Anonymous Slovenia Claims To Have Hacked the FBI and Posted Emails To Pastebin

concertina226 writes "The information, posted by user Black-Shadow of the Slovenian branch of the hacktivist group, purportedly contains FBI domain email addresses and passwords for 68 agents, although the user claims in his post that the collected log-in details are 'not all ours'. The post also includes a short profile on FBI director James Brien Comey Jr, including sensitive information such as his date of birth, his wife's name, the date they got married, his educational history and even the geographical coordinates of his residence."

Comments

Sensitive information?

[ShanghaiBill]

... sensitive information such as his date of birth, his wife's name, the date they got married, his educational history and even the geographical coordinates of his residence.

None of that is "sensitive" information. You can get all of that from public records, or from someone's Linkedin home page.

Re:Sensitive information?

[bob_super]

Cue the turf war with Silicon Valley. Illegally collecting American's data is their job. Releasing it to the public for free is just plain un-american.

Re:Sensitive information?

[gstoddart]

Releasing it to the public for free is just plain un-american.

Good thing they were Slovenian.

Re:Sensitive information?

[ShanghaiBill]

You might be less inclined to think so if that information were provided to people who might want to kill you.

If someone wanted to kill me, they could get my home address either from the post office or the phone book. Then they could use Google Maps to convert the street address to geographical coordinates. As for the other info, I fail to see how my wedding date, educational history, etc. would be particularly useful to a killer.

Re:Sensitive information?

[CanHasDIY]

You might be less inclined to think so if that information were provided to people who might want to kill you.

If it's public information, the government provides it to everyone.

If it's from a social networking site (like LinkedIn), the individual themselves provided it.

And, of course, that applies to people of all professions.

(as is more common for people in law enforcement than others)

Yea, I hear that line of BS from LEOs a lot, but honestly I've never seen a situation where a LEO was stalked/killed based on publicly accessible info, because they were a LEO.

Much the contrary, LEOs use non-public databases to stalk/kill ex-lovers, people who cut them off in traffic, etc.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Anonymous Coward]

So we can drone their asses?

Re:Sensitive information?

[Etherwalk]

... sensitive information such as his date of birth, his wife's name, the date they got married, his educational history and even the geographical coordinates of his residence.

None of that is "sensitive" information. You can get all of that from public records, or from someone's Linkedin home page.

The geographical coordinates of his residence are almost certainly not. People at that level in National Security conceal the address of their residences from the public for good reason.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Ralph Wiggam]

I have friends with secret jobs. They are not allowed to have accounts on social media sites for exactly that reason.

Re:Sensitive information?

[GodfatherofSoul]

This is one of the reasons I have a problem with all those resume-blasting sites. It's one thing to have all that information about yourself sent to a handful of interested companies. It's completely different to have it indexed for any google search or shmucks to set up some phishing operation. OT: I used to regularly get phishing phone calls people (sounded like they were calling from their apartment) using just this kind of information in an attempt to sound legitimate.

Re:Sensitive information?

[jesseck]

As for the other info, I fail to see how my wedding date, educational history, etc. would be particularly useful to a killer.

It depends on how devious the killer is... they may use the home address to kill your dog, kill your spouse on your anniversary, and then off you at a class reunion.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

It's been 30 years since someone figured out how to bounce a laser off a window and hear conversations.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea, I hear that line of BS from LEOs a lot

Among other things.

Fishing for crab is a far more dangerous profession than law enforcement could ever hope to be, for example. (I say hope, because I secretly suspect the paramilitant nitwits actually want a reason to roll down streets in military vehicles with infantry-style rifles pointing out the sides.)

Re:Sensitive information?

[wonkey_monkey]

If someone wanted to kill me, they could get my home address either from the post office or the phone book.

You are not FBI director James Brien Comey Jr, who (just a guess) probably isn't in the phone book.

Can you really go to the post office, give a name, and get an address?

Re:Sensitive information?

[pepty]

Hence the proposal to have a 3rd party hold all of the data NSA collects. If more profits are made it's all good?

Re:Sensitive information?

[jfengel]

They don't put it on their Facebook accounts, but it's not treated like a matter of national security. They buy and sell their houses, and drive to work in their cars, same as everybody else. They don't expect it to be secret, and it would be practically impossible to keep it secret.

Most of them don't even have personal security guards. I imagine that most of them have home alarms, but it's likely not all that different from many other people who live in the upper-middle-class neighborhoods of DC.

Re:Sensitive information?

[mythosaz]

An ongoing feud between Sheriff Joe Arpaio and the Phoenix New Times peaked one day back in 2004 when the PNT published Arpaio's (easily searchable if you knew where to go) home address.

"America's Toughest Sheriff" Arpaio has been sheriff of Maricopa County AZ for 20 years, and he's controversy prone, so he's had hundreds of on-the-record death threats. In a 2011 article, there were eleven open cases of threats against him. Few people have a neutral opinion about Sheriff Joe. He's a love him or hate him kind of guy. The polls show that most of us love him. If you live here, ask your coworkers why they vote for him, and they'll all say the same thing. "Sure, maybe he is a racist, but we like a tough-on-crime, animal-protecting, deadbeat-dad-prosecuting local sheriff."

There's little doubt that the PNT brought a few more kooks out of their closet to the list of people looking to do Joe harm.

[Aside, there was a lot of he-said, she-said, no-you between PNT as the local police, but in the end, the PNT won a pretty big settlement after some bogus arrests in 2007 -- bogus so says the suit settlement.]

Re:Sensitive information?

[tibit]

I'm sorry, but those are still public records in the U.S. There are multiple sources for them:

1. Local newspaper archives. Typically local newspapers publish all recorded births and deaths.

2. Local public record offices. All across U.S., both birth and death certificates are public records and everyone can access them.

3. Local real estate records. Almost everywhere you can look up basic property records for free - the name of the owner, the address, the taxes due. To get details you may need to pay, but that's just administrative fee. In better counties, all of the records are freely available online, including GIS data.

I am in fact in favor of those remaining public no matter what. It prevents certain forms of corruption.

Re:Sensitive information?

[tibit]

No, USPS isn't really in the business of looking people up, lol.

You can look up the county property records online for pretty much every major county in the U.S. All you need is the county and person's name. Perhaps only in the boonies you have to drag your ass to an office to look it up.

You can also look up court records in quite a few counties online, for free.

Re:Sensitive information?

[tibit]

Bullshit. It should be available in the county land records database, online and for free, for crying out loud. Unless he lives in some real boonies.

Re:Sensitive information?

[tibit]

If you live in the U.S., posting the same stuff on social networking sites is frankly said just wasted effort. It is all a matter of public record, and anyone willing can look it up. Heck, there are even companies who regularly get this data from every fucking single public entity in the U.S. and collate them in databases. The access to those is provided as a paid-for service, but the prices are nothing to write home about. $50-$100 will find anyone overtly owning real estate anywhere in the U.S.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Whorhay]

Yeah, I always figured they were public record but never realized how easy it was to find for free online until I bought a house. I periodically google my own name and one of the hits was a government site for figuring out if your home was in a flood zone. You could feed the site any address and it would list the property owner. Now that isn't to say that you couldn't use a dummy corporation or something to hold ownership of the house for you but I doubt many people go that far.

Re:Sensitive information?

[ShanghaiBill]

No, USPS isn't really in the business of looking people up, lol.

I have personally gone to the post office, given them a name, and got the address. There was a small fee, and I had to show an ID and sign a form. It was over ten years ago, so maybe they don't do it anymore, or maybe you are simply wrong.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Yeah, online property records are a big privacy leak. You can do things to obfuscate it -- put the property in a land trust if your state permits it (do it when you buy it, as historical information is also available) or buy it in the name of a new mexico llc (which have minimal reporting requirements, so you don't have to disclose your ownership of the llc - you can use a NM llc in any state).

Re:Sensitive information?

[radarskiy]

Reading Wikipedia (for all but the last item) is just about within the abilities of the typical Anonymous.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Mordok-DestroyerOfWo]

Yes...but he is still a racist. As a man of Hispanic genetic heritage, I refuse to even travel through Arizona. He, and the bigots that keep voting his racist ilk in are ensuring that people like me don't spend a dime there.

Re:Sensitive information?

[ArbitraryName]

You are not FBI director James Brien Comey Jr, who (just a guess) probably isn't in the phone book.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

Re:Sensitive information?

[vikingpower]

You've got the wrong friends. So do they.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Whorhay]

I've never seen someone with a clearance that wasn't allowed to have a social network account because of the job. I have however known a lot of people that don't have such accounts because it is just one more thing to worry about when a clearance review rolls around. Technically speaking though I think that even accounts like the ones we are using here are supposed to be disclosed as "Alliases" in your clearance paperwork.

Re:Sensitive information?

[cavreader]

Well the government already knows everything about me thanks to the federal and state tax returns I file every year. Add in my property records and drivers license and they have all they need if they really want to get in touch.

Re:Sensitive information?

[pla]

I wonder how long America would last if the entire World declared war on America.

We wouldn't win, but we wouldn't exactly "lose", either.

Keep in mind that the "cold" war merely warmed up a few degrees... The world still contains enough nukes to render our ball of mud into an uninhabitable radioactive wasteland 10x over. And the US has a significant fraction of those (and possibly a majority of the functional ones, by most accounts of the state of the former USSR's stockpile).

Re:Sensitive information?

[cayenne8]

Yes...but he is still a racist. As a man of Hispanic genetic heritage, I refuse to even travel through Arizona. He, and the bigots that keep voting his racist ilk in are ensuring that people like me don't spend a dime there.

What things has he done that are racist?

While I have heard his name before, I'm not terribly familiar with him, and haven't head of what he has done as a LEO that is overtly racist, or at least it hasn't hit the national news where I would have heard about it.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Ralph Wiggam]

You think I should ditch friends of 20 years because they got a job with the government?

Re:Sensitive information?

[i kan reed]

Not all of those provide all these data. I'm not trying to say it's a big deal, just that it's a deal at all, which is now an extremist position, apparently.

Re:Sensitive information?

[mythosaz]

As a man of Hispanic genetic heritage, I refuse to even travel through Arizona.

Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, and certainly I propose voting on things with your feet and wallets, but the overall idea that Arizona is racist is a bit much.

Immigration issues, and border-related crime (and fallout from it) is a serious problem in Arizona. There's no simple solution. Everyone knows -- everyone -- that the people standing outside of the Home Depot on 35th avenue looking for day job are almost entirely illegals. Everyone knows plenty of restaurants where the kitchen staff are undocumented. Nobody even blinks when we report another house filled with immigrants held hostage by an extortionist coyote who promised to bring them to the promised land but kept them by force until their "ransom" was paid. We're used to seeing a house in the suburbs get busted for being a drug warehouse -- in a state where marijuana is already legal for medical use.

Largely things are great in Phoenix -- and the rest of the state -- but having a difficult problem with our proximity to the border doesn't make us a state full of racists.

Re:Sensitive information?

[mythosaz]

In a wikipedia link?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...

He's big on the national news from time to time.

Re:Sensitive information?

[rk]

Not long, as would the rest of the world. A global war would like that would stop all trade in and out of the US, and that would wreck the global economy for quite a while.

Re:Sensitive information?

[TheRealMindChild]

Not only that, but a REALLY old client (Haines & Co in North Canton, OH) publishes what the call Criss Cross directory. It has moved to more of an online service, but they still publish and sell a printed book. You can look up an address by phone number, You can look up a person by address, etc. You just need one piece of information and you can easily look up the rest

Re:Sensitive information?

[dimeglio]

It's not a leak, it is required to ensure a fair and equitable taxation system. Just like public criminal conviction records are essential for a fair and equitable justice system.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Ralph Wiggam]

Wow. You're a huge douche.

Re:Sensitive information?

[lgw]

Land records only show who owns a house (which can easily be an LLC) not who lives there.

Re:Sensitive information?

[CanHasDIY]

Anecdotal evidence regarding one guy who's a known racist, has been investigated for abuse of power, and is, generally speaking, a massive attention whore, is not what I would consider evidence of a systemic issue involving public records of persons working as LEOs.

Actually, never mind the other stuff - all the attention whoring is enough to get anybody on a whackjob's radar.

Re:Sensitive information?

[swb]

I'd also guess that the head of the FBI has around the clock armed security, a home that has been hardened against attack & panic room, on-site fully automatic weapons, and an FBI tactical team on standby.

I wouldn't want to deliver a pizza, let alone attack the guy.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Anonymous Coward]

While you were making shit up, you forgot to have them bypass the plasma flow regulator and boost the shields by 400%.

Re:Sensitive information?

[i kan reed]

I suspect that you're wrong, though, about the security. The president(and their families), vice president, foreign dignitaries, officials in dangerous locations, people running for president, and former presidents are the only federal officials that have security provided, as a matter of law.

Re:Sensitive information?

[mythosaz]

I've never seen a situation where a LEO was stalked/killed based on publicly accessible info, because they were a LEO.

Joe most certainly has been stalked based on his information being public - and moreso as a result of his feud with the Phoenix New Times and their publishing of his data. You can argue that it doesn't have anything to do with him being a LEO, but with his beliefs, but now we're just splitting hairs.

I provided this particular data point (which trumps "never") only because I'm here in Phoenix, in his back yard.

As to him being racist or abusing his power -- there's IMHO a grain of truth to it all, but it's mostly a political battle. 20 years as Sheriff in Arizona, plus a penchant for the dramatic gesture (tent city, pink underwear) makes him a big target for others seeking to make a name for themselves. If a patrol officer gets in a fight with a brown skinned guy, papers like PNT will lead with "Arpaio's Office Fosters Racism!" :/

Re:Sensitive information?

[Ralph Wiggam]

Eric and Rob.

Re:Sensitive information?

[arth1]

Checking your posted link, I found this rather funny (or telling, which would be scary):

People James may know

        Wen Wu
        Chengang Wu
        Cheng G Gong
        Fan Wu
        Chenggang G Wu
        Wen G Gong
        Cheng H Wu

Re:Sensitive information?

[similar_name]

If budgets come in to play at all, it might be a close one.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

It's not a leak, it is required to ensure a fair and equitable taxation system.

You are going to have to explain that one. Property taxes don't vary by who owns the property. And if you don't pay the taxes, the state will seize the property, regardless of the owner of record so it isn't like you can get away with not paying just because your name isn't directly on the records.

Re:Sensitive information?

[tibit]

Sure, but most people live in the houses they own :)

Re:Sensitive information?

[tibit]

Privacy leak? Why the fuck would anyone want to hide this stuff?

Re:Sensitive information?

[tibit]

Nice, didn't know that one.

Re:Sensitive information?

[CanHasDIY]

I've never seen a situation where a LEO was stalked/killed based on publicly accessible info, because they were a LEO.

Joe most certainly has been stalked based on his information being public - and moreso as a result of his feud with the Phoenix New Times and their publishing of his data. You can argue that it doesn't have anything to do with him being a LEO, but with his beliefs, but now we're just splitting hairs.

No, it's not 'splitting hairs' - I myself have been stalked because of comments I made publicly; I am not a LEO, nor are the vast majority of people who are stalked by individuals accessing public records. Which is my point - most people who are stalked are not members of law 'enforcement,' and therefore we don't need to give special protections to LEOs just because, one fucking time, one of them got a little sand in his vagina. Hell, if anything we need to put more scrutiny on these public servants, to make sure they aren't abusing the access they have to non-public records.

Re:Sensitive information?

[citizenr]

It is sensitive and you will get prosecuted for posting it _if_ you live in US and those are royalty details. By royalty I mean upper echelons of power, not some cattle citizens.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Anonymous Coward]

>more common for people in law enforcement than others

[citation needed]

I think that's a baseless glorification of law enforcement. A B-list internet celebrity has several times the threat to their personal safety than 99.9999% of LEOs.

Re:Sensitive information?

[John.Banister]

I've done commercial crab fishing, and you're mistaken.

Re:Sensitive information?

[mythosaz]

I get that you think the man is putting us all down, and that's a fair opinion to have. [You don't see me advocating for special protections.] But your position on the matter doesn't contradict this specific case where credible threats against a law enforcement official went up after his address was made "more" public when a newspaper published it.

You said "never."
I said, "here's one."

Re:Sensitive information?

[mythosaz]

Don't worry, he's not from Earth, he's from IdealWorld, where, fortunately for the color-blind, things are all in black and white.

Re:Sensitive information?

[swb]

Sure, Secret Service protection is limited by law, but the head of the FBI has his own armed force and a ton of discretion on how to use it.

The FBI has a laundry list of people with grievances, from wingnut militia groups, criminal gangs like the Aryan Brotherhood, a ton of terrorist groups as well as a lengthy list of foreign intelligence services keen to target the principal domestic counterintelligence organization of the US.

I'm sure he has personal discretion on how much protection to accept and it may fluctuate with threat levels, but the idea that this guy sits in some ordinary surburban house with no one watching and just his trusty FBI issued pistol just isn't realistic.

Re:Sensitive information?

[bob_super]

It it's short.
But if nobody uses nukes, then the US will quickly find itself unable to source enough raw materials locally.
If the war starts early in the winter, invading Canada won't be much help, and Mexico isn't easy terrain...

Re:Sensitive information?

[Anonymous Coward]

Arizona is racists. Arizona also only voted in MLK holiday after the black players threatened to boycott the Super Bowl there. Live in a delusional land now don't you?

Re:Sensitive information?

[ljw1004]

"I'm not a racist but..."

In my book, referring to illegal migrants as just "illegals" is itself racist. At least dignify them with a noun that gives them some agency or humanity. The term "illegal" is solely about how they're affected by current laws and says nothing inherent to them.

Re:Sensitive information?

[lgw]

Most people have no compelling need to obfuscate their home address. Regardless, I'd bet that if you went to county records to figure out where a federal judge lived, not only would you not find out, but you'd find yourself answering questions from armed men in bad suits soon enough.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

> Privacy leak? Why the fuck would anyone want to hide this stuff?

Ever heard of swatting?

There are all kinds of grief that someone can cause you if they know where you live.

Re:Sensitive information?

[ShaunC]

Privacy leak? Why the fuck would anyone want to hide this stuff?

Battered woman who doesn't want her abusive ex finding out where she lives, celebrity fed up with stalkers, etc.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Ralph Wiggam]

You seem to assume that everyone in the CIA is a field agent. Most people with secret jobs don't have a cover story. It's pointless. They are allowed to tell you that they work for the CIA. They just can't tell you more than that.

Re:Sensitive information?

[mythosaz]

That's a grossly simplistic view of something that happened all a quarter of a century ago, and does not, by and large, represent the attitude of Arizonans.

In 1987, the Governor, acting on threats from the state's AG that a new federally forced holiday was illegal, and as such would sue for the cost of the holiday, canceled the outgoing governor's order for the holiday to go on the state's books. This wild-west libertarian, federal government can't tell us what to do attitude was good for Governor Mecham, who probably was racist.

This was still very much Goldwater's Arizona, at least in terms of politics, and played a much larger part than the textbook writing world will remember this event as "just racism."

In 1990, despite threats from the NFL to take away Super Bowl XXVII, the MLK holiday voting issue went to the public (instead of the state legislature) and the popular vote chose not to add the holiday to the state calendar. [Business here either do or don't offer the day off, much like everywhere else in the country.] The NFL followed through with their threat. In 1992, the MLK holiday went up for voting again, and it passed. Now state employees could have the day off. The NFL responded by awarding us Super Bowl XXX -- which we celebrated by making a logo suitable for Vin Diesel movie.

Re:Sensitive information?

[s.petry]

This is not a mandate, this is a training that people receive. We could have all the social media accounts we wanted when I worked for the DOD. We received weekly broadcasts reminding us not to put information regarding our jobs on those sites for our own safety.

"Not allowed" implies that there is some sort of regulation in place preventing people from having a social media account which is untrue.

Re:Sensitive information?

[mythosaz]

"Affected by current laws" makes it sound like they had the unfortunate accident of being dropped in this country by mistake rather than choosing, willfully, to be in violation of the law.

I sympathize with their plight. The other side of the US/Mexico border sucks. If the roles were reversed, I might be here illegally trying to make life better for my family. ...but not choosing a soft, friendly, PC name for people who, by definition, are criminals doesn't make me racist.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Anonymous Coward]

Umm... no, that's you framing the issue to try to win a different argument with a thinly veiled ad-hominem against the GP in which you outright call them a racist (and maybe even truthfully so).

You claim that the word "illegals" as a noun denies them dignity/agency/humanity, and demand that they be called "undocumented migrants" (not alien or immigrant) or such to try to promote agency that they are not granted as a matter of law.

You want to humanize a truncated expression to force thought beyond what has occurred in the catch phrase and hope that you can advocate sympathy for these humans.

That they are by definition here unlawfully does not judge them as a person any more than identifying a criminal judges someone as a person. That a court or due process is required is immaterial -- a criminal is still a criminal when observed in the act, even if not yet convicted. It's a statement of observation, not a statement as a finding of matter-of-justice.

Observing this truth does not make me a racist -- although taking certain actions, or denying them certain human rights/liberties/decency as a result might.

Reflecting that they are here illegally does say something inherent about them. It says they're criminals.

If you don't like this, then perhaps you could make the point that a jaywalker, a speeder, a man who underpays his taxes by a cent is also a criminal, and that this particular criminalization is not a productive use of public resources.

You busy attacking the GP and calling them a racist just demonstrates that you seem to have trouble constructing a legitimate argument and would rather attack a social and cultural problem with cries of "that's racist".

Reflections about reality aren't racist. Our laws are.

Lawbreakers are lawbreakers in the eyes of statists everywhere until such time as the laws are changed.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Areyoukiddingme]

Employees of armed federal agencies depend to a large extent on the rest of the armed federal agency and the implicit promise that "if you mess with one of ours, you mess with all of us." Federal agencies have acquired a certain aroma of lawlessness when it comes to avenging their own, thanks in large part to Hollywood, but aided and abetted by them any time Hollywood comes asking for an adviser. That and there are news reports of just enough jack-booted thuggery that people assume all the rest of it is true.

It's more than a little unfortunate that they've chosen to go that route since 9/11. Now instead of the promise that "we will find you and bring you to justice,' it's "we will find you and kill your dog and probably you too at the slightest provocation." The ongoing militarization of police has many downsides, and make no mistake, the FBI are only police. They should act like it. Sadly, they don't.

Re:Sensitive information?

[skegg]

As for the other info, I fail to see how my wedding date, educational history, etc. would be particularly useful to a killer.

The day after your wedding anniversary, your assassin could ask your wife what type of flowers you bought her and where you took her for dinner.

She'd become so irate that you forgot the anniversary that she'd do the job for him.

Re:Sensitive information?

[SumDog]

They could be answers to your security questions. Personally, my securit question answers are alway additional passwords. I form them based off an algorithm off the first and last words in the question.

Re:Sensitive information?

[ShanghaiBill]

I've done commercial crab fishing, and you're mistaken.

Depends where you did it. Fishing for king crab in the Bering Sea is far more dangerous than, say, fishing for blue crabs in the Chesapeake Bay. The Bering Sea commonly has 25 foot waves and 80mph winds. The decks get icy, the big metal cages are heavy, and there is extreme time pressure because the king crab season only opens for a few weeks. Crushed limbs and even fatalities are common. But, hey, the pay is good.

You can read a lot more in this book.

Re:Sensitive information?

[oddfox]

I guess those children brought along by their families willfully chose to have their parents or parent bring them into the USA through undocumented immigration. Why do you insist on calling these people illegals when they're just as law-abiding as you and I, except they were brought here underage and only found out they were undocumented when they got into High School or College? They are not criminals, they did not knowingly break any laws. Most of the time they don't even speak Spanish, so deporting them to Mexico where they can't speak the language and they don't know any of their family there is exceptionally cruel punishment for someone who ultimately didn't do anything except get brought over by an authority figure early on in life.

It's not a soft friendly PC name calling them undocumented immigrants, it's being realistic about the fact that not every single one of them committed any crime willingly or otherwise. Calling them illegals is absolutely pejorative, and it has no purpose other than to paint the "illegals" as nothing more than criminals. The world isn't so black-and-white, and there are a lot of privileged people who simply cannot fathom that maybe some undocumented people in America aren't here because they decided to cross the border one day, as they had little choice in the matter once their immediate family says "This is what we're doing" and the children don't even yet understand what is happening.

Not every undocumented immigrant comes to America this way, of course, but there are many who do, and to call them criminals via blanket statements is, frankly, ignorant. A child being brought over the border illegally by his/her family has two choices: Go with your family or go live on the streets. They're presented with these choices when they're often times not even old enough to comprehend anything about what's going on, other than "We're moving". I really hope you can begin to consider that maybe everyone you call "illegal" did nothing at all to earn that mean and inaccurate label. It's a pejorative term used to dehumanize the actual people involved, and there are better ways to describe this swath of people without the stigma of "Illegals".

"Affected by current laws" makes it sound like they had the unfortunate accident of being dropped in this country by mistake rather than choosing, willfully, to be in violation of the law.

It's staring you right in the face in the opening of your post, but for some reason it eludes you. There actually are a lot of people who absolutely were not brought here willingly or at an age of understanding.

Re:Sensitive information?

[ShanghaiBill]

... choosing, willfully, to be in violation of the law.

75% of the people on the freeway are also choosing, willfully, to be in violation of the law. That doesn't make them evil, or even wrong, as long as they can safely handle their car. Likewise, if a Mexican comes here, works honestly, and builds a better life for himself and his family, I don't see anything wrong with that.

Re:Sensitive information?

[dbIII]

In my country something like that was clobbered for "copyright" reasons, although I'm sure the reality was because it competed with a very expensive service from the phone company.

Re:Sensitive information?

[BlueStrat]

I'd also guess that the head of the FBI has around the clock armed security, a home that has been hardened against attack & panic room, on-site fully automatic weapons, and an FBI tactical team on standby.

None of which will stop a smart, motivated, and willing-and/or-planning-to-die individual with even modest resources.

All government officials are only alive because nobody who is reasonably sane, intelligent, and resourceful has decided to set out to methodically plan and carry out an assassination. Killing someone in government is not that hard. It's the escaping and eluding capture and prosecution while not being killed afterwards that's the difficult bit.

If one is not worried about escaping or even surviving, tactical operational planning and resource/logistic requirements get a whole lot less complicated, and the chances for success increase sharply.

Strat

Re:Sensitive information?

[vikingpower]

"The free states [...] which had embraced the cause of Rome were rewarded with a nominal alliance, and insensibly sunk into real servitude."

( Gibbon, "History of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire" )

In spite of and in contradiction with the USA's touting democracy all over the earth, quite the contrary has happened, what with the lost wars in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. A mere shimmer of lustre, originating in an American Dream that was all but superficial rhetoric, managed to shine over Europe during the decades of the Cold War. But since 1989, two and a half decades of gradually worsening debt, surveillance and fear-mongering have opened the eyes of many in a Europe that was recently but a vassal: the US government is not to be trusted, and serving it is another form of perpetuating servitude. Of which, enough now.

Re:Sensitive information?

[John.Banister]

I've fished for king crab and opilio crab in the Bering Sea, and in the Sea of Okhotsk. I'm familiar with 40' seas and 80 knot winds. Since the rationalization, there's no intense time pressure on crab seasons anymore. The only limit to the schedule is set by (#$%!#$ slavery making) processing quota owning factories (& fuel consumption related economics), and if you have crab later than others and they still have processing quota available (& someone always will), they'll buy it. If you're green, incautious and working for a boat whose owner puts greed before safety, injury and death are easy to find (and not just in crab fishing), but if you're experienced and working o/b a safety first vessel, it's dangerous, but it's not getting-shot-at dangerous.

Re:Sensitive information?

[The Wild Norseman]

People James may know

                  Wen Wu
                  Chengang Wu
                  Cheng G Gong
                  Fan Wu
                  Chenggang G Wu
                  Wen G Gong
                  Cheng H Wu

Woh. I wonder wu else he knows, though my guess is he's long gong by now so wei can't ask him.

Re:Sensitive information?

[CanHasDIY]

I said

I've never seen a situation where a LEO was stalked/killed based on publicly accessible info, because they were a LEO.

Your little anecdote about Sheriff Joe doesn't change that, namely because there's no mention of actual stalking there (an "open threat" != "stalker"), but also because it seems to me he was being "stalked," if you could even call it that*, because he is an asshole, not specifically because he's a cop.

* I think anyone who's actually been stalked by someone that wants to harm them would likely take offense to that claim. People make idle threats all the time, it's different when you find note left for you somewhere that person shouldn't have had access to; so, wake me when Arpaio starts finding dead cats or the like in his locker, or under the seat of his private automobile.

Re:Sensitive information?

[tibit]

And what does it matter that someone looked up the details of the poor target online, vs. from a random dart throw on a map? Unless there's a conscious, repeated targeting going on, it won't matter at all.

Re:Sensitive information?

[tibit]

Yet, demonstrably, in spite of all this being "out there", both celebrities and battered women are not really much worse for it. If my wife's experience with stalkers is anything to go by, the best way to deal with a stalker is an offer of having sex right now and right there, and oh by the way did you know I was HIV positive for a while now. Stalkers have tiny balls, apparently.

Re:Sensitive information?

[tibit]

For $50-$100 you can do it without having to go anywhere. There are companies that aggregate all that data :)

Re:Sensitive information?

[tibit]

Oh no, you can still do it in Europe, only that digging up all the data is on you. So you can't merely get a phone book, OCR it, and sell a digital version of the same facts. In the U.S. you can, and I agree with that policy. Europe is a bit nuts in this respect IMHO, and you need to have paper trail that shows you did obtain the data independently.

Re:Sensitive information?

[tibit]

Of course lawyers that one should retain in such circumstances know all that. If you have no means to get a lawyer, then most likely the lady's "suing for damages" part doesn't make any sense, because there are no assets to go after. And besides, if the defense lawyer is provided by the insurer, then anyway they know all that and should do due diligence, just like you did, or they are up for firing and possibly disbarment. What you did is really the minimal due diligence that any law student would be aware of, much less a practicing lawyer. Of course kudos for you for having the wherewithal to stay rational and look at the data.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Unless there's a conscious, repeated targeting going on, it won't matter at all.

Are you a dumbass/? Did you read the article about swatting? Did you see even one example of random attacks? Making yourself a smaller target is what it is all about.

Re:Sensitive information?

[Ralph Wiggam]

Wow. You're a poetic douche who doesn't know shit about modern America or ancient Rome.

Re:Sensitive information?

[vikingpower]

Instead of reviling me without argument, rather rebuke me with reason. In the absence of which I stand my ground, albeit insulted.

Re:Sensitive information?

[q4Fry]

The United States wouldn't win, and everyone would lose.

I hate to say it

[sandbagger]

But if he put a wedding announcement in his local paper, it's hardly sensitive information.

Re:Job Fair

[tibit]

As far a US is concerned, I've got some news for you, and you must be living an ever sheltered life.

Ever got a traffic ticket? It's public record, usually available online for a free lookup. Ever purchased real estate? Same. Got born or died? Same. And so it goes.

Re:Job Fair

[Trax3001BBS]

When I expressed why I was uncomfortable with creating a LinkedIN profile, I was told that LinkedIN wasn't like Facebook where people were posting crap or something like that - with a tone of "WTF is YOUR problem?"

I know what you mean, the WTF is that one line in all ToS's that says "due to change at anytime". It doesn't help distancing themselves from Facebook, Twitter, or Google + when linkedin is fourth in line to use site log ons, when logging on to Slashdot.

and I got a refrigerator! Happy days! I have a REFRIGERATOR!!!

Congratulations on your new acquisition! :}

Re:Job Fair

[lgw]

Was that company LinkedIn, by any chance? That's the only company I can imagine with that attitude. It's true though that LinkedIn isn't like Facebook: it's not really a "social" site at all, it's just a place to post your resume, with as few or as many details as you like, and a somewhat-screened contact system.

Also, when someone at a job fair makes some polite excuse for not anting to take your resume, well, maybe take the hint?

Re:Job Fair

[Virtucon]

Isn't turnabout fair play then? Drunk video of her barfing on Youtube = dumped.

Re:fuk

[Anonymous Coward]

If they have nothing to hide, these agents have nothing to fear.

Post the pastebin link

[Sean]

Will someone just post the pastebin link so we can look at judge for ourselves?

Re:Post the pastebin link

[Anonymous Coward]

http://pastebin.com/Luw2XsP2
see also
http://pastebin.com/Eyn23wXm

here is the link

[h54108]

and here is the link http://pastebin.com/DwDJ0WW8

yip

[h54108]

here's the link http://pastebin.com/xTwMqEGs