Slashdot Mirror
ABC Showed IPs of Chatroom Participants
Blob Pet writes "The Associated Press reports that ABC News published the IP addresses of those who participated in an 'Internet news broadcast' Monday with Sam Donaldson. It prevents someone like Bill Clinton from pretending to be an average American and preaching how great the President is on an online forum hehe."
There's also a privacy concern or two here, as the article points out, and IMO ABC booted it on this one. Would "Mark from DC" have been as free with his opinions if he'd known his bosses could easily trace him? I doubt it.
His present 'troubles' (fabricated by a conspiratorial right wing) aside, history will show that he was one of the great orators and statesmen of this century.
Sign me,
Anonymous Coward
(no relation to the President - honest!)
--
It takes a village to raise a child.
Donations for my campaign gratefully accepted.
hilary@whitehouse.gov
I can't stand it when online sites or forums post your IP without first warning you in big flashing bold letters.
/. know how to spoof or masquerade or proxy their real IP...not to mention that Bill Clinton could just get on a AOL account if he wants to look like some average Joe Shmoe.
= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
First of all...from a security standpoint, it's completely useless since any eight-year-old who reads
All it does is post the IPs of people who probably aren't smart enough to know how to hide them...which pretty much paints a big red bulls eys on them for the BO/NetBus crowd.
Back on my dial-up ISP days, I didn't care if my IP was out there since all I had to do was disconnect to get a new one. But now having a cable modem, the last thing I want is for some bored wanna-be-cr/hacker to port scan me because something about my post leads him to believe I have vast treasure troves of illegal warez just waiting for him on port 2121...
- JoeShmoe
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
At least dynamic IP users retain some kind of privacy - but think about all us geeks with leased lines and our own IP space. We're even easier to locate...
Showing your ips is generally a very bad idea. I think an IP should be handled the exact same way as a telephone number. You usually don't go about showing those on tv either, do you?
The least they should do is put up a big warning.
Let's face it - for the vast majority of people, an IP is not an address - it says nothing about your physical location, and for those of us with dynamic IPs at least we retain some privacy in the bowels of our ISP's internals - assuming they have at least some kind of decent privacy policy.
Sure - if someone's IP resolves to whitehouse.gov then we smell something in the works, but 61.2.54.2 resolving to dial245.someisp.ch doesn't do much for anyone...
Sure, people will scream and scream every time our "online privacy" becomes an issue - this is simply another example of it, but think about it, folks - when was the last time someone turned up at your door saying "Hi, I'm fred from somewherechat. I got your home address after I got your IP on the chat room, hacked into your ISP and looked at the dial in logs, and cross-referenced it to the your information on their server"..?
Sure, some might be persistant enough to do it (lord help them) - but when it comes down to it, an IP doesn't mean much, does it now?
As for bosses tracing the IPs of their employees, we still have some privacy when we create an account on an ISP, they will only surrender a user's personal details in a criminal offence has been committed. I don't really think mouthing off one's boss falls in that category. And for those stupid enough to do that from their work computer... they deserve such a fate...
Well, next time there is another "online privacy scare" - remember these words.
- Seth Finkelstein
... that your IP is easily found out if your participiating in IRC and that has been so for ages. Also, you all know of course, that your IP shows up in web logs, and has been from the very beginning of the web.
You all know as well that you need to use some kind of cryptographically hard anonymizing service for better protection.
I can see the byline now when these people find out about the existance of IRC: "Massive privacy concern's discovered using popular IRC program!". Like it or not, people using IRC have their IP address made available, but it's consentual, in a way. Everyone can see your IP address, by you can see everyone's IP address too. But of course, only the really stupid packet warriors smurf someone from their own dialup.
The close to 500k people who use the various IRC networks around don't seem to complain about their IP's being shown.
Ok, actually yes quiet a few of them they do, and it's something I think IRC networks should really get their butts into gear over somehow masking. Knowing who to email when some butthead floods you on IRC is all well and good, but in these modern days of packet warriors, showing the whole IP address is less than wise. Rumour is that a near-future version of a certain-network's ircd will employ some form of hostmasking technique.
Disclaimer: I don't represent Undernet Administration as a whole.
Want to know what else is pathetic? I work for them (But NOT in .com). We were told NOT to watch the broadcast, because it would bring down our internal network. We had to watch it on TV!
... why didn't you post your IP address in that post? What's the matter, are you concerned about your privacy? Maybe someone might try to ping flood you or otherwise take your box out?
Of course that would never happen to someone who expressed unpopular opinions in a high traffic chatroom/BBS... so what have you got to lose? Post your IP address, c'mon, you yourself say it doesn't matter. Put your money where your mouth is.
Right now, most people are probably not too concerned about their IP adresses being kept private. As already said, modem users only have to reconnect to get a new one, and retain some semblance of anonymity. Cable is a different situation -- some services will reassign a new IP after you've been logged out for a few hours, others assign a static address. But what really gets me is the situation at many university's. A lot of schools map students email/net id's to the host name of each IP for those living in the dorms. As if that weren't enought, many then provide electronic student directories on their websites where you can enter said email/net id and get such information as students name, physical address, and phone number. In the future, as more people move away from dial-up services, IP addresses will become just one more personal, identifying number (wow, maybe they could replace social security numbers...heh). It all makes me wonder what will become of personal privacy. I'm sure this is going to be an even more important issue once a majority of people have static IP's, and maybe then something will change. In the meanwhile, watch your back college kids!
a lot of the smaller irc networks actualy listen to the users /dns ktk007 it comes back with your ip not mine :} :}
Which is exackly why i moved my channels off undernet
Current local users: 19 Max: 231
Current global users: 279 Max: 1028
to give you an idea what the user level is
ktk007 is ~ktk007@Star6787.roc-il.concentric.net * ktk007
ktk using Glinx.NS.CA.StarChat.Net Glinx.com - your Canadian connection
the Star6787 is put in by the server replacing what belongs there
and if you do a
nuke that
seeyas
How long do ISPs keep records of who did what on a particular IP? If I see a message posted 5 years ago on a particular IP, would it still be theoretically possible to find the identity of the poster? If ISPs keep logs forever, I can see how there would be a significant privacy concern. After all anything intended to remain private forever eventually becomes public.
Some moderator out there is missing his or her sense of humor and/or irony. This was an "anonymous coward" posting a completely "unbiased" view of the President. Note the signature. It's a joke, get it?
= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
[SARCASM] Maybe Rob Malda needs to fix that "Don't include sig when posting as AC" feature? [/SARCASM]
It's not the most hilarious joke I've ever read but it's certainly not -1:Off-topic...
- JoeShmoe
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
this service will let you surf anonymously for free, avoiding such problems at this.
-DAVEO
IRC is normally "spoof-proof" because it is a two-way medium. It's pretty hard to spoof something if you need to receive traffic.
= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
On the other hand, it appears that you haven't heard of a "bounce" which basically runs all your IRC communication through a vhost/shell (or two or three or however secure you want to make it).
So, in theory someone who wants to find you would need to review the IP logs on several different ISPs probably located around the world. That's something even a governement agent would have a hard time doing if the shell was in, say, Singapore and the sys admin didn't answer his phone.
So, in that situation, IRC is as safe as posting through a proxy on the web. It's not bulletproof but at least if the authorites go after the IP, they are not going to be knocking on your door first.
- JoeShmoe
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
As I mentioned in a previous post, I happen to be using a cable modem...and the mental giants that set up the network decided to name every single host name by it's physical location. Which means if someone does a reverse-DNS lookup on my IP, they will get...
= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
customer.city.region.state.country.home.com
Plus, my since my customer number is first, if the person has any amount of human engineering skills, they will have my street address in no time. I can't tell you how many times I've had @Home reps read aloud my home address and THEN ask me for my security passcode. Failing that, since they have my city and state, if they get my last name they have a better-than-average chance of finding me listed in a phone directory. =\
Obviously, my complaints fall on deaf ears since @Home is not going to change their idiotic naming scheme any time soon. So, that means I must use the utmost caution when allowing my IP to be posted somewhere online. You people think that only e-mail address are harvested from public discussion groups? Wrong. For several weeks following a posting to a beginners help forum (that listed my IP) I was bombarded with signals on port 31337 and 12345. I actually had to threaten @Home with legal action to get them to change my IP and ever since I haven't let that thing get out of my sight.
If you have a cable modem, especially @Home, I strongly suggest you be just as careful.
- JoeShmoe
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
Please read my previous posting (same answer)
= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
- JoeShmoe
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
Some things to check out:
The Anonymizer
Surf the Web anonymously
Replays Anonymous Remailers
Send email anonymously
Onion Routing
Onion Routing allows you to send IP packets anonymously.
SSonet
Multilevel security in computer networks.
We have become a paranoid society when people are unwilling to have their own comments attributed to themselves. It is another symptom of a society that doesn't want to be responsible for its own actions. Bill Clinton is a perfect example of this.
...Don't mean they're not after you.
I don't particularly think this is a paranioa situation. I think in an open forum such as this there should be at least some accountability. right? I mean should the world let the Anonymous Coward say whatever he wants without fear of having to stand behind it.
"When I look down I miss all the good stuff, When I look up I just trip over things.."
"When I look down I miss all the good stuff, When I look up I trip over things..."-Ani DiFranco
I think that given the huge debates surrounding Anonymous Cowards here at Slashdot, the reaction to this issue is very interesting.
;). This is a massive public site, with thousands of people, and perhaps the designers sought to do something to at least keep some people in line. And one thing that this can help prevent is people pretending to be others, about 95% of the time.
So far, the majority of the responses have focused on the bad things that happen when you post IPs. But there are also good things. Let's not forget that this is not a specialty site, a private community like Slashdot wherewe can trust everyone not to post flamebait or redundant posts
This is a personal choice by the site designers, just as CmdrTaco's or Hemos' decision to maintain Anonymous Cowards is their personal choice. As so many have said here at Slashdot, if you don't like the rules, you don't have to participate.
Injured worker wins against Mattel!
all someone has to do is /whois you, and they have your IP.
If ABC was really concerned about such things as a high-placed White House person coming on and waxing poetical about the current administration, they would have merely let the public know that *this* person was the head of the Department for Spreading Lies, and *this* person was the guy who takes care of the water cooler in the Oval Office... and leave the other IPs alone. (It seems like ABC is just flexing; 'Grrr! We have your IP addresses! Look what we can do!' without really accomplishing much except making people paranoid.) Publishing IP addresses isn't necessary. Then again, it isn't the end of online privacy, either. Like it's been mentioned before, it's fairly easy to mask your IP, so if you're that paranoid, go ahead. But you just gotta ask yourself, is Bill really clever enough to try to impersonate Joe Average, let alone mask his IP? (Then again, our Beloved Ruler Chretien swore he chatted with homeless people every day, and he's far less sneaky than Bill, so...) Oh, gods, 8:20 and I've already been through two cups of coffee. It's going to be a long day...
- dom
- gnome
What's up, Mr Jones?
Okay, so I'll drop by for dinner next Thursday ;-)
Seriously though, you're right; it rarely happens. But I don't want it to. I don't want people to know where I live unless I tell them. I don't want people to call me unless I give them my phone number. I don't even want them e-mailing me unless I post my address (you'll note mine here dumps to a Mailcity account. If that fills with spam or death threats (I'm not well liked )-:) then I'll still be able to read my important mail. Privacy is measured in levels of trust.
Now, don't get me wrong. It's been about 8 years since I've done anything remotely like cracking. But I could still get your home address with your IP if I really wanted it. But I grew out of that phase.
Oh, and I have a dynamic IP here at work, so . . .
Bad things often happen to good people,
It is up to them to see that they remain good.
Speaking of which, can anybody reccomend a place that sells super-cheap yet high quality (i.e. hard to take down) BNC access?
One of the security measures I take is to only IRC from my shells on Other People's Boxen (preferably other people with big pipes). This makes securing against floods or whatnot Somebody Else's Problem.
Obscuring IP addresses doesn't sound like a very good idea to me. Just last night I e-mailed a LART for a spammer on EFNet to the admins of the server he was using, his ISP and his ISP's ISP. Without the IP address the LART would have been meaningless to the two ISPs. As it is they'll (hopefully) track him down and kick him in the nads.
I don't buy the stated reason for publishing IPs. Casual anonymization is to easy via AOL or the anonymizer.
I think the real purpose is to visibly enable tracking and make an implied threat to tone down flamage. People with dynamic IPs are as traceable as long as their ISP keeps the logs.
Unfortunately, with IPv6, logs won't be necessary.
-- Robert
There are a couple ways to look at this. To the non-geek, the Internet is a place where you don't have a face or even an identity, you can make your own. You can be whatever you want in this (Internet) world. So, by revealing IP's (if they are static, if it is dynamic...does it really matter?) this causes an identity problem for those who don't want to be revealed. Again, this is the non-geek view. To us geeks, we know that this is not true, depending on what you are refering to. In this case, if you enter a chat room (irc or whatever) you know that you IP is being logged somewhere and could be used to trace you, therefor, you know that you can only hide your identity from the non-geek. The fact is, no matter what, if I, for example, really wanted to know your IP, I could find it. If you don't like the thought of your IP being known, there is one solution and that is unplug your internet connection and work unplugged.
Seems like too many folks can't grasp using the work account for work and the personal account for personal activities.
IMHO if someone isn't willing to identify themselves, then how can I believe what they're saying? There are too many people online who are just here to stir up sh!t.
I think it's irresponsible of the media to use Anonymous Coward postings from Slashdot as News (which happens - our local newspaper printed an article about Corel's GPL violation and used some very damning quotes by Anonymous Cowards on Slashdot to validate their story).
I'd like to think the news I'm seeing on CNN, ABC, etc., isn't being made up by bored, anonymous Internet posters.
- Steve
(Of course an IP address isn't the way to do it.. there's always going to be some level of abstraction when you're accepting people who you've never met.. maybe making them give you an email address and verifying that it exists before allowing them would help. Sure, hotmail addresses are a dime a dozen, but at least you can still email the person after the chat is over and ask for more info or whatever if it's important to you).
I'm thinking lawsuit.
Show me a 'chatroom' where your IP is _not_ published? They'll just send out your message as black text on white background then at then end switch to white on white to hide it from your eye.
Now pick up your mouse, highlight the chat and viola, everyone's IP.
fou aje oym asoyf ueyf jaffaq afset su!6j!/\ op 'ua>|7!>| ppn7
When I used to dial-up to digex and irc from there, I would use IRC and my username would be: axjc734ddda@access#.digex.net
I asked what the trash username was about, and they explained it to me. It was encrypted. Only Digex has the key. That way digex could keep their users anonymous & when trouble set in, could decrypt the username back to what it really was and punish the user.
I bet IRC could do that. Except they would probably need a 'shared private key' otherwise you could evade bans by changing servers...
fou aje oym asoyf ueyf jaffaq afset su!6j!/\ op 'ua>|7!>| ppn7
Why is this even an issue? I'd be complaining if they didn't post the IP addresses.
There isn't a newpaper in this country who values its reputation that runs blind letters to the editor. Period. Every letter must be signed and, at every newspaper I've worked for, the editorial staff goes to great lengths to make sure the name at the bottom of the letter is actually who wrote the letter. Every person who gets a letter published generally gets a phone call before the letter is published.
Folks who use the net expect a greater level of *anonymity* (not privacy) than do most people.
Anonymity and privacy are two different beasts but that's another topic.
InitZero
...shouldn't be using his computer at work to surf the net.
Just remember, your tax dollars at work!
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
I'm pretty sure the President himself would have better things to do with his time than masquerade as Joe Schmoe on some "MTV Yak Live" project. Y'know? It just don't make sense.
I'd personally think the IP logging would be to keep tabs on Joe Schmoe who'd want to try to masquerade as the President. As we have learned through countless "celebrity chat" sessions, it's not so easy to pick out the famous, respected person through use of proper grammar and spelling.
I guess, with a little work, one can easily spoof his/her IP address. I mean, if Clinton REALLY want to do it. Do anyone think a mere IP-address displaying does anything? C'mon.
... not willing to upgrade when the time comes...
On second thought, IPv4 actually has an advantage over IPv6 - it takes less place when you display them. I can smell NSA, ABC,
Judging from the fact that they did release IP, they probably thought that it's useful, which is false.
HOWEVER, that illustrates their attitude and intent which I don't agree with.
And I'm sorry if this response bores you to death. Bite me.
The message on the other side of this sig is false.
You e-mailed an IRC spammer's ISP's ISP because you didn't like what he was doing? Ye gods. I mean, what on earth is *wrong* with you?
I'd hate to work somewhere like UUNET because of stupid people like this ("Joe Weenie on a dialup at x.x.x.x sent me a mean letter...and he's serviced by an ISP that you service! Cut off his ISP's service!").
Okay, email his ISP (though spamming on IRC is such an incredibly minor thing that I can't see doing it). Maybe the server admins. But *you're* the one creating spam...some of us try to get valid concerns through to major ISPs, and you're just clogging up channels.
Throwing a temper tantrum about spammers impresses no one.
Marginally related to the topic, but does anyone other than "Mark from DC" actually think there is an "increasing gulf in the inaccessibility of the Web to (the) poor"?
Maybe a gulf in the desire to access, but not in the ability. And certainly any inaccessibility that does exist is not "increasing".
Consider that computers (not to mention WebTV units) are cheaper than many TVs, that Internet access is cheaper (sometimes free) than basic cable, and that most "poor" households have multiple TVs, VCRs, and premium cable packages. Seems to me that there is just a lack of interest.
The last thing we need is some government subsidized program for Internet access.
BTW, I'm not really an "Anonymous Coward". My Nick (and real name) is "Glen Walters". I just got tired of waiting for my password to arrive.
The web equivalent of an IRC relay would be one of those anonymizer services. They could easily have chosen to use one of these if they were truly worried about their identity.
Most people use IRC to chat with new folks, not to establish a "club room" where the same, select gang meets. It's kind of hard to meet a bunch of new people with similar interests on a server with such a small number of users, so they use a large, established one.
The whole hostname masquerading thing has been discussed on just about every IRC network. Those that choose to support it do so. Those that don't have their reasons.
Until I realized how little about high technology the readers of the ABC website (and probably their viewers as well) I was utterly baffled as to why they considered this news. It's complete nonsense.
Hmmm... Someone's web site is recording the IP addresses of the posters. So what? I'm currently engaged in the process of collecting enough AOL CDs to build a parabolic reflector to use the sun's light to write my name on the surface of the moon, and I'm already about halfway there. Almost three-quarters of the way there if I elected to use all the CDs from the other online services as well. With literally geologic epochs-worth of free online time for dozens of providers, it's far far far too easy to come from dozens of places at once. Trying to say that it will keep people from hiding their identities, I'm sad to have to say, demonstrates an incredible naivete. (Bad Rob! No biscuit for you!) For that matter, it will *not* let people track down the "real identities" of posters, since no ISP who wants to stay in buisness will ever give out the personal details of their customers without a court order.
There is only one thing that is accomplished by posting the IP address of the author... It makes it very clear to them that if they decide to troll or post a load of flame bait, that people will have their IP address and time and can send emails of complaint to their ISP. (You would be suprised at both how many web-boards don't log IP address information, as well as how many users don't realize how truly available that information actually is to the moderator of an online forum. Most of the truly awful trolls will play in other pastures once they realize that they could lose their internet account, not to mention get into a lot of trouble with their parents for their actions.
Get over it folks.
That's what they did in The Net. If you look closely, most (all?) of the IP addresses used had one or more octets above 255, making it invalid. Pretty good idea, if you ask me.
First of all, Lose the bold. It makes you look like an idiot.
I think he just forgot to use a </b> tag. It's an easy thing to do if you don't habitually use the Preview button. I've done it once myself. Give the guy a break.
ABC has been showing either the home ISP or the IP address (when it can't resolve ISP) for as long as I've been viewing their chats -- about a year. I have no idea how long before that.
CNN, ABC, and other "big news" outlets getting into the interactivity department have learned a few things along the way. For instance, CNN discovered that with open registration, people felt anonymous and would fill up their forums with obscenities and personal abuse (flamewars for the uninitiated). CNN began requiring a "real" e-mail address (though so far as I know mainly they reject hotmail). ABC began posting chat messages like this:
frank rizzo from proxy.aol.com at 10:02am ET
Evas mom from splitrock.net at 10:04am ET
Kisuh from [210.183.28.97] at 10:11am ET
This holds in all chat rooms, not just the political ones. So far as I know, all chats at ABC are moderated anyway, so only postings approved by the moderator are shown. This policy is also something found at MANY web-based chat systems, e.g. bianca.com, again instituted after abuse forced them to.
ABC is not in the business of providing an anonymous forum; they're in the business of entertaining people with news. There are plenty of other places on the internet where one can speak their mind privately.
The person posting this was obviously a first-time ABC chat user, otherwise they would have known this. I don't understand the shock; this sort of thing is common and I'm convinced this person is a newbie with an itchy privacy finger.
lake effect weblog
{Network engineer in Chicago--looking for work!}
The chat transcript in question. Valid at least until the next time it's used, I guess.
The IP reporting is not "unusual" as stated in the boston.com article (see my other post), nor is it given for "each participant". It is only shown when the originating ISP cannot be resolved.
lake effect weblog
{Network engineer in Chicago--looking for work!}
Have ANY of you EVER participated in an ABCnews.com chat? They have *always* done this! *Always*! Ever since I first looked at one of their chat forums. If you want an example, go pull up any Friday "Dear Dan" in "Health & Living", he does chats on Fridays, and they always show the IP address! What's the big difference between the current Sam Donaldson chat and any of these earlier ones, that it's worth notice?
Freedom of speech does not come with a clause saying that you are free from responsibility for ever and a day.
If you are going to post something on the internet, post as if you are publishing it in a newspaper or a book: you are still responsible for what you say. Granted, most of the internet claims to be "anonymous", but that is far from the truth, and it still does not give you the ability to communicate without assuming the responsibility of your ideas.
As many have pointed out, ABCnews.com has always done this. This was technology inherited from Starwave years ago. GM Bernard Gershon has only been in this role for a couple months.
From proxy11.disney.com, tho my words and opinions are my own (boy are they ever) and do not represent the opinions or beliefs of rodents or frozen heads anywhere (now do you believe me?)
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
Thats true, no one would want to have their IP broadcasted, but just because you and the general public does not see your IP does not mean your IP is private. By just visiting a web site your IP can be taken and used for any thing they want, just because you don't see it displayed publicly doesn't mean it is not being taken. This discussion board does not seem to use images but other web boards do, if someone wanted to they could create a Perl script that returns an image and logs the IP of the person getting the image, so someone could easily take your IP that way. Or easier then that they could simply have a web site and ask you to visit it and when you go there it logs your IP. In the end, just like your phone number simily, if you call someone (visit their web site) they can get your phone number (IP) easily. The only way to truly be private is to spoof or anonymize your IP through a service, but that would suck if every one had to do this.
It won't allow cookies, and practically everything important demands cookie support these days. We really need a mechanism to fake out those dang cookie things.
By the way, my name really is Anonymous Coward. Please don't make fun. I'm a little sensitive about it. It could be worse, though. I've got an older brother named Craven.
Just a thought:
Anonymous posts sould be taken for what they
are, untraceable and without accountability.
They are useful, and even necessary in a
world that reveres free speach; but I'll
only take someone seriously if they feel
strongly enough about an issue to be accountable
for whatever consequences result.
It's a little twist on the "stand in the
middle of a crowded theater and scream
'fire!'" argument. The minor twist being
a person is likely to yell fire if they
know the fire is both false, and other
people know where to find the kind gentleman
yelled fire.
OTOH, standing firm with your statement
will engender more support if people have
a face or name to make it more personal.
-geoff
The Disassociated press reports that XXX news broadcasted faces of those who participated in a talk show debate on Monday with Sam Body.
Doh.
Link.
Earthlink does something similar, although I think it's a little more cryptic - but certainly not too cryptic to reveal the physical location of the dialup connection. I guess there are more idiots out there than we realize.