Affair Site Hackers Threaten Release of All User Data Unless It Closes

heretic108 writes: According to KrebsOnSecurity, the infamous Ashley Madison affairs hookup website has been hacked by a group calling itself The Impact Team. This group is demanding the immediate and permanent shutdown of Ashley Madison, as well as similar sites Cougar Life and Established Man, owned by the same company: Avid Life Media. If the sites aren't shut down, the hackers are threatening to publicly release personal data for 37 million users. ALM has confirmed that a hack took place, and the hackers posted snippets of account data, as well as bank and salary information from the company itself.

Comments

nothing new under the sun

[FatdogHaiku]

People likely to have an affair will do so with or without a website...

Re:nothing new under the sun

[bluefoxlucid]

Perhaps so; but We, the Righteous, will hack them all and show our moral superiority!

Re:nothing new under the sun

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I would actually be interested to know what the logic is here: the hacker clearly doesn't like AM, or they wouldn't be spoiling their rumored-IPO quite this enthusiastically, they also don't like the users they are threatening to expose; but they also appear to be really bent out of shape about AM's allegedly-dishonest-and-exploitative 'pay to purge the embarrassing traces' feature.

Anger about that feature would seem to be something more likely in some portion of the users, or among people who identify with the interests of the users; but this interested party displays only contempt for them; rather than viewing AM's attempt to squeeze them as an amusing and justified punishment.

We obviously have no particular reason to trust their statement; but we do have to expect that they have a reason worth the legal exposure for doing this(especially since the dataset they are talking about would probably be worth a decent sum for sale to others looking for really juicy spearphishing targets ) rather than not attempting the hack at all or hacking but then staying quiet about it. My guess would be that it is more about attacking the site operator than about the users specifically; it is pretty common for at least a person or two to end up suitably embittered during the course of business.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Anonymous Coward]

There ought to be some societal reward for all of us married folk who take our vows seriously, even if that reward comes in the form of a Nelson laugh at the cheaters' expense.

HA ha /Nelson

Re:nothing new under the sun

[pastafazou]

It costs $15 and their data doesn't even get deleted...a scam that has netted $1.7M for ALM

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Charliemopps]

People likely to have an affair will do so with or without a website...

The site delays the inevitable discovery by their spouse, thereby increasing the damaged caused by the dishonesty. Anything that destroys truth is evil. Period. This site and the people that use it are disgusting.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd hazard a guess that one of the hackers on the team was mad that his wife had an affair using the site, so he got his hacking buddies together to take revenge.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Fire_Wraith]

I'd hazard a guess that this is a disgruntled insider, based in part on the fact that they claimed knowledge of internal practices (charging for profile deletion, but then retaining the information anyway). It's certainly possible someone could find that out through other means (having paid to have it deleted, then having it found anyway), but insider access explains a lot of things.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[AmiMoJo]

What percentage wouldn't have had an affair if not encouraged by seductive advertising or given the opportunity to meet someone online rather than having to trawl bars or date people they know where the risk of discovery is higher?

I have no idea, but for these sites to be making money the answer must >0%.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[jandersen]

Interesting choice of name, though: The Impact Team (TIT). What were they thing of?

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Opportunist]

There already is one. Tax rebates.

Us unmarried folks get to fuck anyone we want, you marrieds get to keep your money and the married ones that want both have to accept the risk.

Sounds pretty fair already to me.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[TheCarp]

You'd like to think that, wouldn't you?! You've beaten my giant, which means you're exceptionally strong, so you could've put the poison in your own goblet, trusting on your strength to save you, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you! But, you've also bested my Spaniard, which means you must have studied, and in studying you must have learned that man is mortal, so you would have put the poison as far from yourself as possible, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me!

I think you are missing some serious possibilities for your over-analyse :)

What if the hackers in question simply do not take as nuanced of a view as you and are just throwing shit against the wall in order to justify their actions and stir up some publicity?

Perhaps, they were paid by a rival site or, are even an ex-employee?

> My guess would be that it is more about attacking the site operator than about the users specifically; it is pretty common for at least a person or two to end up suitably embittered during the course of business.

Well there are only so many glasses the powder can be in right? Sounds about right, personal grudge or even rival corp. Hell, I almost got involved with a contract to do some cleanup a while back because someone had found out his developer in India was abusing the company servers to run his own side business and fired him..... to which he responded by logging in to their hosting service and turning off machines; I could see a more vindictive person doing something like this.

People making twisted ethical arguments in order to justify what they want to do is not really anything new though so it is hard to rule out people who just wanted to pick a target to hack and are justifying a target that wont get a ton of sympathy. It can also be a little of A and a little of B.

The only thing really clear is they don't seem to have done this for money, though, who knows if they have another angle. Maybe they are contacting individuals who look like they might be able to afford to keep their info out of the dump? I bet you there are more than a few who would pay up.

But remember, we live in a world where people actually say things like "If I find he is sleeping with someone else I am going to beat her bloody"....like the third party is the one who did wrong. These are matters that evoke passions that, for many people, shine far brighter than ethics and reason.

Its so much easier when they just demand a ransom or something. Who benefits from the site shutdown? Even a rival site would likely see reputational fallout from this. In fact, the only parties I can think of who really would benefit here are divorce lawyers and the traditional dating sites who may see a slight bump, but its hard to see how they would see this as worth it when there is so much competition for desperation already.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[TWX]

Last time I checked, the tax situation for being married without having any dependents weren't especially better than for being single. First couple tax seasons after getting married we calculated our taxes both ways, and there wasn't really much of a difference.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[cdrudge]

I would actually be interested to know what the logic is here: the hacker clearly doesn't like AM, or they wouldn't be spoiling their rumored-IPO quite this enthusiastically, they also don't like the users they are threatening to expose; but they also appear to be really bent out of shape about AM's allegedly-dishonest-and-exploitative 'pay to purge the embarrassing traces' feature.

I'd be really surprised if the actual hacker(s) really had any moral stance one way or another. My money would be be on just pure financial greed. They see AM and it's customers as a paycheck. They see AM as a source of money and are applying pressure directly on them to pay up and/or shut down. They also pressure subscribers to pressure AM from the other side to pay up to not reveal their information.

In the end I think it will be a loss for the hackers and customers. The hackers aren't going to get their money. AM takes a PR hit but doesn't really care because they already run a website for people with questionable ethics/morality. Customers info might get released, but for the 3 people that are actually real, married, and their partner doesn't already know, the shit might hit the fan. For everyone else, no one cares. And if you're a paying subscriber to a cheating website with your own real information, you're already a fucking idiot and get what you deserve for being a dumbass.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[TWX]

People are disgusting anyway. This is simply another in a long line of ways for people to hide communications that include alternate Internet e-mail addresses, alternate accounts through AOL, Compuserve, and Prodigy, PO Boxes, and if one goes back REALLY far, private couriers.

Ironic thing is, unless one's spouse or significant-other has really, REALLY let themselves go, the grass really isn't greener on the other side. The other person might appeal because they're new, but it's usually because they're new and the shiny luster hasn't been worn off through familiarity, and once that familiarity is well and truly established the new person isn't any better than the previous one, and could actually be worse.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[tibit]

If we wanted to swing or do it with other people, both me and my wife would simply sign up on AM or a similar site, with full knowledge of each other. Perhaps most people "cheat" without their spouses knowing about it? I thought the whole point of rational adults being married was that they talked and shit? Sigh.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Enter the Shoggoth]

Interesting choice of name, though: The Impact Team (TIT). What were they thing of?

Breasts obviously!

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Qzukk]

You also get tax breaks for the marriage thing

Standard deduction, single: $6300
Standard deduction, married filing jointly: $12600

The only tax break you get is if your wife is a stay-at-home mom where you can double your tax deduction. Of course, then she runs the risk of losing all her credits etc from having no income.

if you have kids, you get those breaks too

You get those breaks as a single parent too.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[the_B0fh]

Umm, that charging but not actually removing it was already pretty well known previously I think.

I could have sworn I remember read about it previously.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[NotDrWho]

Or they have some sort of financial interest in harming the site. It's like my grandpa used to say "Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by fucking greed."

Re:nothing new under the sun

[the_B0fh]

I don't see any requests for money, so who is going to pay the hackers?

Individual customers certainly won't.

AM certainly wouldn't.

The hackers just want the site to shut down.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[NotDrWho]

you marrieds get to keep your money

They get those cool minivans too.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Solandri]

I'd hazard a guess that this is a disgruntled insider, based in part on the fact that they claimed knowledge of internal practices (charging for profile deletion, but then retaining the information anyway)

Hey, they were only keeping open the possibilities for future business models.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Charliemopps]

It's simple. Living with someone exposes their flaws. It's hard to see the flaws in people you don't live with. Less flaws = more attractive.

But the fact of the matter is, you should live up to your obligations. Sometimes you make bad choices in life... sometimes they are so bad that it affects the rest of your life... you end up missing an arm, or in prison, or married to a drunk. You've got to live with your choices, and do your best improve the situation. But lies, and dishonesty are not the way. Don't like your wife? Go to counseling, work it out with her... if all else fails, be honest with her and get a divorce, then start dating.

What exactly is the person that's visiting a site like this doing? It's pure, 100% evil. There is nothing good that comes of cheating. You're exposing your wife and children to all sorts of danger and instability. STDs, scorned women... God only knows. You're further harming your marriage with distrust and dishonesty. Infidelity is the ultimate selfish act, and it's at the expense of the people that are the closest to you. There are few other acts that even remotely compare in their depravity, and self interest.

It's not the cheating... it's the lying... and why you're lying. You're causing your spouse ultimate pain, for basically nothing. And you could avoid all of that with a few months of heart ache and once court appearance.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Registered Coward v2]

I'd hazard a guess that this is a disgruntled insider, based in part on the fact that they claimed knowledge of internal practices (charging for profile deletion, but then retaining the information anyway). It's certainly possible someone could find that out through other means (having paid to have it deleted, then having it found anyway), but insider access explains a lot of things.

I wonder if someone got laid off or feels screwed out of IPO shares? It would seem someone who had access to accounts might be able to grab the info, or at least enough to convince AM they have.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Squiddie]

It is called NOT losing half your shit you own for getting caught playing in someone else's panties.

Worse, you still might lose your shit because your wife let someone else play in her panties, and then continue paying for them to fuck in your house. Seriously, marriage is a terrible deal. One of my older friends had to pay his wife half of his retirement from the Army because they were married for ten years. It's not like she was deployed or actually did anything.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[gstoddart]

I would actually be interested to know what the logic is here: the hacker clearly doesn't like AM

I figure there's really only two plausible scenarios here:

1) It's the usual band of clowns and morons doing this for fun, in which case the demands are random crap which don't mean anything

2) The hackers will attempt to claim they represent a religious point of view and wish to clean up the world.

The only commonality with the sites is that they are there to enable some behavior which some asshole who isn't affected thinks is immoral.

Maybe it's Islamic State taking a break from raping their captured sex slaves to tell us how immoral we all are. Or it's some other band of morons looking for attention and this has nothing to do with anything.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Registered Coward v2]

It costs $15 and their data doesn't even get deleted...a scam that has netted $1.7M for ALM

In that case, AM might be liable for damages if someone paid to have the information deleted and it turns out it wasn't and then later gets stolen and released causing damage to the account holder. IANAL, but it would seem they would have at least an expectation the data was deleted, paid a consideration for AM to take a certain action (deleting information) in exchange, failed to do so as promised and as a result some suffered damages. While there is probably some T&C fine print that attempts to absolve them of all responsibility I would argue they were negligent in not deleting the data and safeguarding their systems and thus still liable. Given they are looking at IPO money they would have deep pockets for a class action suit.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[omnichad]

Since there's no ransom demand, the only way to make money is if ALM was publicly traded - they're not. Otherwise, you short sell some stock before making your demands public and hope to make money on the plummeting stock price.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Penguinisto]

I don't see any requests for money, so who is going to pay the hackers?

Individual customers certainly won't.

Dunno - one good spearphishing campaign based on the personal info gathered from the hack would probably garner quite a bit of money... and none of us would ever hear about it. The public announcements would only add to the credibility of the blackmail threats.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[ceoyoyo]

Why? You already get tax breaks. I understand that had a purpose when a wife was a dependent, but why today? Why should the single people pay you to be married, faithfully or not?

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Bob the Super Hamste]

That sounds like a pretty shit deal given that the correct calculation assuming a full 20 years of service should be 25% but then the courts seem to really screw men in divorce.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[loonycyborg]

It's better without site so at least they aren't giving away their personal data. They're lucky those activists decided to perform this stunt rather than sell the data on black market or something..

Re:nothing new under the sun

[hattable]

And if the comment was phrased the opposite direction would you be upset that it implies only men cheat? Or are you just bent out of shape because someone organized a comment for brevity and you have a lot of time to kill?

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Squiddie]

It happens. The man ruined his body in the Army and now he still has to work. Granted, he's not ancient yet, but I just feel it's such an injustice.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[aynoknman]

People likely to have an affair will do so with or without a website...

Your comment ignores the nature of temptation. These websites have a corrupting influence on those who are not likely to have an affair. They catch the idly curious and change "I wonder what it would be like?" to "That person is available to me." and tempt those who would not be inclined and push them to take action.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Krishnoid]

I wonder if someone got laid off or feels screwed out of IPO shares?

I'll bet someone felt in their heart that the company promised one thing in good faith, then cheated on them.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[jandrese]

Another article I read on this had quotes from the AM CEO saying that he knew who did it and was looking at the guy's profile during the interview. We will see what comes of this.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Chelloveck]

Perhaps most people "cheat" without their spouses knowing about it?

That is the reason it's called "cheating", after all. I would never cheat on my wife. That's not to say I'd never sleep with anyone else, just that I'd never do it without her knowledge and consent. It's only cheating if it's against the rules.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Anonymous Coward]

The tax advantage for married couples only affects couples with a large difference in income. If both partners are making similar amounts of money, then it doesn't really matter.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[chilenexus]

Three possibilities I see with the religious point of view:
1) The person wants to make committing acts they find religiously offensive more difficult (yet they don't find theft and extortion morally/religiously offensive?).
2) Since the overwhelming majority of the people using such a site would tend to be the devout, they don't want someone else to hack the site and let that info out - so they claim to hack it and get it shut down so the data aren't available for other hackers to set free.
3) They're just sadistic and want to see everyone in their church squirm.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[KGIII]

As someone who has a very long history of cheating this is very true and why I do not commit to anyone any more. I simply do not behave myself in accordance with the rules implied and am too dishonest to (historically) tell mates the truth about my habits. I have cheated on my girlfriend while I was married so there was a third (and multiple thirds) in play. I feel bad so now I do not date anyone and just have a couple of lady friends who visit for a while and I am honest with them.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[petermgreen]

However if you cheat on your partner you risk a devorce. If you are the richer partner in the marriage that can lead to much larger losses of wealth than the relatively small tax advantages.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[powerlord]

This assumes people ever approach the ability to retire again.

Gone are the days of retiring with a pension to someplace warm, never to work again.

Welcome to the days of concentration of wealth and the need for perpetual employment, but combined with the "joys" of outsourcing, offshoring, reduction of pensions and uncertain future employment.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[dcw3]

"You get those breaks as a single parent too."

As a former single parent, I was able to claim "Head of Household"...more than just a single with a dependent.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[SpankiMonki]

Why should the single people pay you to be married, faithfully or not?

They don't.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Charliemopps]

As long as you're honest with them, that's cool with me. Not sure I'd walk the same path, you might want to see a shrink about your inability to commit, but that's your business, not mine.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[tlhIngan]

I'd be really surprised if the actual hacker(s) really had any moral stance one way or another. My money would be be on just pure financial greed. They see AM and it's customers as a paycheck. They see AM as a source of money and are applying pressure directly on them to pay up and/or shut down. They also pressure subscribers to pressure AM from the other side to pay up to not reveal their information.

In the end I think it will be a loss for the hackers and customers. The hackers aren't going to get their money. AM takes a PR hit but doesn't really care because they already run a website for people with questionable ethics/morality. Customers info might get released, but for the 3 people that are actually real, married, and their partner doesn't already know, the shit might hit the fan. For everyone else, no one cares. And if you're a paying subscriber to a cheating website with your own real information, you're already a fucking idiot and get what you deserve for being a dumbass.

Actually, you're underestimating the impact. The information you have on AM would be perfect for blackmail. And I'm sure you can find some rather large and high-powered people to whom the release of information like that could be deadly - either professionally or politically.

You might think everyone having an affair is doing so with their spouse's full knowledge, but that's unlikely to be the case. I'm sure a tiny percent of those are in open marriages, and maybe a slightly larger proportion are doing so with the spouse's knowledge.

AM is not for people "dating" or "looking for a companion" - they're specifically for people already in a marriage to commit adultery. And this isn't the sort of "let's just get a prostitute" thing either.

So yes, the release of information is potentially devastating, and a good proportion of those marriages will end in divorce, while the others will probably end up with said spouse being a slave.

There may be no money request now, but I'm sure once the offer to shut down is refused, the hackers will be contacting everyone one of those 37M people and asking them for say, $10/month to keep quiet. Not too much to bother police about, see, but enough for a large and steady income.

And yes, the amount is important - ask for too much and the "punishment" for revealing you're an adulterer is probably not as bad. Make it a small amount and most people will just pay for the silence.

Heck, even the hint of a potential affair will drive some marriages on the rocks. Even if there was no one night fling - just having your spouse know you were looking puts you in the doghouse of distrust. (And no, this isn't gender specific - men AND women who were cheated on are equally vindictive to their partners).

I know when I first saw the ads on TV (regular mainstream TV, I know AM has been around a long time, but their profile has been quite low), I knew they would be a perfect hacking target.

Re: nothing new under the sun

[mabhatter654]

AM goes belly up and sells to Prenda Law... New income stream!!!

Re:nothing new under the sun

[tburkhol]

Standard deduction, single: $6300
Standard deduction, married filing jointly: $12600

The only tax break you get is if your wife is a stay-at-home mom where you can double your tax deduction. Of course, then she runs the risk of losing all her credits etc from having no income.

You forgot:
Single 15% tax threshold: $9226
Married 15% tax threshold: $18450
Single 39.6% tax threshold: $413200
Married 39.6% tax threshold: $46850
Double the deduction and lower rates at every income level up the chain. Most advantageous to the single-earner family, but if you believe that "Two can live as cheaply as one," it's still a distinct advantage for two-earner families.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[liquidsin]

and chocolate bars in the checkout lanes at grocery stores tempt people who otherwise managed to avoid the snack aisle. blaming temptation for your failings is a cowardly excuse. own your decisions.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[torkus]

AM would pay. They would (and probably are) offering that themselves.

Think about it. Someone says "I'm going to kill you and steal your wallet" ... typically someone hands over the wallet freely and asks what else they can do to not be killed.

Plus they way they're doing it will earn them a lot less negativity (especially among the "conservative" folks who "abhor" those kind of websites ... and secretly use them of course) than an actual blackmail threat.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[hummassa]

4) someone whose bet is to devaluate the upcoming IPO, so shares sell cheaper than they should at start, wait for them to regain actual value, ..., profit?

Re:nothing new under the sun

[mabu]

>I would actually be interested to know what the logic is here

All you have to do is read the graphic they posted on the site.

It's pretty shallow to think they're motivated by betrayal. The people behind the site appear to also run other sites that promote prostitution and human trafficking, and they even extort money from their own customers to protect their privacy by charging a fee to have personal information removed (which as we all know is probably not actually happening - those sites probably never delete anything unless it's to protect their own ass). The media doesn't seem to be showing the whole side of the story and just claiming this is about the ashleymadison site when it's much more than that. This looks like it was some kind of long-term effort to stop a company from profiting from what many might consider to be illegal and immoral activities.

I'm not condoning what the hackers have done, but this appears to be a conflict between two dark groups on the internet. I don't see a good guy here.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[sjames]

Or perhaps they just got tired of late-night commercials that actually urge them to behave in an immoral and sleazy manner. Do we REALLY need that?

Re:nothing new under the sun

[mabu]

3. The hackers posted a graphic that explained their motivation and you didn't read it.

http://securityaffairs.co/word...

The company running Ashley-Madison also runs sites that promote human trafficking.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[sjames]

Hear Hear!

There is exactly once in my life that I have been actually morally offended by a commercial and it's theirs.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[X0563511]

Heard on NPR this morning that they think it's an inside job, and has all the hallmarks of it being so.

Apparently someone got tired of the all unethical behavior. Something about an account being free to create, but $20 to delete (and then not really being removed, or something like that)

Re: nothing new under the sun

[BarbaraHudson]

Who cares? Reality TV producers are pouring over the list right now to get the reactions of both the cheaters and their spouses. Popcorn shortages are imminent. Ditto divorce lawyers and body bags.

After a couple of decades of high profile data thefts (banks, govt, Microsoft, Apple, computer security firms) anyone who puts something on the internet and expects it to stay secret is a special kind of stupid.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Fire_Wraith]

Inconceivable!

Re:nothing new under the sun

[ceoyoyo]

From your own link, many people who file jointly pay less taxes than filing alone. In certain odd circumstances you can end up paying more if you file jointly, but you have the option of filing separately anyway.

So worst case scenario, you pay the same as single people. Any other scenario, you pay less.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Grishnakh]

You should look into polyamory. There's nothing wrong with not wanting to be constrained to a single sex partner, and there's really no good reason why our society pushes monogamy as hard as it does. It really came about because of land ownership and paternal inheritance.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[halltk1983]

Married filing separately isn't the same as filing single. That's why there are three columns. Note the following is straight rates, no deductions.

Say a man makes $80k and his wife makes $150k. Single he pays $15856.10, and she pays $35175.60. Total together is $51031.70
They get married, they pay $51804.20. Which is $772.50 more.
They file separately and he pays $16023.35 and she pays $37452.10, with a total of $53475.45. That's $2243.75 more than when they were single and $1671.25 more than filing jointly.

The only way that it makes sense to file separately is if you're going to move all the family's deductions to the higher paid person's taxes to get an overall lower rate, and if the changes more than pay for the accountants and potentially lawyers. So, I'm afraid you're wrong, there are definitely ways that married people could end up paying more, but really only if they make enough to actually pay taxes in the first place.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[DarkOx]

1) Limits the spread of sever incurable life altering diseases
2) Two adults provides a far more reliable and economically secure situation for raising children
3) Polyamory aside, most humans are jealous creatures and adultery and cheating in general frequently incite violence

Other than that no society really has no good reasons. Do you know what society is? Have you spent much time around other humans?

Re:nothing new under the sun

[nephilimsd]

The main advantage of being married without children is that you get to average your incomes together. This makes getting married to someone with roughly equal salary less appealing, but the alternative opens up the door to alimony payments should things go south. Guess you get to pick your poison.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[ShaunC]

Source?

The Krebs article linked in TFS mentions as much.

"We're on the doorstep of [confirming] who we believe is the culprit, and unfortunately that may have triggered this mass publication," Biderman said. "I've got their profile right in front of me, all their work credentials. It was definitely a person here that was not an employee but certainly had touched our technical services."

Re:nothing new under the sun

[bughunter]

Well played.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[SpankiMonki]

From your own link, many people who file jointly pay less taxes than filing alone. In certain odd circumstances you can end up paying more if you file jointly, but you have the option of filing separately anyway.

You know what? After looking into the matter more extensively, the balance of the sources I found indicates you're right! Thanks!

So worst case scenario, you pay the same as single people. Any other scenario, you pay less.

Nope, not that part. There are plenty of married couples filing jointly that pay more taxes than non-married couples filing singly.

Now, I haven't yet come across a percentage of one option vs the other, but there does seem to be a marriage penalty for at least some married couples. Whether or not it constitutes a majority, I can't say. Got any info pertinent to the question?

Cheers!

Re:nothing new under the sun

[StikyPad]

In other words, it affects rich people with trophy spouses quite well.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Grishnakh]

1) Limits the spread of sever incurable life altering diseases

Polyamorous != promiscuous. Today's "monogamous" Americans seem to be doing a great job spreading diseases around with their "monogamous" ways (which of course involves a lot of cheating).

2) Two adults provides a far more reliable and economically secure situation for raising children

Three or more adults provide an even more reliable and economically secure situation for raising children. With only two adults with one working, when the breadwinner loses his job, the family is screwed. With two working adults in today's two-earner world, if one loses his job, the family probably can't afford to continue that way for long. In a three-adult household with three earners, one job loss isn't that bad. In a four-adult household, it's not a big problem at all.

3) Polyamory aside, most humans are jealous creatures and adultery and cheating in general frequently incite violence

If people are driven to violence because of their partner's actions, they have mental problems and need anger management counseling at a minimum. Becoming violent is never acceptable just because someone else had sex and didn't invite you. That our society has accepted or even condoned such behavior is barbaric and disgusting.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[StikyPad]

The truth is that people are not monogamous. It's marriage that's the lie.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[budgenator]

These people must be pretty stupid to give out any personally traceable data anyway, that's what "magic jacks", burner phones and "Green Dor" cards are for.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[TapeCutter]

The business model appears to be, entice people to behave badly for free then blackmail them for $20 each when they change their mind, I assume they picked $20 because it would come under the minimum threshold for most 'small claims' courts. It beggars belief that commercialised blackmail is not a criminal offense. Sure most of the victims are amoral cockroaches scurrying for cover, still doesn't make it right.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Stan92057]

Your forgetting one thing, most married people do not file as married filing joint they file as single then claim married and the deductions at tax time to get the refunds. Yes its their own money but for people how cant save on their own..A singe person can only file single..no refund unless they pay extra in fed taxes on purpose. So being married does have its benefits tax wise.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[TapeCutter]

Money is not the worst part of divorce.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[sjames]

Agreed.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[mattack2]

I wonder if someone got laid off or feels screwed out of IPO shares?

Wait, weren't they already on the perfect site for that?

Re:nothing new under the sun

[mjwx]

you marrieds get to keep your money

They get those cool minivans too.

3 words,

Nissan El Grand. Vans can be awesome (and yes, I drive a sports car and am single).

Re:nothing new under the sun

[mattack2]

Ironic thing is, unless one's spouse or significant-other has really, REALLY let themselves go, the grass really isn't greener on the other side. The other person might appeal because they're new, but it's usually because they're new and the shiny luster hasn't been worn off through familiarity, and once that familiarity is well and truly established the new person isn't any better than the previous one, and could actually be worse.

The funny thing is, I thought that long ago while watching "Fatal Attraction", even before she was totally nutso.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[tehcyder]

The information you have on AM would be perfect for blackmail. And I'm sure you can find some rather large and high-powered people to whom the release of information like that could be deadly - either professionally or politically.

I was going to say that you'd have to be stupid to use a dodgy website like this if you really were "high-powered", but then again (a) you can be rich and famous and stupid, and (b) a lot of highly successful people probably can't imagine being caught out by some pleb.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[tehcyder]

The people behind the site appear to also run other sites that promote prostitution and human trafficking

But the "mission statement" of the hackers appears to treat this as the equivalent of websites for arranging affairs, gay dating or overweight dating.

There is an obvious moral difference, and in any case surely a website promoting human trafficking should just be prosecuted anyway, since that is actually illegal?

Re:nothing new under the sun

[tehcyder]

Us unmarried folks get to fuck anyone we want

Says someone who has never had even a vaguely serious relationship without getting married.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[tehcyder]

It's pure, 100% evil.

You set a pretty low bar for evil in a world where there are ISIL, paedophiles, genocides, rapists, murderers and Donald Trump.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[TheCarp]

Job killing? How was he job killing? The indian guy had a job, thats a job. Sorry you are some sore of racist bigot who thinks only americans deserve jobs but, I never felt that way. I work with Indians all the time, and I don't see why someone else deserves a job more just because of geography.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[halltk1983]

Filing as "single" when you're married is flat out tax fraud, and you're subject to fines up to $250,000 and years of imprisonment, so I doubt that is a common method of filing. http://www.avvo.com/legal-answ...

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Marxist Hacker 42]

My guess- a converted religious person of some type, with full faith in conversion, but realized that AM's "pay to delete" was a total fraud, after trying to delete their account. Contempt for the former life and those still in it is common in certain conversion circles.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Stan92057]

Well i did it for years my work would ask me how do i want to pay taxes as? single?married?married with dependents. I'm pretty sure we are not on the same page. That link is no where even close to what i said.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Qzukk]

Single 39.6% tax threshold: $41320
Married 39.6% tax threshold: $46850

In order for this to be a tax ADVANTAGE for two earners, the 39.6% threshold would have to be at least $82640. This is actually a penalty, since if both spouses make $40k, before they married their taxes each would have been below 39.6%, now that they're married, nearly all of the second spouse's income is taxed at the higher rate.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[halltk1983]

The government is willing to take as much money as you're willing to give them in the interest free loan that is overpayment of taxes with the intention of a bigger return. When you file your taxes in the beginning of the following year (what most people call "filing their return"), is when it matters, because then you could be getting back more money / paying less taxes than you are legally required to, and that's when Uncle Sam begins to get peeved.

Re:nothing new under the sun

[Stan92057]

My whole point was, yes married people do have more options then single people do as far as taxes are concerned. Nothing more,nothing less.

Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[bigjocker]

when I signed for ashleymadison.com

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[vivaoporto]

From The Guardian article (as the krebsonsecurity seems to be slashdotted):

The site, which encourages married users to cheat on their spouses and advertises 37 million members, had its data hacked by a group calling itself the Impact Team. At least two other dating sites, Cougar Life and Established Men, also owned by the same parent group, Avid Life Media, have had their data compromised.

"Avid Life Media has been instructed to take Ashley Madison and Established Men offline permanently in all forms, or we will release all customer records, including profiles with all the customers' secret sexual fantasies and matching credit card transactions, real names and addresses, and employee documents and emails. The other websites may stay online," the group's statement reads.

The hackers' main point of contention is with the fact that Ashley Madison charges users a fee of 15 pounds to carry out a "full delete" of their information if they decide to leave the site. Although users have the option of permanently hiding their profile free of charge, the company's advertisements claim that the full delete service is the only way to completely remove their information from the servers.

But the hackers say that that claim is âoea complete lieâ.

"Users almost always pay with credit card; their purchase details are not removed as promised, and include real name and address, which is of course the most important information the users want removed," they allege.

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[91degrees]

The hackers' main point of contention is with the fact that Ashley Madison charges users a fee of 15 pounds to carry out a "full delete" of their information if they decide to leave the site. Although users have the option of permanently hiding their profile free of charge, the company's advertisements claim that the full delete service is the only way to completely remove their information from the servers.

Still don't approve of the hackers, but I have a lot less sympathy for the company, if this is true.

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[nine-times]

Is it legal for them to delete all the records of their credit card transactions? I would guess that they have to keep some records for some period of time, for the IRS, for PCI compliance, etc.

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[angel'o'sphere]

I would guess that they have to keep some records for some period of time, for the IRS, for PCI compliance, etc.
But not on the online data base connected to the site!
And paper records would be good enough anyway.

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[tnk1]

Not only legal to delete the transactions from their online site, but if they were following PCI, required after a certain point.

They could certainly have kept all of that for a longer period in their accounting system, but it is not clear to me that this is what was hacked, as that should have been a non-public system.

Also, all PII and cardholder data should be encrypted, so either ALM didn't encrypt the data, used shit encryption, or there was an insider. Knowing many companies, any of the three is a likely option. Of course, I don't know if they have bothered with PCI compliance, but if there was ever a non-bank entity that should have it is this....

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[Penguinisto]

Point of order: PCI compliance demands that you do *not* store customer CC data unless absolutely necessary (mind the PDF, Henry).

On the other hand, the company is based in Canada, and I'm not sure what their data retention laws may entail. Since the company is pre-IPO, they may have aligned their policies to the Canadian equivalent of SOX (if they have one), but otherwise I don't see much demand to store the CC info for any legit business purpose.

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

That's brighter than you think! "Hello, ladies. I'm CmdrTaco, the commander of tacos, if you know wut ahm sayin', wink!"

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[tibit]

Given that it's rather easy to use a credit card with an assumed name, and also a fake billing address submitted while paying, I really don't see why the people who wanted to stay discreet/anonymous didn't do so.

In case anyone wanted to know how to do it, at least in the U.S. it's rather trivial:

1. Add an authorized user on your credit card account. The name can be fake. You'll get a card for that user.

2. Add a throwaway billing burner phone number on your account. Can be a $5 Tracfone from Walmart. This is optional only if the billing processor demands a phone number.

3. When registering/paying for AM, use the fake authorized user's card, and enter your address with a wrong name of the street. The ZIP and house number must match, the street name doesn't have to. The phone number should be the burner phone.

If the hackers get your data, all they have dirt on is a fictional character. This is 21st century, I thought every guy who knows how to use a bank account and a computer would know this shit?

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[circletimessquare]

i didn't know any of that

then again, i really don't give a shit what people think i do

which could mean i do boring things, or it could mean i have enough integrity to say "this is what i'm doing, fuck you if you don't like it"

a lot of this sneaking around with ashley madison is people who just need to grow a backbone and say "fuck you, i'm out of here"

if you have kids or you fear a large alimony:

well you can arrange to see the kids legally, and what are you teaching your kids when you live a quasi half life as an unhappy person? the kids probably already think it's better, for you, for them, if you leave. unhappiness is not hidden from you kids

and exactly how much are you paying now to be chained in quasi half life where you don't get to be the person you are? in that case, the alimony is actually cheaper

life is short. happiness is more important than money or shallow appareances

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[circletimessquare]

much of the problems in this world are rooted in human weakness

and i'm not going to be all holier-than-thou: i have weaknesses too. we all do

it's just nice not to have a mediocre garden variety weakness like being fearful of appearances or inability to say "fuck you, i'm out of here" when appropriate. the sunk cost fallacy

http://skepdic.com/sunkcost.ht...

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[quantaman]

Given that it's rather easy to use a credit card with an assumed name, and also a fake billing address submitted while paying, I really don't see why the people who wanted to stay discreet/anonymous didn't do so.

In case anyone wanted to know how to do it, at least in the U.S. it's rather trivial:

Because it sounds complex and not entirely legal (it might be legal but it sounds like it might be illegal).

The vast majority of users are going to be using their real credit card.

If the hackers get your data, all they have dirt on is a fictional character. This is 21st century, I thought every guy who knows how to use a bank account and a computer would know this shit?

I'm not even sure every guy who knows how to use a bank account and a computer fully understands how credit cards work. I think you need to seriously recalibrate your opinion of what typical people are capable of.

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[amicusNYCL]

You're suggesting that within any zip code, there's only a single building with a particular street number?

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[GrumpySteen]

You could, but that's too simple. The point of that post wasn't to provide the simplest means of accomplishing the goal. It was to let the poster try to impress other people with his/her superiority. For that, a simple solution won't do and a complex, difficult to implement solution has to be presented.

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[tibit]

I doubt very much that a random dating/cheating site requires a credit check just to sign up. You'd need to provide your SSN, and it would be a US-only thing too. I doubt it very much.

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[tibit]

I've not used a real street name and credit card name anywhere online for the last decade at least... I'm not trying to defraud anyone, so I'm in the clear. I do it so that everyday data leaks don't expose me, that's all.

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[tibit]

I've been doing it for so long that I was thinking that it must be a widely known thing, just like you aren't supposed to click on the "your computer is infected" browser popups. Wait a moment. Yeah, sorry, silly me, what was I thinking. /s

Although to be frank, there's nothing difficult about it. Have a CC account, order an extra card online, it'll come free to your address. When signing up for things, use that card. Boom, done. Takes 5 minutes, one time to set it up, per CC account.

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[tibit]

Don't worry, that's what I use too, except I've got two of them, and one is not used for anything.

If you're not on the phone all the time, a Tracfone is a very good deal. These days you can get 1 year with about 800 minutes for just shy of $100. Not bad.

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[circletimessquare]

what you describe means you treat your significant other like a parent or a cop or a prison warden

which is an incompatible with true love

the feeling you call "true love" about the person you sneak around on is on the level of the shallow infatuations of an immature teenage douchebag. you've never actually known true love because true love is only possible straight and honest. what you have isn't just different, it's shallow and inferior as compared to the genuine article. you lead an incomplete life which is to be pitied

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[Anonymous Coward]

No. Prepaid cards will fail AVS 100% of the time precisely because they aren't tied to any person or address. Most merchants require AVS plus CVV2 for online purchases, so you're shit out of luck buying anything on a lot of websites. Prepaid cards work fine at the gas station or Wal-Mart in large part because they have you on camera, but they're pretty difficult to use online.

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[mjwx]

If the hackers get your data, all they have dirt on is a fictional character. This is 21st century, I thought every guy who knows how to use a bank account and a computer would know this shit?

For bonus points, get the credit card in your wife's name.

If she gets suspicious or finds out, start adding small amounts of LSD to her food.

Re:Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[tehcyder]

Why does almost everyone posting here seem to think that having an affair leads inevitably to marriage breakdown and divorce?

Surely for a lot of people it just acts as a temporary safety valve and after their fling(s) they carry on quite happily? And if the spouse turns a temporary blind eye, what's the harm?

The notion that you should be 100% honest all the time seems ridiculously naive to me. How do you deal with idiots at work or annoying relatives or kids asking if Santa Claus is real at Xmas?

And if you end up stuck in an unhappy marriage/relationship with kids, there is no real happy ending for everyone involved anyway.

Re: Good thing I used CmdrTaco's info

[tnk1]

Yes, encryption is a joke, but you're also supposed to actually delete customer PII after a certain point in PCI as well. I doubt that all of those 37 million users had signed up in the last year or had even used the website in the last year. At least some substantial fraction of that number should have been safe from their CC data being nabbed that way, if the right policies had been enacted and in place.

Go ahead

[1_brown_mouse]

I get the feeling most of the profiles are fake anyway to pull in gullible males. Never give in to blackmail.

Re:Go ahead

[DoofusOfDeath]

I get the feeling most of the profiles are fake anyway to pull in gullible males.

Never give in to blackmail.

Even better yet: Make every effort to be loyal to your spouse. If you fail, repent, hope for forgiveness, and try harder next time. Flee from all forms of temptation to do evil.

Easier said than done, to be sure.

Re:Go ahead

[Anonymous Coward]

As a married man, the last thing I'd want in my life would be another woman. I can barely handle the one I have!

I tell my wife, if she's going to have an affair, at least make sure they guy is rich.

Re:Go ahead

[1u3hr]

The tit size and penis length parts are probably unreliable. The names, addresses and credit card numbers (since it's a pay site) must be real.

Re:Go ahead

[kit_triforce]

Easier said than done, to be sure.

Pro Tip: Make the decision not to cheat before you begin any relationship. Once in a relationship, learn to not let your eyes wander.

Re:Go ahead

[PopeRatzo]

I tell my wife, if she's going to have an affair, at least make sure they guy is rich.

I'm much more reasonable. I tell my wife that if she's going to have an affair, at least make sure the guy plays Sonic & All-Stars Racing so I have someone to play split-screen with.

Re:Go ahead

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. What you get at home from a happy spouse is the best.

Re:Go ahead

[Critical Facilities]

The names, addresses and credit card numbers (since it's a pay site) must be real.

I think a name is pretty easy to fake. Last time I checked, PO Boxes can be had for a very small fee (or once could even put a false address in.....what correspondence would a person want to receive via US mail from that site at their home?), and as for the Credit Card, once could just get a prepaid Visa Debit Card, load it with funds, and use that to pay.

Voila! Privacy secured.

If someone truly gets caught because of this, they weren't being careful. Now, I want to be clear here, I am absolutely not advocating for cheating. Personally, I find the concept abhorrent and the sign of a truly weak character. But, if you're gonna do it, be smart about it.

Re:Go ahead

[AmiMoJo]

Or know when to call it a day and end the relationship mutually, before it gets bad enough to warrant a divorce.

Re:Go ahead

[Penguinisto]

This, right here.

It's not that hard to keep yourself in check, gents. You either love your S/O or you do not. If you do, you will do your level best to remain faithful. ...besides, most of you schmucks are geeks - if you found someone that actually puts up with our little quirks and habits and loves our kind in spite of ourselves, why would you screw that up?

Re:Go ahead

[TWX]

I'm much more reasonable. I tell my wife that if she's going to have an affair ... so I have someone to play split-screen with.

Is that some kind of euphemism?

Re:Go ahead

[cdrudge]

Once in a relationship, learn to not let your eyes wander.

Or perhaps learn to be in a relationship that is built on trust and not on preventing eyes from wandering. I've been married for 15 years and my wife has no problems with me letting my eyes wander because she knows at the end of the day, I still always wander home to her in our bed, and no one else's.

Re:Go ahead

[1u3hr]

Again, its not the "dating profile" that matters, but the membership in the site. You need real details for the financial transactions.

(Yeah, they could use bitcoin, but this isn't a geek site, they'd just use their AmeX.)

Re:Go ahead

[cayenne8]

Even better yet: Make every effort to be loyal to your spouse. If you fail, repent, hope for forgiveness, and try harder next time. Flee from all forms of temptation to do evil.

Even better yet....don't get married at all, unless you are planning to have children.

If you're not wanting to have kids, then there is no real reason to get married. This way, you don't lose half your shit with you "upgrade" to a new and better mate periodically. No need for repent and forgiveness....

Re:Go ahead

[GlennC]

I tell my wife, if she's going to have an affair, at least make sure they guy is rich.

I'd be disappointed if my wife screwed around behind my back. She knows I like to watch!

Re:Go ahead

[Anonymous Coward]

As a married man, the last thing I'd want in my life would be another woman. I can barely handle the one I have!

That's why -as the joke goes- an engineer should have a wife and a mistress. Both of them will assume you're spending time with the other, and during that time you can go to the lab and get soms work done.

Re:Go ahead

[TWX]

Isn't ending a relationship mutually still a divorce if it's a married relationship?

Honestly I've known of two marriages that ended even without claims of sexual infidelity and neither was terribly happy. In one case they were poor enough to where there wasn't much to fight about and in the other case both parties were smart enough to divide assets without a whole lot of fighting knowing that it would cost more in lawyer fees than the items being fought-over would cost. in the latter case it also helped that the party that decided to leave also decided to not claim too much, the house was paid-off, and there were no kids, so it was technically smooth even if there was still a lot of emotional animosity.

I just reflect on the vows I made to the woman that I married from time to time.

Re:Go ahead

[NotDrWho]

Even better yet: Make every effort to be loyal to your spouse. If you fail, repent, hope for forgiveness, and try harder next time. Flee from all forms of temptation to do evil.

I suspect that's what goes through Ben Affleck's mind every time he starts a new movie. "This time it will be different," he tells himself.

Re:Go ahead

[Critical Facilities]

No, you don't.

Just get a prepaid Visa Debit card from the rack at Walgreen's or Wal-Mart, or CVS, or Rite Aid, or Family Dollar, or wherever. Pay for it as if it were a "gift card" and load it with however much money you need on it. Then use that card to pay for your membership. Poof! Financial transaction with no paper trail (unless someone really wants to go through and find out where the card was purchased, and if you're that paranoid, just pay cash).

Re:Go ahead

[Penguinisto]

...as long as you don't cohabitate in certain states (where common-law marriage may apply).

Re:Go ahead

[cayenne8]

...as long as you don't cohabitate in certain states (where common-law marriage may apply).

Yep, always a good idea to check the laws in your community/city/state.

I don't marry them, the most I've done is live with them for awhile, kinda like leasing with an option "to buy".

:)

But I've not lived in a place with those laws, or length of time to make me liable to give her half my worth just for sleeping with me.

I've had some really good pussy in my life, yet the BEST of it wasn't worth giving half of what I own away.

Re:Go ahead

[kit_triforce]

The best way to deal with a security hole is to patch it and be done with it, not constantly doing maintenance on the damage that comes as a result.

Re:Go ahead

[Bob the Super Hamste]

Wandering eyes are OK it is just when the rest wanders it becomes a problem.

Re:Go ahead

[Krishnoid]

What would you want to do that for? You'll put your eye out, kid!

Re:Go ahead

[Krishnoid]

Count me in! I'll have an affair, with Sonic and All-Stars Racing! In fact, forget the affair!

I haven't had a girlfriend or had time to play games for so long, I actually can't remember which is more fun anymore. I just made myself sad.

Re:Go ahead

[phorm]

When my wife was out-of-country for 2 months, she asked a friend to keep an eye on me. The response was
    "What, make sure he's not seeing other women"

My wife's answer
    "No, I'm not worried about that. I'm more worried that he'll be up late every night playing video games!"

So I guess I'm trusted... at least with women if not the gaming! :-)

Re:Go ahead

[cant_get_a_good_nick]

We just had kids... twins. $DEITY bless my wife, she's still jealous after 10 years of marriage (anniversary today), have no idea why, i'm not worth being jealous about :)

Anyways, i tell her often, don't worry, I just don't have time to cheat on you :)

Re:Go ahead

[executioner]

Once in a relationship, learn to not let your eyes wander.

it's not the eyes wandering that is the problem, touching would be the problem.

you can look at the menu you just can't eat any of it.

Re:Go ahead

[DoofusOfDeath]

Maybe some marriage counseling and/or one-on-one counseling for her? Sounds like she may have a source of unhappiness that only a pro can help her understand.

Unless the jealousy leads her to give you blow jobs. Then you have a real quandary.

Re:Go ahead

[DoofusOfDeath]

Pro Tip: Make the decision not to cheat before you begin any relationship. Once in a relationship, learn to not let your eyes wander.

That seems like a great idea, but after years of trying, I can't imagine how I'd ever pull that off.

Re:Go ahead

[DoofusOfDeath]

You either love your S/O or you do not.

That doesn't jive with my personal experience. I've experienced a lot of gradations of attraction and of selfishness over the years. I definitely can't say it was always just one of those to polar opposites.

Re:Go ahead

[Penguinisto]

The question isn't how you feel, but the level of commitment you made. If you married someone, you have made it known to one and all that you love that person (outside of countries where contractual marriage is still a thing, anyway). This carries a certain level of responsibility - unless both partners know up-front that the marriage is "open", then avoiding adultery at all costs is automatically and universally assumed to be one of those responsibilities.

Re:Go ahead

[StikyPad]

Eh.. married men live longer than their single counterparts. Though married women die earlier than single women.

Of course, correlation is not causation.

Re:Go ahead

[mjwx]

As a married man, the last thing I'd want in my life would be another woman. I can barely handle the one I have!

I've never understood the obsession with threesomes, do you really want to disappoint two women at once?

Re:Go ahead

[1u3hr]

That's how you'd do it.

I'm sure there are plenty -- whether it's 99% or 50% , it's still millions -- who would just use a card with their real identity. Anyway, we'll find out when the database is dumped.

Re:Go ahead

[goose-incarnated]

Or know when to call it a day and end the relationship mutually, before it gets bad enough to warrant a divorce.

That makes absolutely no sense considering we're talking about married couples in this thread.

Re:Go ahead

[tehcyder]

Easier said than done, to be sure.

Pro Tip: Make the decision not to cheat before you begin any relationship. Once in a relationship, learn to not let your eyes wander.

if there's one thing I visit slashdot for, it's relationship advice from the experts.

Re:Go ahead

[tehcyder]

You either love your S/O or you do not.

Typical slashdot geek binary thinking. Life must be so happy in your simple world.

Re:Go ahead

[cayenne8]

Eh.. married men live longer than their single counterparts.

The men don't actually live longer....it just seems longer.

;)

Re:Go ahead

[Penguinisto]

Typical slashdot geek binary thinking. Life must be so happy in your simple world.

If you cannot bring yourself to keep your dick in your pants and it didn't involve your being raped, you have no one to blame but yourself. Like I said, it's not that hard to do for someone with a sufficient level of emotional maturity.

If you want to have sex outside of a relationship so bad, then at least be man enough to either say as much to your S/O directly, and/or end the relationship first.

This isn't one of those gray-area fuzzy moral issues where circumstances could excuse the actions... it's a very simple task: Remain faithful to the person you made the commitment to, or don't enter into a commitment until you are capable.

First thing I thought of

[XxtraLarGe]

The first thing that came to mind when I heard of this site is "This is a prime target for a hacking/blackmail scheme." The only surprise here is that it didn't happen sooner.

Re:First thing I thought of

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

>> this is a prime target for a hacking/blackmail scheme

My first thought was that the entire point of the site was to BE a blackmail scheme.

Re:First thing I thought of

[dj245]

The first thing that came to mind when I heard of this site is "This is a prime target for a hacking/blackmail scheme." The only surprise here is that it didn't happen sooner.

As someone who has data in there (out of curiosity), it couldn't have happened to better people. The people that run AshleyMadison are worse than the lowest spammers. Not because they sanction marital cheating, but because they are exceedingly scammy in every aspect of the way they operate their business. They make Paypal and Stamps.com look like saints.

Re:First thing I thought of

[Anonymous Coward]

they are exceedingly scammy in every aspect of the way they operate their business

The same can be said about 99% of everyone in the world . Can you provide some concrete examples rather than some generalizations? I'm actually curious.
,

Re:First thing I thought of

[Anonymous Coward]

On top of that, check out some of the reviews, many believe that the folks who run the site have a shit-ton of bogus accounts set up to bilk their customers/rubes out of cash by way of their pay-per-message scheme. Scummy people serving scummy people, what a pair.

Re:First thing I thought of

[DarkOx]

1) Set up a site for cheaters
2) Charge a subscription fee
3) Profit!
4) Accidentally leave some live shells open and ipkvm with a super weak password or easy vuln on a high port
5) Let 4 slip to cousin Jimmy at the family reunion if he will split the take
6) Confirm to the press the hack to place so black mail victims will take Jimmy seriously.
7) Profit! some more

See there is isn't even a ?? step and two Profit! steps!

Re:First thing I thought of

[fulldecent]

Maybe this is the first step of the grand monetization scheme...

ALM can now start a Kickstarter: "if we receive $20,000,000 we will invest the full efforts of our company into a rockclimbing website and immediately shut down all other websites including X, Y, Z and delete all user data."

The third step would be the hacker provides explicit endorsement of this scheme "as a means to an end" after the Kickstarter begins.

Because of the power-law value of customer information (many fake, some disguised, few real, a couple elected officials with full doxable data) this scheme is the best way to attract payment. Also because the way Kickstarter works and the techniques used to prevent draft evasion (too long for this margin) there is a strong incentive for those with the most to lose to attract payment from those with less to lose.

Re:First thing I thought of

[Gravis Zero]

this is a prime target for a hacking/blackmail scheme

My first thought was that the entire point of the site was to BE a blackmail scheme.

it was a blackmail scheme but now those rotten hackers have ruined it for me!

Re:First thing I thought of

[ultranova]

My first thought was that the entire point of the site was to BE a blackmail scheme.

Correct. From the article: "In a long manifesto posted alongside the stolen ALM data, The Impact Team said it decided to publish the information in response to alleged lies ALM told its customers about a service that allows members to completely erase their profile information for a $19 fee."

Re:First thing I thought of

[nine-times]

Also, as a bonus, there are probably some Congressmen and other public officials who are dumb enough to sign up for a site like this. Suddenly you have a bunch of influence in the government without needing to go through the normal route of bribing people through "campaign contributions".

Re:First thing I thought of

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

For a.limited amount of time, which they should state explicitely as part of the paid removal process.

Re:First thing I thought of

[cant_get_a_good_nick]

I have no idea if A-M does this (i don't have an account there.... ) but a common thing is to keep charging credit cards for no reason. And if you fight the charge, well sure you and your wife just fill out this affidavit to A-M.com, i'm sure she'd be happy to fight the charges with you.

Re:Terrorism

[Anonymous Coward]

depends... are the hackers muslim?

Does this qualify...

[Enter the Shoggoth]

...as revenge porn?

Re:Does this qualify...

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Except that as per Rule 34, there are probably people out there who do get aroused by such lists.

Great News!

[Anonymous Coward]

Now I'll get my listing circulated without paying a renewal fee!

Here's Google's cache

[waspleg]

Even it seems to be getting the shit pounded out of it.

cache

archive.org's just goes back to the original, the original never worked for me and the rest are taking a long long time to load.

Re:Terrorism

[Anonymous Coward]

If the hackers are muslim, it's just blackmail because you can't paint all muslims as terrorists.

If the hackers are white, especially white males, then it is lone wolf terrorism and we need to write all white men out of the history books, destroy monuments to any white men, etc. to atone.

Vigilantes of Morality

[neghvar1]

One immoral act to shutdown another immoral act

Re:Vigilantes of Morality

[Anonymous Coward]

More likely revenge by someone whose spouse used the site.

Re:Vigilantes of Morality

[macxcool]

I know! I hate everything the website in question stands for and I find the idea of breaking the law to shut them down reprehensible. How to choose sides?

Re:Vigilantes of Morality

[Charliemopps]

I know! I hate everything the website in question stands for and I find the idea of breaking the law to shut them down reprehensible. How to choose sides?

You apparently never played D&D. "Alignment" in D&D is actually a fairly ingenious way of looking at belief systems: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

This site was Lawful Evil.
The hackers were Chaotic Good. (well I guess we don't really know do we?)
You're apparently Lawful Good, so you're conflicted. The site breaks the "Good" part of your personality, but the hackers break the "Lawful" part.
I'm probably Chaotic good... So this seems legit to me.

Re:Vigilantes of Morality

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone who thinks real-world ethics and morality can fit into D&D's neat little boxes of "alignment" clearly made INT their dump stat.

Re:Vigilantes of Morality

[Joey Vegetables]

I understand the dilemma, but cannot support what the "hackers" are trying to do. See Romans 3:8. It usually is a bad idea to do evil so that good may result. It will not deter those seeking to violate their covenants with their spouses; they will simply find some other way to do so. But it will destroy many homes, and many children's lives, that otherwise perhaps might have been saved. Some people cheat, and then later repent, perhaps after becoming aware of the fact that the grass really isn't "greener" on the other side and that the short-term pleasures associated with infidelity are not worth the long-term disruptions that it tends to wreak upon their marriages and families. When and how (and some might argue whether) to tell the cheated-upon spouse should not be up to some random strangers.

Re:Vigilantes of Morality

[Spy Handler]

You must be a Ranger, and the OP a Paladin.

Me, I'm just a fighter, neutral and available as a mercenary (in case anyone's hiring)

Re:Vigilantes of Morality

[Charliemopps]

One immoral act to shutdown another immoral act

No, one illegal act, to shutdown another immoral act. There's a huge difference.
Releasing this info is the right thing to do.

Now all the adulterers on slashdot can flag me troll. Go right ahead, that wont save you from your spouse.

Re:Vigilantes of Morality

[neghvar1]

Which is why I used the term vigilante. One who disregards the law to impose what they believe to be the greater good of society.

Re:Vigilantes of Morality

[StikyPad]

You're not a troll, just an ordinary self-righteous individual rationalizing how two wrongs make a right.

On an unrelated note, I think it's wrong thing to leak the data, but if it does get leaked, I can't wait to find out the demographic information! Do women cheat as often as men? More? What age ranges? Does it vary by city? Profession? There's a goldmine of social data there to help understand something that's very difficult to study.

Re:Vigilantes of Morality

[goose-incarnated]

Some of your questions have already been answered by the science community.

You're not a troll, just an ordinary self-righteous individual rationalizing how two wrongs make a right.

On an unrelated note, I think it's wrong thing to leak the data, but if it does get leaked, I can't wait to find out the demographic information! Do women cheat as often as men?

Yes. While 1 in 12 women admit to cheating on their husbands, 1 in 3 women have their paternity claims against their husbands dismissed during divorce after paternity testing. For men, 1 in 3 admit to cheating on their wives.

More? What age ranges? Does it vary by city? Profession? There's a goldmine of social data there to help understand something that's very difficult to study.

You're right about the goldmine - the social data in here would, I expect, be devastating to almost all of the social-science studies carried out in recent years (due to the studies mainly possessing self-selected subjects). These subjects aren't self-selected.

So... torrent? Anyone?

Re:Vigilantes of Morality

[tehcyder]

You apparently never played D&D.

There's a difference between playing a game and thinking it accurately reflects reality.

Credit protection

[otaku244]

Let's see them try to roll out credit protection here. It better come with a box of chocolates, some roses, and a spa-treatment (or a 6-pack and tickets to your spouses favorite event) because that credit score WILL go in the toilet.

perfect..

[Mr_Nitro]

we really needed moral superiority complex hackers....there's no hope for humanity...someone is always going to have the need to shove down someone else throat their views.... no matter how 'smart' .... hope the aliens nuke this shithole asap...

sounds like a winning plan

[nimbius]

"shut down your predatory sites or we will forcibly liberate 37 million victims of either abusive, dead end, loveless, or empty relationships and leave them to reconcile the adult responsibilities of integrity, trust, and honesty while potentially fostering an atmosphere of open discourse on the nature of marriage, divorce, alimony, custody, and child support."

Here's the article text (it's slashdotted)

[ciaran2014]

Large caches of data stolen from online cheating site AshleyMadison.com have been posted online by an individual or group that claims to have completely compromised the company’s user databases, financial records and other proprietary information. The still-unfolding leak could be quite damaging to some 37 million users of the hookup service, whose slogan is “Life is short. Have an affair.”

The data released by the hacker or hackers — which self-identify as The Impact Team — includes sensitive internal data stolen from Avid Life Media (ALM), the Toronto-based firm that owns AshleyMadison as well as related hookup sites Cougar Life and Established Men.

Reached by KrebsOnSecurity late Sunday evening, ALM Chief Executive Noel Biderman confirmed the hack, and said the company was “working diligently and feverishly” to take down ALM’s intellectual property. Indeed, in the short span of 30 minutes between that brief interview and the publication of this story, several of the Impact Team’s Web links were no longer responding.

“We’re not denying this happened,” Biderman said. “Like us or not, this is still a criminal act.”

Besides snippets of account data apparently sampled at random from among some 40 million users across ALM’s trio of properties, the hackers leaked maps of internal company servers, employee network account information, company bank account data and salary information.

The compromise comes less than two months after intruders stole and leaked online user data on millions of accounts from hookup site AdultFriendFinder.

In a long manifesto posted alongside the stolen ALM data, The Impact Team said it decided to publish the information in response to alleged lies ALM told its customers about a service that allows members to completely erase their profile information for a $19 fee.

According to the hackers, although the “full delete” feature that Ashley Madison advertises promises “removal of site usage history and personally identifiable information from the site,” users’ purchase details — including real name and address — aren’t actually scrubbed.

“Full Delete netted ALM $1.7mm in revenue in 2014. It’s also a complete lie,” the hacking group wrote. “Users almost always pay with credit card; their purchase details are not removed as promised, and include real name and address, which is of course the most important information the users want removed.”

Their demands continue:

“Avid Life Media has been instructed to take Ashley Madison and Established Men offline permanently in all forms, or we will release all customer records, including profiles with all the customers’ secret sexual fantasies and matching credit card transactions, real names and addresses, and employee documents and emails. The other websites may stay online.”

A snippet of the message left behind by the Impact Team.

It’s unclear how much of the AshleyMadison user account data has been posted online. For now, it appears the hackers have published a relatively small percentage of AshleyMadison user account data and are planning to publish more for each day the company stays online.

“Too bad for those men, they’re cheating dirtbags and deserve no such discretion,” the hackers continued. “Too bad for ALM, you promised secrecy but didn’t deliver. We’ve got the complete set of profiles in our DB dumps, and we’ll release them soon if Ashley Madison stays online. And with over 37 million members, mostly from the US and Canada, a significant percentage of the population is about to have a very bad day, including many rich and powerful people.”

ALM CEO Biderman declined to discuss specifics of the company’s investigation, which he characterized as ongoing and fast-moving. But he did suggest that the incident may have been the work

Re:Here's the article text (it's slashdotted)

[tnk1]

“Our one apology is to Mark Steele (Director of Security),” the manifesto reads. “You did everything you could, but nothing you could have done could have stopped this.”

Now that makes it sound like an insider job. If the Security boss did his job, then he'd have dealt with most remote attack vectors, which implies that they were hit from a very unlikely place, or by insiders who knew the ins and outs of the setup.

Or it could mean that, like at many places, the IS team did their best to secure things, but their requests for better practices and code were ignored. Which makes it sound even more like an insider.

I'll be interested to see who this is. And discovery of who it is may well happen if they were an insider. If you're an insider, it means that you're already on a very short list of people to investigate. Even W. Mark Felt was pegged by some people as the most likely candidate for being Deep Throat because you can frequently align the relatively short list with who has the most to gain or lose and who knows enough.

Re:Here's the article text (it's slashdotted)

[Charliemopps]

Well, you can never make it "impossible" unless you don't collect the data at all. But what you can do is make it impossible to do anonymously. If it was an inside job, and they had their controls set properly, then they should already know who the insider is.

Re:Here's the article text (it's slashdotted)

[Krishnoid]

It’s unclear how much of the AshleyMadison user account data has been posted online. For now, it appears the hackers have published a relatively small percentage of AshleyMadison user account data and are planning to publish more for each day the company stays online.

Python already did it.

Re:Here's the article text (it's slashdotted)

[KGIII]

I wonder why they do not insist on them taking down the cougar site? It seems inconsistent with the rest of their demands. Is there something special or different about the cougar site that I am not aware of? I have not made use of any of their sites nor used any dating site actually.

Re:Here's the article text (it's slashdotted)

[tnk1]

When I was finally able to read the Slashdotted article, the people at ALM made it sound like they knew who it was and that it was someone technically related to the site, but not actually employed.

So, some sort of consultant or contractor. I wouldn't think a reputable security consultant would out them like this, as that would impact the trust other clients would have in them going forward, and you'd think they'd understand how easy it would be to finger them as the culprit.

Now a contract developer, sysadmin, tester, or something like that is certainly a possibility.

Re:Here's the article text (it's slashdotted)

[goose-incarnated]

I wonder why they do not insist on them taking down the cougar site? It seems inconsistent with the rest of their demands. Is there something special or different about the cougar site that I am not aware of? I have not made use of any of their sites nor used any dating site actually.

They said ...

“Too bad for those men, they’re cheating dirtbags and deserve no such discretion,”

So it appears that the hate is only directed towards men. Not really an unusual thing for the usual self-loathing white knight :-)

Re:Here's the article text (it's slashdotted)

[KGIII]

That may well be the answer. Pathetic, really. Unless the cougars are not cheating? I have no clue nor any desire to educate myself on these sites. I am comfortable being willfully ignorant on these matters. ;)

Worst slashvertisment ever

[Anonymous Coward]

The majority of us can't even talk to women! Let alone get married and cheat on them.

Re:Worst slashvertisment ever

[Virtucon]

put down the video games, clean up the pimples and get in shape. Things start to happen after that.

Welcome to the new "criminal justice"

[RogueWarrior65]

Full disclosure: I'm not defending this company for what it does.
For those of you who were tired of the old criminal justice system, be careful what you wish for. To these hackers and many other people, the fact that this company is not illegal in the eyes of the old criminal justice system is irrelevant. To these hackers, it is amoral. These hackers have decided unilaterally what morality is, who is guilty, and how punishment will be executed. Publicly destroying people and businesses that somehow offend somebody else is now the new normal. The old system of justice won't protect you anymore because even if the old system catches these hackers, the damage will be done and can't be undone.

Re:Welcome to the new "criminal justice"

[Fire_Wraith]

Moreover, I think of this in terms of the panopticon/total awareness paradigm. We are in no way used to living in a society where our every action is not only recorded, but monitored, to the point that we not only have no secrets, but that we can be punished for transgressions we might have otherwise gotten away from.

Think about in the office. In times past your boss couldn't monitor you 100% of the day, and unless you really abused things, it was safe to spend a few extra minutes chatting at the water cooler about last night's TV. Now your computer can flag you the instant you step away for more than your allotted two minute bathroom break, and alert your boss.

Or take speeding, for instance. While it's illegal, something like 99%+ of drivers are going to exceed the speed limit by 1 to 5 mph on any given day. Our speed limits are to a certain degree calculated with that in mind. Do we want to have our locations monitored 24/7 to calculate if we violated them?

Personally, I don't think people should be cheating, but it's not my place to judge them, nor do I want to see it exposed like this.

Re:Welcome to the new "criminal justice"

[moeinvt]

" Do we want to have our locations monitored 24/7 to calculate if we violated [speed limits]?"

Every single person who who uses the "If you're not doing anything wrong then you have nothing to hide" argument should volunteer for that. If they're doing nothing wrong, then they should have no problem with government installing a tracking device on their vehicle which auto-generates a speeding ticket every single time they exceed the limit.

Re:Welcome to the new "criminal justice"

[Charliemopps]

Full disclosure: I'm not defending this company for what it does.
For those of you who were tired of the old criminal justice system, be careful what you wish for. To these hackers and many other people, the fact that this company is not illegal in the eyes of the old criminal justice system is irrelevant. To these hackers, it is amoral. These hackers have decided unilaterally what morality is, who is guilty, and how punishment will be executed. Publicly destroying people and businesses that somehow offend somebody else is now the new normal. The old system of justice won't protect you anymore because even if the old system catches these hackers, the damage will be done and can't be undone.

Nothing is immoral about "Truth" and anyone that furthers "Truth" is doing the right thing. Though it may be difficult or uncomfortable. The people who will be exposed here, had a very easy way to avoid this entire thing. Seek marital counseling, and failing that get a divorce. It's not hard at all these days. One uncomfortable talk with your wife, a few irritating weeks figuring out the finances, sign some papers... one court appearance, and you're done. But what did they chose? Doesn't their spouse deserve to know?

Re:Welcome to the new "criminal justice"

[RogueWarrior65]

Missing my point entirely. My point is not about this site or the company.

Re:Welcome to the new "criminal justice"

[Charliemopps]

Nice try.

Hiding truths about yourself isn't necessarily bad.
"I don't want people to know I really do like Oysters but don't want to eat them because I had a stuffed clam as a child and that's embarrassing"
That secret is ok. Revealing it doesn't really help... anyone. Ok, maybe you could argue that it does but whatever. It's close enough to the line that why not let you keep the secret?

"I'm lying to my wife about dangerous behavior that could endanger her mental/physical health, maybe even her life." or even worse "I'm not sure my husband fathered our son" yea no... that's not a secret you have a right to keep. You should be exposed. You're morally reprehensible for failing to address your marital issues in an honest way.

When you get married, you've made a choice to do things a certain way. You even have a relatively easy way out these day (divorce) it may have been different in the middle ages, but you have no excuse now. Man up, have the talk.

Re:Welcome to the new "criminal justice"

[swillden]

Publicly destroying people and businesses that somehow offend somebody else is now the new normal. The old system of justice won't protect you anymore because even if the old system catches these hackers, the damage will be done and can't be undone.

Welcome to the new world, same as the old world.

Oh, the nature and perhaps, in some ways, scale, is different, but this is what we call "vigilantism" and it's not a new thing, not at all. Old-style vigilantism also often involves doing damage that can't be undone even if the system catches the vigilantes. The classic example is lynching: Don't like what that dirty so-and-so did? Grab some friends and string him up from a nearby tree. If you get caught and prosecuted later you'll be sorry... but he'll still be dead. Or perhaps a more on-point example, suppose one of the whores at the local brothel gets upset with something and threatens to publish the identities of all of the public figures who frequent the establishment. Once published, the list can't be taken back, even if it was acquired illegally.

Sorry son, but there's nothing fundamentally new here. This is what vigilantism is, and vigilantes deciding unilaterally what morality is, who is guilty and how punishment will be executed is why it's bad.

Re:Welcome to the new "criminal justice"

[RogueWarrior65]

But the difference is that it's now much more widespread thanks to social media and a complicit mainstream media. Large segments of the population decide to affect what they believe is "social justice" usually based on misinformation including the premise that the legal deck is stacked against them. Too often these days what these people believe should be law isn't found anywhere in actual law but they don't want to be bothered with the challenge of getting a law passed and the risk of a majority of people telling them no.

Re:Welcome to the new "criminal justice"

[swillden]

But the difference is that it's now much more widespread thanks to social media and a complicit mainstream media.

Cite? I think vigilantism is far rarer than it used to be. Lynchings and similar actions have been really common throughout history.

Re:Welcome to the new "criminal justice"

[Fire_Wraith]

I've never been married, and never cheated on a girlfriend, nor would I (married or not) - so this doesn't really impact me directly at all. I have no stake in the fight.

That said, if someone cheats on their spouse, that's a matter for them, their spouse, their kids, and their therapist/divorce attorneys/etc. It's no business of mine, as a complete stranger, to judge their lives, or to think that I know what's best for them.

And no, part of the deal with privacy is that "bad things" WILL happen. People WILL get away with stuff that they shouldn't be doing, in a moral, ethical, or legal sense, and that's part of the tradeoff. We shouldn't kid ourselves about it, or backtrack the moment someone starts spouting off about cheating spouses, scary terrorists, or some other "but think of the children!" bit. It is a conscious choice we make, because if privacy is to have any real meaning, it has to have absolutes - there's no "reasonable expectation of privacy unless you were doing something Big Brother thinks could be bad."

Re:Welcome to the new "criminal justice"

[RogueWarrior65]

I would classify any action taken against another that violates the target's Constitutional rights without due process as vigilantism particularly when it's politically motivated. For example, looting and torching somebody's business because you think they're associated with some view or way of life you don't like.

Re:Welcome to the new "criminal justice"

[swillden]

Constitutional rights aren't relevant. The Constitution only specifies limits on government action, so it has no applicability to private actions... but vigilantism is almost by definition a private action.

Other than that, sure, looting and torching somebody's business because you think they're associated with some view or way of life you don't like is vigilantism. What I dispute is that vigilantism is in any way new.

Re:Welcome to the new "criminal justice"

[StikyPad]

Or wearing body cams to be reviewed by someone who -- don't worry -- won't share it with his or her colleagues.

Re:Welcome to the new "criminal justice"

[paul_metcalfe]

You should read "So you've been publicly shamed" by Jon Ronson. It's about this phenomenon where people are shamed publicly on-line. Sometimes for something as relatively harmless as a tasteless joke.

The consequences of the shaming are real, people lose jobs and have trouble finding new ones. And now there are companies that help repair this on-line reputation damage.

The worrying part is how this mob justice means the perpetrator has no chance to learn from their mistakes. One slip-up, which just happened to "go viral", and their life is destroyed. Over a bad joke. You could commit an actual crime with less consequences.

Re:Welcome to the new "criminal justice"

[tehcyder]

"I'm lying to my wife about dangerous behavior that could endanger her mental/physical health, maybe even her life."

Mr Puritanism meet Mr Paternalism. I'm sure you'll get on very well.

Will this be a wake up call about Facebook etc.?

[ciaran2014]

I'm not happy this is happening, but I do hope that when things like this happen it makes people think critically about putting their private lives and their means of communication on other peoples servers (i.e. "the cloud").

It's folly to think that 37 million Facebook accounts, with all their private messages and chats, won't be the next.

Morals?

[xenotransplant]

These hackers are a confusing lot. They make a decision to break laws and do unethical things in the name of morals. Is there a word for this kind of behavior?

Re:Morals?

[Riddler Sensei]

The God damned Batman! ...

Just vigilantism.

Re:Morals?

[Virtucon]

No they don't they don't make moral judgements. They went for an easy target-rich environment now they're trying to cash in.

Re:Morals?

[Comrade Ogilvy]

I do not believe the reasons offered. Most likely, it is personal revenge against the company for a perceived slight, and the moralizing is just a clever way to grab headlines and crush this company's IPO in a very public way. Just as the management was anticipating the coming sweet financial success, they will get to have 100 annoying meeting with lawyers on how to put "we are wide open to millions of lawsuits if this stuff is disclosed" on their S-1. It is over. Time to close shop, and open up again with a different management.

I don't get it..

[jcr]

Why would anyone using a cheaters' hookup site use their real name?

-jcr

Re:I don't get it..

[tnk1]

They probably don't on the public part of site itself, but at they same time, they needed a CC and couldn't be bothered to get their hands on some other CC#, so they used their own. If they get the CC bill, and not their spouse, they may have been 99% safe from discovery... unless someone outed their CC information from the site itself to a public list, obviously.

Re:I don't get it..

[TheViffer]

Screen name is one thing, payment option is something completely different especially if you are using your own credit card.

Even when using PayPal, there would be a means to trace that back to the original person even if you used a PayPal Wax account (using a CC through PayPal without actually having a PayPal account).

Only the smart ones would use a prepaid visa card or something of the likes.

Re:I don't get it..

[mjwx]

Why would anyone using a cheaters' hookup site use their real name?

-jcr

First reason: people aren't that bright, especially people who cheat.

Second reason: people are lazy.

Third reason: its a pay site. You need a CC with a real name and address. There are easy ways around this but see reasons #1 and #2 as to why it's uncommon.

Re:Are you one of the 37 million?

[Penguinisto]

To be honest? The act is criminal, but if the affected want sympathy? They can find it in the dictionary between "shit" and "syphilis".

Teenagers

[Viol8]

Everything is black and white to them, no shades of grey. They don't really understand the more complex levels of human nature and morality and try to fit it into their rather restricted mental box along with the typical teenage arrogance that makes them assume they're right about everything and everyone else is wrong.

Re:Teenagers

[moeinvt]

I find it difficult to believe that teenagers would hack a website because they are morally outraged about the practice of adultery.

Re:Teenagers

[sfcat]

I find it difficult to believe that teenagers would hack a website because they are morally outraged about the practice of adultery.

Unless of course the hacker's parent cheated using AM and that caused the divorce of his parent. You simply lack imagination I think...

Re:Teenagers

[tehcyder]

I find it difficult to believe that teenagers would hack a website because they are morally outraged about the practice of adultery.

You must be joking. Teenagers can be the most self-righteous little shits in the world. They often have little wider experience of the world and see things purely in black and white.

Youthful idealism is not just about extreme simplified politics.

So it's a no-brainer for Ashley Madison

[dmomo]

Keep the site up and running, and RISK going out of business.

- or -

Go out of business and actually go out of business.

I wonder; what choice is a predatory, opportunistic venture bound to take?

Re:So it's a no-brainer for Ashley Madison

[sjames]

OTOH, if they shut down now, they have many corporate assets they can sell off to get something out of it. If they don't, they will have more lawsuits than they have assets to pay for.

Re:So it's a no-brainer for Ashley Madison

[paul_metcalfe]

Change the brand name and start over. You can re-use the infrastructure and software.

More interesting is the security, and Cicada.

[Demonoid-Penguin]

Krebs is overloaded by train-wreck picnickers

Noel Biderman CEO of How Low Can We Go, trading as Avid Media.

Some of his demonstrably patent bullshit about their security.

"We have always had the confidentiality of our customers' information foremost in our minds, and have had stringent security measures in place".
Um, encryption - have you heard of it? And PCI - yeah, right, a bus protocol.

The "security" fail company - they would have done better employing CyCura® the "binary ex-situ bioremediation system".

I'm guessing they got confused and deployed this Cycura instead. Which'd explain why alarms didn't go off until after the successful attack. When their teeth started grinding.

Candidate for sociopath of the year award, Joel Eriksson, CTO, Cycura, we will continue to be a leader in the services we provide. "I have worked with leading companies around the world to secure their businesses. I have no doubt, based on the work I and my company are doing, Avid Life Media will continue to be a strong, secure business,".
Continue? Fail. To continue you need to start somewhere.
Secure? Fail.

Makes me wonder if he faked his widely promoted cracking of the Cicada.

This is the most interesting bit
Anyone else see similarities and strangely missing information?

His story.

He certainly he fucked up big time "protecting" his client, and he shouldn't have (because he does seem to have the ability to know how to secure a system).

Curiouser and curiouser. But not so curious I want to follow that rabbit down a hole.

Re:More interesting is the security, and Cicada.

[paul_metcalfe]

Probably a result of ashleymadison going after lowest bidder contracts when trying to get their security sorted. You get what you pay for.

Re:Are you one of the 37 million?

[tnk1]

Yeah, but would you pay to get a delete from a criminal organization when the supposedly legit operation failed to do so? It is true that some of these criminal organizations have been known to have good "customer service" since their business model relies on someone actually trusting them to do what they say they are going to do, but it's still a huge gamble.

If I were one of those folks, I'd start rehearsing how I'd break it to my wife. That and/or start looking into divorce lawyers. Not doing anything and praying, ironically, might be your only other option.

Of the 37 million users

[jlowery]

I suspect 30+ million were 'just curious' after seeing AM's adds on TV. Hard to explain to the spouse, though.

Re:Of the 37 million users

[swb]

All the married men I know seem to be happily married and we've ALL had what-if conversations about affairs. Usually it seems to boil down to which set of totally unrealistic circumstances might arise and at which point the regret of not doing it is greater than doing it.

Like, I'm trapped in a hotel during a blizzard and by sheer chance so are two super hot movie stars and after killing time drinking they both decide they want me.

Short of that, other opportunities just seem unlikely or destined for serious nightmares.

Re:Of the 37 million users

[SecurityGuy]

And yet affairs do happen.

I agree with you, it's really hard to imagine a scenario where it's a good idea, but am I willing to believe there's a large number of people out there ready to make a bad decision? Sure. I also agree with those who are saying a lot of those 37 million may be fake accounts.

Re:Of the 37 million users

[swb]

I think it's all about barriers to entry (no pun intended).

Ie, some woman you think is attractive enough to warrant sexual interest, has an interest in you for same, doesn't care you're married, you're able to engage in this without your wife or anyone else who might bust you suspecting anything.

I think if the barrier to entry was low, a lot more men would be tempted. But what's probably holding them back isn't so much their morals, but their own unwillingness to have sex with a less attractive woman or take many risks.

Re:Of the 37 million users

[Comrade Ogilvy]

I would guess a lot of people realize that a woman who is interested a married man is disproportionately likely to be carrying a lot of emotional baggage, or worse. Yes, there do exist women who are happy fairies who flounce through life bringing joy of the moment to whomever they meet. But that is also the story the very wounded tell themselves. Can you know the difference from text messages or a chat over a few drinks?

Re:Of the 37 million users

[StikyPad]

No, it's easy for married men to cheat. It's easier than getting laid when you're single.

one sizable study found 90 percent of single women were interested in a man who they believed was taken, while a mere 59 percent wanted him when told he was single.

https://www.psychologytoday.co...

Well, they will go belly-up anyways

[davidwr]

Even if the bad guys are arrested today and the blackmail threat is gone, they will either be shut down from customer lawsuits or their customers will abandon them in droves, leading to bankruptcy.

I have a likely alternative

[aepervius]

It was a spouse which found out their wife/husband cheated on them using such web site and decided to go vigilante and make life a living hell for other cheaters.

Re:I have a likely alternative

[budgenator]

Must of been a big hit to the ego to find your spouse's profile on the cheating site you worked at; then to add insult to injury you get laid off because your spouse was a member and you can't even confront them because of the NDA you signed!

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Snack cakes

[slipped_bit]

I was only going there to buy snack cakes!

Re:Snack cakes

[KGIII]

It is possible to get muffins there or so it seems. I suspect you're more likely to get muffin tops though.

Divorce Lawyers rejoice

[Virtucon]

They just had 74 million prospective clients show up on their doorstep.

Noel Biderman

[koan]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Please, Please, Please...

[dcw3]

Please release the data! I'm getting my popcorn ready to see the sparks fly, and who's getting divorced, or dropping out of the presidential race.

Re:Interesting side story here...

[k6mfw]

It's interesting from an employment perspective -- as more and more companies outsource everything, they have less control over who sees their data, and potentially have more people with axes to grind, or who could just make a quick buck more easily than an insider could. So the question is, if this blackmail thing becomes a trend, will companies stop completely trusting their contractors?

I made a similar comment about the OPM hack, someone replied to my comment, "you have been reading too much science fiction." Though it still sounds reasonable that outsourcing reduces direct costs but they also give up control. Getting back to original story, if the hack was an inside job then it doesn't matter what security measures are put in place.

Re:Are you one of the 37 million?

[Anonymous Coward]

What is a marriage for? What are the legal and social issues surrounding it?

In ye olde days a marriage was a contract, essentially, to provide for a family whilst raising children. Someone's gonna be out of work doing daycare duty, and that person is going to be at risk without a career. A marriage is essentially buying them out of the employment pool and the responsibility of working so that attention can be paid to raising a family.

In really olde days there was even a transfer of wealth in order to buy the child-bearing abilities of girls. They'd literally trade them for goats and cows. Y'know what, that sounds horrendous but it all worked out and we're all here.

Fast-forward to today. The modern woman has a lot of choices to make. One of those is the option to remain child-free. If a marriage isn't about raising children anymore then what's it about? A promise of fidelity? (for some arbitrary definition of fidelity). A promise to cook dinner on Friday night? A promise to talk about what's happening on TV? What are the core concepts of a marriage?

And before judging everyone unilaterally you might consider that some people on that website have spouses that *know* they're on that website. What's more they might have talked about it and they might both be "totally okay with it". Judging people by our own standards can be dangerous, as this hack shows. All these people are going to get painted with a really bad and really large brush no matter what the truth is now. The response proves they'll get no trial in the social justice system.

Re:Are you one of the 37 million?

[KGIII]

Hmm... Woman falls in between wolverine and wombat. No, I have no idea where I was going with that. Just an observation as you made me think about it with your sympathy remark.

If you cut that site down...

[gestalt_n_pepper]

It will become more powerful than you can imagine...

Politicians and Anti-Privacy Feds?

[billstewart]

SELECT * FROM ashleymadison WHERE match(email, ".gov")

Really, though, it would be useful to remind lots of anti-privacy Feds that encryption is important for lots of things, including protecting civil liberties and keeping them from getting into trouble with their spouses and potentially losing their jobs.

Re:Politicians and Anti-Privacy Feds?

[bluefoxlucid]

Encryption wouldn't protect you here. The application can access the underlying data; the database can access its contents (to search on indexes); you have the access to ask for the decrypted content.

Re:Politicians and Anti-Privacy Feds?

[billstewart]

No trolling intended here - the word "Politicians" is right in the title.

The Ashley Madison crack is happening now, after several months of heavy campaigning by various US Feds and Congressmembers and their UK counterparts (like Tory Prime Minister David Cameron) who all want to ban encryption or make us put magic back doors into all our crypto systems so they can eavesdrop on conversations instead of "going dark", their term for "not getting to increase our surveillance capabilities quite as fast as we want."

With 37 million names in the database, it wouldn't be surprising if at least some of them are the same people trying to deny the public's right of privacy, and they ought to get spanked publicly about their political hypocrisy, as opposed to just getting spanked privately if that's what they were looking for.

Re:Will this be a wake up call about Facebook etc.

[ciaran2014]

> You mean 1.44 billion?

I mean, getting 37 million would only require access to a quarter of a percent of Facebook's data, so a hack on this scale shouldn't be hard to imagine.

Re:Will this be a wake up call about Facebook etc.

[ciaran2014]

> Facebook doesn't have [...] verifiable identities and proof of cheating

I think you'll find it has both.

If an account has been posting photos of your personal life and having chats with your spouse, your family and your friends, do you really think anyone needs more verification that it's your accounts? Even if the account is under your nickname, everyone who knows you through that account knows that you are you.

And if you're cheating and you met this person via Facebook, or communicated with them via Facebook then just try denying it when your spouse sees the chat logs.

Legal Obligations should make this obvious

[s.petry]

The best that any company can do is reduce things down to a real name and transaction number, which could then be cross referenced (perhaps externally) to find payment data. Deleting "all" data would be a breach in law, as you are required to maintain financial records for at least 7 years. There is no restriction for credit card purchases, compliance testing just ensures that you are not keeping Card data and PII data like PIN numbers and SSN.

Sneaker-net is the only answer here, and it's difficult to maintain feasibility on a web site to begin with. And we all know what happens when people need bonus checks and higher profit margins. Why do you think we have all those articles on the risks to our power plants and water treatment facilities? When the Government with the biggest budget in world history won't pay a few bucks for it.. well why would you expect any different behavior from others?

Re: Legal Obligations should make this obvious

[BarbaraHudson]

The site operates from Canada. The law (Personal Information Privacy and Electronic Documents Act, aka PIPEDA) requires that all personal private information be deleted when the purpose for gathering it has passed. ALM web sites were not allowed to keep a copy and then charge money to permanently scrub data on closed accounts. Class action suit, anyone?

Re: Legal Obligations should make this obvious

[s.petry]

I don't claim to know Canadian law, and didn't pay enough attention to see it was a Canadian company :) Class action suit would not fly in the US, but may in Canada.

Re:Legal Obligations should make this obvious

[StikyPad]

You don't need your customer's names unless you're a bank. There are plenty of cash businesses that have zero information on their customers. There's a reason they call it money "laundering," after all.

Re:Legal Obligations should make this obvious

[s.petry]

How many pay for Web sites are cash only? I know of exactly... zero

There is a reason registered credit cards are not used for laundering money, and at reasons that online vendors need to track who pays them for what goods.

Re: Legal Obligations should make this obvious

[Cinnamon Beige]

The site operates from Canada. The law (Personal Information Privacy and Electronic Documents Act, aka PIPEDA) requires that all personal private information be deleted when the purpose for gathering it has passed. ALM web sites were not allowed to keep a copy and then charge money to permanently scrub data on closed accounts. Class action suit, anyone?

That'd require people with standing to come forward; there might be a few singles who lied about being married, or people in open marriages who had done it for reasons such as "Saves explanation headaches" (since presumably somebody on there expects you to be married already and has no problems with this).

(Also commenting to remove mismoderation.)

Re:Are you one of the 37 million?

[requerdanos]

> This is \.

This is backslash dot?

Penetration Testing

[penguinoid]

Perhaps so; but We, the Righteous, will hack them all and show our moral superiority!

They deserve it anyways, for not doing sufficient penetration testing.

Re:Penetration Testing

[bluefoxlucid]

+1 funny would bang your wife again

Good!

[p51d007]

If you were STUPID enough, to give a "cheaters" website your REAL name, REAL address, REAL bank information, REAL personal information, then you deserve to be hacked and exposed as the lying cheating SOB that you really are, regardless if you are a man or woman, or other.

If I worked for AshleyMadison.com

[maur]

I'd be very interested in seeing which member profiles are conspicuously absent from the leak.

That extra "full delete" option for $20

[paul_metcalfe]

Ignoring the moral implications of cheating, I think the fact Ashleymadison.com charged an extra fee for the 'full delete' feature, which did nothing, is the real problem here.

Well, also the fact people actually trusted Ashleymadison to honour something they couldn't possibly verify :D

This, of course, makes good food for thought when other sites promise to treat your private data carefully. And even moreso if they charge you for that privilege.

Re:Are you one of the 37 million?

[tehcyder]

The Puritanism is strong in this thread.

Re:Cycura, Cicada and Impact

[Demonoid-Penguin]

Probably a result of ashleymadison going after lowest bidder contracts when trying to get their security sorted. You get what you pay for.

What I found most interesting was the similarity between the correspondence Joel Erickssonn of Cycura says he had with the "people" (person?) behind Cicada 3301 and the nature and wording of the "attackers" demands/claim of responsibility for the ashleymadison breach.

And his company (basically just him) is very unlikely to be the lowest bidder, he's also much more of an attacker and cryptographer than a security engineer.

Re:Are you one of the 37 million?

[Penguinisto]

There is no puritanism here, merely a respect for marital trust, and the unwillingness to violate it.

Marriage isn't a mere contract that you can seek out loopholes for, or something you do just so that you can have sex-on-demand. It's a commitment; a sacred trust between two individuals who become as one in spirit. You do this for life, and bind your lives and fortunes together.

Many things are negotiable in this world, even in marriage - but remaining faithful to someone you are married to is not something you can (or should ever) negotiate over. If you haven't the maturity to understand that, then don't get married.

Re:Are you one of the 37 million?

[Penguinisto]

The reasons why folks marry have changed over time, but until recently, the basic principles of it has not (even if people routinely violate said principles.)

Yes, I'm fully aware of "open" marriages - few of them last very long, at least judging from folks in my social circles. Then again, why would they be embarrassed by the revelation of their names on such a website? Are you saying that even a quorum (let alone a majority) of the folks on that site practice such relationships? If so, the revelation of their names shouldn't be a problem (though actively seeking to hook up with folks from non-open marriages is rather questionable). I'm more than willing to wager that the vast majority of the users are keeping up a façade at home while cruising for some strange on the website.

All these people are going to get painted with a really bad and really large brush no matter what the truth is now.

Sleep with dogs, wake up with fleas. There are most likely websites out there for folks in open marriages to meet up and do whatever they please... can't really bring myself to feel sorry for 'em.

37 million?

[barrygrommit]

There are 37 million users on these web sites? 37 MILLION? I assume they operate internationally. Assume also that this represents only a subset of the total cheater population (web-based, non-web-based). Yikes...it would be fascinating to search through the names.

Other people's standards aren't ours to set.

[Vordreller]

On one hand, I'm against cheating and I expect all adults to be able to take responsibility for their own actions.

On the other hand, I do not feel I have the authority to tell an other person how they should live their lives. If you wanna cheat, go right ahead. I'll think you a piece of shit for it, but I won't stop you.

My only problem is when people get purposefully hurt, or their personhood is violated.

It is disheartening to see ...

[murkwood7]

how many people are actually that stupid!

Re:It is disheartening to see ...

[ebvwfbw]

Easiest person in the world to fool is yourself. All the things to fool you about moral decay are out there. What's a little fun on your part? The 'ol bat will never know. She hasn't screwed you in a month anyhow. "Nobody gets hurt." Come on... just sign up.

I've actually received some AM e-mail. For the most part - your partner doesn't need to know. Everything is discreet. We won't tell. Come on, have fun! It's safe!

Not me... I'd be the guy they would send to the press to show they have data. Everyone would know about me. That's how I know there really is a God, and he has a sense of humor that way.

Hacking is worse then cheating

[HarryBauer247]

Off course cheating is immoral. But so is hacking and publishing personal information. Actually that is worse. Cheating is just immoral, but not a crime. Hacking and violation of privacy is immoral AND a crime punishable by law. Besides who says the account info is correct? What is people make accounts using someone elses name? I would asume that if you want to start an affair you won't use your own name and address. People who don't cheat can get in trouble because people use their names on this site.