Slashdot Mirror


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."

335 of 497 comments (clear)

  1. I swear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    i only read it for the articles.

    1. Re:I swear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      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. :)

    2. Re:I swear by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    3. Re:I swear by johnsnails · · Score: 1

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

  2. Gimme, gimme by petman · · Score: 2

    Where can I find the passwords?

    1. Re:Gimme, gimme by zonky · · Score: 5, Informative
    2. Re:Gimme, gimme by pandrijeczko · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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! :-)

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
    3. Re:Gimme, gimme by JavaBear · · Score: 1

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

    4. Re:Gimme, gimme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Thank the gods!!!

      I totally forgot my password for that site!!

      Thanks LulzSec!! :-)

    5. Re:Gimme, gimme by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 2

      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!

    6. Re:Gimme, gimme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      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...

    7. Re:Gimme, gimme by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      And no comment on "12345" and its variants?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    8. Re:Gimme, gimme by Golddess · · Score: 1

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

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    9. Re:Gimme, gimme by citylivin · · Score: 1

      its a text file genius.

      --
      As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
    10. Re:Gimme, gimme by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Ahhh, someone knows his movies. :)

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    11. Re:Gimme, gimme by Seumas · · Score: 1

      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!

    12. Re:Gimme, gimme by mrman18766 · · Score: 2

      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

    13. Re:Gimme, gimme by trout007 · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    14. Re:Gimme, gimme by trout007 · · Score: 1

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

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    15. Re:Gimme, gimme by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
  3. Dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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?

    1. Re:Dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

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

    2. Re:Dumb by zonky · · Score: 1

      Before the tube sites came along, at least.

    3. Re:Dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >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!

    4. Re:Dumb by DrBoumBoum · · Score: 1

      Forget that, who pays for pron anymore?

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

    5. Re:Dumb by somersault · · Score: 1

      Talk about morons!

      --
      which is totally what she said
    6. Re:Dumb by kangsterizer · · Score: 1

      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.

    7. Re:Dumb by silentcoder · · Score: 5, Funny

      #/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

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    8. Re:Dumb by RoFLKOPTr · · Score: 5, Funny

      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.

    9. Re:Dumb by SilentStaid · · Score: 1

      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.

    10. Re:Dumb by blackbeak · · Score: 2

      ....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".

      --
      Everything and its opposite is true. Get used to it.
    11. Re:Dumb by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    12. Re:Dumb by Nieriko · · Score: 2

      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...

    13. Re:Dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      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.

    14. Re:Dumb by echnaton192 · · Score: 1

      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.

    15. Re:Dumb by rubycodez · · Score: 1

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

    16. Re:Dumb by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    17. Re:Dumb by idontgno · · Score: 1

      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.)

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    18. Re:Dumb by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

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

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    19. Re:Dumb by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    20. Re:Dumb by makomk · · Score: 1

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

    21. Re:Dumb by asdf7890 · · Score: 1

      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).

    22. Re:Dumb by echnaton192 · · Score: 1

      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.

    23. Re:Dumb by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    24. Re:Dumb by psyclone · · Score: 1

      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.

    25. Re:Dumb by CSMoran · · Score: 1

      an extra cat improves the flow

      This.

      --
      Every end has half a stick.
    26. Re:Dumb by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    27. Re:Dumb by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    28. Re:Dumb by Kalriath · · Score: 1

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

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    29. Re:Dumb by Paul1969 · · Score: 1

      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.

    30. Re:Dumb by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

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

  4. Re:Who cares who they belong to by Haedrian · · Score: 4, Funny

    so we can see some pron for free...

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

  5. Who? by lvangool · · Score: 1

    Who the fuck still pays for porn?

    1. Re:Who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      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.

    2. Re:Who? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      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.

    3. Re:Who? by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      Who the fuck still pays for porn?

      Your Government?

    4. Re:Who? by blackbeak · · Score: 1

      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!

      --
      Everything and its opposite is true. Get used to it.
    5. Re:Who? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re:Who? by Warlord88 · · Score: 1

      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.

    7. Re:Who? by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      who the fuck still pays for movies?

    8. Re:Who? by Vegemeister · · Score: 1

      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.

  6. Two minds by metlin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Two minds by cc1984_ · · Score: 5, Funny

      On one hand....

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

    2. Re:Two minds by mikael_j · · Score: 1

      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"...

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    3. Re:Two minds by mcgrew · · Score: 5, Informative

      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.

    4. Re:Two minds by digitig · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    5. Re:Two minds by rollingcalf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "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.

      --
      ---------
      There is inferior bacteria on the interior of your posterior.
    6. Re:Two minds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >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.)

    7. Re:Two minds by silentcoder · · Score: 1

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

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    8. Re:Two minds by silentcoder · · Score: 1

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

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    9. Re:Two minds by rwv · · Score: 4, Funny

      Paying for porn is like paying for kittens.

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

    10. Re:Two minds by thegarbz · · Score: 5, Funny

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

    11. Re:Two minds by rust627 · · Score: 1

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

      --
      da da da dum indeed.
    12. Re:Two minds by muffen · · Score: 1

      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.

    13. Re:Two minds by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 2

      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!!!

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    14. Re:Two minds by hipp5 · · Score: 1

      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.

    15. Re:Two minds by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    16. Re:Two minds by ugen · · Score: 2

      Clearly, you are young and not married.

    17. Re:Two minds by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    18. Re:Two minds by metlin · · Score: 1

      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"?

    19. Re:Two minds by Abstrackt · · Score: 1

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

      --
      They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
    20. Re:Two minds by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "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.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    21. Re:Two minds by Kjella · · Score: 2

      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...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    22. Re:Two minds by rollingcalf · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      ---------
      There is inferior bacteria on the interior of your posterior.
    23. Re:Two minds by Opportunist · · Score: 1

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

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    24. Re:Two minds by Opportunist · · Score: 1

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

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    25. Re:Two minds by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    26. Re:Two minds by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      if it exists, it is a genre of japanese porn

    27. Re:Two minds by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      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.

    28. Re:Two minds by swb · · Score: 3, Interesting

      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.

    29. Re:Two minds by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    30. Re:Two minds by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

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

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

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    31. Re:Two minds by antdude · · Score: 1

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

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    32. Re:Two minds by nyctopterus · · Score: 1

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

    33. Re:Two minds by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      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."

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    34. Re:Two minds by u38cg · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
    35. Re:Two minds by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    36. Re:Two minds by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

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

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    37. Re:Two minds by FauxPasIII · · Score: 1

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

      Please make a note of it.

      --
      25% Funny, 25% Insightful, 25% Informative, 25% Troll
    38. Re:Two minds by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      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

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    39. Re:Two minds by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      Rule 34

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    40. Re:Two minds by tompaulco · · Score: 1

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

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    41. Re:Two minds by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

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

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    42. Re:Two minds by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      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?

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    43. Re:Two minds by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      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)

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    44. Re:Two minds by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      Funny, I met my wife in a bar.

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    45. Re:Two minds by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    46. Re:Two minds by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 1

      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.

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    47. Re:Two minds by Kjella · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    48. Re:Two minds by Crag · · Score: 1

      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.

    49. Re:Two minds by metlin · · Score: 1

      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.

    50. Re:Two minds by u38cg · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
    51. Re:Two minds by metlin · · Score: 1

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

    52. Re:Two minds by semi-extrinsic · · Score: 1

      uninterrupted supply of pussy during the switch.

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

      --
      for i in `facebook friends "=bday" 2>/dev/null | cut -d " " -f 3-`; do facebook wallpost $i "Happy birthday!"; done
    53. Re:Two minds by PoopCat · · Score: 1

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

      I've found that typically helps.

    54. Re:Two minds by metlin · · Score: 1

      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.

    55. Re:Two minds by wdef · · Score: 1

      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.

    56. Re:Two minds by wdef · · Score: 1

      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?

    57. Re:Two minds by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    58. Re:Two minds by fyngyrz · · Score: 1


      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.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  7. Pathetic Lamers by bjourne · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Pathetic Lamers by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

      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"...

    2. Re:Pathetic Lamers by mcgrew · · Score: 1

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

    3. Re:Pathetic Lamers by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    4. Re:Pathetic Lamers by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      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.

    5. Re:Pathetic Lamers by hedwards · · Score: 1

      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.

    6. Re:Pathetic Lamers by scubamage · · Score: 1

      Its a pretty epic troll, i agree.

    7. Re:Pathetic Lamers by Timmmm · · Score: 1

      > 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.

    8. Re:Pathetic Lamers by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      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?

    9. Re:Pathetic Lamers by bjourne · · Score: 1

      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.

    10. Re:Pathetic Lamers by JezmundBerserker · · Score: 1

      Thou doth protest too much methinks!

    11. Re:Pathetic Lamers by ianare · · Score: 1

      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 ?

    12. Re:Pathetic Lamers by gweihir · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    13. Re:Pathetic Lamers by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Indeed.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    14. Re:Pathetic Lamers by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
  8. WeinerGate by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 5, Informative

    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

    --
    Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    1. Re:WeinerGate by MimeticLie · · Score: 3, Funny

      flag@whitehouse.gov | karlmarx

      I think Andrew Breitbart just had an orgasm.

    2. Re:WeinerGate by geogob · · Score: 5, Insightful

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

    3. Re:WeinerGate by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      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. :)

    4. Re:WeinerGate by trout007 · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    5. Re:WeinerGate by MichaelSmith · · Score: 3, Informative

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

    6. Re:WeinerGate by rich_r · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yes. Research purposes. Honest!

    7. Re:WeinerGate by trout007 · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    8. Re:WeinerGate by xxMSAxx · · Score: 1

      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"

      --
      Work for Pay and Pay for Freedom
    9. Re:WeinerGate by ugen · · Score: 1

      gov.my is Malaysian government.

    10. Re:WeinerGate by dfxm · · Score: 1

      Implying that they don't watch together...

    11. Re:WeinerGate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      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.

    12. Re:WeinerGate by mandark1967 · · Score: 1
      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"

      --
      Sig Follows: "Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." -- Mark Twain
    13. Re:WeinerGate by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      "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?

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    14. Re:WeinerGate by DirePickle · · Score: 1

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

    15. Re:WeinerGate by Opportunist · · Score: 1

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

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    16. Re:WeinerGate by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      I got here through a series of tubes
    17. Re:WeinerGate by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    18. Re:WeinerGate by ginbot462 · · Score: 1

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

      --
      Atlas Shrugged : Thematic Story :: Battlefield Earth : Organized Religion
    19. Re:WeinerGate by gknoy · · Score: 2

      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.

    20. Re:WeinerGate by fyngyrz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      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.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    21. Re:WeinerGate by Jim_Maryland · · Score: 1

      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.

    22. Re:WeinerGate by Strider- · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
    23. Re:WeinerGate by PitaBred · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

    24. Re:WeinerGate by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

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

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    25. Re:WeinerGate by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

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

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    26. Re:WeinerGate by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 1

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

      I use this.

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    27. Re:WeinerGate by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

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

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    28. Re:WeinerGate by treeves · · Score: 1

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

      - Walter Sobchak

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    29. Re:WeinerGate by treeves · · Score: 1

      That's what Pete Townshend said!

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    30. Re:WeinerGate by GuruBuckaroo · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      Poor means hoping the toothache goes away.
    31. Re:WeinerGate by pseudorand · · Score: 1

      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.

    32. Re:WeinerGate by Archwyrm · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power. -- Mussolini
    33. Re:WeinerGate by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    34. Re:WeinerGate by adamchou · · Score: 1

      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.

    35. Re:WeinerGate by adamchou · · Score: 1

      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

    36. Re:WeinerGate by MagusSlurpy · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells by the seashore.
  9. American Puritans... by matt007 · · Score: 2

    "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.

    1. Re:American Puritans... by digitig · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    2. Re:American Puritans... by MurukeshM · · Score: 1

      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!

    3. Re:American Puritans... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

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

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:American Puritans... by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      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).

  10. Simple vandals and criminals by GauteL · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Simple vandals and criminals by Anubis350 · · Score: 4, Informative

      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

      --
      "goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
    2. Re:Simple vandals and criminals by paziek · · Score: 2

      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.

    3. Re:Simple vandals and criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      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.

    4. Re:Simple vandals and criminals by radio4fan · · Score: 1

      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.

    5. Re:Simple vandals and criminals by GauteL · · Score: 1

      "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.

    6. Re:Simple vandals and criminals by GauteL · · Score: 1

      "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.

    7. Re:Simple vandals and criminals by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

      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)

    8. Re:Simple vandals and criminals by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      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.

    9. Re:Simple vandals and criminals by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      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?

    10. Re:Simple vandals and criminals by cavreader · · Score: 1

      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.

    11. Re:Simple vandals and criminals by edremy · · Score: 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.

      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

      --
      "Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
    12. Re:Simple vandals and criminals by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      Touché.

    13. Re:Simple vandals and criminals by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      What does that tell of the security in adult industry?

      They're used to being screwed?

    14. Re:Simple vandals and criminals by FrootLoops · · Score: 1

      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?".

    15. Re:Simple vandals and criminals by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      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.

    16. Re:Simple vandals and criminals by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      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.

  11. Re:So what? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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...

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  12. Re:Not funny by gmhowell · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  13. The most popular passwords... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Surprise surprise:

    123456
    123456789
    12345
    1234
    12345678
    1234567
    password
    1234567890
    123
    123123

    1. Re:The most popular passwords... by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 5, Funny

      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.

    2. Re:The most popular passwords... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

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

    3. Re:The most popular passwords... by frisket · · Score: 1
      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.

    4. Re:The most popular passwords... by Tukz · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      - Don't do what I do, it's probably not healthy nor safe. -
    5. Re:The most popular passwords... by digitig · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    6. Re:The most popular passwords... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      My favourite password so far is "remember".

    7. Re:The most popular passwords... by Mark+Hood · · Score: 1

      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 :)

      --
      Liked this comment? Why not buy me something nice
    8. Re:The most popular passwords... by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 1

      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.

    9. Re:The most popular passwords... by guyminuslife · · Score: 2


      $ 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.

      --
      I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
    10. Re:The most popular passwords... by midicase · · Score: 1

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

    11. Re:The most popular passwords... by toddestan · · Score: 1

      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?

  14. That's it. by MMC+Monster · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now they've gone too far.

    --
    Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    1. Re:That's it. by Tasha26 · · Score: 1

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

  15. Re:Who Pissed in Anon's Cornflakes? by James_Duncan8181 · · Score: 2

    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.

    --
    "To any truly impartial person, it would be obvious that I am right."
  16. Less known is that by Fuzzums · · Score: 1

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

    --
    Privacy is terrorism.
  17. Phone numbers? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

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

    1. Re:Phone numbers? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Manmohan@myman.com | +919455674783

      I seem to have heard this name before...

    2. Re:Phone numbers? by digitig · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
  18. Re:So what? by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 1

    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.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
  19. Re:Not funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    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?

  20. Okay... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 5, Funny

    marvelcash@gmail.com | Slashdot69

    Anybody owning up to this one?

    1. Re:Okay... by marvelcash · · Score: 5, Funny

      No

    2. Re:Okay... by adycarter · · Score: 1

      Awesome!

      --
      Witty Comment Here
    3. Re:Okay... by gblackwo · · Score: 1

      Awesome!

    4. Re:Okay... by ustolemyname · · Score: 3, Insightful

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

    5. Re:Okay... by 228e2 · · Score: 1

      Well played sir . . . well played.

      --
      Since when does being a Socialist mean 'someone who has a different opinion than me'?
    6. Re:Okay... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

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

    7. Re:Okay... by xxMSAxx · · Score: 1

      Stan Lee would be proud. Golden.

      --
      Work for Pay and Pay for Freedom
    8. Re:Okay... by Nrrqshrr · · Score: 1

      I spilled coffee all over the screen.

      Damn that was good...

    9. Re:Okay... by Xacid · · Score: 1

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

    10. Re:Okay... by gblackwo · · Score: 1

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

    11. Re:Okay... by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      Talk to this guy...

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    12. Re:Okay... by Kjella · · Score: 1

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

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    13. Re:Okay... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

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

    14. Re:Okay... by rubycodez · · Score: 1

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

    15. Re:Okay... by Tasha26 · · Score: 1

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

    16. Re:Okay... by MasterGwaha · · Score: 1

      GWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA~!

    17. Re:Okay... by adamchou · · Score: 1

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

  21. Sexual blackmail? by elucido · · Score: 2

    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"

    1. Re:Sexual blackmail? by pacinpm · · Score: 1

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

    2. Re:Sexual blackmail? by tibman · · Score: 1

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

      Not exactly a good reason though.

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    3. Re:Sexual blackmail? by asdf7890 · · Score: 1

      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...

    4. Re:Sexual blackmail? by mlts · · Score: 1

      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.

    5. Re:Sexual blackmail? by 1u3hr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

    6. Re:Sexual blackmail? by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

      The attitude toward porn in US is certainly lulzworthy.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    7. Re:Sexual blackmail? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      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?".

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    8. Re:Sexual blackmail? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    9. Re:Sexual blackmail? by Seumas · · Score: 1

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

    10. Re:Sexual blackmail? by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      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?

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    11. Re:Sexual blackmail? by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      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."

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    12. Re:Sexual blackmail? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    13. Re:Sexual blackmail? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

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

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    14. Re:Sexual blackmail? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
  22. Wow, so this is supposed to be embarrasing? by Tomsk70 · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:Wow, so this is supposed to be embarrasing? by scubamage · · Score: 1

      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.

    2. Re:Wow, so this is supposed to be embarrasing? by scubamage · · Score: 1

      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.

    3. Re:Wow, so this is supposed to be embarrasing? by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

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

  23. Oh I agree. But they do it for power. by elucido · · Score: 1

    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?

  24. Re:So what? by Kjella · · Score: 2

    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.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  25. What makes it different is the threat by elucido · · Score: 5, Informative

    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?

    1. Re:What makes it different is the threat by gsslay · · Score: 2

      Remember Jason Fortuny?

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

    2. Re:What makes it different is the threat by LordSnooty · · Score: 1

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

    3. Re:What makes it different is the threat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      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?

    4. Re:What makes it different is the threat by hoggoth · · Score: 4, Informative

      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.

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    5. Re:What makes it different is the threat by wikdwarlock · · Score: 1

      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.

      --

      "I must not fear. Fear is the mind killer." -Bene Gesserit Litany Against Fear
    6. Re:What makes it different is the threat by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      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?

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    7. Re:What makes it different is the threat by wikdwarlock · · Score: 1

      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.

      --

      "I must not fear. Fear is the mind killer." -Bene Gesserit Litany Against Fear
  26. Security failure on all sides. by wvmarle · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:Security failure on all sides. by asdf7890 · · Score: 1

      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.

    2. Re:Security failure on all sides. by moco · · Score: 1

      make that Salt + Hash.

      --
      moi
    3. Re:Security failure on all sides. by gmack · · Score: 1

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

    4. Re:Security failure on all sides. by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      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.

  27. Re:Imagine if Google got hacked similarly .... by elucido · · Score: 3, Funny

    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.

  28. question by kqc7011 · · Score: 1

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

    --
    Passionately Indifferent
    1. Re:question by asdf7890 · · Score: 1

      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...

  29. cottaging by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    make a bog deal out of sex between consenting adults

    Are we talking about George Michael?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  30. You did not disappoint me. by ethoxyethaan · · Score: 3, Funny

    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

    1. Re:You did not disappoint me. by symes · · Score: 1

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

    2. Re:You did not disappoint me. by ACS+Solver · · Score: 1

      You do not disappoint either, running as root!

    3. Re:You did not disappoint me. by Gray+Elf · · Score: 1

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

    4. Re:You did not disappoint me. by tusam · · Score: 1

      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*)

    5. Re:You did not disappoint me. by ethoxyethaan · · Score: 1

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

  31. Sheesh! by JayRott · · Score: 1

    Now that is just mean!

  32. Damn by deepershade · · Score: 1

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

  33. Did it myself by rogabean · · Score: 1

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

    --
    "why don't you just slip into something more comfortable...like a coma!"
    1. Re:Did it myself by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      Beat em to it!

      So to speak...

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  34. Stigma by Bocaj · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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!

    1. Re:Stigma by Combatso · · Score: 1

      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.

    2. Re:Stigma by scubamage · · Score: 1

      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.

    3. Re:Stigma by dotancohen · · Score: 1

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

      Cyberwarfare maybe?

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    4. Re:Stigma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      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. ;-)

    5. Re:Stigma by PPH · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    6. Re:Stigma by black+soap · · Score: 1

      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.

    7. Re:Stigma by fyngyrz · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    8. Re:Stigma by Archwyrm · · Score: 1

      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".

      --
      Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power. -- Mussolini
    9. Re:Stigma by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    10. Re:Stigma by scubamage · · Score: 1

      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.

  35. Porn are bad MMKay by OrangeMonkey11 · · Score: 1

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

    1. Re:Porn are bad MMKay by gweihir · · Score: 1

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

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  36. Suggests a new Security best practice by mysidia · · Score: 1

    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 :)

    1. Re:Suggests a new Security best practice by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      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.

    2. Re:Suggests a new Security best practice by psyclone · · Score: 1

      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.)

    3. Re:Suggests a new Security best practice by mysidia · · Score: 1

      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

  37. Some use the iterns ... by sourcerror · · Score: 1

    others use the internets.

  38. I am disappointed by this promising looking group by ComputerGeek01 · · Score: 1

    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...

  39. Will this be the first time... by DemonGenius · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... that porn sites everywhere get Slashdotted?

    1. Re:Will this be the first time... by gknoy · · Score: 2

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

  40. No big deal... by SeeSp0tRun · · Score: 1

    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...

    --
    Something witty.
  41. Re:So what? by blackbeak · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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!

    --
    Everything and its opposite is true. Get used to it.
  42. I love you by RulerOf · · Score: 2

    ...But seriously...

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

    --
    Boot Windows, Linux, and ESX over the network for free.
    1. Re:I love you by silentcoder · · Score: 1

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

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    2. Re:I love you by lewiscr · · Score: 1

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

  43. ATM card numbers by Error27 · · Score: 1

    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.

  44. To support the actresses? by ron_ivi · · Score: 1

    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?

  45. Re:Microsoft! by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

    Corporations need sex too, you know!

  46. Obligatory by Yvan256 · · Score: 2
  47. Not so dumb by echnaton192 · · Score: 1

    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.

  48. Re:Who cares who they belong to by Opportunist · · Score: 1

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

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

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  49. Emails are unverified by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    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.

  50. Not on my Tax nickel.... by Kernel+Krumpit · · Score: 1

    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.

    --
    May the lies we live by make us strong, healthy, happy and wise - Kurt Vonnegut.
  51. Porn is now ad-supported. Nobody pays for it. by Animats · · Score: 2

    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.)

    1. Re:Porn is now ad-supported. Nobody pays for it. by echnaton192 · · Score: 1

      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.

  52. Malaysia by mosseh · · Score: 1

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

  53. Cretins doing fundamentalist propagnda by gweihir · · Score: 1

    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.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  54. Re:So what? by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

    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.

  55. Re:So what? by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

    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.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  56. Re:So what? by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

    Sadly, you've understated the problem. :(

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  57. Watch *YOUR* Back by BBF_BBF · · Score: 2

    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.

  58. LulzSec = twats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    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.

  59. Re:So what? by Kjella · · Score: 1

    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...

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  60. My Password dictionary thanks you. by Vegemeister · · Score: 1

    My Password dictionary thanks you.

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

  61. Re:By this point, nobody takes you seriously by Elbereth · · Score: 1

    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.

  62. Re:I am disappointed by this promising looking gro by OrangeMonkey11 · · Score: 1

    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.

  63. Re:So what? by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

    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.)

  64. Mail Addresses are not verified by johan_from_cape_town · · Score: 1

    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.

  65. sarcasm noted, but.. by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

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

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  66. The point? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

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

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  67. It is so easy... by DiEx-15 · · Score: 1

    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.