, at least.

Re:Dumb

[Anonymous Coward]

>Who signs up with a government issued email or even real info to a sex site?

Forget that, who pays for pron anymore? Talk about morons!

Re:Dumb

[TheRaven64]

Yes, that's what the poster that you quoted said in the sentence immediately after the one you quoted. Short attention span?

Re:Dumb

[DrBoumBoum]

Forget that, who pays for pron anymore?

Forget that, who pays for anything on the Internet anyway?

Re:Dumb

[somersault]

Talk about morons!

Re:Dumb

[kangsterizer]

Sex industry is like any business, there should no be so much shame about something instinctive and just human after all. This is just what society put in your head.

Re:Dumb

[silentcoder]

#/bin/bash
for I in `cat ~/lulsec_passwords.txt | awk '{print $1}'` ; do
  echo "I wanted to personally thank you for paying for porn and thereby funding the creation of the content I download for free. Sincerely P. R. Vert" | sendmail -s "Thank you very much" $I
done

Re:Dumb

[RoFLKOPTr]

Yes, that's what the poster that you quoted said in the sentence immediately after the one you quoted.

lol the guy must have a really short attention span.

Re:Dumb

[SilentStaid]

I just want you to know that I see what you did there and you deserve the +5 funny, though I think it'll woosh over most people.

Re:Dumb

[blackbeak]

....there should no be so much shame about something instinctive...

That kind of thing is exactly what Terence McKenna means when he says "Culture is not your friend".

Re:Dumb

[AHuxley]

Depends on your clearance level, agency and sexual needs.
http://articles.boston.com/2011-01-05/news/29335792_1_child-pornography-investigation-pentagon
Customs Enforcement agency handed a list of 5,200 Pentagon employees suspected of viewing child pornography to the Pentagon. They looked into about two-thirds of the names, unearthing roughly 300 who had viewed child pornography on their work or home computers.
1,700 names on the list where not checked.

Re:Dumb

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean you don't watch the movies for the amazing acting and intriguing plot?

Re:Dumb

[Anonymous Coward]

why use awk instead of cut -d " " -f 1?

Re:Dumb

[Nieriko]

I don't think these published accounts are 'paid' accounts. There is no reason to think that they are.

Also pron.com does not require email confirmation to make an account: I just signed up with email address 'president@whitehouse.gov' and got immediately logged in to the site.

lulz...

Re:Dumb

[Anonymous Coward]

why use cat instead of awk '{print $1}' ~/lulsec_passwords.txt

oh wait.
who cares?

Re:Dumb

[Anonymous Coward]

Gratuitous use of `cat' (and `echo', but at least that one's probably a built-in). Try this instead:

#!/bin/sh

for addr in `awk '{print $1}' ~/lulsec_passwords.txt` ; do
        sendmail -s "Thank you very much" $addr << EOF
I wanted to personally thank you for paying for porn and thereby funding the creation of the content I download for free.

Sincerely P. R. Vert
EOF
done

Also, useful variable names are your friend.

Re:Dumb

[echnaton192]

I do. Because free pr0n is too much hassle. I know it exists and I know how to obtain it. But the paid service is easier to use and more secure. P2P and binary newsgroups are nice for moviez, but not for pr0n. And the tube sites? Insecure and not the perfect quality I demand. No, to me it makes sense to pay per view on a big pr0n site, because I get better service without the security problems - as long as no third party hacks the site, te information is secure, because it is in the site owners best interest to handle it as a serious business.

Re:Dumb

[rubycodez]

no, you philistine. it's all about the dialog. those erudite scripts don't write themselves, you know.

Re:Dumb

[tompaulco]

You mean you don't watch the movies for the amazing acting and intriguing plot?
Well, you sure wouldn't be watching it to try to get excited about the actors/actresses themselves. They kind of look like, well, porn stars or something.

Re:Dumb

[idontgno]

I do. Because free pr0n is too much hassle. I know it exists and I know how to obtain it. But the paid service is easier to use and more secure.

Irony: commenting of the ease-of-use and security of using paid pr0n service in discussion about significant compromise of userid, email address, and passwords of a paid pr0n service.

(Actually, I'm kinda ducking my head, in case there's a WHOOSH incoming. It's kinda hard to tell.)

Re:Dumb

[sgt scrub]

I mean for rizl. With states like Kansas revoking support for the arts they need every buck they can get.

Re:Dumb

[Anonymous Coward]

On pay sites, the content is well sorted, you get guaranteed downloads, no adds, and you know what you're getting. I don't have an account anymore, and I tried the "free" downloads. You get what you pay for. Maybe I'm not as open-minded as you, but thee are some things I DON'T want to see.

Re:Dumb

[GodfatherofSoul]

Same rationale for all the "data wants to be free" types. You need people to pay for it to subsidize you're free downloads. Which is why the people who pay for music, movies, etc. can't stand listening to them.

Re:Dumb

[makomk]

Judging from the list, many users probably didn't sign up with real info, or even with e-mail addresses they actually controlled...

Re:Dumb

[asdf7890]

Gratuitous use of `cat'

I don't tend to object to extra cat calls. Some people get quite passionate about "demogification" so I might be asking to be modded to oblivion here, but I often find an extra cat improves the flow of a command when read. "cat something | someprogram --option=value" makes more natural sense to someone who natively reads left-to-right than "someprogram --option=value someprogram" or "someprogram --option=value
Some of my scripts may need to be read by others, now or in the future, with less command line experience and less ability to think so this could make a beneficial difference. The issue of instantiating an extra process is usually not a big deal (it is hardly an expensive operation on Linux/BSD/similar), nor is that extra process reading and writing the content with no other action (disk/network IO being the main bottleneck usually). Also when at the command-line directly you can replace cat with pv (or similar) without rearranging anything else and get a useful progress bar if the operation is going to take a long time to complete, though that wouldn't work in this example.

Also, useful variable names are your friend.

Now there I am definitely with you. I remember the joy of up-to-40-character variable names in BBC BASIC when just about every other 8-bit would only look at the first two. Limited RAM meant you often had to reduce the names later if a project grew large enough, had tight loops to worry about (but if you had loops so speed critical that the speed of the interpreter was an issue, you probably needed to switch to assembler anyway), or you were competing for some "one liner" challenge, but I always went for meaningful first and search+replace to shorten as needed later (which it usually wasn't).

Re:Dumb

[echnaton192]

Irony: commenting of the ease-of-use and security of using paid pr0n service in discussion about significant compromise of userid, email address, and passwords of a paid pr0n service.

Nope. The article proves that one of those sites has been compromised. It does not prove that all or most sites have been hacked. Besides: The password I only use there, but to me this is standard procedure on nearly every site. But the mailaddress is my real name mailaddress, so someone could make it known I use pr0n. Big deal.

Avoiding all the malware on free sites and saving the time spent on finding what I want to me is worth the money. I don't know about others, but I like to spend my time other than browsing and searching for free pr0n. I could spend it on browsing slashdot, play DNF (finally! After 14 years!) or getting off streaming the pr0n I instantly found using said site while others are still searching.

To me, that is worth some money. To others, it seems like it is not. But this does not make them Übergeeks, just people witout money.

Re:Dumb

[bryan1945]

That was the first thing to pop into my mind. Unless there is some specific porn stuff that couldn't be found through a search engine? Overseas stuff that is illegal in the US? Sure I may check out some racy pics of celebrities or models, but the more 'intense' stuff was solved when I got married 10 years ago.

Re:Dumb

[Anonymous Coward]

Not to mention the possibility of signing up for a porn site using someone else's e-mail address...

Re:Dumb

[psyclone]

Totally OT, but if you're just extracting columns, cut is great. However, I still use awk in those cases because I often go back and "do something else" with the data too. For instance, I might want to stick these email addresses in a hash to keep a counter, then print any with count > 1. Or perhaps I'm dealing with columns of numbers and wish to printf them for formatting. If I stick with the habit of using awk, even for simple operations, I use it more so I learn more features over time.

Re:Dumb

[CSMoran]

an extra cat improves the flow

This.

Re:Dumb

[cayenne8]

Sure I may check out some racy pics of celebrities or models, but the more 'intense' stuff was solved when I got married 10 years ago.

So...you don't get at least a little tired of looking at the same nekkid chick every day for the rest of your life?

I mean, I've had some beautiful girlfriends with great pussy....but after a few months...I still like to look at a little 'strange'. And after 10yrs of marriage, I'd have to imagine you'd need a little imagery of someone different while doing your wife..to keep it interesting, no?

It has nothing to do with love...just that men are prone to liking variety....and find it exciting.

Re:Dumb

[bryan1945]

Err, it's not the looking part; she's not even what most people would call 'hot'. Just need to find the right girl who likes to 'experiment,' if you get my meaning. I did find her.

Re:Dumb

[Anonymous Coward]

The site in question is not a paid porn site though right?

Re:Dumb

[Kalriath]

Those tube sites collect an even more astronomical profit if I'm not mistaken. Them and the cam sites.

Re:Dumb

[Paul1969]

In the US, the main paid subscribers to internet porn reside in the so-called Red States.
I bet they thought the pay sites were more secure. Or maybe they pay for ideological reasons, to show their fundamental belief in Capitalism.

Re:Dumb

[cthulhu11]

They would have to be stupid indeed to still be running sendmail.

Re:Dumb

[Anonymous Coward]

I wrote this in script format purely to make it more readable and went for the most readable version of said scripting - in real life I wouldn't even save this - it would just be a one-liner I'd type, and then I'd make use of bi-directional piping etc. rather than cat and echo.

In this case I wanted to do it more verbosely so the joke woudl be obvious even to people with more limited shell scripting experience.

Not funny

[Anonymous Coward]

To be honest. This does not help anyone and certainly will create a strong wrong perception of hackers.

Is this hacker group christian or something like that? Seriously folks...

Re:Not funny

[gmhowell]

What are you on about? This could help people who like to masturbate. I'm told that a significant part of the population engages in that activity.

Re:Not funny

[Anonymous Coward]

To be honest. This does not help anyone and certainly will create a strong wrong perception of hackers.

Like, that hackers are nasty folks who break into other people's computer systems and engage in illegal and/or offensive behavior?

I fear that damage is done already, thanks to the word "hacker" having been used in that meaning for quite some time in mainstream media.

And with a name like "LulzSec", did you really imagine this group would do something good for the world, rather than stroke their own egos and grab attention in, shall we say, typical 4chan fashion?

on their website

[Anonymous Coward]

http://lulzsecurity.com/releases/

Re:Who cares who they belong to

[Haedrian]

so we can see some pron for free...

You're new to this whole 'internet' thing aren't you?

Who?

[lvangool]

Who the fuck still pays for porn?

Re:Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

Would you pay for a movie? If yes, why not if the content is adult?

Re:Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you really that stupid? There will be actually no porn to download for free if not enough people pay for it.

Plain stupid idiots like you make me very angry! I could beat the hell out of your stupid face.

Re:Who?

[MichaelSmith]

There will be actually no porn to download for free if not enough people pay for it.

Maybe (NSFW link, BTW).

Plain stupid idiots like you make me very angry! I could beat the hell out of your stupid face.

Maybe you should take a stress pill and lie down.

Re:Who?

[Sulphur]

Who the fuck still pays for porn?

Your Government?

Re:Who?

[blackbeak]

Plain stupid idiots like you make me very angry! I could beat the hell out of your stupid face.

And people would pay to see that!

Re:Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe you should take a stress pill and lie down.

Given the topic of this thread don't you think a lie down and a wank would be more appropriate?

Re:Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

not everyone has been on the internet for 20 years, god bless them. these people don't know about imageboards, thumbnail galleries, bittorrent, rapidshare, etc. Likely they never will. there is a a tier structure in place to hook the marks, and the holy grail is to hook people for a recurring monthly payment that they let ride and ride and ride for whatever reason (being a repressed porn addict comes to mind as one reason...)

Re:Who?

[Opportunist]

Well, considering the amount of people who make movies of themselves screwing around and the various porn variants of YouTube that litter the net, I would not be worried that there wouldn't be any thrusting action left if all the "professional artists" suddenly decided to cease production.

Re:Who?

[Warlord88]

There was a thread on reddit where the owner of videobox.com (a porn site) answered any questions asked. While he says that the porn industry is sort of in decline in the sense, less and less people are paying for porn. His guess was that eventually all porn will be free and the industry will make money from "adult social interaction" which will still be paid.

Re:Who?

[rubycodez]

who the fuck still pays for movies?

Re:Who?

[Vegemeister]

Fortunately for us freeloaders, orgasms are fucking awesome. Many people try different things to make their orgasms more frequent, or more awesome. One of these things people do is post video of themselves on the Internet. These people are called 'exhibitionists'.

The material produced by these 'exhibitionists' is erotically superior to commercially produced pornography, and with the continuous improvement of consumer video equipment, the graphical quality is catching up quickly. Really, the only area where the commercial stuff is still winning is glamor photography. Medium format CCDs are expensive, and in the absence of sound and motion it is difficult to ruin the mood with ridiculous slutty vocalizations or an excess of blowjobs./p.

So what?

[Anonymous Coward]

People watch porn... so what?

Do we live in the Dark Ages and masturbation is a sin?

Re:So what?

[petman]

What, you mean masturbation was a sin in the Dark Ages but it's not now?

I must have missed the memo.

Re:So what?

[TheRaven64]

People watch porn... so what?

Depends. Are they legislators who are campaigning against obscenity on the Internet?

Do we live in the Dark Ages and masturbation is a sin?

A lot of elected representatives in the US would like us to...

Re:So what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Also...

best email/pass combination ever: flag@whitehouse.gov | karlmarx

Re:So what?

[AliasMarlowe]

Do we live in the Dark Ages and masturbation is a sin?

Depends whether you have a religion, and on which religion if you do.

For many branches of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic cluster, masturbation is definitely considered sinful, and you should resist attempts to leave the Dark Ages. Not sure about the Jain-Buddhist cluster or Shinto, but it was not generally impugned in the Indo-European cluster, of which Hinduism is the major survivor.

Atheists don't have sin, but do classify actions on an ethical scale, and mostly consider masturbation to be harmless or healthy.

Re:So what?

[Kjella]

Do we live in the Dark Ages and masturbation is a sin?

A lot of elected representatives in the US would like us to...

It's Americas biggest version of "don't ask, don't tell". A classic is the Utah store owner who proved they were watching tons of PPV porn at the local hotel to get past the Miller test. Politicians simply play the game to win votes, I hardly think they're better than the rest of us. Most of the world - and even the US - have gotten over the whole "sin" to spill the seed, but you still don't talk about it. That's the way it's been from the very beginning, where's little Suzy? Oh, she's furiously frigging her clit. A lot of them go "LALALALALALA", don't want to see it, hear about it, think about it, go to your room and this is on DADT basis. Never figured out why it was such a big deal, if I didn't I'd have such a serious case of blue balls I'd sleep with almost anything - which would be grounds for concern.

Re:So what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Once would assume if their named "Little Suzy" you are most likely related. And frankly, I don't want to hear about my relatives and their masturbatory activities. The rest of the population is fine. Just not that small group of people. Kinda grosses me out. Most likely because I don't want to think of my relatives' sexuality.

Re:So what?

[blackbeak]

Do we live in the Dark Ages...?/p>

Uhm, yes. We could make a very good argument that we're in or entering another dark age. Education is on the wane while the disparity between wealthy and poor rapidly accelerates toward complete serfdom. The middle class is fast disappearing. Science is riddled with political agenda and strangled by the patent and copyright system, while many "peer reviewed" studies are really just simple corporate propaganda. The public domain (water, minerals, parks, roads, etc.) is being sold off to wealthy private and corporate interests. Draconian laws proliferate, making almost everything a serf might do a potential offense. (Steal a loaf of bread and you may well serve hard time, but wipe out someone's retirement, or foreclose on a home without a mortgage and you'll probably laugh about it on the golf course.) The haunting specter of "terrorism", real or imagined, has allowed many hard won personal rights to be effectively repealed, while a virtual witch hunt is in process. Virtually anyone is subject to a home invasion by authorities at any time without notice or significant recourse. The courts are stacked with political cronies, and few can afford a decent lawyer anyway. Fraud is rampant, yet rarely punished at the highest (most significant) levels. Government regulatory agencies are all captured and worse than ineffective. Naked resource wars are initiated unilaterally, as oil and other important resources dwindle. Unemployment and homelessness are rapidly rising, with no relief or government fix in the works. Retirement programs are in the sights for drastic cuts, as the moneyed interests refuse to cut bloated military budgets. The media is not obligated to tell the truth, so the masses are less informed then if they consumed no news. Resistance groups interested in not being in a dark age are infiltrated and rendered impotent in various other ways. The international moneyed powers are rapidly changing the governance of the world into something more hideous than anything the world has ever seen, while all eyes are on the insignificant spectacle of something else.

Looks kinda dark to me!

Re:So what?

[interkin3tic]

I don't think there is anything wrong with DADT between family members about that. In fact, it seems a bit disturbing for it not to be the case. And "little" makes that sentence disturbing, just FYI.

Re:So what?

[fyngyrz]

where's little Suzy? Oh, she's furiously frigging her clit.

I would like to congratulate you on the very first technically correct use of the term "frigging" I have encountered on the Internet. Kudos, sir.

Re:So what?

[fyngyrz]

Sadly, you've understated the problem. :(

Re:So what?

[Kjella]

I meant it to be disturbing but DADT is different than "I know, but we've had the talk about it and as long as she does it her room" as I hardly expect it to be the topic around the breakfast table. It means you really don't know at all, and you'd rather never find out. I mean it more like a state of denial, no my kids don't masturbate. And my teens don't have sex. And my husband doesn't look at porn. LALALALALA not happening. It's the only country I know still seriously trying to push abstinence and a single sex partner for life. The rest of the world has pretty much said as long as they don't get pregnant or catch STDs, oh well...

Re:So what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well I guess we should just all kill ourselves now and it least we won't have to read any more missives from the prophet of doom. Oh by the way when has the world ever NOT been faced with problems of one sort or another? The only difference today is everyone gets to voice their opinions in the global information network. Especially the bit about the news media ever telling the truth. Rich people have been gaming the system ever since their was a system we just get to hear more bitching about it in the information flow. The foreclosures did not help but nobody was forced to enter into mortgages that they knew they could not afford. Anyone buying a house who takes a chance on adjustible mortgage rates is just asking for trouble. It's better to save a little more and take a fixed rate mortgage that won't end up bankrupting you when the economy turns which it always does. There are all kinds of injustice in the world today but the vast percentage of it is due to the poor decisions made by the individual and not the harsh dictates of society as a whole. You have swallowed hook line and sinker every negative steroetype promulgated by the International Organization of Doomsayers.

Re:So what?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't want to think of my relatives' sexuality

Ya ever bop your baloney?

Re:So what?

[interkin3tic]

It's the only country I know still seriously trying to push abstinence and a single sex partner for life. The rest of the world has pretty much said as long as they don't get pregnant or catch STDs, oh well...

I've never been to a more puritanical country myself, but I hear that Mexico and several Latin American countries are far more socially conservative and toe the old Catholic line more than the US. You can't tell me that politicians in Iran or Saudi Arabia are less obsessed with stopping sex than ours are. Large parts of Africa are pretty conservative when it comes to that too. Australia is engaged in censoring the net, games, and I seem to recall they were at least talking about banning porn involving women with small breasts, too childlike or something.

I'd agree that Europe, Japan, and maybe Russia and/or China are less generally scared of sex than we are, but again, not entirely. In Japan for example, groins are pixelated in porn, and there are plenty of people who act like sex doesn't happen. Approval of birth control pills for Japanese women took forever, in part because of concerns it would lead to more promiscuity. Compare Portland or San Francisco to a small town in Russia, and I suspect you'd conclude the US is far less concerned with abstinence.

Anyway, the not wanting to see other family members as sexual creatures is pretty universal and goes both ways pretty much everywhere and isn't exactly related to fear of sex. It usually doesn't jive very well with our image of them, we usually think of family members as being clothed (infants excepted.)

Two minds

[metlin]

On one hand, I couldn't agree more with one of the posters who said something along the lines the how people make a bog deal out of sex between consenting adults, including the watching of it. The Victorian-esque morality that most aspects of sex are something that people should be ashamed of, including porn, is not something I can relate to.

That said, I have to wonder about the kind of people who would be paying for porn. Even if you are particularly desperate, there's so much free porn on the Internet that it's almost pointless to pay for porn. Plus, if you're that desperate, just how hard is it to pick girls up at a bar (or if you're a geek Don Juan, Craigslist)? Paying for sex in any shape or form has to be one of the silliest things, given how easy it is to find women who are more than willing if you just looked around.

Re:Two minds

[cc1984_]

On one hand....

You never told us what you're doing with the other...

Re:Two minds

[mikael_j]

Well, there's always the stuff that's kinky enough that you have to pay for any quality material. Not that I can imagine what it would be considering that if you go to any of the many many sites that specialize in porn torrents or streaming porn videos you're pretty much bombarded with "xXx Thai ladyboys and dalmatian golden shower urethral insertion of baseball bat and cactus AT THE SAME TIME!!1"...

Re:Two minds

[mcgrew]

It's going to cost, one way or another. The cheapest I ever had cost a draft beer, the most expensive cost me a house, a car, and part of my pension. Granted, that last one lasted 27 years...

But porn? Paying for porn is like paying for kittens.

Re:Two minds

[DarkOx]

people make a bog deal out of sex between consenting adults, including the watching of it. The Victorian-esque morality that most aspects of sex are something that people should be ashamed of, including porn

I can't agree. The fact is disease, and unwanted pregnancy don't care that its consensual. The moral majority is correct on this, sex with multiple partners is socially irresponsible. Now as a libertarian I am opposed to anyone telling you that you can't, but even I will support telling you that you shouldn't.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

On one hand....

You never told us what you're doing with the other...

Good catch.

Re:Two minds

[digitig]

Even if you are particularly desperate, there's so much free porn on the Internet that it's almost pointless to pay for porn. Plus, if you're that desperate, just how hard is it to pick girls up at a bar (or if you're a geek Don Juan, Craigslist)?

That gets a lot more difficult for most men as they get older. I'm guessing most of the people paying for porn are not in their 20s or 30s.

Re:Two minds

[rollingcalf]

"Paying for sex in any shape or form has to be one of the silliest things, given how easy it is to find women who are more than willing if you just looked around."

90% of men are incapable of getting sex for free. At a minimum, they have to pay at least for a few drinks or dinner at a restaurant. Usually multiple times, and with no guarantee of their effort and expenditure resulting in sex. Not to mention the costs of marriage and divorce.

"Plus, if you're that desperate, just how hard is it to pick girls up at a bar (or if you're a geek Don Juan, Craigslist)?"

How hard? This is Slashdot, where understanding quantum cryptography is easier than picking up women at a bar. Random sluts on Craigslist or sex-only online dating sites? ... can you say STDs?

Free sex is often the most expensive kind of sex.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

Now do the spiderman witth it.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

I've paid for porn*, namely because I was in the mood to watch porn with
1. Pretty women - I can't stand porn with women who look like they shoot up between takes
2. Petite women - big tits just don't do it for me
3. People looking like they're enjoying it

There's a huge amount of free porn out there, but a great deal of it appears to be some huge breasted crack whore being being brutalised by three black blokes.

* However, I've had enough sense to use a throw away email account.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

I can smell your cunt!

- Multiple Miggs.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

>90% of men are incapable of getting sex for free. At a minimum, they have to pay at least for a few drinks or dinner at a restaurant. Usually multiple
> times, and with no guarantee of their effort and expenditure resulting in sex. Not to mention the costs of marriage and divorce.

Hmm I must be a genius then - it's not that hard. You go out, talk to people, and some will be interested. Of course if you come across as a strange needy pervert, you might have problems, but I haven't. In fact I've had girls pick me up several times. On the other hand, I don't really count buying a drink or two, since I do that for my friends (including guys...) too. I usually meet new people with the idea of making friends, and if it turn out to be more fun that that.. goodie ;0

>"Plus, if you're that desperate, just how hard is it to pick girls up at a bar (or if you're a geek Don Juan, Craigslist)?"

Bars are hit or miss, but usually easy when they work.

>How hard? This is Slashdot, where understanding quantum cryptography is easier than picking up women at a bar. Random sluts on Craigslist
>or sex-only online dating sites? ... can you say STDs?

Well uhm.. if you picked them up .. anywhere, they could still have STDs. The best way to prevent STDs other than not having sex is to use a condemn. Just because you picked up an "innocent" girl at church and married her doesn't mean she won't have an STD.

>Free sex is often the most expensive kind of sex.
Well I know what you're trying to say here... I had one girl that I slept with like once, and then she stalked me for like 6 months, including coming to my office and writing a note on my desk, and sneaking past security at my apartment. (And no, I didn't "play" her or anything like that.)

Re:Two minds

[silentcoder]

Hey - I seeded that one too ! And they say bittorrent is anonymous :P

Re:Two minds

[silentcoder]

Nah, I just do what Charles Manson did - I talk the Beach Boys into paying for my ghonorhea tablets.

Re:Two minds

[rwv]

Paying for porn is like paying for kittens.

How so? And exchange of dollars for a little bit of pussy?

Re:Two minds

[thegarbz]

There's so much porn on the internet I just sit there shaking my fist.

Re:Two minds

[rust627]

does this mean it gets harder to find free porn as you get older ???

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

As a guy with a kink that isn't rare but is specific, let me tell you that it's very hard to find exactly what I want. Free or paid for. Probably if you follow that link to thai ladyboys and dalmatian golden shower urethral insertion of baseball bat and cactus simultaneously, you'll find regular old boring badly shot vanilla sex.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

Plus, if you're that desperate, just how hard is it to pick girls up at a bar (or if you're a geek Don Juan, Craigslist)? Paying for sex in any shape or form has to be one of the silliest things, given how easy it is to find women who are more than willing if you just looked around.

I want to live in your town, where woman are easy and require almost no effort to bed. Where'd you say you live again? Whore Island?

Re:Two minds

[muffen]

It may not be so easy for everyone, and there are people who don't have time and/or money to look around in the right places. Heck, im sure there are quite a few people who would be very happy if you showed them where the right places were.
Also, there are people with special sexual preferences who find it easier to pay a site then look for the conent they are interested in.

i can think of many reasons people pay for sex or pornographic content, I fail to see the problem in this, or why they are being judged.

And no, ive never paid for it myself, i have a wife and i have a kid and im sure i'd know where to look, but i will not judge or think anying of people who choose to pay, as long as noone is hurt.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know about others, but I find it more morally repugnant to lie to someone about desiring a relationship to have sex with them than just paying a prostitute for the same.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

Riiiiiight ... disease and unwanted pregnancy. Not sure if in the USA you know about condoms, but they are this plastic raincoat you put on your johnson while having sex. Work pretty good too.

Re:Two minds

[cbiltcliffe]

The best way to prevent STDs other than not having sex is to use a condemn.

That's exactly what all the religious nuts are doing, and you bitch about them to no end!!!

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

This is Slashdot, where understanding quantum cryptography is easier than picking up women at a bar.
 
Slashtards just like to think they're smart. I bet you good money that the average poster around here couldn't pass the finals of an advanced high school algebra course, write Hello World in two languages and/or hold an intelligent discussion on Newtonian physics.

Re:Two minds

[hipp5]

Paying for sex in any shape or form has to be one of the silliest things, given how easy it is to find women who are more than willing if you just looked around.

(Looking in from the outside, i.e. never have paid for sex myself) I can see valid reasons to pay for sex. One is the amount of effort required. Sure there are willing girls at a bar, but it's still going to take you a minimum of 3 to 4 hours to go to the bar, seduce girl, get her home, etc. etc. A hooker you can get the whole thing done in 30 minutes. The second is commitment. Even with a random from a bar there is somewhat of an obligation to that person. With a prostitute the exchange begins when the money is paid and ends at the agreed time. That's it. Done. The third is professionalism (if you're paying enough). The girl at the bar might suck (at sucking) or she might have crazy expectations or something. The prostitute is there for a business transaction, and a good one will say and do what's required to make your experience satisfactory.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL. Get out of here. I think you're confusing your own puritan insecurities with a rational argument. Socially irresponsible unless of course you are pregnant proof and get tested between partners. Go fuck yourself, then.

Re:Two minds

[betterunixthanunix]

Except that the moral majority is also opposed to sex with a single partner, except in the context of marriage. They are also opposed to the sale of sex toys, pornography, homosexual sex, sex enhancing drugs, and many other sexual activities that carry little risk. Their opposition is not to high-risk sexual activity, but to any sexual activity that maximizes pleasure over reproduction.

The far-right's attack on sexuality goes beyond just advising people of risky behaviors. Their attack is on the very idea that sex is for any purpose other than procreation, and they want all procreation to be done within a marriage. They would even deny married couples access to things like handcuffs, whips, and vibrating rings, because they call these things "obscene," for the simple reason that they enhance pleasure.

Re:Two minds

[ugen]

Clearly, you are young and not married.

Re:Two minds

[betterunixthanunix]

You forgot "discretion" -- high class prostitutes do not run around telling people about who they are having sex with. If you are a rich and powerful man, for whom a sex scandal could mean serious damage to your ability to do your work (whatever that may be), I can understand paying thousands of dollars an hour for sex with someone who is not going to go blabbing to people you know. This represents a minority of people, of course, but for those people this is a factor that comes into consideration.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

It's free to register there, when you register you can comment on vids I assume...

Re:Two minds

[metlin]

Who said anything about lying? As an adult, it is quite easy to be straightforward when picking up someone bar -- she knows it, you know it.

I mean, you think one-night stands happen because the girls think they are desiring to be in a "relationship"?

Re:Two minds

[Abstrackt]

Last time I told my wife I wanted more pussy we got a cat. :(

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

you're wrong. 100% of men are incapable of getting sex for free. At a minimum, they have to feed themselves food, so that they don't die.

Your logic is just so so stupid. A drink is TINY amount of money. It's not really "paying for sex" anymore than feeding yourself so you're still alive to have sex is just "paying for sex". you're so out of touch with reality it's scary.

Re:Two minds

[Khyber]

"The moral majority is correct on this, sex with multiple partners is socially irresponsible."

Too bad morals and the laws of nature don't get along. Guess which one is more correct?

Prohint: It's not the monkeys.

Re:Two minds

[Kjella]

That's the pure economic cost, but that's not the biggest "cost". Have you ever had a friend that's dating someone who's a complete mismatch? That suddenly has different interests when he's with her, even though it's really out of character? I've seen a lot of strange things come and go because of regular access to pussy. Usually they end when she figures out he doesn't want to be serious with her and never will be.

The ratio of men to women who'd really like just the one night stand is nowhere near 50-50. And even if they were, the men generally want it more often so a few sex hungry studs covers the needs of many sex hungry women. For the rest of us, except for the rare lucky strike we have to try building a relationship. That's a lot of time and effort that is a sunk cost - I'm not talking economically - and so when you're finally fucking you'd rather just keep it up, even if you've figured that as a long-term relationship it's a bust.

I think it's the second biggest cause of infidelity, after wanting more sex on the side. That yes you are getting sex, but you're not getting the rest you want to so people are looking to jump onto something else without first ending their current relationship. In short, to have an uninterrupted supply of pussy during the switch.

Paying is probably the most honest form of exchange, it's clear what you're giving and what you're getting and there's no false pretenses. As long as the woman is doing it of her own free will (no pimps or such forcing her to the sex trade) then it's her choice whether she wants to or not. Seriously, you can marry Playboy-Hefner but not pay a girl for a blowjob? It's all legal as long as you pay in diamond rings...

Re:Two minds

[rollingcalf]

A drink may be a tiny amount of money, but one drink isn't enough.

It's more like 1 in 10 women will have sex after buying them 3 drinks (each) ... that's 30 drinks and several hours of time. Pr0n and Pr0stitutes are much cheaper in time and money.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

some points:

1. although there is plenty of free porn on the internet, it is inevitable that most non-geeks one will stumble upon at least one virus while searching for it (best practice: avoid all thumbnail sites). and even for geeks, it is still a _ton_ of work to find the right high quality material, and honestly after a full day of computing who wants to spend _more_ time scouring, worrying about viruses, etc. just to wank. and also, most of the freely available pictures and movies are duplicates, they are low-resolution, and in the case of movies are subjected to chopped endings, bad quality, short time, etc. lastly, all the free stuff, if its not amateur, is ripped from a pay site anway.

2. picking up girls at a bar is not "free" either; generally if you are single and go out you end up spending _alot_ on booze. and even if you do go out, are attractive, dress nice, it still does not guarantee that you will get laid, leading to waking up the next morning dejected and horny...and back to point 1. the problem for geeks in general is that we dont have enough "real life" friends in order to form a proper (hate to use the term) "social network" in which meeting people flows naturally from the connections that one establishes. then you never go out alone and meeting women becomes 10x easier.

3. "paying for porn" and "paying for sex" are two completely different things.

Re:Two minds

[Opportunist]

Simple solution: Fuck another guy and use a condom. Problem solved.

Re:Two minds

[Opportunist]

Let's put it that way, my hand doesn't want breakfast the next morning, it makes breakfast.

Re:Two minds

[Opportunist]

While I couldn't see myself paying for sex either (I don't think it's "immoral", but sex is something I'd like to have with someone who wants to have sex with me, with the intention to have sex with me instead of getting something else out of it but an orgasm), I can understand why someone would hire a professional. Because that's what prostitutes are: Professional "sex workers". They know what they're doing and I guess they're good at it, and probably I'm missing out here. I can see why someone would want to have it done by someone who knows his (or her) trade, after all, I hire a professional to fix my plumbing or heating, so hiring a professional for sex seems quite sensible.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

"given how easy it is to find women who are more than willing if you just looked around."

Yeah. Not all of us were born looking like an underwear model. Your personal experiences do not reflect the mean, or anything close to it.

Finding willing women is not at all easy if you are ugly. Wealth, status, height, intelligence, and any number of other factors that women claim to matter, in fact do not. In the end, if you don't look the part, you're going home every night to jerk off to porn. But I will agree that the porn in question is easy to obtain for free.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

there's so much free porn on the Internet that it's almost pointless to pay for porn

There is no free porn. Someone has to pay for it or it stops being a profitable business. So you should be thanking these people, they are the ones that pay for your free porn.

Re:Two minds

[rubycodez]

if it exists, it is a genre of japanese porn

Re:Two minds

[rubycodez]

and they were invented thousands of years ago, and known to prevent disease and pregnancy. But our prudish society in the USA is so very backward we think it's a recent invention.

Re:Two minds

[swb]

You must be in your twenties and project an aura of some financial success (not rich, but not struggling 20-something).

Sex partners weren't impossible to come by when I was in my 20s, but it wasn't always easy, and quite often the girls who were the easiest to get also were the least pleasant to be with.

o Weird self-esteem issues
o More convenient than attractive
o Unbalanced desire/need that usually left me feeling guilty (ie, they always wanted 'more')

I found that that most of the 'desirable' women -- ie, complete package, smart, good-looking, sexually engaged -- when I was in my twenties all were looking for way more than sex and at a minimum expected a relationship with some kind of long-term status, generally marriage, and they really favored people with some sense of financial success (good job/income).

I don't think that changes a ton as you get older. I think there may be some golden age between about 35-50 where women are divorced or decide that they don't want to be married and feel less sexually constrained.

This may be different "now" than it was when I was in my 20s, 25 years ago, but probably not a lot on average.

Re:Two minds

[tompaulco]

My thinking is that I would never pay for porn because I would want proof that they actually have what they say the have. If there is none out there for free, I would think that the ratio of paid for stuff of the same type is probably in the same range.

Re:Two minds

[sgt scrub]

they have to pay at least for a few drinks or dinner

A few drinks? If none include a pill, please, tell me more.

Re:Two minds

[antdude]

Yeah, show us where single nerds/geeks can get sex for free from hot women! :P

Re:Two minds

[nyctopterus]

Yeah! And congregating in public too! It spreads disease, totally irresponsible. Kissing and handshaking have to go too.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

women have to spend much more on makeup, jewelry, and things like getting their nails done or getting a bikini wax, to make psychos like you interested in them, than you have to spend to show that you're a normal person and not a psycho - i.e. follow social norms and buy them a few drinks. if i were a woman, i would pay $1000 instantly, even if that was my entire life saving's at the time, if that meant I never had to be in social contact with another psycho like you again. by the way prostitutes have to spend even more on their bodies -- if you think what you're paying them is 100% profit, you are very wrong. as a business, they are not profitable once you take into account the opportunity cost of the woman involved: instead, she has to resort to it because she does not come from a good enough background to have the tools to put a decent life together on her own merits. And so psychos like you are her customers, even though you are really not saving anything on her as compared with what you would be spending on dating if you were a normal person. honestly, for normal people dating expenses don't even register on the budget -- it is nowhere near as much as anything else that they spend money on of any note whatsoever, and the fact that they are not cooking for one in a microwave as a result, but have actual contact with girls to split stuff with, means that in the end they are saving a lot of money. but enjoy your hot pockets, you fucking psycho, and try not to think about how much you're spending on living and being forever alone.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

Plus, if you're that desperate, just how hard is it to pick girls up at a bar (or if you're a geek Don Juan, Craigslist)?

Yet another clueless extravert telling introverts how "easy" socializing is. Yeah, sure, it is easy for you to pick up girls at a bar.

First, you go to bars; I don't. You don't go to bars for the purpose of picking up girls - you go there to drink with your friends; the girls are a secondary activity. Since I never go to bars, due to not being a drinker and to having no friends, picking up girls would suddenly become the primary purpose of the visit, which is painfully obvious and would cause immediate rejections from any girl who is still conscious.

Second, even if you don't go to bars, you go out to other places to socialize with friends. I don't do that because I derive no enjoyment from socialization. Not that it's always an unpleasant experience, but it is usually stressful and pointless. To you, conversation is an end in itself and needs no point; to me, no conversation should happen unless somebody has something valuable to communicate. Since regular people seldom have anything worth saying, they chit-chat about nothing. It is fun to you because interaction recharges your [self-esteem,ego,social needs,or whatever it is you need it for]. To me it is a waste of time. It is also stressful because I would have to constantly try to think about something worthwhile to talk about and quickly come up with intelligent responses to whatever subjects the other party brings up. Intelligent responses during chit-chat are unappreciated.

Which brings about the next point: you have friends; I don't. You have friends in order to do the above described social interactions, because it gives you pleasure and satisfaction. Since I get neither from socialization, I have no use for friends. Also, I never do anything that requires more than just me. You can probably name a dozen activities off the top of your head that you could do (and often do already) with a friend or a date. I can't name one without really thinking about it or doing research. I don't chit-chat, or dance, or eat out, or go to bars, because doing these things alone is no fun. However, without doing these things it is very difficult to find a reason to have a friend (or date), resulting in an interesting catch-22.

All this applies to picking up girls as well. Since I have no friends, I have no real reason to be in any of the places where I can do that. No girl will talk to a guy who is obviously trying to pick her up. Especially to one who has little experience in conversation (I have a conversation maybe once a year, so the lack of experience really does show) and doesn't look like an alpha male (geeks never are).

But the most important reason I hesitate to even try seeking dates is that I might get one. They say shyness is being afraid of rejection; I'm afraid, or at least anxious, of acceptance. Girls come with a relationship string attached. You ask her out, (assuming you) give her a good time, and she'll expect to do it again. And again. See friendship paragraph above. I don't do chit-chat. There may be a few group activities I may learn to enjoy. But there really would not be much point to the relationship.

The thing is, for most people, sex is the best thing they've got to offer from a geek's perspective. They are not interested in how the world works. They are not interested in making anything. The only thing they care about is people. Gossip, chit-chat, relationship, and all that other socialization stuff. What have I to talk about with such a person? Would she be interested in computers? No. Science? No. Any other technological subject? No. Home improvement? No. DIY hobbies? Definitely not. Science fiction? Absolutely out of the question. Hence, any conversation is doomed before it even starts, and so is the relationship.

Without any desire to have a relationship, trying to satisfy my sexual needs with real women is simply not going to happen. If I had no

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

Clearly, you are young and not married.

I was together with a woman who HAS BEEN married and had a child. My sexdrive as a 29yo went from 200 to 0 in 3 months.

Re:Two minds

[fyngyrz]

I bet you good money that the average poster around here couldn't pass the finals of an advanced high school algebra course, write Hello World in two languages and/or hold an intelligent discussion on Newtonian physics.

And in return, I'd bet you good money that's a completely ineffective screen for "smart."

Re:Two minds

[u38cg]

No, the sexual needs of men and women are more or less equal; the difference is they don't want to have one-night-stands with *you*. For whatever reason.

Re:Two minds

[fyngyrz]

as a business, [prostitutes] are not profitable

That statement is hugely incorrect; profitability depends on the level that the prostitute works at. You speak as someone completely unfamiliar with prostitution does (and strangely enough, that's usually where these types of unilateral statements come from, imagine that.)

she has to resort to it because she does not come from a good enough background to have the tools to put a decent life together on her own merits

What are the "merits" in this context? For a sex worker, looks, intuition, fashion sense, and athleticism (definitely a plus) are all perfectly valid merits (and there are others as well) in the context of the job. Just as looks are for a model or an actor; athleticism for a football player or a martial artist; fashion sense for a clothes designer or a news anchor. As far as background goes, I've spent quality time with escorts that have backgrounds most people can't afford to seriously consider as life goals. Fluent in multiple languages, college degrees, well traveled, expert conversationalists and superb companions, and of course, highly sophisticated in matters sexual.

Re:Two minds

[fyngyrz]

Well, at least it is clear he has not partaken of the marriage koolaid, for which unusually perceptive act, I salute him. :^)

Re:Two minds

[FauxPasIII]

Reminder: 100.0% of the people who post on Slashdot that picking up women is easy, are virgins.

Please make a note of it.

Re:Two minds

[fyngyrz]

It's not your looks. It's your wallet and how you manage it, I assure you. Speaking as someone who is not particularly good looking, but knows how to spend.

Guy A in average bar: "Can I buy you a drink?" Odds of going the distance in a fabulous way: low.

Buy B in non-meat market (grocery store, charity event, convention, etc.) Same odds: decent

Guy C in upscale environment (never a bar, sorry): "Would you like to fly to Paris with me this weekend? I'd love to take you shopping along Saint-Honoré and treat you at Alain Ducasse au Plaza Athénée" Same odds: excellent

Re:Two minds

[bryan1945]

Rule 34

Re:Two minds

[tompaulco]

Find any fat balding middle aged guy. Chances are greater than 75% that someone found him attractive enough to marry him.

Re:Two minds

[bryan1945]

Hey, don't disparage monkeys! (see my sig)

Re:Two minds

[tompaulco]

No one has to pay to produce amateur porn. They just set up a video cam and shoot (no pun intended). And who wants to watch used up professional porn stars anyway?

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

"90% of men are incapable of getting sex for free. "

Wow...I feel special now. All I have to do is get drunk and go to a party most of the time. I can't hold down a relationship for shit but finding a lay is almost too easy

Re:Two minds

[bryan1945]

I doubt these people are the majority anymore. They may shout louder, but the only thing I see that has a majority view is trying to keep teens from having sex (young pregnancies), and the usual pedophilia & beastiality. The latest country wide debate was about homosexual marriage. (I guess gays in the military might count, too)

Re:Two minds

[bryan1945]

Funny, I met my wife in a bar.

Re:Two minds

[bryan1945]

Yeah, I'm thinking he doesn't have any good female friends. They're all married now, but back in college when our group would get together the day after partying, the girls where just as bragging as the guys.

Re:Two minds

[Jedi Alec]

In that case it has jackshit to do with morality and is simply a case of statistics.

And speaking of statistics, what's more dangerous: having different sexual partners while using condoms and getting regular tests or taking part in daily traffic? I'll leave that as exercise for the "moral majority".

Sex with multiple partners is perfectly responsible so long as all the parties involved are aware of the full situation and have made a decision for themselves as to whether or not the risk is worth the fun. Surely as a Libertarian you can agree with that.

Re:Two minds

[Kjella]

Yawn, turn it into to a baseless personal attack if that makes you feel better, did I hit a nerve or something? Examples of studies showing:

1. Men think more about sex.
2. Men seek sex more avidly.

"Men want sex more often than women at the start of a relationship, in the middle of it, and after many years of it,"

Men (...) are more interested in casual sex.

The rest of it basically goes on to say that women need lots of effort from the man on feelings, setting, foreplay etc. while the man is much more ready to just do it.

Of course that's on average... I have at least on two occasions have people comment on her wanting more sex than him, but usually it's the other way around.

But I'm sure you'll reply with another snarky comment to show your superior sexual prowess. You go, champ.

Re:Two minds

[Crag]

There are lots of potential motivations to pay for porn or sex (all of which could be invalidated in context):

• absolution of guilt: I know this person wants to have sex with me because I paid them. That makes it consensual.
• feeling of control: They have to do what I want because I'm paying them.
• proprietary feelings: I don't want to sleep with a stranger, but since I'm paying this person they belong to me (for an hour), so they're not a stranger.
• illusion of quality (sometimes justified): I'm getting better sex because this person is a professional.
• expectation of security or discretion: Since I'm paying for it, this person won't try to get something else out of me later.

Paying for porn or sex is no stranger than paying for music when you've got plenty of musicians in your circle of friends who'd be happy to make music for or with you. Paying for it allows you to choose from a wider variety of styles and to enjoy it in the way you want to (odd times of day, peculiar tastes, etc).

I "have to wonder" about people who treat all transactions in life as part of a zero-sum game to be optimized for maximum personal benefit. I also "have to wonder" about people who think picking someone up at a bar for a one-night-stand is always equally as satisfying as maintaining a professional relationship with a trust-worthy sex worker.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

if these prostitutes had all the merits you've mentioned, but also a family to help them through setting up a normal life, they would not be prostitutes. I'm not talking millionaire families, but I mean that they are talented beyond their lot in life (prostitution) and that goes for every prostitute. If you want to delude yourself into thinking that even if the prostitute could rearrange her life in any way she wanted, she would still be a prostitute, you are quite wrong. they could just as easily be a business consultant or many other things, and the honest truth is that they would choose that over a life of prostitution if they had the family to guide them through that.

I said profitable "once you take into account opportunity cost". I doubt very much that the prostitutes you've patronized are really profitable, given what they could be doing instead if they had the support and choice. It's also the same for porn stars.

Re:Two minds

[metlin]

There's a bit of selection-bias involved there.

Chances are, a hooker will sleep with you if you paid her enough. Money is the motivator. But odds are, an interesting and decent looking girl at a bar is not going to sleep with you unless she finds you attractive and interesting.

That makes a huge difference in terms of social validation, and gives an ego boost. And that, combined with the anticipation, makes the experience and the encounter all the more interesting.

Re:Two minds

[u38cg]

It's hardly news that women's sex drive is more complex. As far as your studies go, I don't know many women that would answer one of those studies honestly. By the same token, I don't know many men who wouldn't be tempted to spin it just slightly.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

When you work for the federal government, you probably have money to pay $20/mo for the kind of porn you like. And $50/mo for pencils, and whatever else you pretend to need.

Re:Two minds

[metlin]

I met mine at a coffee shop. Serendipity is funny that way.

Re:Two minds

[semi-extrinsic]

uninterrupted supply of pussy during the switch.

Did you just coin the term UPS (uninterruptable pussy supply)?

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

Since you missed it in my original comment, the concept of "Opportunity cost" is what I was referring to when I said they weren't profitable when you take that into account as well. I don't mean that they aren't profitable discounting opportunity cost -- if you don't include that, they can be profitable. Which is why it makes people feel better to think of prostitutes as being worthless. If someone worthless gets $500 for having sex with a couple of strangers a day, they're doing pretty well.

If things ever took such a turn that I were getting $500 for having sex with a couple of strangers a day, my family would be correct in concluding my life had become an unmitigated disaster. (Of course, I wouldn't show it to my clients). I have about the same qualities that you listed. The difference is, I'm on slashdot, and you don't assume that my opportunity cost is 0. If I mentioned the possibility of "making $500 a day by fucking strangers" you would automatically (even without thinking) deduct from that the amount I can make doing something else slashdot readership is able to do, and just view the premium -- you would AUTOMATICALLY compare it with the $150-$200/day that I can probably easily making doing something related to my area of ability. Whereas for the women you listed, there is an implicit variable in the calculation that outside of sex they are worthless. Otherwise, you would not consider them profitable in the fuller sense -- just as I wouldn't really be profitable, if I were in their position.

There's more, too, than just the money. Would the prostitute be willing to take a 20% pay cut to become a nude photography model? If she is, then she is putting a premium on a lifestyle that doesn't include "having sex with strangers every work day". I'm sure they let you think that's what they live for though - I would too, if I ever sunk to that position.

You sorely delude yourself if you don't think these prostitutes ever give a moment's notice to life after all this. They won't be high-priced talented escorts forever. Will they find the right man? Will they start a family? Will they let this person know about how they chose to make a living?

Every prostitute of the kind you refer to has had to make some difficult choices and trade-offs, just as anyone does who has any career. The question to ask is: could they have done better? if they had had the family and resources and background to take whatever they can do, and do whatever they would do with it if they could magically rearrange their life?

We can ask this a different way. Do any well-off families who give their children all the tools and background to succeed, ever produce a few siblings, one of whom has the abilities you listed, and chooses to make a life of prostitution of it, while the other siblings choose some other things they could do instead?

Not really. There's never a celebrity scandal where some rich girl has chosen to make a career of prostitution in someplace where it is legal, and is found out as having decided to work as a sex worker, and gets in the tabloids. Scores of well-off girls have chosen mundane professions within their abilities and to which they're drawn - so why not sex? What's your answer to that question?

The next time you're paying for exquisite conversation, (as well as for fucking your interlocutor), ask that worker about their family, what their parents do, how they grew up - noting carefully their reaction. In that moment you will know a person's life.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

What?? Are you kidding me? Have you never heard of the condom?

It's a thing you see, that prevents STD's.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

They might need all of that from the "provider," which would be most men. From the other type, who flouts convention and defines the social sphere around him, they are more than happy to receive his seed, since with that unflinching confidence he matches up with the "leader receptor" circuitry that's been a good heuristic for many female mammals in all ages past.

It's no surprise that it's fucked up in the modern age -- if logic could hook in rationally to that circuit, the woman would take interest at seeing intelligence, become wet immediately upon seeing some physical indicator of his wealth, and attain orgasm as the man signs a contract providing resources to her and the offspring.

Instead, a man like the first one in this video can actually be seen as "swaggering" or some such nonsense, and it seems statistically likely that a child of average intelligence at best would result from such a coupling.

Re:Two minds

[PoopCat]

when you're finally fucking you'd rather just keep it up

I've found that typically helps.

Re:Two minds

[metlin]

I wish I had mod points to mod you up. Well said. Hats off, sir.

Even though I do not believe in legislating morality, in an ideal society where you could be whatever you want, odds are that no one would want to be a prostitute or a porn star.

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't sound like a normal introvert, more like an introvert squared (introvert > 1). I don't mean to insult you by that, it's just the way you come across, saying that you have absolutely no need for socializing.

Not all girls are as shallow as you describe them. There are interesting girls who do cool stuff and don't just spend all of their time watching reality shows and texting. You just don't see them as often, since they're often busy with their interesting pursuits and are generally not very attention-seeking. Of course it's completely up to you whether you want to get a girlfriend or not.

You make these two statements:
A: going out with no friends is no fun, so why bother going out
B: I don't go out so I have no use for friends

The thing is, A causes B causes A.

If you get some friends, you might discover going out with them is fun. But you have to get some useless friends first. That's right, the friends might have a negative or zero ROI. Try it, you might like it. OTOH, if you stay a hermit, you'll never have to explain which seat has the perfect viewing angle and airflow, and is therefore yours.

Also, did you know that people are actually incredibly advanced robots made out of molecule-sized parts such as 3D printers that can make very long molecules that fold up in particular ways, which gives them their particular function. Also, they have incredibly sophisticated AI. Well, except for the ones who just spend all of their time watching reality shows and texting. In fact, this AI alone is absolutely fascinating!

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't tell if this is an intentional post trolling the GP in some subtle way or not, but it makes me regret not replying to the man first. Fundamentally the message seems correct, yet part of it was also the exact same thing the GP previously stated, and knowing this mindset the GP probably does not value redundancy.

I don't chit-chat, or dance, or eat out, or go to bars, because doing these things alone is no fun. However, without doing these things it is very difficult to find a reason to have a friend (or date), resulting in an interesting catch-22.

~=

You make these two statements:
A: going out with no friends is no fun, so why bother going out
B: I don't go out so I have no use for friends

The thing is, A causes B causes A.

Of course it's completely up to you whether you want to get a girlfriend or not.

No shit, who else would it be up to.

The conclusion about having to get useless friends seems excellent, because it is a series of skills that are necessary to obtain over time. But I would stress also to him that the definition of "friends" is not equal to "pouring kerosene on your dick and igniting it." Quite possibly the GP has a rigid model of what a friend is; one where he passively receives all manner of little slights and receives nothing in return.

Now to address some stuff in the GP post.

[...]picking up girls would suddenly become the primary purpose of the visit, which is painfully obvious and would cause immediate rejections from any girl who is still conscious.

Sounds like a model derived from the media as well as some confirmation bias if something similar ever happened. Women actually like to be approached in an obvious and bold way by men. You don't even have to buy them a drink either. They are essentially a mirror that will feed off of and back to you what your own emotional state is. They're wired for male value according to what mattered 100,000 years ago, just like we are with their facial symmetry, body type, and the sexual "in heat" kind of signs simulated by makeup.

It may be that it's tough to get over the idea of inevitable rejections, but there isn't really a way around that fear. That fear is just something that kept you alive when if you approached boldly and failed, your head would be caved in by rocks, or you would be outcasted -- not a likely scenario for an American with the same kind of failure these days.

As for any morals, I really can't say. I can only say that you can still do a one-night-stand without lying. They want them too, if it's from an "alpha enough" guy as you put it. This might make all of us pseudo-sociopaths, acting to be islands just for ourselves and our families. That is what they want, and what they demand us to be. Every instance of aggression over cooperation feeds into it and rewards us. I like to think that once we're in that seat of power, we can leverage our own power to be socially responsible.

One last thing:

That's right, it means that reproduction is out of the question as well.

I think this can actually be engineered around. Now, and even more so sooner into the future.

Cheers, ACs

-AC

Re:Two minds

[wdef]

How hard? This is Slashdot, where understanding quantum cryptography is easier than picking up women at a bar.

Amen to that. These guys that say picking up women in bars is easy are either (1) hunks and jocks, (2) mega charming, (3) frequent e-parties and feel the love, or (3) are very very unfussy (think: obese drunken smelly hideous grandma skanks with exotic skin diseases and psychiatric conditions). Also, those in classes (1) and (2) who are indeed geeks are not the Aspergers-ridden asocial nerd variety that most of us are. They are most likely managers who never do any actual work. Hunks never understand why it is hard for the rest of us to pick up women because for them it never has been hard.

Re:Two minds

[wdef]

You forgot "discretion" -- high class prostitutes do not run around telling people about who they are having sex with. If you are a rich and powerful man, for whom a sex scandal could mean serious damage to your ability to do your work (whatever that may be), I can understand paying thousands of dollars an hour for sex with someone who is not going to go blabbing to people you know. This represents a minority of people, of course, but for those people this is a factor that comes into consideration.

You mean like Silvio Belusconi?

Re:Two minds

[Anonymous Coward]

Peiter Zatko and others want to "rebuild" the internet.

They want to piss people off enough so they get their 4-billion dollars.

Does anyone remember this:

(Anonymous) Hackers shut down several Australian government Web sites Wednesday in a coordinated attack against a proposed Internet filter that targets pornography and criminal sites. The Australian Parliament House Web site was down for almost an hour and the Department of Communications site also experienced difficulties, the Attorney-General's Department said in a statement.

Re:Two minds

[fyngyrz]

if these prostitutes had all the merits you've mentioned, but also a family to help them through setting up a normal life, they would not be prostitutes.

That is simply utter nonsense coming from someone who is baffled about sexuality. Sex can be a service; a payment; a gift; a kindness; an act of love; combinations thereof and more. And furthermore, it is normal for it to be all of those things. Your limited view of sexuality has completely blinded you to the many dimensions that exist outside of your concept of people only engaging in the act for reasons you approve of. Luckily, what you approve of is wholly irrelevant.

Re:Two minds

[fyngyrz]

in an ideal society where you could be whatever you want, odds are that no one would want to be a prostitute or a porn star.

Why act? Get paid to stand on a stage or in front of a camera, pretend you're someone you aren't, and act out fictional relationships, situations, times... so people can lose themselves in the fantasy... is that part of your "no one would do THAT" idea? I'm guessing not.

What about a masseuse? Get paid to rub someone's body, all over, to make them feel better. That ok in your ideal society? I'm still guessing, yes. Or a physical therapist: rubbing to repair, among other things. Exercise, range of motion, that all sure feels good (I'm a martial artist... very familiar with the pleasures of working the body from either end.) Again, are those things any part of your "gee, no one would do THAT" idea? I'm still guessing not.

So we've established that some people are ok with faking who they are for fun, pleasure and recompense; others are ok with extended, long term body contact by appointment, with oils, atmosphere and more, to make you feel better, again for recompense. And this is all perfectly ok. Right? Your imaginary ideal society would allow acting and massage and physical therapy, yes?

Well, a sex worker does both of these. There may be even less body contact than with a masseuse; there may be less detailed acting than you'd see on stage or film (or not, if you've chosen well.) So what's the problem? I'll tell you: the problem is social conditioning; the problem is in you. Accept the performance as it is delivered, as an exchange, and you'll be fine. Try to convince yourself you know what's going on in the other person's head, and it's all bad, and you know better than the performer. that your payment has bought something you weren't offered... and you're simply proving you're a pompous ass. Otherwise, enjoy the performance, treat the performer with respect, appreciate the time and energy and skill, pay what is due, and move along.

It is simply pitiful watching you and your post's parent trying to paint a fixed morality picture -- in your case, an entire society -- for people who don't agree with you. Remember: everyone is different. That means you don't know what's going on in their heads, and you don't know what is ideal. Period. There are people who turn to prostitution (and McDonalds) out of desperation; there are others who are there because it suits them just fine. Anyone who is doing anything out of desperation should work to get clear; anyone who is doing what they want in a consensual and informed manner -- regardless of what it is -- has absolutely no need of your clueless moralizing.

Sex definitely isn't the one-dimensional thing you've been conditioned to think it is. Getting beyond that illusion will instigate beneficial personal growth. Count on it.

Also, good looks, athleticism, intuition, a desirable figure, a kind heart... these are perfectly fungable assets. You have no right to declare any of them off limits, in any combination.

Pathetic Lamers

[bjourne]

The reason why you never hear about porn sites getting cracked is because it is fucking easy. Most porn sites are vulnerable as hell and almost anyone with some technical proficiency can exploit them. They are run by low budget companies who often just cant afford to secure their sites. Cracking porn sites are for pathetic script kiddies with little to no skill what so ever. Also what's up with trying to shame owners of porn site memberships? Fucking puritans.

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[shutdown -p now]

It seems to me that these people did it as a slap in the face to all the geeks out there who were cheering them on "for freedom" etc. After all, they do call themselves LulzSec, and humiliating your own fanbase like that is very much "lulz"...

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[Anonymous Coward]

Cracking porn sites are for pathetic script kiddies with little to no skill what so ever.

Which is what any group related to Anonymous is full of, save for 2 or 3 people.

Also, I often wonder why people write whatsoever like that.
It's like those high school movies with the popular girls, "And then I said to him: WHAT-SO-EVER!".

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[mcgrew]

Script kiddies is probably right. I get the idea that nobody in that club is old enough to drink.

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[Anonymous Coward]

You've never been to 4chan, have you?

I seriously doubt their fanbase pays for porn.

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[Gravis Zero]

mods: before you hastily mark this as a troll, remember that an opposing point of view does not imply trolling.

The reason why you never hear about porn sites getting cracked is because it is fucking easy. Most porn sites are vulnerable as hell and almost anyone with some technical proficiency can exploit them.

perhaps it's time for that to change.

They are run by low budget companies who often just cant afford to secure their sites. Cracking porn sites are for pathetic script kiddies with little to no skill what so ever.

surely you arent suggesting that getting pron.com was a cheap acquisition. though in the words of Wikipedia, "[citation needed]"

Also what's up with trying to shame owners of porn site memberships? Fucking puritans.

i know this sounds like a troll but it's not, just think about it: logically speaking, only those who think there is something wrong with having a porn site membership it would be ashamed of having one, right? dont be brave, be fearless.

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[Anonymous Coward]

Or realize that if they don't live in the US, or a country we can easily extradite them from if they slip up, they could have a tragic accident?

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[wvmarle]

surely you arent suggesting that getting pron.com was a cheap acquisition. though in the words of Wikipedia, "[citation needed]"

If they were the first to ever register that domain - then yes it'd have been a really cheap acquisition.

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[hedwards]

They did themselves a significant disservice by pulling this one off. With the previous exploits they did there was at least some plausible political motive. But this is pretty much just straight up black hat stuff with no redeeming value to it at all.

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[scubamage]

Its a pretty epic troll, i agree.

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[Timmmm]

> They are run by low budget companies who often just cant afford to secure their sites.

I'm pretty sure porn.com isn't a low budget company.

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[Anonymous Coward]

I imagine most of LulzSec's fanbase downloads their porn for free.

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[wvmarle]

That cracking porn sites is very easy, I'll take your word for it.

The main reason though for porn sites to have logins, would be that this are paid logins (a visit to pron.com has a link for free registration; I couldn't find the benefits of registration though during that quick visit; and clicking on a link that says "Premium" sent me to a site called porn.com). Paid logins generally mean that the web site is accepting credit card payments, that's the most common form of payment on the Internet. And Paypal maybe. Anyway aren't there all kinds of requirements by credit card companies on protection of credit card data, that a site has to fulfill before they can accept credit card payments? Which includes some basic security that prevents credit card details to be out in the open?

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[bjourne]

Porn sites, just like most internet commerce sites, do not handle payment processing themselves but instead let a third party handle it. Most often CCBill or SegPay which are some of the few payment providers that accept porn companies as customers. This crack did not reveal any credit card details, just email addresses and passwords.

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[JezmundBerserker]

Thou doth protest too much methinks!

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe, but despite the reputation, porn sites actually serve less in the way of malware than general commercial websites.

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[ianare]

only those who think there is something wrong with having a porn site membership it would be ashamed of having one, right? dont be brave, be fearless.

What about your password ?

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[gweihir]

I think it is a combination of low skills, low self-esteem and plain old maliciousness. These people are as black-hat as they come, i.e. evil scum. Even spammers are better morally and often more competent technologically.

In addition they are stupid. Halfway competent black-hats do not brag publicly. My guess is we will see this pathetic losers in the press before long.

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[gweihir]

Indeed.

Re:Pathetic Lamers

[Kalriath]

PayPal won't touch a porn site with a 1000ft barge pole. Most credit card companies won't either. Their industry is what is termed "high risk" - there's a small number of providers who'll work with them, they won't even try to fight chargebacks (they pretty much expect them), and their discount rate is usually above 10% per transaction. 99% of these providers handle the payment page themselves (so the adult merchant never sees the card details). This supposedly makes it more discrete, but let's be honest - if "CCBill.com" appears on your card statement, everyone knows it's porn.

Nothing new here

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems like people are entirely unaware of how there have for over 10 years now been f.e. IRC channels available (in the dozens) with people just spending time cracking and mining passwords for sex websites - for fun, and on request. But I guess the lulzsec guys deserve some more attention and praise.

WeinerGate

[Forty Two Tenfold]

I think it'd be nice to relate this to the latest "scandal" in the US:

azmeal@cmc.gov.my | ilovedyna
flag@whitehouse.gov | karlmarx
kamarudinalias@mmea.gov.my | 814550
james.ben.hopkins@us.army.mil | j347576
wade.quigley@ang.af.mil | mywife01
aaron.c.sewell@us.army.mil | 3689817

Re:WeinerGate

[MimeticLie]

flag@whitehouse.gov | karlmarx

I think Andrew Breitbart just had an orgasm.

Re:WeinerGate

[geogob]

I'm finding the Irony of using "mywife" as a password for a porn site quite delectable.

Re:WeinerGate

[geminidomino]

azmeal@cmc.gov.my | ilovedyna
kamarudinalias@mmea.gov.my

I don't think Malay gubmint toadies surfing porn at work is going to be much of a scandal (with or without quotes) in the US. :)

Re:WeinerGate

[Anonymous Coward]

Looking at the "mywife" address obviously his gun wasn't good enough for him :D

Re:WeinerGate

[trout007]

flag@white house.gov was for reporting misinformation about the healthcare law. With a password like Karl arc I'm pretty sure this was someone making fun of the president. In fact who has ever used their real email to sign into a porn site. I almost feel bad for the spam email dude@yahoo.com gets on account of me.

Re:WeinerGate

[MichaelSmith]

CMC & MEA: Malaysian communications and multimedia commission. It is possible that these accounts are for research purposes.

Re:WeinerGate

[rich_r]

Yes. Research purposes. Honest!

Re:WeinerGate

[trout007]

I wonder if these accounts had to have password verification? If not I would assume many of these are from people that didn't like them.

Re:WeinerGate

[Anonymous Coward]

The interesting thing is that gov.my is not the US but myanmar aka burma. Internet access is heavily filtered there.

Re:WeinerGate

[xxMSAxx]

I'm finding the Irony of using "mywife" as a password for a porn site quite delectable.

I couldn't agree more...wonder if she uses "myhubby"

Re:WeinerGate

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure bill@smith.com also has a few complaints to file against me.

Re:WeinerGate

[ugen]

gov.my is Malaysian government.

Re:WeinerGate

[dfxm]

Implying that they don't watch together...

Re:WeinerGate

[betterunixthanunix]

I feel a profound sense of pity for that person. To me, that choice of passwords suggests an unhealthy attachment to pornography.

Re:WeinerGate

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because sociopathic hackers publish a list of e-mails that used to be private doesn't make it acceptable for you to post them elsewhere. You're can be accused of being an accomplice.

Re:WeinerGate

[Anonymous Coward]

I almost feel bad for the spam email dude@yahoo.com gets on account of me.

You fucker!
-Dude

Re:WeinerGate

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/26188.html

That address was formerly used to report people saying bad things about the Obama health care plan. Nothing to see here.

Re:WeinerGate

[Anonymous Coward]

Since flag@whitehouse.gov was a tips address, I'm guessing that pron.com didn't bother with any email verification. More then a few addresses in that list are probably bullshit.

Re:WeinerGate

[mandark1967]

james.ben.hopkins@us.army.mil could refer to Army 1st Sgt. James B. Hopkins, who is the batteryâ(TM)s first sergeant for the 479th Field Artillery Brigade.

This is, however, just speculation since it's information taken from the first result of a Google search of "james b hopkins +US Army"

Re:WeinerGate

[PhxBlue]

"Wade.quigley@ang.af.mil" belongs to the first sergeant for the 162nd Civil Engineer Squadron, based out of Arizona. I'm curious if the leadership at his squadron is aware of this?

Re:WeinerGate

[Anonymous Coward]

Aren't you that stranger I found in the Alps?

Re:WeinerGate

[DirePickle]

I imagine that people in the military will be horrified to learn that people look at porn.

Re:WeinerGate

[Opportunist]

As long as it's straight porn, no problem, carry on, soldier!

Re:WeinerGate

[Reverand Dave]

Yes, exactly like the 6 week investigation that the police did in my town on whether the local titty bars were violating the nudity ordinance.

Re:WeinerGate

[PhxBlue]

Point being, they're not supposed to do it using their government email accounts. Also, if he's married and his wife doesn't know about his membership, the blackmail risk inherent there could jeopardize his security clearance.

Re:WeinerGate

[ginbot462]

Well, just as long my account: asdf@asdf.com is still safe.

Re:WeinerGate

[gknoy]

If it's publically known, though, there's no risk of blackmail. "We will tell people that you watch porn!" "Sorry, but everyone knew that already." It'd be like someone threatening to to tell my wife that I am a nerd.

Re:WeinerGate

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if these accounts had to have password verification? If not I would assume many of these are from people that didn't like them.

After finding

.com | rightway13

near the top of the list, I think, it's safe to assume there were no verification of the email addresses at all.

Re:WeinerGate

[fyngyrz]

I feel a profound sense of pity for that person. To me, that choice of passwords suggests an unhealthy attachment to pornography.

I feel a profound sense of pity for you, as your post suggests you think an interest in media depicting the rich breadth of sexuality as entertainment and adjunct is unhealthy. But I forgive you, because I presume you were brought up in a social and/or religious environment that has profoundly crippled your sexual nature, as well as skewing your sense of perspective such that you incorrectly think you can infer anything significant about people you don't know, from a password.

Re:WeinerGate

[Jim_Maryland]

Even if not publicly known, as long as it is something that can't be used against you, it is fine. Saying you "view porn" online isn't that big of a deal for most people. Would I want my parents to know something like this? It wouldn't be my first choice, but if they found out, it isn't that big of an issue. I'm sure my parents wouldn't care to explain some of the "romance novels" my mother had or magazines my father had. The ability to blackmail someone with this sort of information is greatly dependent on the individual, but I'd guess that most people prefer it remain private, but wouldn't care much if it became public.
b The greater concern here, as others mentioned, is the use of government systems or even employer owned systems. I doubt most people will accept funding people viewing sites like these. The viewing also opens up possible harassment lawsuits, which may end up further funded by the public.

Re:WeinerGate

[Strider-]

Also, a violation of General Order #1 over there (The "No Fun" order). Among other things, General Order 1 prohibits booze, porn, and males in female quarters, and females in male quarters. Ostensibly this is to be understanding to the local Muslim population, yet they serve obscene amounts of bacon in the DFACs. Of these, the only one that I have seen religiously enforced is the ban on booze. The males/females in each others quarters is solved by putting cots in the mortar shelters, or other random places.

Re:WeinerGate

[Anonymous Coward]

I think he likes bowling and his rug.

Re:WeinerGate

[PitaBred]

Why don't you use dude@example.com or nospam@example.org? Almost no sites filter it, and there's no chance of it causing spam for anyone.

Re:WeinerGate

[betterunixthanunix]

No, not an interest in pornography -- an attachment to the point of referring to porn actresses as "wife."

Re:WeinerGate

[bryan1945]

Already in the public domain, ie internet. It's not like he's posting secret information for the 1st time.

Re:WeinerGate

[Forty Two Tenfold]

In fact who has ever used their real email to sign into a porn site.

I use this.

Re:WeinerGate

[fyngyrz]

Well again, then, you're inferring a great deal from a very, very small bit of information, aren't you?

Re:WeinerGate

[treeves]

Can't be. He's my bowling partner.

- Walter Sobchak

Re:WeinerGate

[treeves]

That's what Pete Townshend said!

Re:WeinerGate

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't recall anyone referring to a porn actress as wife. What i read was he typed "mywife" as a password.

Re:WeinerGate

[GuruBuckaroo]

I prefer "abuse@ftc.gov" for my spam traps, as it provides a nice self-reporting feature. "These nails taste irony" - and irony tastes good.

Re:WeinerGate

[pseudorand]

No, you misunderstand. It's some soldier who married a porn star and gets to see her picture when he's deployed oversees by checking out that website. Totally legit. This is why we have freedom of speech in the US: To prevent overzealous legislators from harassing hard-working patriots from doing perfectly acceptable things.

Re:WeinerGate

[Anonymous Coward]

1. You have no idea if any of this information is actually real. One of the dangers of wikileaks is that people will begin to assume that every giant mass of data released by a shadowy organization is actually real and not fabricated for political motives.

2. You don't even necessarily need to submit a real email to sign up, do you? It's not like they want to send you a confirmation link before your account activates, because that's one component that could fail.

3. The admin emails from other porn sites are probably just to steal content.

Re:WeinerGate

[Anonymous Coward]

Or he's an actively deployed soldier and needs to surf porn while thousands of miles away. Better surfing porn than visiting a whorehouse for his relationship with wife, would you agree? He might rather be with his wife, but porn's all he's got at the moment.

Re:WeinerGate

[Archwyrm]

The us.army.mil addresses aren't even worth mentioning. Every member of the Army has one of these. So you just proved that some members of the Army look at porn. Good job!

The walls of the squad rooms of the first platoon that I was assigned to had their walls plastered with porn. Probably not unusual of any other all male environment either.

Re:WeinerGate

[Scarletdown]

I'm sure bill@smith.com also has a few complaints to file against me.

And likewise, noway@inhell.com probably isn't too happy about all the unwanted spam from when I do fake registrations while trying out assorted bits of shareware and demos.

Re:WeinerGate

[adamchou]

why the hell does it even matter if someone in the military is on a porn site? its not like they can look at porn on military computers. they're doing it in their off time. and being that he's in the military, he certainly ain't seeing much of the opposite sex.

Re:WeinerGate

[adamchou]

why the hell do you even care? he's served his country for a hell of a long time to make first sergeant. get over it

Re:WeinerGate

[MagusSlurpy]

I prefer "abuse@ftc.gov" for my spam traps, as it provides a nice self-reporting feature. "These nails taste irony" - and irony tastes good.

And I think my leftover mod points disappeared less than an hour ago. Damn.

Re:WeinerGate

[Anonymous Coward]

So is anyone gonna point out that Anonymous is basically an anti-sex fascist group that targets people for natural biological behavior because Anons are a bunch of religious moralist arseholes?

Did we just get a free pass?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or did we just get hacked?

American Puritans...

[matt007]

"LulzSec called on its followers to try the email/password combinations against Facebook, and tell friends and family of the users that they were subscribers to a pornographic website"

I cant believe those hackers are so influenced by american puritanism...

We all like sex. Its the way nature designed us to be able to spread.
My friends dont care if i'm subscribed to a porn site... well i guess bc im not in the US.

Re:American Puritans...

[Anonymous Coward]

We all like sex. Its the way nature designed us to be able to spread.

Gay slashdotters disagree.

Re:American Puritans...

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when do gays not like sex?

Re:American Puritans...

[digitig]

I think the point was that gay sex tends not to help us "to be able to spread", i.e., it's not adaptive. There are some theories that suggest it might be, though, at least in the case of male homosexuality. The whole thing about the more older brothers a man has the more likely they are to be gay has led some to speculate that nature is diverting them from reproduction (which could lead to problems with resources) to providing to their siblings (which helps genes they are likely to share). Presumably on that theory nature found it easier to divert the male sex drive than to turn it off -- which I can believe.

Re:American Puritans...

[Anonymous Coward]

My friends dont care if i'm subscribed to a porn site

...my friends would care that i was a subscriber; not that I was watching.

Re:American Puritans...

[MurukeshM]

Neither would my friends. But perhaps my Mum, some of my aunts, etc.. And I'm not in the US either. I'd like to make a joke: They do it as a test of character. To know how many of these subscribers have the balls to say: Yeah, I watch porn. Now shut up and (let me) jerk off!

Re:American Puritans...

[drinkypoo]

Keeping them from breeding other people's women leads to more successful offspring because people tend to treat children who look like them better.

Re:American Puritans...

[rubycodez]

such hypocrisy to even think it's an issue. almost all men jerk off, over 95%. At least 70% of all men with internet access watch porn. Thirty percent of women with internet access watch porn (fire up the search engine and verify my words).

Simple vandals and criminals

[GauteL]

After they exposed loads of username/password combinations off some Sony service, I thought to myself; who are they actually hurting? It seemed to me they just made it loads easier for criminals without the skills to do this sort of thing themselves.

Yes, it is possible that some more sinister hackers already had this data without telling anyone, just secretly exploiting them, but actually publishing the combinations makes it many times more likely that someone will exploit your personal data.

I consider this hacking group no more than simple vandals and criminals at this stage. There is no "honour" in it, and exposing porn clients are extremely likely to be hypocritical. I don't believe for a second that all members of this hacker group has a "clean conscience" about porn.

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[Anubis350]

to play devils advocate for a sec, exposing such a breach means that pron.com *has* to notify their subscribers in addition to patching the vulnerability, whereas a similar breach using the same exploit for direct criminal reasons might get hushed up in order to avoid losing business

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[paziek]

Indeed. Customers need to be hurt A LOT in order to get conscious about security and start demanding it, or start avoiding companies like Sony - more or less forcing everyone to pay more attention into securing their services.

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[Anonymous Coward]

That's fine BS.

The baseline is, if it wasn't for LulzSec, nobody would even know Sony keeps your passwords in plaintext on several services. People would use those services and feel safe. Dangerously safe. Even worse, Sony's competitors who actually spend effort on security would be unable to efficiently compete, as nobody notices the difference in safety.

The only way to ensure Sony and the likes improve security practices is to make press go after them. That requires something as big as repeated security breaches.

Don't kid yourself, the passwords of users were never safe in the first place; they could be as well printed and distributed like a telephone directory book. Point in case -- a bunch of script kiddies hacked the website in no time.

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed. Customers need to be hurt A LOT in order to get conscious about security and start demanding it, or start avoiding companies like Sony - more or less forcing everyone to pay more attention into securing their services.

Excellent logic. I can recall a similar one: US citizens need to be hurt A LOT in order to get conscious about not interfering with other nations internals and start demanding it, or start immigrating to Canada - more or less forcing everyone to pay more attention to their foreign affairs.

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[radio4fan]

I consider this hacking group no more than simple vandals and criminals at this stage. There is no "honour" in it

Indeed, they admit that they are just in it for the lulz, and don't claim to have an honorable motive.

But there may be unintended benefits if companies actually start to take security seriously and start to actually *budget* for it.

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[GauteL]

"Customers need to be hurt A LOT in order to get conscious about security and start demanding it, or start avoiding companies like Sony"

This does in no shape or form excuse actually hurting them. Just because someone has to be the first, doesn't mean the first is any less despicable than the second.

To use the standard lock analogy: just because some unscrupulous lock company sold their customers locks that could be defeated by someone sticking a pin into the lock, doesn't excuse someone breaking into houses in this way.

To be fair, PatheticLosersSec doesn't steal anything from the house it would seem, but it would be like breaking into all these houses and just leaving the door wide open. It would massively increase the chances of someone exploiting the situation.

If they actually had noble goals, they would notify all the users and publish information to embarrass the company in a way which wouldn't compromise all their users personal data.

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[Anonymous Coward]

I, for one, absolutely agree.

The baseline is, if it wasn't for al Qaeda, nobody would even know the airlines and airports would let weapons right through security checkpoints. People would board planes and feel safe. Dangerously safe. Even worse, other methods of transportation who actually spend effort on security would be unable to efficiently compete, as nobody notices the difference in safety.

The only way to ensure the airlines and the airports improve security practices is to make press go after them. That requires something as big as 9/11.

Don't kid yourself, the airlines passengers were never safe in the first place; they could be blown up or shot down at the terrorists's leisure. Point in case -- a bunch of not terribly bright terrorists hijacked four aircraft in no time.

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[GauteL]

"exposing such a breach means that pron.com *has* to notify their subscribers in addition to patching the vulnerability,"

Actually, this hacker group has access to a few hacked servers and they have all the personal details of these subscribers. They could just notify the users themselves by means of a mass email. And failing that, they could easily expose the breach without revealing the customers actual passwords.

These people are simply doing this for kicks, not for some noble goal of exposing evil and insecure companies.

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[WWWWolf]

I consider this hacking group no more than simple vandals and criminals at this stage. There is no "honour" in it, and exposing porn clients are extremely likely to be hypocritical. I don't believe for a second that all members of this hacker group has a "clean conscience" about porn.

I don't have any opinion on the motivations of Lulzsec. I'm more concerned about what happens now.

Try not to think of "Lulzsec, the annoying and dangerous cracking group, just busted open a porn site. How evil of them."
Think of "A goddamn porn site was compromised. What does that tell of the security in adult industry? What does that tell to the victims?"

In short, it's irrelevant who cracked them. The milk's on the floor, too late to cry.

Someone pointed out that Lulzsec is definitely doing a good job at pointing out security flaws that should be addressed. Why did a porn site have such lax security? Why is a porn site storing passwords in cleartext? Aren't they aware that quite a few of their members might not appreciate being advertised as members? Should people be more concerned about the security in porn sites? Not everybody minds being advertised as a member of a porn site, but since a lot of people obviously have a problem with that, should the porn sites provide additional security measures for people who are embarrassed to admit this stuff publicly? (e.g. not store details that might identify them, such as email)

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[Anonymous Coward]

Right, we must provide a good reason for toy makers to raise the price of their toys. The the toys are going to cost more, but the web site will be secure at last! For your own good. For the same reason we should make it a common practice to break into houses that have no bars in the windows in order to make home-owners more conscious about security. As a matter of fact, I think that every property should have a 10m wall perimeter with barbed wire on top, armed guards and killer dogs running around it. After all, we never know when a REAL criminal is going to attack, so it's better to raise awareness early, right?

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[Anonymous Coward]

Mr Smithers, release the hounds!

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[jeff4747]

exposing such a breach means that pron.com *has* to notify their subscribers in addition to patching the vulnerability

Why?

It's naive to assume they care.

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[jeff4747]

Why did a porn site have such lax security?

Because it's cheaper than real security.

Why is a porn site storing passwords in cleartext?

See answer to #1

Aren't they aware that quite a few of their members might not appreciate being advertised as members?

A better question is why should they care? The worst-case scenario where subscribers go away is solved by selling the domain, buying a new one and putting the same content back up with a minor re-design of the pages.

Should people be more concerned about the security in porn sites?

We menfolk have two heads and enough blood to run one of them at a time. They may be concerned in the abstract, but that's not going to stop them from signing up. Not to mention there's no way to measure the security of a porn site from the outside without breaking the law.

Not everybody minds being advertised as a member of a porn site, but since a lot of people obviously have a problem with that, should the porn sites provide additional security measures for people who are embarrassed to admit this stuff publicly?

Again, costs money and why should they care?

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[cavreader]

If you are referring to what I think you are you the generation protesting the government in that time period are the same people that have been running the country for the past 20 years. Both in goverrnment and private sector. It seems like those noble righters of wrongs in that era have re-evaluated their positions.I guess after they put down the bong they started looking at things a little differently.

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[edremy]

Aren't they aware that quite a few of their members might not appreciate being advertised as members?

A better question is why should they care? The worst-case scenario where subscribers go away is solved by selling the domain, buying a new one and putting the same content back up with a minor re-design of the pages.

Actually, the worst case scenario is taking the entire tarball of content on the site and uploading it to one of the free porn sites or as a torrent. I'm guessing that if the site is hacked badly enough to get the password list that it's pretty much open season

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[Yvan256]

Touché.

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[Yvan256]

What does that tell of the security in adult industry?

They're used to being screwed?

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[FrootLoops]

I might believe that could be their motivation, except that's not what they say. It would be more reasonable to just come clean and say "we want to hurt users to ultimately help them" rather than "hah isn't this funny?".

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[Dr_Barnowl]

If they are incorporated in certain jurisdictions, the law compels them to inform their subscribers that they were breached. pron.com is registered in Cyprus though - I have no idea what their law states.

Re:Simple vandals and criminals

[jeff4747]

If you're not shooting your own porn (ex: Vivid, Playboy, etc) then you're buying DVDs of other people's porn and it's the same stuff being put up on a lot of low-rent sites. Wide distribution means that stuff appears for free very quickly.

From the producer's perspective, this isn't much of a problem because the low-rent sites have to keep buying new DVDs.

The big boys care, and have the legal team to do something about it. But everyone else just puts their logo in the corner and hopes they'll get some traffic from the free advertising.

The most popular passwords...

[Anonymous Coward]

Surprise surprise:

123456
123456789
12345
1234
12345678
1234567
password
1234567890
123
123123

Re:The most popular passwords...

[FunkSoulBrother]

I kind of feel for this guy:

uanzmg@fpfzxc.com | tZxHgJNlpRERQEkK

as he clearly put some effort into a difficult password and still got fucked.

Re:The most popular passwords...

[MichaelSmith]

Not sure what's going on in the mind of the person who used "children" as his/her password.

Re:The most popular passwords...

[frisket]

More interestingly, with uniq -c

670 123456
212 123456789
111 12345
75 1234
72 12345678
65 1234567
62 password
52 1234567890
49 123
41 123123
40 111111
36 000000

Of the 26,000, 18,500 are singletons.

Re:The most popular passwords...

[Tukz]

Quite sure he is using some sort of password software, that manages his passwords for him.
Doubt he has to type it all the time.

Re:The most popular passwords...

[digitig]

I kind of feel for this guy:

uanzmg@fpfzxc.com | tZxHgJNlpRERQEkK

as he clearly put some effort into a difficult password and still got fucked.

No he probably didn't, that's why he was on a porn website.

Re:The most popular passwords...

[MichaelSmith]

My favourite password so far is "remember".

Re:The most popular passwords...

[Mark Hood]

And he probably therefore has a different one on every site...

Of course, his email's still out there for all to see, which is embarrassing. But at least he won't be frantically scouring Facebook to get rid of all the stuff 'he' posted :)

Re:The most popular passwords...

[FunkSoulBrother]

Sure -- just that he (as an end user) went to the effort of generating a unique and strong password, and still gets screwed with all the '12345' types. Obviously he can't stop an attack on the site's shit security, just an observation that it double-sucks for him.

To draw a wildly out of proportion analogy (this is Slashdot, after all), it's like watching someone who never smoked die of lung cancer alongside someone who had been smoking for 65 years.

Re:The most popular passwords...

[guyminuslife]

$ whois fpfzxc.com

Whois Server Version 2.0

No match for "FPFZXC.COM".
>>> Last update of whois database: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 11:06:01 UTC

...I think not.

Re:The most popular passwords...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey! That's the combination of my briefcase!

Re:The most popular passwords...

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, that's the combination on my luggage.

Re:The most popular passwords...

[Anonymous Coward]

uanzmg@fpfzxc.com | tZxHgJNlpRERQEkK

as he clearly put some effort into a difficult password

No numbers, no non-alphanumeric characters, yes caps.

Passwords that are case sensitive but doesn't allow numbers or special characters? Or this guy has some wacky mnemonic device that only works with letters.

It's also possible s/he just randomly pressed keys then copy pasted it into a txt document.

Re:The most popular passwords...

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless his Firefox master password is peter123. Let FF slave it for you at pron.com!

Re:The most popular passwords...

[midicase]

Forget the pass (at least you have that reset/mailed), how does [s]he remember that login?

Re:The most popular passwords...

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought "changeme" was cutest. Because it can either be a reminder to change the password or a small cry for help.

Re:The most popular passwords...

[Anonymous Coward]

I kind of feel for this guy:

uanzmg@fpfzxc.com | tZxHgJNlpRERQEkK

as he clearly put some effort into a difficult password and still got fucked.

it's not a real person -bot. A few websites I run get hit with these types all the time.

Re:The most popular passwords...

[toddestan]

It's also possible s/he just randomly pressed keys then copy pasted it into a txt document.

I wonder if that's what he also did for his email?

That's it.

[MMC Monster]

Now they've gone too far.

Re:That's it.

[Anonymous Coward]

And ahh too deep...

Re:That's it.

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the funniest thing I've read in weeks. Nice work :)

Re:That's it.

[Tasha26]

They got your email too [list]? :'(

Imagine if Google got hacked similarly ....

[Anonymous Coward]

They must have a phemonenal amount of personal info on people based on web search alone, never mind everything else they do.

Some Google engineers must have the ability (if not necessarily permission) to track the porn surfing habits of the vast majority of the world's internet surfers. Think how many powerful people that they could blackmail with this information.

Don't fuck with Google ...

Re:Imagine if Google got hacked similarly ....

[elucido]

They must have a phemonenal amount of personal info on people based on web search alone, never mind everything else they do.

Some Google engineers must have the ability (if not necessarily permission) to track the porn surfing habits of the vast majority of the world's internet surfers. Think how many powerful people that they could blackmail with this information.

Don't fuck with Google ...

If Anon hacked Google they'd have the dirt to blackmail the entire internet. They'd know who was researching how to kill their husband. They'd know who thinks what and who watches what porn.

This is why your Google password should be at least 100 characters long, random, and impossible to remember.

Who Pissed in Anon's Cornflakes?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why are they going after everything and anything?

Maybe they should blow up some unmarked yellow vans to further obscure whatever their "message" is.

Re:Who Pissed in Anon's Cornflakes?

[James_Duncan8181]

Why are they going after everything and anything?

Maybe they should blow up some unmarked yellow vans to further obscure whatever their "message" is.

Why are they going after everything and anything?

For the lulz, obviously.

Less known is that

[Fuzzums]

anybody going to that site will get a mandatory free "upgrade" for his system, offered by LulzSec.

Re:Less known is that

[Anonymous Coward]

Is that anything like a happy ending?

Phone numbers?

[MichaelSmith]

Looks like a lot of those people use their phone number as their password.

Re:Phone numbers?

[MichaelSmith]

Manmohan@myman.com | +919455674783

I seem to have heard this name before...

Re:Phone numbers?

[digitig]

Looks like a lot of those people use their phone number as their password.

Where is the 123 dialing code, then? Looks like it would be a good place to start selling Kleenex.

The Author Of This News = Member Of LulzSec ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Who else would be that stupid and give them the attention they want?

Only completely stupid retards with an IQ of 63 or members of the hacker group...

Lulzy Pathetic Lamers aka Humans

[Anonymous Coward]

I lulzed and I've almost been that dumb myself once.

Sure I jerk off, but I don't pay for it, and I don't do it in the White House or in the Pentagon using their mail servers etc. (or interns).

Anyways don't the boobs on the list know that everything they do is being seen by their technical staff and network administrators? XD It's not like my ISP doesn't know my exact sexual preferences, they might even think they're boringly ordinary verging on stereotypical.

The truth shall set us free :) Bring these humans back down to the ground here with the rest of us and maybe things will work out better.

No...

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow! Humans like porn? Damn, I never saw that one coming...

I didn't know these hacking groups were so fascio-christian.

Okay...

[MichaelSmith]

marvelcash@gmail.com | Slashdot69

Anybody owning up to this one?

Re:Okay...

[marvelcash]

No

Re:Okay...

[adycarter]

Awesome!

Re:Okay...

[gblackwo]

Awesome!

Re:Okay...

[ustolemyname]

I wonder how many people are going to check your uid...

Re:Okay...

[228e2]

Well played sir . . . well played.

Re:Okay...

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the funniest thing I've read all morning.. still can't stop laughing.

Re:Okay...

[xxMSAxx]

Stan Lee would be proud. Golden.

Re:Okay...

[Nrrqshrr]

I spilled coffee all over the screen.

Damn that was good...

Re:Okay...

[Xacid]

Holy crap - thank goodness I'm not a coffee drinker or I would have been right there with ya.

Re:Okay...

[gblackwo]

That was good until I realized you created the account from scratch just for that post.

Re:Okay...

[countertrolling]

Talk to this guy...

Re:Okay...

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude also own nubilegirlfriends.com
http://whois.domaintools.com/nubilegirlfriends.com

Re:Okay...

[Kjella]

Not me, but knowing the gender composition of slashdot that password sounds extremely gay.

Re:Okay...

[Anonymous Coward]

Analyzing humor is like dissecting a frog. Few people are interested and the frog dies of it.
E.B. White

Re:Okay...

[rubycodez]

i don't drink coffee but my nose is burning from the cola ejaculated out of my nose

Re:Okay...

[Tasha26]

Lolz, but watching porn can be healthy, u don't want any build up of rocks in the shaft...

Re:Okay...

[MasterGwaha]

GWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA~!

Re:Okay...

[adamchou]

best fucking comment on slashdot, ever. this should go into an archive of slashdot's best or something

Sexual blackmail?

[elucido]

What is the purpose of the threat to tell peoples families about the porn they look at?

This is looking like a blackmail mechanism. Similar to "we got ur noods, don't worry we won't show mom and dad"

Re:Sexual blackmail?

[pacinpm]

And what is there to blackmail about? Porn? Everybody watches it. You tell it like it's something wrong.

Re:Sexual blackmail?

[tibman]

I would say, "They did it for the lulz."
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=lulz

Not exactly a good reason though.

Re:Sexual blackmail?

[Anonymous Coward]

Some religious people are afraid their wives could find out that they watch gay porn exclusively.

Re:Sexual blackmail?

[asdf7890]

What is the purpose of the threat to tell peoples families about the porn they look at?

The intention may be to embarrass people into taking proper security precautions like keeping different passwords for different accounts (I even keep different usernames for some things, using a catchall sub-domain for sites that insist my email address should be my username (also useful for screening spam, when a site is hacked or sells on their address list)). Or to embarras the sites into operating in a secure manner (not saving passwords unhashed/unsalted and so forth).

In either case I doubt it will work. Users affected will just complain about the hackers or stay silent and hope nobody they know notices that their name is on the list, and sites affected will make some token effort to clear up this one hole but leave many more in place (and probably not stop storing passwords plain).

Of course, as the group name suggests, they may have just done it (and suggested others do more) because they can rather than because they want to encourage better security awareness in sites and their users, or because of any other lofty ideals.

This is looking like a blackmail mechanism.

Though they themselves are not blackmailing the users in that way (but legally they could be help a party to any such action someone else takes as they have publicly encouraged it), so extorting anything other than awareness from people can't be their aim. Unless they are using the usernames+passwords themselves and using the public announcement to encourage others to arrange an amount of cover fire to disguise their action amongst the resulting smoke, of course...

Re:Sexual blackmail?

[mlts]

Don't forget, the election year silly season is starting up. A candidate that gets caught watching nudies will have ads made against them each day, every day about their "moral turpitude", and there is a good chance that it will cost them the election.

Re:Sexual blackmail?

[1u3hr]

This is looking like a blackmail mechanism.

How so? Blackmail is threatening to expose something unless the victim pays or does something for you. There's no suggestion that is happening. They're simply being published.No payment is being asked for.

Re:Sexual blackmail?

[Alex Belits]

The attitude toward porn in US is certainly lulzworthy.

Re:Sexual blackmail?

[Opportunist]

Don't single out the US, I bet you can't find a single country on this planet without sex laws that makes you go "wtf?".

Re:Sexual blackmail?

[Kjella]

The hackers are just in it for the lulz, but it certainly could be used as a blackmail mechanism by others. If for example you find one of the guys on the list is a big bible thumper and threaten to put this in the mailbox of everyone in his church group. Like if you move to start over and someone from your old town threatens to expose your old life to your new neighbors, it doesn't have to be a strict secret as long as there's someone who don't know and that you don't want to know.

Re:Sexual blackmail?

[Seumas]

Yeah, I don't get what the big fucking deal is, either. Oh noes, I enjoy porn. It's the end of the world.

Re:Sexual blackmail?

[bryan1945]

If that's the worst they did/do, I'd be happy. Mostly it's affairs, hookers, long-term mistresses, etc. Isn't Penthouse magazine like online porn now? I think Playboy still just shows nudity. Hardcopy vs. online, what the difference?

Re:Sexual blackmail?

[bryan1945]

If your on this list, change your password immediately. Then say "Go to that site, it won't work. See, they just put a made-up password with my email."

Re:Sexual blackmail?

[Kalriath]

I dunno, even prostitution is legal here. Off the top of my head, the only laws that really apply now are that it has to be consensual, between two adults, and you can't do it in public.

Re:Sexual blackmail?

[Opportunist]

Really, all legal? All kinds of toys, all kinds of porn between consenting adults?

Re:Sexual blackmail?

[Kalriath]

I've not seen any laws on the books banning anything with the exception of obviously youths, non-consensual, not in public, and the usual banning of objectionable films - can still do whatever you want in your own house though.

Wow, so this is supposed to be embarrasing?

[Tomsk70]

Not sure I'd really care if people found out I was subscribing to a porn site....it's not as if my Wife doesn't go there too :-)

As a result, I feel sorry for those who apparently think it's something to be shocked at.

In fact, I'd be more embarrassed at people knowing I *paid* for it when there's so much free stuff about.

Re:Wow, so this is supposed to be embarrasing?

[scubamage]

Thank god I'm not the only one who wouldn't really care. My girlfriend likes porn too. I also have a pin on my messenger bag that says "I 3 Porn" that I picked up at the sex museum in NYC. I like sex, I like porn, and I don't see anything wrong with that. If anyone does, they can kindly keep their opinions to themselves. I don't dig at them for being ninnieish prudes.

Re:Wow, so this is supposed to be embarrasing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess that for the religious person, porn is going to be offensive.

For your average person, regular porn is no big deal but what about the fetishes? Would it bother you if people knew you had a feet fetish?

Everyone has its limits, one way or the other.

Re:Wow, so this is supposed to be embarrasing?

[scubamage]

No reason to post as AC, you make a great point. After reading some of the other comments I think the worst case scenario isn't even fetishists, but closeted members of the LGBT community who could be outed. Coming out of the closet is a horrifically painful experience for a number of people, and it should be done on their terms.

Re:Wow, so this is supposed to be embarrasing?

[SleazyRidr]

I always send the cool pics/vids to my girlfriend. She thinks they're awesome ;)

Oh I agree. But they do it for power.

[elucido]

Since none of us know just how many porn passwords they have cracked, along with Facebook accounts. We do not know whether or not for example some Anon somewhere cracked our most sick perverted teen porn password, and also has our Facebook to tell our family.

Seriously, this sort of stuff can cause suicides. Remember that gay kid who committed suicide over something similar?

What makes it different is the threat

[elucido]

They are telling people to go and destroy peoples lives.
Telling them to log into their Facebook accounts and tell their families about their porn habit?

So if a guy or girl is secretly going to gay porn sites, and his or her parents are religious, what kind of damage could that do?

Re:What makes it different is the threat

[gsslay]

Remember Jason Fortuny?

Roundly condemned for interfering and casting judgement on others' sex lives. This isn't any different.

Re:What makes it different is the threat

[LordSnooty]

This is the internet, who cares about real-life outcomes?

Re:What makes it different is the threat

[Anonymous Coward]

They're Anonymous. They don't care. A year ago I remember them outing a trans women to her deeply conservative and potentially violent family and community just because she didn't post nudes they wanted or something. Why would this be any different?

Re:What makes it different is the threat

[Anonymous Coward]

They are telling people to go and destroy peoples lives.
Telling them to log into their Facebook accounts and tell their families about their porn habit?

So if a guy or girl is secretly going to gay porn sites, and his or her parents are religious, what kind of damage could that do?

It's an excellent piece of Lulz-trolling across 2 fronts. They get to hurt random people for doing things they wouldn't admit publically (lulz 1), and secondly, anyone who tries to log in to facebook using this information will have their IP recorded, outside of LulzSec I doubt their 'fans' are nearly as competent at cracking and will just connect directly from their home system without a proxy allowing them to be traced (lulz 2).

You have to admire the Machiavellian nature of this, they're playing both sides against each other for their own amusement. There's even a cunning little get-out here as well; since they aren't doing the Facebooking themselves they are effectively saying that they are somehow above that but other even 'less' moral people will make it happen anyway.

Re:What makes it different is the threat

[hoggoth]

Ding ding ding! You just figured out what's wrong with 4chan, /b/, Anonymous, etc.
There is no "they" there. Some are do-gooders. Some are do-badders. Some do anything for "lulz", even if it hurts someone. Some are "white-knights".
So while on the one hand "they" fight to expose corporate and governmental corruption, on the other hand "they" are laughing because some naive kid's life just got ruined.

Re:What makes it different is the threat

[wikdwarlock]

I'd argue that the individuals involved in the ruining are those friends/families who actually bring about the ruination. If the pizza delivery guy walks past your house and sees you murdering someone through the front door (which you left open), is it HIS fault if you get arrested and sent to prison? Or, if he sees you killing puppies and posts a notice on telephone polls in the neighborhood to be cautious with your pets because a puppy murderer lives here, is it the pizza guy's fault if your PETA friends beat you up?

It's shady to spill other peoples' secrets to their friends and families, but ultimately it's those friends and families who make the decision to ruin or not ruin lives.

Re:What makes it different is the threat

[hoggoth]

The parent post mentioned outing a gay kid to his uptight conservative family. So if the family sends the kid to a "deprogramming" camp to wring the "gay" out of him, no sweat off your brow for outing him, it's his uptight family's fault, right?

Re:What makes it different is the threat

[Anonymous Coward]

Do religious parents have a facebook account?

Re:What makes it different is the threat

[wikdwarlock]

Yes. It is not ethical and certainly not nice, but it is not my ultimate decision to do the deprogramming. It's convenient to spread the blame around, but it's not accurate. We are all still individuals, equipped with decision making and reasoning faculties. Data from any source should necessarily be factored into decisions, but the will of the decider is the ultimate authority. If I tell you your wife was cheating on you (with me or with anyone else, it makes no difference) it's unreasonable for me to feel personally responsible if you murder her out of grief, rage, or any other response to that data.

At the end of the day, if you let others' reactions to your existence determine how you live your life, you're abdicating your individuality and unnecessarily burdening yourself in a life already sufficiently supplied with burdens.

Security failure on all sides.

[wvmarle]

Really is it that hard to build some basic security into one's site? I mean like storing the passwords as hash, instead of plaintext? It is just a few bits of code... so simple... but yet again a web site failing on such a basic matter. No wonder they got hacked to boot, and now have all their member's e-mails and passwords out on the street.

I would expect a porn site to care a bit more about their user's privacy, considering the business they're in. Though considering how much some of their users care (using a .mil or .gov address to sign up) maybe indeed it's just as well that they didn't care too much. Oh well, let's hope it's a lesson learnt for porn site subscribers, even though considering they are paying for on-line porn they're not the smartest cookies of the pack.

Re:Security failure on all sides.

[asdf7890]

Really is it that hard to build some basic security into one's site? I mean like storing the passwords as hash, instead of plaintext?

No, but while it isn't hard it is still easier not to bother in many cases. And unless you are sufficiently cynical you'll be surprised how many people out there are running a site, or programming for one, without the faintest idea about potential security issues and how to address them.

Re:Security failure on all sides.

[moco]

make that Salt + Hash.

Re:Security failure on all sides.

[gmack]

The (flawed) logic is that it is easier to deal with password issues if site staff can view the passwords.

Re:Security failure on all sides.

[Yvan256]

I can't use salt, I have high blood pressure!

Oh wait, never mind that. I was just browsing some websites related to the topic to better understand the context.

Move along.

question

[kqc7011]

How many signups were done by someone else "ordering a pizza" for a little revenge.

Re:question

[asdf7890]

How many signups were done by someone else "ordering a pizza" for a little revenge.

It that how you are explaining your address being on the list!

I jest, of course...

cottaging

[Hognoxious]

make a bog deal out of sex between consenting adults

Are we talking about George Michael?

You did not disappoint me.

[ethoxyethaan]

root@host:~# strings pronz.txt |grep -o "[^ ]*$" | sort | uniq -c | sort -nr | head
        671 123456
        212 123456789
        111 12345
          75 1234
          72 12345678
          65 1234567
          62 password
          52 1234567890
          49 123
          41 123123

Re:You did not disappoint me.

[symes]

I was kind of expecting to see 31415926 up there... But then I guess IT folks can get thier needs fulfilled in other ways

Re:You did not disappoint me.

[ACS Solver]

You do not disappoint either, running as root!

Re:You did not disappoint me.

[Anonymous Coward]

Or naming his box host!

(Or maybe he sanitized them, because giving out actual information defaults to no in any sane /.ers head.)
(Then again, he is logged in, allowing people to correlate his posts, implying he's not all that sane.)
(It's not paranoia if they really are out to get you!!)

Re:You did not disappoint me.

[Gray Elf]

12345?! AMAZING! I have the same combination on my luggage!

Re:You did not disappoint me.

[Anonymous Coward]

Note the "one handedness" of these top passwords...

Re:You did not disappoint me.

[tusam]

Speaking of stats here's some demographic, pron.com are themselves one of the biggest source of users, also proportionally large indian presence.

$ awk 'BEGIN{FS="[@ ]"} /@/{print $2}' pronz.txt |sort -f|uniq -ci|sort -n|tail -n20
          66 comcast.net
          81 126.com
          96 mail.ru
        109 pron.com
        118 qq.com
        145 msn.com
        148 yahoo.co.uk
        168 163.com
        172 rocketmail.com
        180 hotmail.co.uk
        250 yahoo.co.id
        288 yahoo.in
        408 live.com
        438 yahoo.co.in
        470 rediffmail.com
        517 ymail.com
        614 aol.com
      3631 hotmail.com
      4113 gmail.com
      9481 yahoo.com
(more of a tail man myself - *ba dum tsh*)

Re:You did not disappoint me.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why the hell are you logging in as root?!

Re:You did not disappoint me.

[ethoxyethaan]

I'm not really logged in as root on my server but I thought root@host would be more recognizable.

Microsoft!

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone is registered with the email "microsoft@microsoft.com". Can that be accurate?

Re:Microsoft!

[Yvan256]

Corporations need sex too, you know!

Sheesh!

[JayRott]

Now that is just mean!

why do people need to be embarassed

[Anonymous Coward]

people like porn, everyone needs to stop pretending they don't and get on with life

Damn

[deepershade]

None of the logins work now unless i'm missing something :(

Re:Damn

[Anonymous Coward]

get rid of the domain part of the email =)

Did it myself

[rogabean]

I just posted to my own facebook wall that I watch porn! Beat em to it!

Re:Did it myself

[GodfatherofSoul]

Beat em to it!

So to speak...

Stigma

[Bocaj]

If it weren't for the stigma surrounding porn this would just be another hacked website. I still don't understand societies taboos about sexually related things. Especially when we are so accepting of of violence and death. The number of crime scene centric shows on public TV is staggering. The number of sex centric shows? Almost non-existent. People are perfectly fine looking a images of death and dismemberment, but put naked people on TV and it's a travesty. Personally I think the world would better off if people spent more time watching pornography than watching people get killed. Remember, you can have safe sex, you cannot have safe war!

Re:Stigma

[Combatso]

Remember, you can have safe sex, you cannot have safe war!

Seems to me to this is reason people seek violence in their entertainment. Its something a lot of people do not see in everyday life, atleast in middle-class america. Personally, I dont like violent entertainment, aside from the odd "who-dun-it" show... but it seems to me that the norm is Sex in the bedroom, murder in the livingroom.

Re:Stigma

[scubamage]

I never understood that either. We're perfectly fine with accepting the end of life in all of its horrible ways; but so many of us are repulsed by the act from which all human life springs. Its beautiful (in concept, sometimes in practice). Maybe it has something to do with deep seated fears of our own mortality that we want to see all of the different ways we can be shuffed loose this mortal coil.

Re:Stigma

[dotancohen]

Remember, you can have safe sex, you cannot have safe war!

Cyberwarfare maybe?

Re:Stigma

[Anonymous Coward]

You must not be an American. We Americans will fight to the death to defend our right to kill anyone that gets in our way. All our causes are just and we are always on God's side so we can't risk God's ire by looking at naked people that aren't our spouses. That would reduce our crusades against evil to just killing people!

I hope I straightened things out for you. ;-)

Re:Stigma

[Anonymous Coward]

People are perfectly fine looking a images of death and dismemberment, but put naked people on TV and it's a travesty.

I think there are two fairly simple reasons you don't get much sex in film / tv.

1. When people die in a drama, the audience doesn't generally get an urge to kill people. When people have sex on film, the audience does have an urge to have sex. That's why there's a bigger call to ban one than the other. And parents are seeing an increasing sexualization of children, whereas they're seeing violent crime rates drop; whether either is related to media is beside the point, that's what's setting their priorities.

2. Death can actually advance the plot, and the actual violence is over quite quickly. Explicit sex does little to advance the plot, and you can't have much fun with less than 10 minutes. As a dramatic device, sex is far less practical, so there's less desire on the part of filmmakers to resist the bans.

Those reasons also explain why porn is just porn, that is, it has no plot, no character development, etc. Since the audience doesn't care, neither do the studios, so production is universally terrible, and even if there weren't a social stigma, there's going to be the practical stigma that if you worked in porn, you're probably a lousy actor. So that means there's not going to be much exchange of talent between mainstream and porn media.

So much of this stuff isn't a social taboo, it's also an economic divide.

Re:Stigma

[Anonymous Coward]

Agree.

Re:Stigma

[Anonymous Coward]

If we didn't have taboos, intolerance and hypocracy, none of the politicians could afford to get re-elected. If people thought sanely, rationally and without prejudice, America would be a genuinely socialist country.

Re:Stigma

[PPH]

I still don't understand societies taboos about sexually related things.

Its not about society in general. Its about a small fringe group who has some psychological hangup about sex and a penchant for causing trouble until they get their way.

In my community, we had a local TV personality who was involved in the swinging life style. This was well known to those of us within that group and also known to their managers and coworkers, most of whom didn't give a damn. But thanks to continual pressure from the morally conservative nut jobs, this person was let go. As a result of this, that station had to cancel a number of popular local shows, and their ratings collapsed. Since then, they have not managed to hold together a stable local news staff (other stations poach their better reporters) and rumor has it that the morale at the station is pretty low. In hindsight, management would have been a lot better off telling the busy bodies to piss off. But they must have figured it was easier to avoid confrontation and capitulate.

I don't know about you, but I don't want to risk my job to some manager's lack of character.

Re:Stigma

[black soap]

I think what bothers the various religious groups is the idea of people wanting to have sex without the procreative aspect of it. Or knowing the partner's names.

Re:Stigma

[Anonymous Coward]

non-existent? what moder show is without it? you are an idiot.

Re:Stigma

[fyngyrz]

Maybe it has something to do with deep seated

Nah, it mostly has to do with the fear most men have of not being able to get as "deeply seated" as the next or previous guy.

Well, that, and the powerbase the religio-politico types have built by making sexuality forbidden territory.

Re:Stigma

[Anonymous Coward]

are repulsed by the act from which all human life springs

Most are repulsed by the way it's soldout, or are repulsed by the idea one of the few things "rewarding" to lead a life bringing up that life is whored out and isn't exclusive. Eg: the incensives to maintain and spring that that beautiful life are taken away. Sex feels good because otherwise we wouldn't be motivated to find a mate and to stay with a mate. (we don't bring up children out of a sense of guilth I'd think.)

Why do you think there's been such an obsession with "purity"? Violating the body of your woman with your penis (you open her up, you mark her body) in love and unity creates a bounding experience and makes her "your wife". Sticking around a woman for her personality or because you are afraid to die alone, or "because it's time to think of your offspring" seem to me lesser-romantic ideals. Which justify your ability to maintain loose relationships without going into a bounding unity to harbour that beautiful wonder of life.

As a matter of fact, you rather have that beautiful wonder of life exploited and whored out, accessible for yourself instead of children growing up in single-mom families, divorced families or abusive houses? (yes, I take the privelidge to relate the two: the absence of this sensed bound and the sense "you can always go out and fuck another one" is underming the save base for a family.)

Your lusting and "free spirit" is attributing to children growing up fucked up. Think this over a bit. Then reply.

Re:Stigma

[Archwyrm]

That is the US. It is a bit the opposite in most of Europe. It is not unusual to see nudity in various media or suggestive adverts (usually involving some humor) that would have mothers over here in the US demanding that someone think of the children. Meanwhile graphic violence so common in the US is avoided. Many video games ship with blood removed or characters changed so that the player is not killing "humans".

Re:Stigma

[Anonymous Coward]

you can if you stand BEHIND the American forces.

Re:Stigma

[Kalriath]

Stop trying to ram your religious dogma down everyone's throat. Having never met my father, I take great pride in pointing out that I'm not a sociopath or psychopath, and telling you that you are full of shit.

Not the GP, but replied anyway.

Re:Stigma

[scubamage]

You do realize that human beings were NOT monogamous animals to begin with, right? No primates are. Our whole family line is an anal loving, homo and hetero-sexual sex having, infidelitous breed. It is simply not our nature to be tied together. The whole idea that a woman needs to be "marked" during marriage serves solely as A) a way of keeping women defined as property (hence needing to "sell them" with dowrys), and B) verifying lineage. Sex has never been something sacred - overly zealous people have placed it on a pedestal that it is something wrong or private. Its not, and it will never be sacred like some people want it to be because it is simply not who we are. Its a vital part of keeping our species alive, not something dirty, private, or possessive. I respectfully disagree with your standpoint.

Porn are bad MMKay

[OrangeMonkey11]

Sounds like lulzsec is a bunch of religious moral crusaders with this act.

Re:Porn are bad MMKay

[gweihir]

Just my thought. Looks like they either are terminally stupid or actively promoting a conservative, right-wing agenda.

Suggests a new Security best practice

[mysidia]

We already have the "don't re-use passwords" security best practices, but it seems e-mail addresses themselves are just as dangerous, as they can be linked to identities, which could have social implications way beyond simple security compromise.

Always register accounts on porn sites (or other embarrasing websites) using a different e-mail address, an e-mail address not known to friends, employers, coworkers, churchgoers, neighborhood busybodies, etc; one that cannot easily be linked to your identity, social network accounts.

Security will also be improved, if you use separate e-mail accounts for private business. For example: use one e-mail address for Facebook, use a separate e-mail address for your bank account.

The hacker may attempt to login with the same e-mail address and password at many sites; but if the e-mail address is different, they won't even have an account ID to attempt to attack (even if the password did happen to be similar)

This wouldn't be such an issue if every website didn't demand to know your e-mail address and store it in their database; but the reality, is your e-mail address has become kind of like your internet driver's license or SSN, that every website demands before they can establish an account for you.

Thankfully, unlike a driver's license or SSN, you can have as many of them as you want, due to the event of..... free webmail-based email services such as Gmail, Hotmail, Yahoo Mail :)

Re:Suggests a new Security best practice

[wvmarle]

This saga starts me thinking again about my own on-line privacy and security.

The problem is indeed the e-mail addresses. You could generate random ones for each website, which is a bit of a hassle especially if you're not sure whether you want to seriously use the site.

Just pondering a bit I'm thinking of a quite effective scheme that should do the job, without too much hassle from the user's side.

For each web site create a unique password, and unless it's some social networking site where you want your identity known and where your login name matters in that respect, create a unique user name as well.

Registered e-mail address (especially for those sites where you don't care much about): username@mailinator.com where username is the (random) name you chose when signing up. Now your password manager can store username and password for you, and you simply know which e-mail you use for the password recovery if necessary. This is security-by-obscurity as anyone who knows your login name (which is very hard to guess), and knows you use the same at mailinator.com for password recovery, could steal your account on that web site. So this is great for those random forums that all require you to register first, not for anything that involves your credit card.

Sites you care about: create username@gmail.com with your random name, and use this as registered e-mail address. Use another random password for this gmail.com address, and for convenience have it redirect to an e-mail account that you do check. Your main personal account, or another gmail account created just to collect those mails. This is as secure as it can be - from your side at least, the rest is fully up to the web site itself. No-one can recover your password other than you, and identities on several sites can not be linked directly (unless it starts to involve extra information like credit card details - but sites that process credit cards should have pretty decent overall security to begin with - which generally should include paid-for porn sites, for that matter).

Let's see if someone has already built a Firefox plugin to make this process more automated.

Re:Suggests a new Security best practice

[Anonymous Coward]

All you really need is 1 throw-away Gmail address. Then use tags, e.g. "throwaway+s78ghj@gmail.com" to register for one site, "throwaway+zho489wuo@gmail.com" for another, "throwaway+wfhla234u@gmail.com", etc. You could even set it up to forward all the mail to your real Gmail account if you want. Sure, if any one of the sites gets hacked they'll have your throwaway Gmail address, but as long as they can't trace that back to you personally you're still fine and they can't use it to track you across multiple sites because the tags will be different on every one.

Re:Suggests a new Security best practice

[psyclone]

Except a lot of sites will go to the effort of maintaining a blacklist of "throw away email" domains, such as mailinator.com (yet those same sites won't salt+hash the password).

If you create a new address at a domain you own, you're in the same identity-linking problem. Creating new accounts that need to be maintained every few months (gmail/yahoo/etc) are also a pain.

An annoying problem for sure, but I agree that we should try to follow some of your guidelines. (And I think many of us on /. already do.)

Re:Suggests a new Security best practice

[mysidia]

If you create a new address at a domain you own, you're in the same identity-linking problem. Creating new accounts that need to be maintained every few months (gmail/yahoo/etc) are also a pain.

Another option is to use some e-mail hosting service that lets you pick a domain and create a number of aliases, that just forward to your primary e-mail account. E-mail remains a critical service that if compromised, you are in for a hurting, though.

If you opt to use a domain you own for an account on an 'embarrasing' site, you probably want to list the WHOIS contact using a pseudonym, and a forwarding address such as a private PO Box, MailboxesEtc or other mail forwarding service address.

Probably better to use the free/webmail accounts for that purpose though; and use e-mail under your domain for the addresses you actually share with friends.

So the whole possibility of domain registrars' private records being compromised can't introduce a permanent weakness

Some use the iterns ...

[sourcerror]

others use the internets.

I am disappointed by this promising looking group

[ComputerGeek01]

They only took this half-way to completion! If they would have only pulled the sites IP log to see who was looking at what particular video's then I'm sure we would have had a much more interesting reaction...

Will this be the first time...

[DemonGenius]

... that porn sites everywhere get Slashdotted?

Re:Will this be the first time...

[gknoy]

I hope not, what if they can't handle the load?

By this point, nobody takes you seriously

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't get it, do you? Nobody takes you seriously drinkypoo.

I took a peek at your post history.

There, it's shown that You ran away from simple questions asked of you here that show you're also nothing but a troll http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2225174&cid=36390518 which your evasion and running away from that simple question makes you out as a logically invalid off topic troll (because that's a fairly simple question asked of you that you ran from which shows you are nothing but an online trash troll).

Re:By this point, nobody takes you seriously

[Elbereth]

And people take you seriously, apk?

You have two topics that you post about: hosts files and drinkypoo. And, frankly, I'm sick of hearing you go on about them both.

No big deal...

[SeeSp0tRun]

Porn (as mentioned in other posts) is sex between consenting adults (generally speaking).
For those less "vanilla," and you know who you are, even depicted rape in porn is consenting.

Lets take the extreme route of one of these government addresses being registered on one of these rape oriented sites...
Just because you like all the SAW movies, doesn't mean you're going to go all Jigsaw on us...

Kudos 2u

[Anonymous Coward]

SO glad there wasn't any coffee in my mouth as I read this. Hardest I've laughed in a week. Golf clap.

A few of them are seem indeed to be on facebook

[Anonymous Coward]

Some combo name+family name seem rare enough on the net. No I won't give an example, after all I have nothing against porn myself.

Just like Linux??

[Anonymous Coward]

Free sex is often the most expensive kind of sex.

This reminds me of the "Linux is only free if your time is worth nothing" assertion that is often thrown about. Lets fix the rest of your post:

"Paying for software in any shape or form has to be one of the silliest things, given how easy it is to find programmers who are more than willing if you just looked around."

90% of companies are incapable of getting software for free. At a minimum, they have to pay at least for a few consultant or support contract. Usually multiple times, and with no guarantee of their effort and expenditure resulting in working software. Not to mention the costs of code mergers and forks.

"Plus, if you're that desperate, just how hard is it to hire a programmer in India (or if you're a geek Don Juan, Spain)?"

How hard? This is the Unwashed Masses, where picking up women at a bar is easier than comprehending the average three letter acronym. Random programmers on Linkedin or software-only online download sites? ... can you say viruses?

Free software is often the most expensive kind of software.

Hmm, maybe I should send this to Microsoft's PR department.

I love you

[RulerOf]

...But seriously...

Could you possibly rewrite that in a copy/pasteable SQL Injection format? My ISP blocks port 25 outbound :-(

Re:I love you

[silentcoder]

Dude, I'm not gonna write your codes for your ISP's problems, this works for me :P

Re:I love you

[lewiscr]

My ISP (Time Warner) blocks outbound 25, except to smtp-server.roadrunner.com. I configured postfix to use that machine as an outbound relay.

ATM card numbers

[Error27]

If the password is a four to six digit number that is not 1234 then it's probably an ATM card number as well. Actually if it's 1234 then it's still probably an ATM card.

Quick analysis

[Anonymous Coward]

Top ten passwords:
password 123123 , count 41.0
password 123 , count 49.0
password 1234567890 , count 52.0
password password , count 62.0
password 1234567 , count 65.0
password 12345678 , count 72.0
password 1234 , count 75.0
password 12345 , count 111.0
password 123456789 , count 212.0
password 123456 , count 669.0
total: 25887.0

Top ten emails:
domain yahoo.co.id , count 248.0
domain yahoo.in , count 284.0
domain live.com , count 400.0
domain yahoo.co.in , count 437.0
domain rediffmail.com , count 463.0
domain ymail.com , count 509.0
domain aol.com , count 593.0
domain hotmail.com , count 3572.0
domain gmail.com , count 4044.0
domain yahoo.com , count 9325.0
total: 25884.0

To support the actresses?

[ron_ivi]

That said, I have to wonder about the kind of people who would be paying for porn.

Perhaps they pay to support the actresses?

Kinda like the same way people donate to Wikipedia or the Mozilla Foundation, or buy Red Hat?

Is any public exploit a good one?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can criticize the Sony PSN hack and this one and a lot of other on any moral, ethical and whatnot grounds. But what if all these hacks actually served a real purpose?

To open some managers' eyes on the poor state of security? After all not all the companies got hacked because most don't want to be hacked: it's not like all the world SMEs and big corp. where running unpatched Windows ME boxen behind no firewall.

Maybe that the more public exploits, the more managers will realize that they're potentially the next victim and the more they can convince upper management to take security more seriously?

For example, shall the PSN come back online and be as vulnerable as it was? What if after the HBGary hack sysadmins realized they really shouldn't give root passwords by email etc.?

Maybe that, say, in twenty years or so, networks will eventually become a little bit more secure?

If that's the case, then I'm in for as many RSA hacks, HBGary, Sony PSN, lulzec whatever etc. exploits.

Re:Is any public exploit a good one?

[Anonymous Coward]

But what if all these hacks actually served a real purpose?

Then we'd be having a grown-up discussion about whether or not the ends justify the means. But we're not. Instead, we're basically waiting to see who gets to these guys first: the police or the eastern europeans.

but...

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought that it was wrong to assert morality. Now we have hackers coaching people to disclose personal habits? Of course it is wrong for politicians to do it but I guess hackers can under the guise of technology.

Re:but...

[Anonymous Coward]

shall I remind you that these hackers call themselves LulzSec?

this is why storing passwords on the server is bad

[Anonymous Coward]

Any sys admin creating a system that stores passwords should be held liable for damages.

10/06/11 Pron.com user database

[Anonymous Coward]

I think its safe to say that a good deal of this community should have already known about this 3 days ago.

Obligatory

[Yvan256]

Disposable email

Not so dumb

[echnaton192]

Let's see. The site I use:

- Does not come with spyware and stuff
- Has all the stuff sorted and searchable
- Uses pay per view, so I pay only for the time I watch

Of course there is no chance in hell I would use my businessaddress or the same password I use on other sites. But why should I bother using crappy sites that try everything to rip my money and my personal information, when I could use a normal business service that has an interest in me coming back and is until now proven to be secure?

Why should I care about free stuff when paying gives me better service?

I am single - again :) - and I am allowed to use pr0n. There is nothing bad about that. I don't use the site TFA mentions, but to me it is perfectly reasonable to pay for pr0n. I don't waste time with the free stuff to find the pr0n I like. I don't need to think about security. I don't need to think if the file is what it says it were.

Re:Who cares who they belong to

[Opportunist]

Wait, wait, what? You need passwords to view porn on the internet now?

Oh great, again something important changed and no story on /.

Emails are unverified

[Anonymous Coward]

From the list:

test@test.com | test

So it seems like they dumped a list of registered, but not necessarily activated, accounts. Not that I want to defend the .gov/.mil people in there, but it seems like anyone could have created an account named president@whitehouse.gov and get some "lulz" out of it, but it does not mean that the POTUS is actively using that account.

Hypotwits

[Anonymous Coward]

So these hackers want to "embarrass" people for doing something that is not illegal by publishing personal information. However, they, who are engaged in illegal activity, carefully hide their own private information.

Sorry, the LulzSec people are in the wrong and until they are willing to publish their own private information they are just a bunch of internet thugs breaking laws for their own benefit.

Not on my Tax nickel....

[Kernel Krumpit]

Lemme see now; I pay good tax money for the benefit of militarists and government 9 to fivers. I have a share in being their employer. If it were me I'd fire the lot of their sorry asses. Not 'cos they're on Pron sites but because their against my company's IT policy. Oh, wait. I'm Canadian and only get to pay taxes without a vote. Here's Pron: Let me pull my pants down a little lower! Darn! will one of you Americans please fire them for me. Thanks.

Porn is now ad-supported. Nobody pays for it.

[Animats]

Really. Just use Google Video search, with SafeSearch turned off. Porn has gone ad-supported, like all other forms of content.

(If only the music industry would figure that out.)

Re:Porn is now ad-supported. Nobody pays for it.

[echnaton192]

Really. Just use Google Video search, with SafeSearch turned off. Porn has gone ad-supported, like all other forms of content.

And ads - especially the massive ads on pr0n sites - suddenly stopped being annoying? Or containing malware? And they suddenly provide all the features other paid sites have? Either you have found some really secret free pr0n nobody else has seen, or you actually can not compare free and paid content.

(If only the music industry would figure that out.)

Oh, they do, at least in Europe. But I prefer the ad free version of spotify/simfy, because I don't like the ads and restrictions. The music industry is still evil, but the next target should be the film industry, because they still use DRM on a regular basis.

Malaysia

[mosseh]

Pretty ironic that one of the addresses mentioned above belongs to a Malaysian government official given their stance on porn.

Cretins doing fundamentalist propagnda

[gweihir]

These people would never dare to subscribe to a porn-site themselves. Obviously conservatives with messed up morals and small brains. Despicable. Nothing is even the slightest bit funny about this blatant fundamentalist propaganda.

all these good cristians?

[Anonymous Coward]

The tendency for people with a religious reference in the email to use a religious based password is interesting. Hopefully I'm not adding to the damage, as this list is very public now.

youthpastor49@hotmail.com | balls11a
alligatorchurch@gmail.com | broadstairs
lasterbarbara@yahoo.com | Iovejesusforlife
Danielbenjamin4jesus@yahoo.com | 111222
ambersmith4jesus@yahoo.com | splash9
emennamdi4christ@yahoo.co.uk | holyman
ecw_champion_christan@yahoo.com | christan

eh

[Anonymous Coward]

"and tell friends and family of the users that they were subscribers to a pornographic website."

that usually isn't a shocker for most...it would be weird if your family members name ISN'T on that list

Are Lulz our best practice?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://newschoolsecurity.com/2011/06/are-lulz-our-best-practice/

This is a good article worth reading. Yes i also agree, security sucks in many places and it takes groups like Lulz to show it, because management can't be bothered to... and everything else is covered.

Which makes me wonder, isn't lulz a group with the task of pointing out security weakness? True attackers would obtain the same info, without divulging, so they can exploit it for years... And i believe they are doing a service of elevating security conscience.

It is a shame it has to be this way, but reality shows this is the only method for some to get it...

Watch *YOUR* Back

[BBF_BBF]

Yep, just because some hacktivist group posts a list of emails and passwords, supposedly taken from a pron website, all the text in it *must* be 100% true.

Because nobody would ever put in a fake email address when subscribing to a porn site, even if we give lulzsecurity the benefit of the doubt and the list is 100% authentic. ;)

I'd personally be more concerned that actually going to lulzsecurity's website to fetch the list would have them place an exploit to a vulnerability in my browser on that page.

Obligatory - Hey! That's...

[Anonymous Coward]

111 12345

Hey! That's the combination to my luggage!

I put on my wizard cloak and hat

[Anonymous Coward]

hfink37@yahoo.com | hunter2

Nice to see the classics aren't neglected

My Personal Favorites

[Anonymous Coward]

ambersmith4jesus@yahoo.com | splash9
Danielbenjamin4jesus@yahoo.com | 111222
jimmy.pelham@yahoo.com | jesus08
lasterbarbara@yahoo.com | Iovejesusforlife
sweetsabu20@gmail.com | jesus143


Hee hee...

The Bible made me do me and her..twice!

[Anonymous Coward]

The fact is that more crimes are committed by people with hotel rooms that have Bibles in them than rooms that have have pornography in them, so burning the former makes even more sense than burning the latter.

LulzSec = twats

[Anonymous Coward]

Before I start this rant i should point out i havent been compromised by LulzSec so these arent the words of someone who has been burnt.
Hacking to prove a point is one thing but releasing passwords for 100's of users is the act of juvenile twats that have never had a girlfriend. All they have suceeded in doing is causing grief for innocent people. Well done! Why dont you go round pissing in peoples letter boxes while your at it /sarcasm off
They need to grow up, move out of their mothers basement and get laid.
They remind me of the teenage anarchists that go to protests, not to protest about anything but just to smash stuff up. To seek attention for their pathetic lives and score points and try to look cool with their retarded friends.
So basically, fuck you LulSec I hope you get whats commig to you.

more porn sites have huge flaws anyhow

[Cito]

I've found majority of all porn sites have major flaws that accept ACH/online checks, all you have to do is put a legit routing number (you can get routing numbers for all banks online just google) then use a fake account number but a real address. Works every time for registration, and the username/password lasts from 3 days to a week. Course you only need it for a few minutes anyhow... HA! :)


btw kudos to the Lulz

FUCK lulzsex

[Anonymous Coward]

FUCK lulzsex

Tips and tricks

[Anonymous Coward]

1) Use Linux, BSD or another real OS.
2) pwgen -sy 128 1 > mypasswd
3) steghide embed -ef mypasswd.txt -cf verylarge.jpg -e rijndael-256
4) post in plain sight
5) Connect to SSL only.

Useless Use of Cat Award

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, this would not have passed muster on Slashdot once upon a time...

How about

while read email foo
do
commands
done < /path/to/lulsec_passwords.txt

My Password dictionary thanks you.

[Vegemeister]

My Password dictionary thanks you.

awk -F '|' '{print $2}' pronz.txt | sort -u >> passwords.txt

Not quite

[Anonymous Coward]

As a whole, Anonymous tends to be far more political oriented and symbolic with its attacks while Lulzsec's attacks have been more harmful and not linked with a political message. Though they have aimed at big corporations, the FBI, Fox News, they've also hit PBS and a porn website. Your argument would be true if "Anonymous" were responsible for the Lulzsec attacks or if Lulzsec was promoting itself in the same way Anonymous does, yet hits PBS and porn sites and exposes personal data of thousands of ordinary people. In the best light, Lulzsec is showing these big companies, despite their massive profits, are not spending the extra money to make sure the data of their employees and customers are safe and people need to be careful with their usernames across sites, the emails they use to sign up to sites, and their passwords. However, many may just be motivated for the personal thrill of getting access to this data from big companies and governments.

Stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

To do this is just stupid. Why would people do this? If there was some sort of way to earn money of it, I would at least understand why. Who cares if some people watch porn? Even if you think watching porn is harmful in some ways (I think it might be in some cases), to spread peoples passwords is in any case a lot worse than that. You have to be some heartless idiot to do this to people for fun.

Who should be ashamed here?

[Anonymous Coward]

That a group of people can do this to other people makes me loose a bit of faith in human beings. Did no one in this group stop and think what they were doing?

Re:I am disappointed by this promising looking gro

[OrangeMonkey11]

That would be great then we would all point and laugh and tease them all like little school children for liking midget donkey porn; o how we love to point out other peoples' short coming.

Mail Addresses are not verified

[johan_from_cape_town]

After actually looking at the list for a minute I came to the conclusion that the mail addresses were not verified (domain names spelt wrong :-) . The question really is - what percentage of these mail addresses are fake and which are real? Anybody can punch in your mail address in a webform. It doesn't proof anything. I would be very careful drawing any conclusions from this list, or trying to do anything with the data - it can land you in a lot of trouble. Specific example of domain name problems. I searched for all e-mail addresses for South African companies (.co.za) and came across "0789746848@mtnloeded.co.za". The real domain name should be mtnloaded.co.za - mtnloeded.co.za does not exist. If the spelling mistake slipped through it means that the mail address is unverified. Now I would love to give "Cecil" a call on +27 78 974 6848, but I cannot be sure it is in fact him. The sheer number of wrong e-mails I receive on my e-mail is of further concern in this situation - somebody could by accident type in my mail address and I would suddenly appear on a list like this! So all in good fun - chances are the more controversial mail addresses are fake.

sarcasm noted, but..

[KingAlanI]

Sarcasm noted, but I wonder what kind of market there would be for sexy stuff that's actually well-written and well-acted?

and...

[Anonymous Coward]

...won't somebody think of the pedophiles?!

The point?

[nurb432]

So they are no better than the kids that paint graffiti.. no point or direction, just to cause mischief.

OTOH:

[Anonymous Coward]

Should it not have read:
Hackers Expose 26,000 Sex Website Passwords
from the sex-wants-to-be-free dept?

OR:
Hackers Expose 26,000 Sex Website Passwords
from the just-another-26,000-exposed-Weiners dept?

No XKCD Reference yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://xkcd.com/792/

It is so easy...

[DiEx-15]

The reason why you never hear about porn sites getting cracked is because it is fucking easy. Most porn sites are vulnerable as hell and almost anyone with some technical proficiency can exploit them. They are run by low budget companies who often just cant afford to secure their sites. Cracking porn sites are for pathetic script kiddies with little to no skill what so ever. Also what's up with trying to shame owners of porn site memberships? Fucking puritans.

My cat can hack into it.

if these people are too lazy

[Anonymous Coward]

to look for the free stuff, they deserve to be exposed.

Nice...

[Anonymous Coward]

Awesome. Not only they are exposing their "hobbies" which are OK... the worst is that they are exposing the stupidity of some people.
You can set up a free anoymous email address in like 3 minutes. Why do these melon heads use thoir personal work address. More so if they have a .gov or .mil ending... gosh, stupidity will destroy human life sometime very soon.

Hoaxers, Hackers, and Policymakers

[Anonymous Coward]

Hoaxers, Hackers, and Policymakers

Re:do-gooders

[Anonymous Coward]

This looks like false flag work done by the crazy judeo-christians at the FBI who take vows of computer purity when entering the Bureau and who feel guilty after jerking off, so they want to expose anyone in government who doesn't share their "morality" and guilt. They are all Catholics and Mormons and Orthodox Jews, they won't let you into the secret club unless you are into secret handshakes and blood atonements. The REAL Anonymous guys have known how to hack porn sites for years and they would go after more corporate targets, than this stoopid, amateurish operation.

Signed, anonymous