Extortionists Begin Targeting AshleyMadison Users, Demand Bitcoin

tsu doh nimh writes: It was bound to happen: Brian Krebs reports that extortionists have begun emailing people whose information is included in the leaked Ashleymadison.com user database, threatening to find and contact the target's spouse and alert them if the recipient fails to cough up 1 Bitcoin. Krebs interviews one guy who got such a demand, a user who admits to having had an affair after meeting a woman on the site and who is now worried about the fallout, which he said could endanger his happily married life with his wife and kids. Perhaps inevitable: two Canadian law firms have filed a class action lawsuit against the company, seeking more than half a billion dollars in damages.

Comments

Happily married?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems to be at odds with having an affair.

Re:Happily married?

[drinkypoo]

He's happy to continue to be married to someone he doesn't respect while fucking around on them.

Re:Happily married?

[Anonymous Coward]

Did he tell his wife what he did? Or did he continue to hide it from her knowing that it was something that could ruin their marriage? Something he swore he would never do?

Re:Happily married?

[Zero__Kelvin]

Who cares? Is it any of your business?

Re:Happily married?

[Billly Gates]

That is not the point.

It is still wrong to extort people and demand ransoms between private affairs that is really none of our business.

Re:Happily married?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure if she was the one cheating all the sjws here would be defending her privacy to no end, saying he probably deserved it anyway.

Re:Happily married?

[Dutch Gun]

I think having an affair would be one of the most emotionally hurtful things one person can do to another. Many married couples make explicit vows of faithfulness at their weddings, along with witnesses. An affair is a complete betrayal of that trust. We override raw instincts with reason and intellect all the time. We defer immediate gratitude for long-term payoffs. That's part of becoming an adult and a functioning member of our society. It seems like a bad idea to make excuses based on what our natural instincts are, because that leaves the door open to all sorts of horrible tendencies that are "instinctual".

Also, I'd argue monogamous marriage is more a societal construct than a political one. There are roughly the same number of single men and women in society at large. Unless you plan to kill off large numbers of young men in pointless and frequent wars or turn them into eunuchs, they're probably going to want to get married. The math just doesn't let polygamy work all that well, so we've deemed it bad for society and outlawed it.

Re:Happily married?

[ChrisMaple]

Stable families benefit children and civilization. Organizations and belief systems that want to gain power or destroy their enemies frequently try to destroy stable family structure - you can see this in the U.S. Democratic party, and various leftist governments that remove children from their parents to provide state education / indoctrination.

There are political aspects to any arrangement of men and women, and implying that monogamy is unique is this regard (worse yet, implying that it is founded on dark motives) is a dishonest attempt to disparage monogamy. Being an arrangement that forms stronger bonds among a small group of related people, stable families resist external political pressure and tend away from tyranny.

Just looking at the screwed up families that raised Bill Clinton and Barack Obama is enough to predict their sociopathic behaviour and the damage they've done.

Re:Happily married?

[AthanasiusKircher]

An unhappy marriage is not the defining feature leading to an affair, and a number of happily married people do fall into affairs.

This is pointless rationalization. What you're talking about are people who delude themselves into thinking they're "happily married" but also don't like to live by the rules of marriage... They may be "happy" (in some one-sided "relationship" as they like to define it themselves), but they actually aren't happily married (which, you know, requires both parties to understand and consent to such actions).

You see, the rules are actually quite simple here. Don't "fall into affairs" (as you so nicely put it) by accidentally getting out your genitals and putting them in someone not your spouse.

Sorry, but this is NOT something one just "falls into" -- "Oops, I'm sorry my penis just accidentally fell into there." That's teenage boy logic. Grow up. I don't care how some psychologist may rationalize it.

A hug that goes a little too far? Sure. A woman gives you a drunken kiss at a party? Sure. These can happen, and you stop it and say "sorry -- I'm married, and that makes me happy." That's what people who are actually "happy" to be "married" do.

You sign up for a website, make plans, and stick your genitals in someone else? Sorry -- no, you didn't just "fall into" that. And then you keep it a secret from your wife when it does happen? Nope -- you're definitely not "happily married," as least not when you took a whole bunch of deliberate actions to cheat on the normal principle of marriage.

Re:Happily married?

[narcc]

FWIW I personally have never married and thus have been single my entire life (never dated either) so as a male on the outside looking in, I'm calling this as I see it.

This particular revelation came as a surprise to absolutely no one...

Re:Happily married?

[Zero__Kelvin]

It is called an analogy. Intelligent people understand them. You shouldn't concern yourself with it at all. As you have shown, you'll just be confused.

Re:Happily married?

[AthanasiusKircher]

The wife is the body. I respect my body, but I occasionally eat a Sundae. At the moment I eat unhealthy foods it is hard to argue that I respect my body 100%, but it would be equally absurd to claim I have no respect for my body.

It may be absurd to claim that you have "no respect" for your wife if you cheat, but it is NOT absurd to claim that you have "no respect" for your MARRIAGE, which is an agreement between you and your wife. And usually pretty high on the list of terms of that agreement for most spouses is no adultery. Some may be okay with it, but that's generally something you negotiate with the spouse's consent. This is not the "fine print" of what marriage means -- it's pretty fundamental to the agreement.

To go back to your analogy, you may not completely disrespect your body by eating some ice cream, but if you made an explicit agreement stated before hundreds of witnesses in a formal ceremony that you would not eat ice cream, then you are completely disrespecting that agreement (and, by extension, you are disrespecting all who took part it in, at least to some extent).

You don't want that agreement? Fine. Don't take a vow to it. Or negotiate out of it. Some people want a diet where they can also eat ice cream. Be honest with your body and say that's the only kind of diet you want, and if your body can't deal, well... no diet for the body at all.

I'm getting tired of this analogy. Point is: this is about a formal, binding agreement. Honest people sign onto agreements that they plan to keep. And if they can't hold up the terms, honest people admit to it and either get out of the agreement or negotiate for something else.

And not only that, but we're not talking about some sort of accidental drunken hook-up here... we're talking about a guy who signs up on a website explicitly devoted to cheating and then deliberately makes a choice to cheat.

It's not like you were just at a party and somebody stuck a scoop of ice cream in your mouth, and you succumbed to accidental temptation. You sat at your computer, deliberately sought out a place to acquire ice cream, checked it out in detail, and then made plans to surreptitiously go eat it. A person who respects his dietary plan and is honest about how he is "happily dieting" does not do such things.

Re:Happily married?

[Tom]

I think having an affair would be one of the most emotionally hurtful things one person can do to another.

I see you are new to the human race. Pro hint: We are a lot more creative than that when it comes to hurting each other, including emotionally.

I'm not saying it's low on the list. But the most hurtful? Nah.

We override raw instincts with reason and intellect all the time.

And sometimes our intellect is right and sometimes it is wrong. Just "reason" is not a sufficient reason for superiority. Again, I'm not saying we should shut down our brains, on the contrary. But do not underestimate instincts - they made us survive these past million years.

The math just doesn't let polygamy work all that well, so we've deemed it bad for society and outlawed it.

That is true to some extent. Even in societies that allow polygamy it is in practice limited to a) the rich who can afford multiple partners and b) economic security. The most common case for muslim men to have multiple women is apparently that a man dies and his brother marries his wife to give her and the kids a home. In a society where she's not allowed to work that's pretty much the only way to ensure your family genes in that branch survive.

However, in most poly talk we always assume it's a 1:n relationship. In modern polyamoury, the relationships are usually m:n so the relative number of partners in each gender is not of importance because all involved have multiple partners.
Will it work? I don't think so, it will remain a niche, because it requires so much communication and emotional maturity from all involved members that I simply can't see it as a working model for society as a whole. But I personally know enough people who live now or temporarily lived in the past in such arrangements that it seems to me it's no better or worse than traditional monogamy.

To come back to your point: I think we should stop regulating relationships with laws. Our society has advanced enough that the previous arguments - mostly economical - are now moot.

Re:Happily married?

[anmre]

not only do wives not give husbands the sex that they want, but they also hold husbands to not going out and getting it elsewhere

Barring obvious trolls, that's quite possibly the most misogynistic comment I've ever read on Slashdot. You clearly have no interest in being married (which is fine), so don't presume to know what it's like simply because you have some friends who wish their wives would "put-out" more or some other bullshit.

Re:Happily married?

[AthanasiusKircher]

Monogamy is not actually in the standard Catholic marriage vows or its derivatives.

No, it doesn't need to be, because it's a stipulation that defines marital behavior in the Sixth Commandment, as well as numerous other places in both Old and New Testaments. (See official Catholic catechism.) To someone who assents to a Christian "marriage," they are inherently agreeing to the basic definition of that word, which precludes adultery. I don't think this is a secret.

Even if it were implied, marriage is a civil contract, many non-religious people get married, and there is no legal requirement for monogamy.

False. Adultery is still officially a criminal offense in roughly 20 states. Prosecutions are exceedingly rare these days, but they used to happen. States are repealing these laws, but they're still on the books many places. And even if adultery isn't prosecuted, in almost all states divorce law allows adultery to be considered as part of "bad behavior" which can either be cause for a divorce (in states that still allow grounds for cause) or at a minimum it is something that judges can explicitly use as evidence against a spouse in making a determination about how to split assets.

The expectation is culturally-specific, and lots of cultures have completely divergent expectations (including polygamy, as among some Mormons, Muslims, etc.)

That's true, of course. But we're talking here about one specific dude who signed up on Ashley Madison, and clearly lied to his wife because he thought it was wrong. So whether someone else may have different expectations about marriage, this guy is clear that the "no adultery" clause is pretty relevant to his own marriage.

Furthermore: Is it even feasible to promise a "forever" thing like that at a young age? I would argue "no"; people don't really have a capacity or right to make such an oath, time and variations are deeper than the young person can digest, and the demographic statistics bear that out.

There are two options for such people. Divorce and "open marriage." Both involve talking to your spouse. Choosing instead to continue to benefit from the marriage while lying to your spouse and breaking your vows is definitely not adhering to spirit of the marriage agreement.

To the extent that young people are deluded, tricked, or forced into a commitment of implied eternal monogamy, it's not entirely their fault, and they should be given some sympathy and charity as they try to naturally relieve or find their way out of the situation.

"Oops, my penis just accidentally fell into the lady parts of another woman. It isn't entirely my fault!"

Seriously, owning your decisions is part of being an adult. You don't want to be married anymore? Fine. Get divorced. At a minimum, be honest with your spouse about what you need and what's wrong -- you might be surprised that many people who make an effort can find that they actually can be happy in their marriage... but when you make unilateral decisions about that relationship and lie about them, that's not going to be good for anyone.

I am happy to give honest people "sympathy and charity." I understand that many young people make mistakes in getting married. But that doesn't mean you get to reap the benefits of a "happily married life" (as TFS puts it) while lying and cheating on the person who's giving that life to you.

Hopefully the long arc of history will continue to degrade this unrealistic expectation and allow people to be happy and connected without being condemned on by uptight, moralizing craphats.

Look -- I think marriage is pretty much a stupid idea for many folks, too. I never said otherwise. But it is a thing, a

Re:Happily married?

[AthanasiusKircher]

Who is to say that he doesn't respect her? If he is happily married I can only assume that he does respect her.

For most people, "respect" does not include lying. If he respected his wife, he would have asked for an open marriage before breaking his marriage agreement. If she refused and he still needed to screw around to be "happy," then his next option is divorce. Marriage is an agreement between two parties -- a person cannot be "happily married" while violating the agreement without the other's knowledge.

However, every male spouse I have ever talked to has desired more sex from his mate than she was willing to give.

Have you ever talked to a person over the age of 30 or who has been married for more than 5 or 10 years? Sex may be great, but people who are married long-term tend to often be concerned about other benefits from a durable, caring relationship.

The unfairness is that not only do wives not give husbands the sex that they want, but they also hold husbands to not going out and getting it elsewhere.

Unfairness? No -- what's unfair is if you agree to something in exchange for a person's affection and then you secretly break that agreement and lie to that person while continuing to benefit from that affection.

You don't want to be married? Fine -- don't get married. You get married, and you find it doesn't make you happy (because you can't get enough sex or whatever)? Fine. You have a legal option since no-fault divorce was created.

But what we're talking about here is a person who wants to benefit from his marriage and all the good things it brings him while lying to the people who give those good things to him. If he doesn't like the terms, get out of the marriage. But claiming that he's "happily married" while deliberately lying and cheating on those terms is just nonsensical.

About that

[pushing-robot]

a user who admits to having had an affair after meeting a woman on the site and who is now worried about the fallout, which he said could endanger his happily married life with his wife and kids.

I think you accomplished that all on your own, sir.

P.S. With so much personal info floating around the Internet, what's to stop scammers from creating fake profiles and going after anybody?

Re:About that

[Anonymous Coward]

All he simply needs to do is go to his wife and tell the truth. Problem solved.

Re:About that

[Tom]

A man who has a "happily married life" does not lie to his spouse and participate in affairs without her knowledge. It's as simple as that.

Nothing in humans is simple. You do not know the details of this persons life. Maybe you are right and he is deluded. Maybe a choice quote doesn't tell a persons life story.

Whatever is between his wife and him is between them and not your business nor mine. Maybe his marriage was not always happy. Maybe they just restored it from completely broken. Sure he should have been honest with her, but do you know all the circumstances so you can judge, or are you taking all your information from a three-liner in an online paper?

Should his wife and kids suffer because of his actions? Probably not -- but they'd probably be better off in the long run knowing what kind of scumbag they're trusting

Right. Because human beings are so simple that we can classify them with binary parameters.

I'll let you know where I come from. Many years ago, I was betrayed. I hit her in the face and left, the only time in my life I've ever hit a woman. But I'm also smart enough to ask myself why it happened and how much of it was my fault (pro hint: If you answer 0% you are always wrong). I understand that people are humans and nobody is the villain of their own life story.

I don't judge this guy without knowing a lot more about what was going on in his life. Maybe he's a scumbag, maybe he's just weak, maybe I could even understand him. The point is: I don't know and I find it disgusting how we judge other people from three lines of text.

Re:About that

[AmiMoJo]

To play devil's advocate for a moment, he could have had the affair some time ago and since fixed his marriage. He's still guilty of something, but sometimes the best option in a bad situation is secrecy. I don't know enough about the circumstances, in just saying that since you can't really delete your profile it's like that a number of people signed up and then changed their minds and fixed their marriages. Could be hard to prove that in divorce court though.

Seems to be

[Etherwalk]

Seems to be at odds with having an affair.

"Seems to be" is one key phrase here. People can sleep around and still love an SO, or can do that when they are unhappy and later they become happy. Turns out people are more complicated than "thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife." Who knew?