Anonymous posts usernames and passwords of US Congress staffers
sebsauvage.net
sebsauvage.net
Counter-productive and juvenile, that's all this was.
Totally agree.
yep, sounds like he is just young and thus naive.
> working for the government to help develop systems that deliver water to people whom would otherwise not have enough water to survive.
government and water at places where not enough water ... what can go wrong here ... Chinatown.
As a sidenote, it is interesting that water issues underlie so much CA politics even now, many decades later, and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future.
Do some people enter politics because they just want power or they want to polish their ego? Sure! But that doesn't mean everyone in the industry is inherently a bad actor.
Even politicians (as opposed to staffers) sometimes take stands on moral issues - that would hurt them politically (rare but it happens)
Most people I know in the political realm are looking for a paycheck without having the bother of producing anything.
A cynic could say they're just resume padding to sell out later, but if you're trying to mooch off of the taxpayer, being a low level capitol staffer is NOT the way to go about it.
Ben Franklin, 1787
http://www.bartleby.com/268/8/12.html
"Sir, there are two passions which have a powerful influence in the affairs of men. These are ambition and avarice—the love of power and the love of money. Separately, each of these has great force in prompting men to action; but, when united in view of the same object, they have, in many minds, the most violent effects. Place before the eyes of such men a post of honor, that shall, at the same time, be a place of profit, and they will move heaven and earth to obtain it. The vast number of such places it is that renders the British government so tempestuous. The struggles for them are the true source of all those factions which are perpetually dividing the nation, distracting its councils, hurrying it sometimes into fruitless and mischievous wars, and often compelling a submission to dishonorable terms of peace.
And of what kind are the men that will strive for this profitable preeminence, through all the bustle of cabal, the heat of contention, the infinite mutual abuse of parties, tearing to pieces the best of characters? It will not be the wise and moderate, the lovers of peace and good order, the men fittest for the trust. It will be the bold and the violent, the men of strong passions and indefatigable activity in their selfish pursuits. These will thrust themselves into your government and be your rulers. And these, too, will be mistaken in the expected happiness of their situation, for their vanquished competitors, of the same spirit, and from the same motives, will perpetually be endeavoring to distress their administration, thwart their measures, and render them odious to the people."
Lots of people just spend their lives trying to research how to make the world a little less crap, or planning infrastructure, or trying to keep people in housing. With limited resources, and a system that backfires on them from time to time because they've relatively little power in the grand scheme of things (depending on government structure and incentives) but that doesn't make them bad people.
Anon is occasionally lucky with their targets (ie: they happen to line up to a good cause), but internet vigilantism consistently does crappy things to innocent people.
Yes and No.
Russian Gangs are known to fly the flag of Anonymous, but I bet you that the rank-and-file members of Anon would prefer not to be confused with those guys.
Which is why the idea of a 'false flag' Anonymous operation seems absurd to me, there is no 'false' Anonymous flag, any more than a 'real' Anonymous.
Sure, there are the "core" Anonymous groups that you might associate with LulzSec, but those were very different from the WhyWeProtest Anonymous groups that continue to fight the Church of Schientology, which are in turn different from the Anonymous groups that supported Occupy Wall Street, which are in turn different from those involved in the Arab Spring, which are in turn different from those working with the FBI to take out child porn rings on TOR, etc. They may share some common ideals, and perhaps even membership, but they're all disparate groups and none is more or less Anonymous than any other. The people who did this are just as deserving of the label as those who worked to bypass internet surveillance in Iran, as they both choose to fly the flag.
And whether or not it is "right", there are groups of people on the internet who "respond to the call of Anonymous". As long as you invoke the name anonymous, then you recieve them as an ally. This is dangerous behavior, and leads not necessarily to "false flag" attacks (in the strictest sense), but allows the groups that align themselves with Anonymous to be easily manipulated.
http://news.softpedia.com/news/The-Jester-Anonymous-Hackers-...
Its a dumb, irresponsible, and juvenile setup.
That said, I'd guess that much of the irresponsible vigilantism of Anon probably is still the work of idealistic teenagers and so forth.
etc...
Eric.Slocum@mail.house.gov: Fuckface^1
I'm afraid that the government will use this incident as "proof" that what they're doing thus far isn't "enough" and they need even more power and control... and, given the victims of this attack, I'm certain they'll get it.
If my bank get's hacked, don't be too harsh with my password, I swear I can't remember a new, unique, secure and constrained password every 3 months :(
I'd be willing to bet that the actual house/senate domains require strong passwords, I've interacted with their IT in a few situations and found them to be on the ball.
Obviously this leak is bad, but I think it's also humanizing. Staffers are people.
Iconst!tu3nt x3
iConstit*09
iConstituent
I feel bad for the people whose passwords were leaked, but I'm happy to see that there's (as far as I've seen so far) terribly embarrassing among the passwords. (Edit: okay, I was wrong on this one. notalentassclown3, Fuckface^1, poopypants1, DallasSucks10! and 1044shit, I'm looking at you)
Also funny: Senatebound2012!
Its from office space right?
Some are pretty easy to guess who they belong to. like TX32republican!
It says something about how thoroughly they vet their vendors, but it's not 'our government's security. (although requiring a full audit that deep before letting them pay a third party just makes them more lumbering and tech-phobic...)
On the other hand, do they really store house.gov passwords unencrypted? I'm not even talking about salted vs unsalted hash here, just plaintext? Seriously?
Really wish government employees would be forced to use more secure passwords, or at the least heavily trained on the importance of them.