- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.zip
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.zip
You must log in or # to comment.
That’s fucking metal.
Now we need a website that we can add to that doxxes them that we can browse like a Nazi Facebook site, but frozen in time.
The genius of launching an attack of this scale from an address space that is already jam-packed full of hackers, should not be understated. Id say that, if not for doing it live on stage, law enforcement now has a giant haystack of needles to sift through.
I need more hackers doing this. Great work.
Hope they dumped their shit on the dark web
No, they didn’t dump it on the dark web. They‘ve dumped it on the regular web instead: https://okstupid.lol/
1:5 gender ratio. Perfect for incels.
Imagine calling yourselves the “master race” but forgetting to secure your own website—maybe try mastering to host Wordpress before world domination.
Oof
A gender ratio that makes the Smurf village look like a feminist utopia
I cackled
Even better, thanks.
The administrator of the three websites did not immediately respond to TechCrunch’s request for comment, which was sent to an email address shown during the conference talk.
Uhm… You’ll be waiting forever. They literally deleted admin email accounts in the video. Good journalism 👍
TechCrunch also sent an email to an address that appears on the public domain records of two of the three websites. The person behind that address also did not immediately respond to our email.
I’d be very nervous: Did I place enough try/catch blocks in my lol.py?
Are all the passwords correct before I run it on stage?
Is this endpoint to delete an email correctly spelled out?
Does the WiFi of the conference allow connecting to these domains?
So many things could go wrong.
bah, you just run the script that shows an unconditional [x] done. you can check the details later!
That’s basically what I thought when I saw this - there’s no way anything is happening that quickly, this is just outputting “done!” over and over.
Get fucked Nazi scum.
I hope some well intentioned vigilantes use this information to make America a better place.
Or in this case, they don’t get fucked. It is a dating site after all.
A dying breed
An extinction that I can get behind.
“Imagine calling yourselves the ‘master race’ but forgetting to secure your own website — maybe try mastering to host WordPress before world domination,” Root wrote.
Fucking gold.
The last 3 years of “White Supremacy” has me questioning the narrative on White Competency.
It’s okay, you can say it: White Inferiority. We have NOT been sending our best. For a handful of centuries or so.
I love this. I love it so much. I have to defend my employers shit every day, and they don’t give a fuck.
“They publicly delete all my websites while the audience rejoices. This is cyberterrorism,” the administrator wrote on X
Lmao mald harder
The terrorist suddenly pays the victim when their terrorist site is taken down.
The number one skill of every nazi and fashit is pretending to be victims
It is always morally acceptable to punch a Nazi. No exceptions.
I’d say it’s a moral responsibility to punch a Nazi.
I mean, it is technically true, but in a trial with a jury of peers it wouldn’t matter. This reminds me of the old school outlaw definition. If you were declared an outlaw the laws of the land no longer applied to you. You could commit crimes, but it also meant anyone and everyone could commit crimes against you without repercussions. It was a bit of a given that you would commit crimes because if you were declared an outlaw you probably were already committing crimes, but now anyone could rob, harm, or even kill you and it wouldn’t be a crime.
I say fuck these neo-nazis but this is cyber terrorism technically.
Terrorism is the use of force against civilians to influence a nation’s policy. This is not it.
I agreed with another comment that this is probably not cyber terrorism, because definitions of cyber terrorism indicate a wide spread impact on people while this only impacts a relatively small group. Your definition isn’t quite right either as one potential goal for cyber terrorism is to cause disruption or fear. Terrorism as a general term may be politically motivated but it doesn’t have to have the goal of influencing policy directly. Technically revenge can be a goal of terrorism.
Technically illegal, yes, but it has nothing to do with “terrorism” though.
You’re probably right, I went back and double checked the definition of cyber terrorism and the main difference is scale of impact. To be cyber terrorism it would probably have to impact a larger group of people.
It would also have to cause terror. The people using these websites live in such an abject state of terror about their own inferiority that this probably had no measurable effect anyway.
I call it self-defense, honestly.
Eh, I want to like this statement because I hate these people, but I can’t in good conscious call it something it isn’t. This sort of thing is the essence of debate because we have good people doing bad things to bad people and then have to justify why it’s ok despite it being bad. It’s justice vs righteousness, it’s lawful neutral vs lawful good. The only reason why this is acceptable is because it’s against people that we deem not worthy of legal protection, but as a precedent that’s dangerous territory. As soon as the definition of people not worthy of legal protection changes it suddenly becomes a problem.
At it’s core this person probably committed a crime, but people don’t care because it’s against a bad ideologue. It’s like if we said it’s ok to round up and execute neo-nazis, a lot of people would rejoice, but if you change that to most any other group they would cry about human rights. At the end of the day rounding up and killing anyone is a bad thing no matter who it’s against.
Paradox of tolerance. It’s absolutely self defense at the society level.
At some point the scales will not balance well and you need to be ok with that. There is no paradox of intolerance, for example, because tolerance is itself part of a social contract that bigots broke all on their own and once that’s out the window they do not get to reap the benefits of it. Social contracts aren’t easy math but they do make sense.
This isn’t blowing up a furry website because someone thinks that’s weird. White supremacy is an incredibly dangerous ideology that has no place in whatever better society we claim to be aiming for. No one killed them for it, either. White supremacy built a website and a better person removed that website the same way one might paint over a swastika but leave the nice mural.
I agree with the sentiment, but sadly can’t agree with the implementation. Laws exist in a neutral environment, you can’t bypass them just because the other party is someone society disagrees with. Even if they are committing crimes you can’t unilaterally exact justice against them due to vigilante laws.
This event took place in Germany, Crimical Code §§ 202a-d criminalizes unauthorized access, interception, and manipulation of data, with penalties ranging from fines to imprisonment, covering acts like phishing and data espionage. Within German law this should be a crime. Germany has laws against neo-nazis, but this would be vigilantism which Germany also prohibits.
It’s a slippery slope to ignore your own laws because they support the popular narrative.
It’s a slippery slope
Slippery slope is literally a logical fallacy. You are not making a logically sound argument.
You’re right, using a slippery slope argument is a type of logical fallacy, but for it to be a logical fallacy it has to preclude a result and also be implausible in it’s steps.
My argument was did not preclude a result and was more a statement of fundamental change in the nature of law. If you change the application of laws from a definite system (the law applies to everyone) to a spectrum (the law applies to some people) then you are now on a slippery slope where as before you were not. As to the plausibility of the argument, we are literally seeing this effect in real time with Trump. Laws switched from being definite to being suggestions and now no one is truly certain what laws do apply and to who.
Look, I am aware of the dangers of vigilantism but I’m struggling to see why you’re so dead-set on this. There is basically no movement from those in power to actually curb these people and that’s where I start to care a whole lot less. Yes it’s still important to consider somewhere in there but hey, if the German government wasn’t doing anything about it then I guess that means they’ve passed on the opportunity.
I’m not certain on much, but what I do know is that I believe in law. I like rules and I like order. Even more so I want rules and order to apply universally. You are arguing on the side of chaos against others with the privilege of law to protect you. That’s all well and good until those same standards are applied against you.
I can easily call it self defence. These people preach hate and would gladly see us dead if they were the majority. Ensuring they lack the ability to do so is defence.
As for the legality, fuck that. Direct action is always the way to go.
Nothing you are saying makes sense in the framework of legal functionality. You’re basically advocating for non-gun castle doctrine in which you have the right to do whatever you want against people who you disagree with and who have the potential to do something against you. We live in a society where rules apply, when you say these things you should take a second to think how these decisions would apply if they were turned against you.
I don’t care about legal frameworks, I’m a human not a nationstate.
We live in a society where laws are made without our input or consent and are enforced on us by those who gave themselves a monopoly on violence.
Those same rules are frequently used against us to oppress us, historically taking loss of lives and illegal action to see any change in them. I do not value or respect such a system and I advocate for its destruction so that we can build better human systems based on consent and mutualism.
Yet you live in a world where laws and nation states exist. Just because you divorce yourself from these rules or think they do not apply to your beliefs does not make it so. You’re commenting like a Sovereign Citizen in the US, but the laws and legal frameworks exist whether you believe in them. To a point you must frame your discussion in their context and if you do not then your opinion doesn’t matter until you change that very framework.
If your argument hinges on ignoring the legal framework then you have to be Robin Hood or the Unibomber, anything less is meaningless.
This argument does not apply to anti-social ideologies such as white supremacy that are incompatible with society.
Yeah it does, even mass murders are due the process of law and protections under it. We don’t drag murderous sociopaths into the public square and execute them without trials. You can’t fight for fair and equal rights while also saying other people aren’t entitled to those same rights.
I think you have sense on your side there about outlawry. It existed as the photo negative of the golden rule, and it’s a great way to make an example of people who break the social contract.
That admin can get fucked up the ass with shit-covered rusty barbed wire. They chose to be a shitwad, and someone chose to wipe them.
Sounds rad actually
All while wearing a Mighty Morphin’ Pink Ranger costume - people DON’T call her a Power Ranger for nothing
wearing a white power ranger outfit would have been too ironic
Shoulda gone with the black ranger outfit.
[WhiteDate had] A gender ratio that makes the Smurf village look like a feminist utopia
Lol. I like this Martha Root, I wish her many more happy hacking years.
Did they get it wrong? Like Grindr being suddenly popular wherever the Republicans have a convention, maybe the ratio is far better for partner-seekers than it looks on the surface.
I looked through the data and less than 1% was looking for a same-sex partner
Talk link?
Edit: here it is
Don’t just stop at 3, there are so many more shitheads still out there.
Root also published the data allegedly scraped from WhiteDate online.
The hacker said that they scraped WhiteDate’s public data and found “poor cybersecurity hygiene that would make even your grandma’s AOL account blush.” Root said that users’ images included precise geolocation metadata that “practically hands out home addresses with a side of awkward selfies.”
“Imagine calling yourselves the ‘master race’ but forgetting to secure your own website — maybe try mastering to host WordPress before world domination,” Root wrote.
They literally just typed
whitedate.net/download-all-users/into the browser and the website willingly gave them a button to download all users.I’m going to say you shouldn’t be shocked that people like this aren’t the most insightful or analytical minds.
Or that the site owners aren’t just two bit grifters
i heard someone looked at thier profiles, something tells me they are all mcpoyles.
deleted by creator
