6 ms·

If some journalists were able to find his identity, he can safely assume that the people behind wannacry are also able to do it. Maybe he'll take some measures

If some journalists were able to find his identity, he can safely assume that the people behind wannacry are also able to do it. Maybe he'll take some measures to protect himslef more now. I would've liked to see the journalists find the hackers behind this. That would've been an achievement indeed.

tonmoy 9y ago
I would have liked to see a story from the journalists on how easy it was for them to find the guy and then they had responsibility alerted the person on those points w/o revealing his name (you know like what security researchers do)
- ConceptJunkie 9y ago
  So you expect journalists to be something other than whores? Good luck with that.
  - sctb 9y ago
    Please comment civilly and substantively on Hacker News or not at all. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - tripzilch 9y ago
      A "slang" term for a perfectly legal profession (where I'm from) used in a derivative but substantive manner--it's obviously short for the phrase "attention whore" (which is really the main reason why you shouldn't have moderated this remark) and this type of journalist is doing it just for the attention to make money, which is relevant because it sheds light on their motivation behind their questionable actions. The phrase couldn't be more on-point, actually. Which leaves the "civil" part. Because he said "whore" instead of "prostitute". Certainly from now on, you'll be moderating people for using the ugly word "hacker" instead of "security consultant/researcher", right? It really (still) has the same bad name among people not well-acquainted with the biz. And no, it doesn't matter that some people chose to wear the "hacker" title with pride, because guess what? So do most whores. To add substantively to the discussion myself, here's an open question. I'm having a real hard time coming up with a phrase two words or less, that communicates this aspect of journalism as accurately as "attention whoring". How would you say it?
      - kentrado 9y ago
        Reading your reasoning. The mod is certainly on the wrong here. But what can you do about it \_(ツ)_/¯
      - grzm 9y ago
        I think you may be missing the forest for the trees by focussing on a single word as the cause for 'sctb's comment. He specifically mentions that comments should be civil and substantive. That phrase is often used to describe the goals for discussion on HN, and they're both important. The comment 'sctb responds to has very little substance, adding little to the conversation other than castigating its parent for assuming that people (journalists in particular) ever strive to do anything other than follow their basest instincts, that all journalists only seek attention. You add some nuance ("this type of journalist") which is entirely lacking in the original. The phrasing is also aggressive and does not invite further civil and substantive responses—hallmarks of comments that are not appropriate for HN.
infinity0 9y ago
Yeah, but they would have had to waste several dozen man hours having to redo the work that the British media did for them, for free. Cunts.
dagw 9y ago
If some journalists were able to find his identity, he can safely assume that the people behind wannacry are also able to do it. How do you figure? Digging through information and finding out this sort of stuff is literally what journalists do for a living.
- thrownblown 9y ago
  Digging through information and finding out this sort of stuff is literally what hackers do for a living for lack of a better term
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- Nadya 9y ago
  I occasionally offer to dox people to show them how bad their OpSec truly is or as an example of why I don't use social media like Facebook for privacy concerns. Doxing people is often trivial since nearly anyone contributing to discussions online have large online profiles. It isn't a very difficult task - just a game of connecting the dots and knowing how to construct specific Google search queries (eg: "site:___ + 'some info'"). If a journalist can find it - any internet layman who knows how to Google can find it.
  - Spare_account 9y ago
    I've been wondering if it is possible to dox my Reddit account. I like to think I've been careful not to give too much away but I wonder if it is true. I would like to find a white hat site that prepares a report on what they can find about you. (For the record, my reddit account has a different username than my HackerNews account)
    - Nadya 9y ago
      >I would like to find a white hat site that prepares a report on what they can find about you. This would be difficult to start as it would require trust. I already do exactly this ("white hat doxing") but do you trust that that is actually what I'm doing? Maybe it would be easier as an established corporation with an explicit privacy policy. >I've been wondering if it is possible to dox my Reddit account. You can make it much more time consuming and more difficult (read: but not impossible) to do so by using this userscript as frequently as possible: https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/10380-reddit-overwrite https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/10380-reddit-overwrite I personally run it for all posts older than 2~3 weeks (when activity/relevance of the post is nearly equivalent to "0"). Some sites still archive posts w/o updating for any future edits, there is web cache, etc. But those are far harder to search and tie together than simply browsing your comments on your profile. Note that some subreddits may ban you for using it and you'll get a bunch of AutoModerator posts asking you not to do that because of thread integrity and blah blah blah.
xroche 9y ago
> If some journalists were able to find his identity, he can safely assume that the people behind wannacry are also able to do it. Maybe he'll take some measures to protect himslef more now. The people behind wannacry targeted Russian banks. Chances are they already died of unexpected radioactive contamination, accidental stabbing, or unfortunate neuro-toxic poisoning. Anyway, comparing these journalists as "sphincters of bad journalism" is probably even too positive. Unlike sphincters, that do have a useful purpose, tabloids could be wiped out of this planet without any negative side-effects.
- sasas 9y ago
  > The people behind wannacry targeted Russian banks. Do you have a reference for this?
duxup 9y ago
I'm not sure the people behind this are going to bother researching it themselves.... but if handed to them they might choose to do so.
pmontra 9y ago
Maybe the wannacry people had more profitable ways to invest their resources, but the cost of pursuing this guy is much lower now.
- tripzilch 9y ago
  This. It's the added opportunity that put this researcher in unnecessary danger. It's like, almost every front door lock can be broken, or circumvented by smashing a window. Leaving your front door unlocked and open however, creates opportunity, that really increases the danger of burglary.

tonmoy 9y ago

I would have liked to see a story from the journalists on how easy it was for them to find the guy and then they had responsibility alerted the person on those points w/o revealing his name (you know like what security researchers do)

ConceptJunkie 9y ago
So you expect journalists to be something other than whores? Good luck with that.
- sctb 9y ago
  Please comment civilly and substantively on Hacker News or not at all. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - tripzilch 9y ago
    A "slang" term for a perfectly legal profession (where I'm from) used in a derivative but substantive manner--it's obviously short for the phrase "attention whore" (which is really the main reason why you shouldn't have moderated this remark) and this type of journalist is doing it just for the attention to make money, which is relevant because it sheds light on their motivation behind their questionable actions. The phrase couldn't be more on-point, actually. Which leaves the "civil" part. Because he said "whore" instead of "prostitute". Certainly from now on, you'll be moderating people for using the ugly word "hacker" instead of "security consultant/researcher", right? It really (still) has the same bad name among people not well-acquainted with the biz. And no, it doesn't matter that some people chose to wear the "hacker" title with pride, because guess what? So do most whores. To add substantively to the discussion myself, here's an open question. I'm having a real hard time coming up with a phrase two words or less, that communicates this aspect of journalism as accurately as "attention whoring". How would you say it?
    - kentrado 9y ago
      Reading your reasoning. The mod is certainly on the wrong here. But what can you do about it \_(ツ)_/¯
    - grzm 9y ago
      I think you may be missing the forest for the trees by focussing on a single word as the cause for 'sctb's comment. He specifically mentions that comments should be civil and substantive. That phrase is often used to describe the goals for discussion on HN, and they're both important. The comment 'sctb responds to has very little substance, adding little to the conversation other than castigating its parent for assuming that people (journalists in particular) ever strive to do anything other than follow their basest instincts, that all journalists only seek attention. You add some nuance ("this type of journalist") which is entirely lacking in the original. The phrasing is also aggressive and does not invite further civil and substantive responses—hallmarks of comments that are not appropriate for HN.

infinity0 9y ago

Yeah, but they would have had to waste several dozen man hours having to redo the work that the British media did for them, for free. Cunts.

dagw 9y ago

If some journalists were able to find his identity, he can safely assume that the people behind wannacry are also able to do it. How do you figure? Digging through information and finding out this sort of stuff is literally what journalists do for a living.

thrownblown 9y ago
Digging through information and finding out this sort of stuff is literally what hackers do for a living for lack of a better term
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
Nadya 9y ago
I occasionally offer to dox people to show them how bad their OpSec truly is or as an example of why I don't use social media like Facebook for privacy concerns. Doxing people is often trivial since nearly anyone contributing to discussions online have large online profiles. It isn't a very difficult task - just a game of connecting the dots and knowing how to construct specific Google search queries (eg: "site:___ + 'some info'"). If a journalist can find it - any internet layman who knows how to Google can find it.
- Spare_account 9y ago
  I've been wondering if it is possible to dox my Reddit account. I like to think I've been careful not to give too much away but I wonder if it is true. I would like to find a white hat site that prepares a report on what they can find about you. (For the record, my reddit account has a different username than my HackerNews account)
  - Nadya 9y ago
    >I would like to find a white hat site that prepares a report on what they can find about you. This would be difficult to start as it would require trust. I already do exactly this ("white hat doxing") but do you trust that that is actually what I'm doing? Maybe it would be easier as an established corporation with an explicit privacy policy. >I've been wondering if it is possible to dox my Reddit account. You can make it much more time consuming and more difficult (read: but not impossible) to do so by using this userscript as frequently as possible: https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/10380-reddit-overwrite https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/10380-reddit-overwrite I personally run it for all posts older than 2~3 weeks (when activity/relevance of the post is nearly equivalent to "0"). Some sites still archive posts w/o updating for any future edits, there is web cache, etc. But those are far harder to search and tie together than simply browsing your comments on your profile. Note that some subreddits may ban you for using it and you'll get a bunch of AutoModerator posts asking you not to do that because of thread integrity and blah blah blah.

xroche 9y ago

> If some journalists were able to find his identity, he can safely assume that the people behind wannacry are also able to do it. Maybe he'll take some measures to protect himslef more now. The people behind wannacry targeted Russian banks. Chances are they already died of unexpected radioactive contamination, accidental stabbing, or unfortunate neuro-toxic poisoning. Anyway, comparing these journalists as "sphincters of bad journalism" is probably even too positive. Unlike sphincters, that do have a useful purpose, tabloids could be wiped out of this planet without any negative side-effects.

sasas 9y ago
> The people behind wannacry targeted Russian banks. Do you have a reference for this?

duxup 9y ago

I'm not sure the people behind this are going to bother researching it themselves.... but if handed to them they might choose to do so.

pmontra 9y ago

Maybe the wannacry people had more profitable ways to invest their resources, but the cost of pursuing this guy is much lower now.

tripzilch 9y ago
This. It's the added opportunity that put this researcher in unnecessary danger. It's like, almost every front door lock can be broken, or circumvented by smashing a window. Leaving your front door unlocked and open however, creates opportunity, that really increases the danger of burglary.