How is this post different from a d0x?
Krebs doing his homework to reveal ringleaders of a criminal enterprise and showing how he got there is firmly in the "investigative journalism" category.
Obviously, there are unfortunate cases where some (often young and inexperienced) journalists shoot first and ask questions later, which can lead to harm, but Krebs has clearly kept the receipts here.
Previously: https://itwire.com/business-it-news/security/infosec-researc...
Also the coinhive situation where he doxxed imageboard admins due to the coinhive connection of the previous owner.
Is this conversation about a journalist not an opportunity to remind us Voltaire said “I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
At the end of the day "maximal" isn't near as far in the max directory as people reading the statement expect.
The same reason why it’s considered acceptable to out the folks that participated in the watergate scandal, but not ok to out a confidential informant.
Even if not charged with a crime, if you do something shitty-but-legal and someone gets a video of it, you're not going to get control over that viral video.
And even if you luck out and don't get "doxed" as part of the arrest, you will be outed as soon as your formally charged.
So, no, at least in the US, privacy is not retained until conviction.
Not in the US. I can pull out my local newspaper right now and see a list of everyone who was arrested last week; long before they will be convicted of anything if they're convicted at all. For a lot of them they probably won't even be accused of anything because the other party won't press charges.
Journalists naming people as part of their work is a third category, and probably the one this falls under. It's dangerous territory, and Krebs stands to lose a lot (i.e. credibility, lawsuits, possible reprisals) by making this allegation if it turns out he didn't do his job right.
It’s just that most people don’t feel a need to protect criminals.
In most places, doxxing is not illegal. In the places where it is illegal it's usually only when there's stalking/harassment intent behind it. Doesn't appear to be against the HN rules either.
Funny story. In German „Krebs“ means cancer. And when he revealed the names and Adresses of Admins of a German Imageboard, the community started a fundraiser for cancer treatment named „Krebs ist scheiße“ or in English „cancer sucks“
It also means plain old "crab".
If he got it wrong, he'd be facing a lawsuit. He's also incentivized to retract and apologize in that case to preserve his credibility as a journalist. Very different story than an unaccountable anonymous troll with a grudge on Twitter/Reddit/4chan.
Do you see that is likely to ever happen?
Just so we are on the same page. Here we "can't get a conviction" because the person resides in a country which doesn't care about the crime he committed. Not because the evidence does not pass the required evidentiary level.
> don't have the right to ruin a life.
Please explain to him how a life is ruined here?
> Any deviation from this principle leads to mob rule.
Where a mob is a single high profile individual with his reputation on the line, and this singular "mob" performed a through analysis and provides the full reasoning how he come to the conclusion. This "mob" rule does not look like the ones I usually hear about.
Most things in life are, thankfully.
I don't want to become the subject of a New York Times expose, either, but that's no reason to ban journalism.
I feel I have a right to make my decisions based on such information also.
That doesn't mean the publisher shouldn't have liability here also. They are damaging someone's reputation, and should be held responsible if the claims are untrue.
But if the claims are true, then the damaged reputation is warranted. That's one of the consequences of doing something bad. You only have a right to have a good reputation if you don't do anything bad.
It’s realpolitik. It’s ok for Russians to steal from Americans, and likewise it’s ok for Americans to dox Russian criminals. There is no international law here, and even if there is it cannot be enforced and no one cares about. There might some moral high ground, but morals usually stay away from politics.
Ask Fox News that one, I hear they are a little over 700 million short from that stunt.