Slashdot Mirror
E-Mail Hack Exposes Bush Family Pictures, Correspondence
New submitter rHBa sends this article about another high-profile email account breach:
"The apparent hack of several e-mail accounts has exposed personal photos and sensitive correspondence from members of the Bush family, including both former U.S. presidents. The posted photos and e-mails contain a watermark with the hacker's online alias, 'Guccifer.' ... Included in the hacked material is a confidential October 2012 list of home addresses, cell phone numbers, and e-mails for dozens of Bush family members, including both former presidents, their siblings, and their children. ... Correspondence obtained by the hacker indicates that at least six separate e-mail accounts have been compromised, including the AOL account of Dorothy Bush Koch, daughter of George H.W. Bush and sister of George W. Bush. Other breached accounts belong to Willard Heminway, 79, an old friend of the 41st president who lives in Greenwich, Connecticut; CBS sportscaster Jim Nantz, a longtime Bush family friend; former first lady Barbara Bush’s brother; and George H.W. Bush’s sister-in-law. "
G "dubya" Bush's shower self portrait.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
The kid gloves are off. They're handing out actual jail time for people hacking phones/email for nude pics of Scarlett Johansson. If they find him/her, this dude's going to end up in gitmo over some addresses and phone numbers.
"Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." - Oscar Wilde
Clearly you haven't been reading your Huff-Po this morning.
Oh dear, it appears that someone's privacy has been violated without a warrant. Hey, Bush family, join the club!
Just don't try the same trick with Obama. He has no problem drone bombing US citizens.
This isn't going to end well for the "hacker".
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Hint: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War
Yes, hundreds of thousands, precipitating from Bush's decision to start a war in Iraq. You Americans seem pretty eager to forget that your prior Administration killed more people than the despot it meant to depose.
There's an object lesson here: there's no such thing as privacy on the Internet.
All the world's an analog stage, and digital circuits play only bit parts.
not our fault that sunni and shia hate each other. wonder how the hazara are doing in afghanistan? everyone hates them.
No one has issue with Afghanistan. The OP is more than likely talking about Iraq. Whom we were literally lied to and told they had ties to al-qaida, and then oops we misunderstood the report - but they have "weapons of mass-destruction1!!!!!" oops, we misread that one too, "but sadam is torturing his people!!", oops, turns out they weren't asking for help.. "ohhh.... okay well then I guess we need to stick around to clean up. "
can you imagine having died and learned that was the reason? That there wasn't one, never was, but now more need to die because of the mess we created by being there wrongfully in the first place? Can you imagine that the vast majority of our current debt is because of the massive amount being pumped into the war in iraq? And you're going to defend it?
Nobody wants to see pictures of the Bushes!
There other ways to crack someones mail account than using passwords, like exploits. Especially if it's webmail.
We were too busy posting stories about patents we don't like.
I can't help but wonder what's in these pics, our company blocks the link for "adult themes."
And you believe that justifies the senseless carnage your war brought?
Never mind those local conflicts were never any of your business to begin with.
You people will never get it. You will never understand accountability or responsibility for your actions. Where mature adults would feel ashamed and penitent for what their country had done, America is obviously governed and populated by grown-up children who defiantly think they can have their way and never suffer consequences.
Spear phishing is my bet or easily guessed security questions a la Palin. Speaking of security questions, why did their use rise after the Palin email incident? Could have also been targeted malware key loggers.
...guess I've been out of the hacking biz for too many decades, but how are these mailboxes being compromised? I mean, it seems a rather long and arduous task to brute force passwords, especially if there are timeouts/captchas/whatever after so many missed passwords. Are these inside jobs?
I know I get emails daily from friends who have had their email accounts hacked...I simply can't believe that someone is sitting in front of their computer or even automatically generating passwords to hack these accounts.
Palin's account was hacked by guessing the "lost password" secret security question, such as "what was your mother's maiden name?"
I'm guessing something similar happened here.
It depends ... it is pretty easy to hack a common person's e-mail. Look them up on FaceBook (if they have an account there).
Did they leave their e-mail address publicly available? Now you have their e-mail address, all you need is a password.
Look over their profile, noting the names of pets, significant others, family members as well as any publicly mentioned interests, celebrities, whatever.
Use variations of those names of pets, family members, etc as a password, if the account the e-mail is on requires numbers, toss 123 or the age of family member at the end. If the person was a fan of a particular car, try the model and year, etc. You get the idea.
The above will fail more often than not, but sometimes you* get lucky.
*I say you, but of course neither you nor I would be so malicious as to go breaking into an e-mail account.
"Flame away, I wear asbestos underwear"
Here's a picture of daddy drunk again...
Here's a picture of daddy throwing up again...
And here's a picture of mommy at *her* house...
but... but... I'm hungry
AOL? No wonder Republicans are losing the technology war to Dems...
That's actually a pretty ridiculous assertion. The administration is going to say what they are going to say, and if they lie to us, precisely what intelligence assets to we have to prove them wrong?
In the end, we only found out that there were intelligence problems because we went there and had a look around ourselves, which is to say, the army did and they found nothing. We wouldn't have gotten that sort of information any other way.
Let's remember, the fact that Saddam did not have WMDs would actually have been less surprising if we didn't already know he had them at one point and used them on the Iranians and the Kurds. In retrospect, I don't see why you think it would have been obvious to the American public that Saddam wouldn't have had weapons that he clearly demonstrated possessing and using in the past. The fact that he did not have them is something that would not have been immediately apparent to the man on the street. It would have been quite another thing if we made that assertion about a country that never possessed and used them in the past.
Well, I don't want drone strikes, but I do think a lot of people get the feeling that if you can mess with an ex-President, you probably feel like you could mess with everyone. While I know I don't have a security detail, there is probably the illusion that there is some protective mechanism keeping people from messing with me. The fact that Bushs 41 and 43 can get hit shows that there really is no such protection or shelter by default. Once you show that there is no shelter, people start wanting you to die at the end of a Hellfire missile so the threat you represent is addressed.
Please please tell me the shoe really did find its target!
Table-ized A.I.
No one has issue with Afghanistan.
I have an issue with Afghanistan. More coalition troops have died in Afghanistan than died in 9/11. And what have we got for it? A dead bin Laden? Even if he would have been able to pull off another 9/11(unlikely), we're losing more lives than we're saving.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
That's actually a pretty ridiculous assertion. The administration is going to say what they are going to say, and if they lie to us, precisely what intelligence assets to we have to prove them wrong?
Were you paying attention in 2003? It was clear then that most of their intelligence was fabricated. Opposition to the Iraq war produced some of the largest protests ever. Lots of people figured out that they were being lied to.
In the end, we only found out that there were intelligence problems because we went there and had a look around ourselves, which is to say, the army did and they found nothing. We wouldn't have gotten that sort of information any other way.
Bullshit. We could have waited for Hans Blix to finish. But Bush&Co knew that he wouldn't find anything that would support an invasion. Therefore he couldn't be allowed to finish.
Let's remember, the fact that Saddam did not have WMDs would actually have been less surprising if we didn't already know he had them at one point and used them on the Iranians and the Kurds.
The fact that Saddam did not have WMDs was not surprising at all.
In retrospect, I don't see why you think it would have been obvious to the American public that Saddam wouldn't have had weapons that he clearly demonstrated possessing and using in the past
Because there was no physical evidence, only fear mongering.
The fact that he did not have them is something that would not have been immediately apparent to the man on the street.
The man on the street should be able to recognize fear mongering when he sees it. When you hear things like "We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud", you KNOW you are being manipulated. It was blatantly obvious in 2003.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Correlation != causation
I haven't had a cold since I started taking that homeopathic medicine...
At what cost? Over the past 10 years we lost about 3000 people in Afghanistan. In the 10 years before that, we lost about 3000 people in terrorist attacks. This is a draw at best. And that's if and only if you expect a 9/11 attack every 10 years, which is not historically the case.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
George jr. is not heard or seen much in the media since he left office, he's figured out how most of us do not like him, if some of us ever did.
George Sr was pretty low profile too. He's had a couple of moments in the spotlight, but there's been 16 more years to spread them out over.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
American here. I've always thought Bush Jr.'s Iraq war was a simple case of "Love me, daddy". "I'll get that Saddam for you. If I do, will you love me then?" A truly disgusting abuse of power. George jr. is not heard or seen much in the media since he left office, he's figured out how most of us do not like him, if some of us ever did. I hope that the world knows that the average U.S. citizen was against Bush from the beginning, when the voting shenanigans in Florida (hanging chads!) led to the outright theft of the office of the presidency. There are a lot of disillusioned voters who could only watch with disbelief what went on then. Many Anti-Bush demonstrations at the White House lawn happened, their effect was nothing changed, the friends of Bush kept profitting from these unnecessary wars. Truly a shameful time to be an American, imo.
It's true, he's a turd. Like father, Like son.. I think that's how the old saying goes. The only thing I wonder is whether or not he was really out to screw his own country or was just incompetent.
Are you the guy in the other thread who "remembers gettng milk home delivered'?
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
They're now private citizens, and deserve some regard for their personal privacy. IMHO, they should be left alone and this guy is a dick.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Slashdot is so hypocritical sometimes.
I hear ya, man, it's almost as if there was more than one of us.
"If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
Remember that before G.B. sr. became the president he was head of the C.I.A., and you don't lose those connections when you step down. George jr. couldn't run a hair dryer without help from his father, much less a country. Obama inherited a mess, one that isn't easy to ever fully repair. There, imo, should be treason charges brought against so many people from the Bush jr era, from the top on down. It won't happen, of course. Perhaps when documents are released in 50 years, we'll then be able to know the full scope of what went on. All the players will be long dead by then, of course. (sigh) I try to be the best person I can be in my own little life, best I can do.
I can almost hear the armada of drones heading to Anonymous's house.
Really - even if they were still in office, this is a dick move. Private emails are private emails. I care less about the hacking than the release, to be honest. If there's some actual funny business (like using personal email to avoid public disclosure statutes), then maybe the relevant text, but just releasing a bunch of personal, day to day emails (and all of the petty squabbling that everyone does) is unnecessary. I don't care what names they called each other or what they said "in private" about anyone.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Anon, because I modded you up.
Disclosure, I am very far from being in Bush's camp
Protests:
Lots of people protested what was going on, but from where I sat, it seemed to be more about "I think GW is an arse and a liar"( and I have sympathy for that viewpoint ) ( I.E. partisan politics ) I do agree we were being manipulated, but I agree with the other poster that we could not know ( rather than think ) that that was the case until we had been in there.
Hans Blix && the inspection of Iraq's WMD capabilities:
Waiting for Hans to finish was looking like an endless loop. Saddam didn't have anything to hide, but he was being quite obstructionist, denying access to areas and buildings that needed to be inspected. Honestly, I get that, from a pride and nationalistic standpoint, it didn't mean that he had anything. It is hard to prove he didn't from there also. So, from the viewpoint of "he has them" ( or even, "he might have them" playing the waiting game didnt look like a reasonable way to proceed.
Everybody, everywhere is a TERROR-WRIST!
Let's start putting them in FEMA camps for their protection! FEMA camps? why they're only for housing people during a "emergency", no? And the guard towers, electrified barbed/concertina wire fences is just to insure that the interned are "safe" no?
In the (future) land of the "free", "freedom" will mean that you are kept happily distracted while you are slowly and methodically herded into a slave labor camp where you will be kept medicated while you work for a Chinese company 12 hours a day, 6 days a week until you "retire" and are surreptitiously turned into cat food.
Just a joke?
I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
Ok.
Done!
Dammit.
I honestly never saw why anyone thought an ad hoc UN weapons inspection team ever had a chance of discovering anything. The only satisfactory thing Hans Blix could have done was succeed in finding them. Not finding evidence of a secret program in a foreign country is not exactly surprising.
I am also not sure why you also think that a country that was actually attacked by terrorists only two years previously was going to be particularly skeptical about fear mongering either. There's nothing like a few airliners crashing into buildings to make the man on the street reconsider if perhaps the world is a little bit more dangerous than they thought.
Sometimes people are right and sometimes people are wrong. And being right or wrong in the absence of your own ability to verify makes you ignorant, but it doesn't make you culpable. If you go down that road, then perhaps we should argue about the culpability of the Iranian people in the actions their religious nut leaders take, or how the Afghan casualties are their own fault for not overthrowing the Taliban themselves because they "should have known" the Taliban were terrorist harboring assholes. It cuts both ways. There are times that a government says something and you're only going to do anything about it afterward.
We certainly could have went in with WWII style annihilation and occupied what was left of the country afterwards
And kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people, rather than just thousands of them? And this is a mistake in your eyes?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
I am also not sure why you also think that a country that was actually attacked by terrorists only two years previously was going to be particularly skeptical about fear mongering either.
Because after a crisis is when people are most susceptible to fear mongering. Is this not obvious? Look at what happened after Sandy Hook, a shit load of fear mongering over guns, people crying "something must be done!", when violent crime is at historical lows.
Politicians use crises as cover for power grabs. That is how fear mongering works. Whenever there is a national tragedy, you will find politicians celebrating the opportunity to ram through bad laws and bad policy. It happens every time, so there's no excuse for being ignorant.
I knew from the moment I saw the planes hit the towers on 9/11/2001 that our overreaction would hurt us far more than the attack did, and I was right. I don't see how anyone could possibly expect anything else. If the way this has played out wasn't obvious from day one, you simply have no clue how the world works.
And being right or wrong in the absence of your own ability to verify makes you ignorant, but it doesn't make you culpable.
If you distort evidence to bolster your reasoning, that absolutely makes you culpable. Being honestly wrong is OK. But the Bush administration was never honest in the run up to Iraq, it was blatantly dishonest, and that was obvious to anyone who paid attention at the time.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
When the gauge is how many Americans have died or been maimed because of the war, yes.
Now, if it is a gauge of how many innocent people are killed or maimed, then no and that is largely a reason why we chose to fight that way.
But please, by all means, jump in and change the metrics of the conversation in order to impress your point. I mean it's not like the GP didn't directly compared the loss of US soldiers to the loss of people in the 9/11 attacks or anything. Oh wait, yes he did.
Except the US military gets to train with and test out a lot of new toys. The ability to get familiar with the weapons systems available to us is invaluable to the military.
Because after a crisis is when people are most susceptible to fear mongering. Is this not obvious? Look at what happened after Sandy Hook, a shit load of fear mongering over guns, people crying "something must be done!", when violent crime is at historical lows.
Well you know.... if you look at everyone as being as intelligent as you are, I don't know if that is fair. After all, consider your own statement there. You knew, just as I did, that people would freak out and blame guns. Well how did you know this? Because you knew that the general population would be susceptible to it. The reason they are susceptible to it is because they are not particularly introspective, but they also lack independent sources of information. That makes them ignorant, but again, ignorance is not culpability. Blaming the People for the situation is like smacking a puppy who peed on the carpet. It's just what they do.
If you distort evidence to bolster your reasoning, that absolutely makes you culpable. Being honestly wrong is OK. But the Bush administration was never honest in the run up to Iraq, it was blatantly dishonest, and that was obvious to anyone who paid attention at the time.
Well, I am more concerned about discussing the culpability of the voters, as opposed to the government itself, since that was the original point of the discussion. I can't really account for what happened in the government, and I am very displeased with what happened, but I don't think it was *so* obvious.
If you're inclined to disbelieve, the fact that you happened to be right introduces a sort of confirmation bias when it comes to asking why no one else saw it. You believe you'd have to be guilty of allowing it to happen for *you* to go along with it, but those who don't share your perspective are not going to come as easily to the same conclusion.
What you can argue is that perhaps people should be less trusting in the future, but there's only so far you can go with that when people want the government to take over their health care and other things.
I submitted the story after seeing it on the BBC and was surprised to see it wasn't already listed here.
Approx. 2 hours after submitting the story it was accepted.
I guess the lesson here is don't crowd-source if expediency is of the essence. In this case I can't see a few hours making a difference, it's not exactly a 'developing story'.
Last month a drone strike killed 24 civilians, with zero enemy combatants present. Bush would get blamed for this kind of thing outright, yet nobody blames obama.
Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
The kid gloves are off. They're handing out actual jail time for people hacking phones/email for nude pics of Scarlett Johansson. If they find him/her, this dude's going to end up in gitmo over some addresses and phone numbers.
Are you sure we are on the same page?
I thought there was a kickstarter for nude pictures of certain celebrities?
And you don't think that spending a shitload of time, resources and effort on a war with zero return benefit might have had something to do with the recession?
Money is just numbers in a bank, the war pissed away a lot of lives and real resources that can't be recreated by adding more zeros to MIC bank accounts.
I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
What is this revisionist crap? Powell threw away his political career (and fell on a sword for Bush) because he told obvious lies to the UN about WMD and nobody in the room believed him. Blair etc pretended to believe to get a fake justification for their actions. The WMD stuff came from a fucking PR company FFS!
You are deliberately misleading the kiddies again with another very stupid lie. The links are far more unlikely than that between the Taliban and Kevin Bacon.
Think about it people - a secular government that see religeous extremists as it's biggest threat and has tortured and killed thousands of them teaming up with a bunch of the people they usually round up and shoot?
Nothing wrong with being anonymous. Don't be an idiot.
If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
in the death count? Why should humans be so special? I'm sure its at least into the quadrillions or quintillions if you do an accurate re-count.
Are you that far divorced from reality? Apart from homoerotic fantasies it was like watching an angry child having a tantrum.
With the claim above, just like the last one, put up or shut up.
Look - just ditch your baggage and get back to the topic. You are the only one on this site that gives a shit about what you think about me and all I care about in this thread is your lie of the moment.
So put up or shut - the link between Saddam and Taliban. What is supposed to have drawn those opposite poles of ideology and mortal enemies together?
Oh yea, I almost forgot.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/29/world/state-union-iraq-issue-bush-enlarges-case-for-war-linking-iraq-with-terrorists.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War_Resolution
Read the reasons on the war resolution. And understand this is not exact but edited by the fine morons slanting everything to their advantage for wikipedia. Here are some highlights in case you can't figure out how to find the link.
Members of al-Qaeda, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq.
Iraq's "continu[ing] to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations," including anti-United States terrorist organizations.
Iraq paid bounty to families of suicide bombers.
This one is from the actual resolution itself
Oh, one more thing, it appears that the mass media actually knows Al Qaeda was in Iraq pre9/11 and attempted to blame their killing people after the invasion on Bush failing to act before the invasion.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2008/02/29/nbc-claimed-bush-allowed-al-qaeda-iraq-war-media-now-ignore-pre-war-p
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Musab_al-Zarqawi#Known_attacks
and according to George Tenet's book, July 2001, an associate of Zarqawi had been detained and, during interrogations, linked Zarqawi with al-Qaeda operative Abu Zubaydah. Of course I don't have a direct link to the book, but you can find reference to it on one of the links I already posted.
But hey, continue being a delusional moron tolling me. Opps, I have smacked you once again. I hope that doesn't mean you will start stalking me in real life or other sites.
You are spending an awful lot of time following me around and trolling me not to give a shit about what I said. But look at the other post I made troll.
Finally! About 30 posts asking you to put something up about your lies or shut up and you finally give an answer. Propaganda this time, so at least high quality professional level lies, but that's a vast step up from before.
In SOME countries, leaders are not blamed or not blamed. They are put on a public trial. But this is rare. When it does happen it's usually only cinema.
Now, imagine every American president (after that we can go on European ones) on trail (ON TV !) because of killing and destroying lives of millions of civilians(directly/indirectly) around the globe. Now.. talk about utopian ideas.
If you want a "citation", sorry. No instant gratification here. Open youtube or wikipedia if by any chance you're actually interested.
Keep trolling bud. Just remember, you can't have me.
Lies, I seriously don't think you know what that word actually means. You certainly aren't using it correctly. Of course that is if you are capable of grasping reality. Perhaps I should report you to the obama SS so you can be put on that list of retards not allowed to own guns before you hurt yourself or someone else.
Apparently, it's only wrong to hack someone's email if they're popular politically. I can only imagine that the response would be dramatically different if it was Bill and Hilary Clinton email instead of the Bush family.
Except we've known for years that Bush said that it was both retaliation for the attempted assassination of his father and to ameliorate the risk he perceived to his daughters from the Hussein regime. The rest was just political posturing.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
oops we misunderstood the report - but they have "weapons of mass-destruction1!!!!!"
Oops yourself. They did have WMDs - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#Chemical_Weapons_Recovered
Then our friends at wiki leaks - http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/wikileaks-show-wmd-hunt-continued-in-iraq-with-surprising-results/
The majority of our debt has nothing to do with Iraq. It has everything to do with Obama and the Dems not passing a budget since BUSH WAS IN OFFICE! That's because when you cannot pass a budget they do a continuation of the last one that was passed - that included the 1 trillion bailout. That would seem to indicate that he's spent more money than all of the previous presidents combined. At least number wise. Don't blame the Republicans, the Dems controlled the house and Senate Obama's first two years and they couldn't pass a budget either. They didn't want to.
BTW - let's dispel another myth - China holds all of our debt. In fact they don't. The Japanese hold almost as much or by now probably more than the Chinese.