8 ms·

Just read though it all. So far, this is unimpressive and not really indicative of any serious criminal activity. And here's the torrent: http://thepiratebay.

by davidu 16y ago

Just read though it all. So far, this is unimpressive and not really indicative of any serious criminal activity. And here's the torrent: http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/6241472 http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/6241472

cookiecaper 16y ago
I seriously hope that there's a lot more stuff coming out, because this would be a truly useless thing to spend the rest of your life in court, litigation, judgments, repayments and debts, etc. for.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
- redthrowaway 16y ago
  If you think there's a uTorrent 0day being used, use a much smaller client. uTorrent may be dangerous because anyone looking to compromise the most people possible would use it as a vector, but even transmission should be fine. At any rate, I'm perfectly happy to trust what anon is putting out, having spent significant amounts of time hanging out in IRC and chatting with those involved. I haven't seen anything that makes me suspicious, and I'm not the most trusting type when it comes to random people on the internet. edit: My comment makes no sense now, but it was originally in regards to concern expressed that Anon's releases could contain malware.
  - trotsky 16y ago
    I'm going to revisit the situation in the morning, I just need sleep. I didn't intend to cast aspersions on anon.
    - redthrowaway 16y ago
      No, by all means, you're right to be cautious. I'm just saying I don't think there's anything to worry about.
      - trotsky 16y ago
        Just to clarify, I was actually reacting to some links to 3rd party file sharing sites that were being passed around on twitter that I had been looking at before this piece was posted, and not the bankofamericasucks.com or TPB links posted here. Sorry for deleting my post on you, it just made more sense for me at the time as I felt like I wasn't going to be able to clarify myself well.
        redthrowaway 16y ago
        No worries.
dsplittgerber 16y ago
I think opinions may differ regarding whether or not that's criminal activity. See argument here: http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/g3hgw/bank_of_america_fraud_documents_released/c1knp22 http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/g3hgw/bank_of_amer... The guy who leaked this information is a former employee of BofA. Since his firing BofA has ruined his life/credit/relationships and he will probably be in court for the rest of his life. Bank of America made a lot of errors with their loan adjustments due to not updating and/or staying on top of things and subsequently forclosed a lot of homes that should not have been forclosed on. So the emails you see at the bottom of the page are BofA execs asking for the removal of certain DTN records from their Databases (from what i understand DTN's are like information records). The reason they are doing that is because they are being audited, and when the auditors look up the loans that should be tied to those DTN's and find that there is no existing DTN record, they will discount it as a system error and move on. The result of this "deleting of DTN's" was some $60B worth of fraud on the part of Bank Of America in order to cover up the mistakes they made during the housing crisis. These emails are just the first ones released, but they are clearly TO and FROM BofA execs, asking for the deletion of DTN's from the system and even a response from one exec saying, "Are you sure we can do this"??
- jrockway 16y ago
  Since his firing BofA has ruined his life/credit/relationships and he will probably be in court for the rest of his life. I'd really like to hear more, as I'm having trouble understanding what they could do other than take him to court for stealing documents or whatever. Specifically, how did they ruin his relationships? Do they call and hang up when his girlfriend answers? Do they call his friends claiming to be him, impersonating his voice, and saying things like, "you know, your feet really smell"?
  - dsplittgerber 16y ago
    Apparently, it's this: http://bankofamericasuck.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/boa10010.png http://bankofamericasuck.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/boa1...
retrogradeorbit 16y ago
There is mountains of evidence of serious criminal activity on the public record without any need to resort to leaks. The problem is not lack of evidence. The problem is lack of prosecutorial action by the state.
- anonymoushn 16y ago
  I want to upvote this more than once.
- Stormbringer 16y ago
  Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
- yummyfajitas 16y ago
  Could you link to some of the public records proving criminal activity?
  - roadnottaken 16y ago
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/opinion/14krugman.html http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/opinion/14krugman.html
    - yummyfajitas 16y ago
      I'm not sure how the opinion of a columnist (and not just any columnist, but one well known for being dishonest) qualifies as "evidence of serious criminal activity".
      - deleted 16y ago
        [deleted]
      - irickt 16y ago
        Please point to evidence of this alleged dishonesty.
wladimir 16y ago
The thing that is impressive to me is how many things are accepted and not considered 'serious criminal activity' these days. Fraud and other white collar crimes aren't even considered criminal anymore since the crash in 2008. We're in a perpetual state of 'look the other way, nothing happening here'.
- jcromartie 16y ago
  For example: blow the whistle on the largest tax evasion scheme in history: go to jail. Participate in largest tax evasion scheme in history: no problem.
  - eftpotrm 16y ago
    If we're talking the UBS case that others have alluded to here: He went to jail because he didn't tell the whole story and tried to cover up his part. Whistleblowing rules require full disclosure of your information to prevent them just being used to take out rivals; by covering up his part in the illegal activity, he forefeited part of his protection and so is in prison. This is normal and perfectly fine.
    - jcromartie 16y ago
      It's not so much about the whistleblower being in jail: but rather only the whistleblower being in jail. It seems like retaliation.
  - yardie 16y ago
    If this is the UBS guy, the hole in your statement is he did both and went to jail for the latter. He was whistleblowing on his competitors while actively trying to hide the assets of his clients.
- davidu 16y ago
  There is literally nothing in what he released that is obviously illegal to me. He says a bunch of it is illegal, but I'm no lawyer and it looks like one person just deleted a bunch of data and another person asked if that was really kosher and we don't know what happened after that. I'm just not jumping to conclusions I'm not qualified to make. It's impressive to me, that you can do that.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
rbarooah 16y ago
Yeah - it's ok for banks to engage in minor frauds - only really serious ones matter so we should ignore this. After all isn't everyone entitled to a little fraud now and again?

by davidu 16y ago

cookiecaper 16y ago

I seriously hope that there's a lot more stuff coming out, because this would be a truly useless thing to spend the rest of your life in court, litigation, judgments, repayments and debts, etc. for.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

redthrowaway 16y ago
If you think there's a uTorrent 0day being used, use a much smaller client. uTorrent may be dangerous because anyone looking to compromise the most people possible would use it as a vector, but even transmission should be fine. At any rate, I'm perfectly happy to trust what anon is putting out, having spent significant amounts of time hanging out in IRC and chatting with those involved. I haven't seen anything that makes me suspicious, and I'm not the most trusting type when it comes to random people on the internet. edit: My comment makes no sense now, but it was originally in regards to concern expressed that Anon's releases could contain malware.
- trotsky 16y ago
  I'm going to revisit the situation in the morning, I just need sleep. I didn't intend to cast aspersions on anon.
  - redthrowaway 16y ago
    No, by all means, you're right to be cautious. I'm just saying I don't think there's anything to worry about.
    - trotsky 16y ago
      Just to clarify, I was actually reacting to some links to 3rd party file sharing sites that were being passed around on twitter that I had been looking at before this piece was posted, and not the bankofamericasucks.com or TPB links posted here. Sorry for deleting my post on you, it just made more sense for me at the time as I felt like I wasn't going to be able to clarify myself well.
      - redthrowaway 16y ago
        No worries.

dsplittgerber 16y ago

I think opinions may differ regarding whether or not that's criminal activity. See argument here: http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/g3hgw/bank_of_america_fraud_documents_released/c1knp22 http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/g3hgw/bank_of_amer... The guy who leaked this information is a former employee of BofA. Since his firing BofA has ruined his life/credit/relationships and he will probably be in court for the rest of his life. Bank of America made a lot of errors with their loan adjustments due to not updating and/or staying on top of things and subsequently forclosed a lot of homes that should not have been forclosed on. So the emails you see at the bottom of the page are BofA execs asking for the removal of certain DTN records from their Databases (from what i understand DTN's are like information records). The reason they are doing that is because they are being audited, and when the auditors look up the loans that should be tied to those DTN's and find that there is no existing DTN record, they will discount it as a system error and move on. The result of this "deleting of DTN's" was some $60B worth of fraud on the part of Bank Of America in order to cover up the mistakes they made during the housing crisis. These emails are just the first ones released, but they are clearly TO and FROM BofA execs, asking for the deletion of DTN's from the system and even a response from one exec saying, "Are you sure we can do this"??

jrockway 16y ago
Since his firing BofA has ruined his life/credit/relationships and he will probably be in court for the rest of his life. I'd really like to hear more, as I'm having trouble understanding what they could do other than take him to court for stealing documents or whatever. Specifically, how did they ruin his relationships? Do they call and hang up when his girlfriend answers? Do they call his friends claiming to be him, impersonating his voice, and saying things like, "you know, your feet really smell"?
- dsplittgerber 16y ago
  Apparently, it's this: http://bankofamericasuck.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/boa10010.png http://bankofamericasuck.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/boa1...

retrogradeorbit 16y ago

There is mountains of evidence of serious criminal activity on the public record without any need to resort to leaks. The problem is not lack of evidence. The problem is lack of prosecutorial action by the state.

anonymoushn 16y ago
I want to upvote this more than once.
Stormbringer 16y ago
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
yummyfajitas 16y ago
Could you link to some of the public records proving criminal activity?
- roadnottaken 16y ago
  http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/opinion/14krugman.html http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/opinion/14krugman.html
  - yummyfajitas 16y ago
    I'm not sure how the opinion of a columnist (and not just any columnist, but one well known for being dishonest) qualifies as "evidence of serious criminal activity".
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]
    - irickt 16y ago
      Please point to evidence of this alleged dishonesty.

wladimir 16y ago

The thing that is impressive to me is how many things are accepted and not considered 'serious criminal activity' these days. Fraud and other white collar crimes aren't even considered criminal anymore since the crash in 2008. We're in a perpetual state of 'look the other way, nothing happening here'.

jcromartie 16y ago
For example: blow the whistle on the largest tax evasion scheme in history: go to jail. Participate in largest tax evasion scheme in history: no problem.
- eftpotrm 16y ago
  If we're talking the UBS case that others have alluded to here: He went to jail because he didn't tell the whole story and tried to cover up his part. Whistleblowing rules require full disclosure of your information to prevent them just being used to take out rivals; by covering up his part in the illegal activity, he forefeited part of his protection and so is in prison. This is normal and perfectly fine.
  - jcromartie 16y ago
    It's not so much about the whistleblower being in jail: but rather only the whistleblower being in jail. It seems like retaliation.
- yardie 16y ago
  If this is the UBS guy, the hole in your statement is he did both and went to jail for the latter. He was whistleblowing on his competitors while actively trying to hide the assets of his clients.
davidu 16y ago
There is literally nothing in what he released that is obviously illegal to me. He says a bunch of it is illegal, but I'm no lawyer and it looks like one person just deleted a bunch of data and another person asked if that was really kosher and we don't know what happened after that. I'm just not jumping to conclusions I'm not qualified to make. It's impressive to me, that you can do that.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

rbarooah 16y ago

Yeah - it's ok for banks to engage in minor frauds - only really serious ones matter so we should ignore this. After all isn't everyone entitled to a little fraud now and again?