Contents of Leaked HBGary Emails Reveal Wrongdoing 369
chargersfan420 writes "Ars Technica has sifted through the contents of the HBGary emails leaked last week in the attack by Anonymous and posted an interesting story about some of the things they were up to (which include rootkit development, selling rootkits to the private sector, and an entire list of 0-day exploits in a variety of OSes and other software, among a variety of other devious plans). Today they are reporting a democratic push for a congressional investigation of HBGary Federal."
Score one for Anonymous. (Score:5, Insightful)
of course good guys, indifferent guys, and bad guys will do things by hiding behind such a mask. but, that doesnt make the presence of that mask, something bad.
Wow. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Countermeasures against HBGary (Score:4, Insightful)
3) Don't use Flash
4) Don't use Java
Interesting what they have unpublished 0-day exploits for.
Re:Careful what you wish for (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Careful what you wish for (Score:4, Insightful)
That's why we need 2 congressional investigations in parallel. One run by Republicans digging up any dirt they can find on Democrats, and one by Democrats digging dirt on Republicans.
What we really need is a Highlander style competition amongst politicians. That way there's just one we need to feed to a tree chipper to restore democracy in the U.S.
Re:Careful what you wish for (Score:5, Insightful)
This is in no way to say that I think the Obama administration is completely blameless and angelic in all things. If we were to discover that this firm was working on some of the same hacking and propaganda techniques on behalf of the government, then I'd damned well like to know about that as well. If the Obama administration was using these tactics on American citizens, I hope the investigation uncovers it somehow. And if you, parent poster, murdered a bunch of people ten years ago, I would hope that you are sent to jail for it. You know, if you did that. But in the meantime, we've got documents pointing to fraud being done by this firm on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce, so why don't we start with that?
Re:Score one for Anonymous. (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't forget ACS:Law as well.
Us Britons had to suffer their bullshit and lies for many years.
No more people suffering their crap anymore. And they will get the punishment they deserve.
Now if only someone would go after Global Debt Recovery AKA Tower Investigations AKA a bunch of other terrible companies who buy off loans legally out of date and scare people in to paying up or face "harsh punishments"...
The Anonymous Movement isn't one group, it is many, there are no members, just people with the same ideals.
This gives them power.
Of course, no doubt many countries are in the process of getting rid of any anonymity online.
It won't work, but they will try. Even many ISPs are against some of the crap governments try to pull.
The moment a "No-Anonymity" law is mentioned, all rights groups it applies to will instantly shoot it down. (you can bet your ass EFF will be on it in a heart beat)
And the problem with this is? (Score:2, Insightful)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Yes_Men
The Yes Men often deploy a satirical approach: they pose as a powerful entity (typically a corporate or government representative or executive) and make ridiculous and shocking comments that caricature the ideological position of the organisation or person. Furthermore, they acknowledge the idea that many corporate or government entities manipulate their ideology using spin; in response, the Yes Men use this power of spin to their own advantage, and use media outlets to disseminate their personal interpretation of the situation. A sense of humor and shock value is usually employed to make these issues more palatable to the general public and to call greater media attention to stories of interest.[1] Some of these outrageous ideas include the possibility to sell one's vote or that the poor should consume recycled human waste. On most occasions, little to no shock or outrage is publicly evoked in response to their prank.
On occasion, the Yes Men's phony spokesperson will make announcements that represent fictitious scenarios for the anti-globalization movement or opponents of corporate crime. The result often heed false news reports which cover the demise of the World Trade Organization, or Dow Chemical paying compensation to the victims of the Bhopal disaster, which the Yes Men intend to provide publicity for problems concerning these organizations. One of the effects of apologizing and promising support on behalf of an organization is that the organization is then later forced to re-acknowledge the event in question and retract all of the proposed good will. This served to further publicize the negative event of the organization and sets-up the organization to look bad for taking back any support The Yes Men offered under the name of their organization.
--
There are people who attack corporations in this way, and are not investigated by the Democrats on anything like a regular basis.
Re:Careful what you wish for (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you ever considered that we might like to know about government malfeasance even if it's done by people we voted for? (hell, especially in that case).
If this radical idea had occurred to the Republican voter base back in 2001, maybe they wouldn't have to deal with a Democratic President in the first place.
Re:Countermeasures against HBGary (Score:4, Insightful)
3. You are omniscient and avoid running afoul due to ignorance.
No matter how ethically you behave, if someone wants to nail you to the wall because they don't like you, they can probably dig up something you've failed to do -- some tax law you fail to meet, some paper you failed to sign before you did something, some place you happened to be that you didn't know you shouldn't be, etc.
Also, in some countries, you can get in trouble for failing to pay bribes. I consider bribes unethical. See the problem?
Of course, neither of these run afoul of the "actively hiding" clause -- they depend on the "ignorantly hiding" clause. But once you realize that the only reason you're not in trouble is because you failed to disclose something, do you disclose it (acting ethically) and pay the penalty (no longer being safe), or do you hide it (no longer acting ethically) and fly under the radar?
Ethics are social. This world has many societies, and they aren't all compatible.
Hey, for a historical example, Jesus was killed because he was condemning the unethical acts of the Jewish elite. They accused him of things he readily admitted to (as well as a bunch of lies) that were punishable by their law by death by stoning. Of course, if they'd followed that law (ethical to them) then they would have been guilty of murder under Roman law -- Romans considering stoning both unethical and illegal.
Those who are truly willing to live by their ethical code have to be willing to die by it. They are by no means "safe".
Re:Haha. Read the memo they left in the conference (Score:5, Insightful)
> i wonder what will the senate committee say to them, in regard to their dealings with this filthy outfit.
Here's my guess: "When Blackwater got caught doing evil shit, they had to split up into a bunch of shell companies with different names so we could keep paying them enormous sums of taxpayer money to keep doing business as usual. Now you are going to have to do the same. One of the contractors from one of the new Blackwater shells who works for the CIA just got caught shooting non-combatants in the back, and we are having a motherfucker of a time keeping people from making the connection. Like that guy, we'll give you diplomatic immunity or state secrets protection, or whatever we need to do to prevent justice from being served, but it is a pain in the ass. Don't get caught again."
Of course, that's not going to be the public part.
Re:Wait, there is more! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Careful what you wish for (Score:5, Insightful)
I would have modded you up, but you're already at 5.
Evidence based support of politicians. Evidence based policy. Evidence based... stuff in general.
If it turns out that the folks I voted for are scumbags, I'd like to know so they can be kicked out, taken to court, discredited, whatever. It's not "my team" and "their team", this is not about tribes or who's dad can beat up who else's dad, this is about the governance of of the USA.
If more people thought like this we wouldn't have the ridiculous spectacle of politicians throughout the western world getting away with all sorts of dodgy behaviour because "if you don't vote for me the other tribe will win!" and we might actually get a government we want.