A Hacker Has Wiped a Spyware Company's Servers -- Again (vice.com) 64
Last year, a vigilante hacker broke into the servers of a company that sells spyware to everyday consumers and wiped their servers, deleting photos captured from monitored devices. A year later, the hacker has done it again. Motherboard: Thursday, the hacker said he started wiping some cloud servers that belong to Retina-X Studios, a Florida-based company that sells spyware products targeted at parents and employers, but that are also used by people to spy on their partners without their consent. Retina-X was one of two companies that were breached last year in a series of hacks that exposed the fact that many otherwise ordinary people surreptitiously install spyware on their partners' and children's phones in order to spy on them. This software has been called "stalkerware" by some.
I cannot say I feel bad for these companies (Score:5, Insightful)
That a company like these should even exist is not really open to debate. It's one thing for warranted police to do this; it's quite another for the average man on the street to have this capability. As a 20-year systems administrator with loads of ability to see everything on the network, I never am tempted to do so. Unless and until HR asks me to engage in such an activity, I will never do it. People have a right to their privacy. Even here at work, I never go looking through user histories, etc. Let them do what they will short of breaking the law.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not really sure I approve of the police doing this any more than a random citizen. At the very least it should require approval by three separate courts and a public notice (which the target, of course, anonimized). And public notice doesn't mean a posting in some inaccessible place, but listing on a web page, something like:
2018/02/18 15:27 warrant approved until 2018/02/25 15:30 to (stalk?..need better description) (some explicit description of what is to be surveilled).
The explicit description of t
Re: I cannot say I feel bad for these companies (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
-- I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
I think this was quite the more thought-provoking part of your post. ;)
mnem
Thanks for that! :D
Re: (Score:2)
The advantage is it makes it a bit harder to just go to one judge who always rubberstamps everything "ok". It's not a great improvement, but it's a bit of one. I just couldn't think of anything that would really mean they had to actually show cause.
Re: (Score:2)
So a public notice that I'm being wiretapped? That doesn't sound... counterproductive.... at all. And multiple courts would arrive at difference decisions because??
Re: (Score:2)
Did you notice that the identification of who was being wiretapped was hash coded? You can't easily tell who the target it, but it can be easily validated that the target was the one specified.
Re: (Score:1)
Privacy for all, or privacy for none.
Allowing specific exceptions for anyone opens holes that can not be closed.
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that police don't lie to get warrants, but they do:
And you also seem to believe that police are trustworthy, unfortunately, they're not: https [denverpost.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree this can be up to debate.
There are Black Hat Spyware companies: Which are meant to go onto anyone's PC and all the data is just used for the company. (Clicking a link in an forged email...)
This company is in a Gray Zone. Using such tools to monitor your kids computing habits isn't necessary bad (As your children have limited rights, which are often overrides by their patients). Then the issue if you have a Work Issued computer, for Work use, while not good HR Policy, it is their equipment to be
Re: (Score:1)
You know I once had a problem with poor email behaviour at a company. My solution, make everyone's email accessible by everyone else, things quietened down real fast. A full absence of privacy seems to work far better than a partial absence of privacy (some keeping theirs whilst other loose theirs). When everyone looses it, things seem to stabilise real quick, overnight in fact, sometimes the simplest solution is the best.
Re: I cannot say I feel bad for these companies (Score:1)
Hopefully that spyware company in Redmond (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Does using software to monitor your ex-girlfriend's activity warrant a vigilante destroying the data you uploaded to a private company?
Re: (Score:2)
Does using software to monitor your children's activity warrant a vigilante destroying a private company's data? The article reads a bit click-baity to me.
For that matter, maybe the parents told their kids they put the software on their devices.
Re: (Score:2)
Does using software to monitor your children's activity warrant a vigilante destroying a private company's data? The article reads a bit click-baity to me.
For that matter, maybe the parents told their kids they put the software on their devices.
Precisely. "Monitoring your own kids' behavior" is neither evil nor criminal.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:A legit use? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I run a Raspberry Pi running Pi-hole for my kids. I don't whitelist them, I blacklist the things I don't want them to see or use. With age comes more availability. In addition to blocking ads, beacons, and tracking evil at the DNS level, the Pi-hole allows you to truly see what happens at the DNS level on your personal network. It's pretty eye opening to see what's phoning "home". I never knew my Netgear router needed to phone Disney due to the child protection element built in (now nixed). It's alarming to
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I told my kids I could track the gps on their phones to make sure they were where they said they would be. I had to ask the older kids to take a picture that proved where they where and send it but my oldest son was before smart phones so I actually I had to drive by and make sure he was there. My parents relied on the fact that we lived in a small town and I couldn't do anything without someone telling my mom before I got home.
I have exterior security cameras because although it's a nice neighborhood we ge
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: A legit use? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's true that the police have the burden of proof but if I have indisputable evidence that will make them stop wasting my time then I'm not going to allow them to arrest him make me pay for a lawyer and take it to trial before I present it. I'm just going to say here security camera footage from the time of the robbery showing that he was home and not on the other side of town.
Someone has something against a manager or the owner where he works and the place has been swatted a couple times and they have giv
Re: (Score:2)
(1) Can he change jobs -- is working in that particular place so important as to put himself at risk?
(2) Why are the dumbass cops going after the employees, not the swatter?
Re: (Score:2)
He could get a job somewhere else for less pay and no one told him about it until after the police showed up to question him and three other co-workers.
It a non-issue now the police are well aware that the company has filed a lawsuit against them and they will be on their best behavior when dealing with them.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:A legit use? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
yes, kids should have freedom to run around and not be stalked by their parents. same as we did in the 90s. fuck this company, hope the hacker did some real and permanent damage. it's called trust.
I grew up a few decades before you and was thinking the same thing. But one thing that you and kids today don't have to keep them in line is the fear that we had. Don't get me wrong, I did plenty of stupid shit when I was a kid. But we had corporal punishment at school back then. Which sucked and hurt a bit. But we also knew it was nothing compared to what we would get when we got home. It was the same if we got caught by the police or a neighbor turned us in to our parents. I think by the 90's it's unlikel
Re: (Score:1)
Bullshit. The whole community watched you, and held you accountable for your actions. You didn't have anonymity or the right to not be seen running around outside.
Re: (Score:2)
This type of software falls well into a gray area. They will market people who are interested in spying on others. So while there are legit good uses for it, it is easily open for abuse.
Re: (Score:2)
The hero we don't deserve... (Score:3)
...so kudos to him
Fuck you, Getty Images... (Score:3)
Man, this took much longer than it used to...
Anyway, Obligatory Nelson Muntz [nocookie.net].
Stalkerware (Score:2)
My kid is too old for this. (Score:2)
But if anyone out there is thinking about using something like this on their SO, don't. First of all it is a massive breach of trust. Secondly if you feel that you NEED to spy on your SO, then it is already over, just walk away with some dignity.
Who buys this stuff? (Score:2, Interesting)
The customers for this company sound like interesting subjects for psychological study. Don't trust their spouses and kids, do trust nameless, faceless strangers who make software to violate people's privacy. If that ever makes sense to me, I'd rather spend the money on therapy.
(As for the hacker, I wonder if "zer0 c00l" here believes that Angelina Jolie will be his girlfriend now?)
Re: (Score:1)