8 ms·
LulzSec releases trove of AZ law enforcement documents
- jvandenbroeck 15y agoLet's hope they catch them soon.
- abbasmehdi 15y agoCatch whom? The smokescreen creators or those exposing them?
- watty 15y agoHe's referring to the kids cracking anything and everything for the "lulz". There is no greater good and it's far from funny. If caught they will be behind bars for a very long time.
- ineedtosleep 15y agoSpecifically with this attack, I don't think they're doing for lulz anymore.
- jvandenbroeck 15y agoCatch LulzSec, in the beginning, I had nothing against them. Ok they where causing Sony harm, but they where making a good point about internet security. Now that they are publishing all these peoples information, law enforcers, encouraging other people to do the some in other countries,.. they are going to far. That's not "lulz" anymore.
- PaintBucket 15y agoBefore anyone says, "Why harass these people? They're just trying to make a living." Think about it for a little while.
- watty 15y agoSorry, they didn't "target" the AZDPS and there were no good intentions involved. They are vultures and I'm guessing one of them that lives nearby cracked an insecure wireless network and stole some shared docs.
- kylemaxwell 15y agoThat's appropriate on many levels... As you intended, no doubt.
- PaintBucket 15y agoI'm glad one person got it.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- TomOfTTB 15y agoHave you bothered to "think about" this? Police officers have a sworn duty to uphold the law. They don't write it. If you have a problem with the law your issue is with the Legislators not the cops. (This is the very definition of "killing the messenger")
- barry-cotter 15y ago"I was only following orders." Speaking as a supporter of democracy in the Arizonan context.
- bsiemon 15y agoPolice have a great deal of latitude in how they enforce the law. Ever been to court when it was your word against a police officer? Who would you imagine the court, jury or your peers will believe?
- roc 15y agoI'm guessing you've never been in a car when a cop plays the "I smell pot Joe. What do think?" game. Police officers do have a sworn duty. But some of them do not uphold their oaths. Some of them even break the law outright. It's therefore quite possible to have an issue with law enforcement, separate from the laws themselves.
- clintjhill 15y agoExposing home addresses and wife is uncool. Leave the home and family out of it.
- mikemoka 15y agoI can't judge the whole thing (but it doesn't seem for the lulz), this action anyway has been certainly uncool, I guess they were lucky that their children weren't on file, otherwise they would have been probably involved too.
- lallysingh 15y agoI don't know why they didn't just pass it over to WikiLeaks. They've been through that problem already, and have a process in place to delete that sort of stuff.
- krashidov 15y agoLulzsec has had a history of defending WL (PBS hack for Bradley Manning), but I don't know if they are willing to give them this data as it might shine the spotlight away from Lulzsec.
- redthrowaway 15y ago1) They clearly don't care about collateral damage, and 2) WL still isn't accepting submissions until DDB hands back their database.
- lhnz 15y agoDDB? I've not heard of this.
- redthrowaway 15y agoDaniel Domscheit-Berg. A quick intro to the submission issue can be found here: http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2011/02/09/wikileaks-fires-back-at-defector-over-book-claims/ http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2011/02/09/wikileaks-f...
- racketeer 15y agowikileaks is gonna be jealous
- alex_martin 15y agoThis may be the first time the public gets really riled up by hackers in (almost) the same way they do about murders and robberies. I can imagine a police appeal for information resulting in literally thousands of names of hacker-types being given over.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- abbasmehdi 15y agoRacial profiling sucks! It's demeaning, belittling, and alienating. If the cops acted within the law, then what are they afraid of? More transparency = a more democratic state, right? (I don't think their family names should have been listed here though). You can't applaud Wiki leaks for igniting the overthrow of autocratic Middle Eastern governments, and hypocritically argue against similar actions when it's your own country in question. The US is turning into a police state slowly. I recently saw on HN how a woman was arrested for taping them on her own property. Sounds less like the land of the free, and more like a place where the citizens serve the authorities (my country of birth, Pakistan, citizens, especially the innocent ones, pee their pants when they see cops - something very wrong about that).
- sukuriant 15y agoI'm trying to figure out if you're being sarcastic. "If the cops acted within the law, then what are they afraid of?" That sounds like the exact same statements we usually say with regard to what the government would say to us when we want our emails to remain private, etc. "If you've got nothing to hide, why do you want it kept private?" You cannot hold both positions here. You cannot. I'm sorry. In this instance, what LulzSec has released stands in the way of privacy and of freedom, and it is unforgivable.
- daeken 15y agoI'm not entirely sure that accepting "If the cops acted within the law, then what are they afraid of?" and fighting "If you've got nothing to hide, why do you want it kept private?" are mutually exclusive, for the same reason that many believes Wikileaks is in the right: these aren't private organizations, these are public workers on the people's dime. Secrecy in government and privacy for citizens are two completely different things. That said, it seems to me (just from what I've read here, mind you) that there is people's private data in here, not just "police business data", for lack of a better term. Of course, that's to be expected with Lulzsec, considering their previous releases. If that's the case, then the line is certainly blurrier with respect to this data, but I don't believe that detracts from my point.
- 15y ago
- natural219 15y agopassword: 12345 I knew there'd be at least one.
- brs 15y agoIn fact, all the passwords included seem pretty weak. As the group tweeted a few days ago, "I argue that the simplest hack embarrasses the target more and thus wins"
- pkulak 15y agoGood target to retaliate against. I'm sure they considered going after the people who drafted the legislation, or the voters who passed it, but passed on that because... this was the server they happened to find that was easy to get in to and they came up with their justification afterwards.
- TomOfTTB 15y agoThe problem is the Officers are actually the least guilty here. SB1070 actually requires officers check people's papers. Officers COULD do that before SB1070 but they weren't. So the legislature passed 1070 in part to force officers to do it more often. The truth is Officers generally don't want to get involved in immigration cases because it requires interaction with the Federal Government. That is a local cop's least favorite activity.
- mbateman 15y agoYes, there have been many articles and letters written against this law by Arizona police officers and their representatives. I don't understand why one would target the Arizona police of all people. Probably not worth analyzing LulzSec too deeply, though, there aren't any real answers or justifications besides maybe psychological ones.
- sliverstorm 15y agoThere is an automatic hatred of the police shared by just about every lawbreaker. Just or not, I believe they basically see the police as their enemy, not the state.
- true_religion 15y agoLawbreakers feel that they are in a war against the state and the police are the soldiers of the state. In this case, they feel justified to 'shoot' the enemy soldiers even if they didn't individually start the war.
- 15y ago
- sunchild 15y agoSetting aside the release of this information, why was anyone able to get ahold of it? That's where the responsibility (and breach of public trust) starts.
- blhack 15y agoSome of my friends work for Phoenix DPS. According to them, their "IT Department" (in quotes because according to them they don't really have an IT dept.) is...horrifyingly incompetent. Like really, really bad.
- sunchild 15y agoLike "negligent" bad?
- jordan0day 15y agoIt might depend on your definition of negligent. Imagine building out a city, streets, alleyways, highways, etc. The imagine paying one guy to put up all the street signs, paint the lanes on the roads and highways, tow broken down cars, and handle street cleaning duties. When a wreck happens because a particular intersection was missing stop signs, would you consider that one guy negligent?
- Andrew_Quentin 15y agoYup. Him or her and his/her employer. That is according to the law. Negligence is merely falling below the standard of the reasonably competent sign poster/programmer/doctor/ etc.
- jordan0day 15y agoThat's my point -- a single reasonably competent sign poster couldn't be expected to handle the duties for an entire city. The responsibilities placed upon the sign poster in my example went way above and beyond anything reasonable. I'm not trying to defend the IT folks who do a terrible job of security for municipal/state governments, but in my experience there's a lot more work to be done than resources provided to do it.
- beedogs 15y agoAnything that embarrasses Joe Arapio, in any way at all, is good news to me.
- blhack 15y agoArizona DPS and the Maricopa Country Sheriff's Office are two completely separate departments that basically don't interact with one another. It would be like targeting hacker news because reddit made you mad.
- astrodust 15y agoOr invading another country because...oh wait, that happened.
- kristofferR 15y agoThere's certainly a bunch of interesting stuff in there, like how officers are instructed to place iPhone in nickel or copper plated containers in order to prevent remote wipes and a ton of information about gangs and smuggling. There's also other cool technical stuff in there, like how they gather digital evidence, information about hacker forums like ryan1918.com that have information on FBI honeypots and a book on how to "crack leetspeak". Unlike the other releases by LulzSec, this looks like it actually is an useful, WikiLeaks-style release (except they haven't filtered out any private or irrelevant information like Wikileaks tries to do)
- Animus7 15y ago> like how officers are instructed to place iPhone in nickel or copper plated containers in order to prevent remote wipes Idea: a self-destruct mode where if your phone can't call home to check for remote wipe and kick an internal watchdog, it will prompt for local self-destruct override. Failing that, automatic wipe.
- jacoblyles 15y agogiven AT&T's infamous coverage area, this might not be a good idea.
- trotsky 15y agobummer: sleeping through the alert after your local tower goes offline for a few hours.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- JonnieCache 15y ago>Idea: a self-destruct mode where if your phone can't call home to check for remote wipe and kick an internal watchdog, it will prompt for local self-destruct override. Failing that, automatic wipe. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Dead_man%27s_switch https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Dead_man%27s_...
- JonnieCache 15y agoI hope lulzsec enjoy communal dining and sleeping with the lights on.
- blhack 15y agoThey can't go back now. Before this, mostly what they were doing was small time. DOSing a website, or leaking some emails is annoying, this could potentially get people killed. This is max level from what I'm reading so far (others' reports, I'm not touching that torrent). Homeland security info, info on ongoing investigations, etc. etc. This might actually make lulz more dangerous. They have nothing to lose now. Before this, I'm sure in the back of the heads of whoever was doing whatever, was the thought of getting caught, and that they might go to jail for a couple of years. It doesn't matter anymore, because nothing that they can do now can make things worse for them. If [when] they get caught, they're going to prison for the rest of their lives or worse. Basically: consequences will never be the same.
- mynameishere 15y agoThe FBI probably already has their number and was waiting for something good to prosecute. They inject their filthy politics into their "lulz" and as far as I'm concerned they can go straight to damnation.
- redthrowaway 15y agoThe press release wasn't written by them. [1] Also, "filthy politics"? Really? The best you can say of those who hold political views contrary to your own is that those views are "filthy"? [1]http://twitter.com/#!/LulzSec/status/84075440024719361 http://twitter.com/#!/LulzSec/status/84075440024719361
- pnathan 15y agoThey are playing with the big boys. But really - does anyone think that direct action anarchist philosophy leads elsewhere?
- patrickaljord 15y ago> (others' reports, I'm not touching that torrent) This is ridiculous, thousands of people are downloading that right now and the details will be on the news anyway. > If [when] they get caught, they're going to prison for the rest of their lives or worse. Only if they're from the US. In most of western Europe, maximum is 20 to 30 years and only for murders or specific crimes. For that they'd probably just get a few years.
- blhack 15y agoIs anyone else seeing pirate bay sans any CSS? Is somebody counter-attacking TPB?
- sigzero 15y agoShowing yet again just how "stupid" they are...
- sunchild 15y ago"...describe the use of informants to infiltrate various gangs, cartels, motorcycle clubs, Nazi groups, and protest movements." FWIW, this probably means some people are going to die.
- redthrowaway 15y agoUntil somebody shows me the names and covers of undercover agents, this means "acknowledging the fact that there are undercover agents".
- sunchild 15y agoI never said the informants would be killed. If a gang reads that they've got an informant in their midst, they'll find someone and punish them – right or wrong. I'm not saying LulzSec is wrong to publish it; I'm just pointing out that it won't be lulz for those particular people who catch the short end of that particular stick.
- redthrowaway 15y agoI haven't seen the document yet, but unless they went any more specific than, "we have informants in xyz gangs" then there's no danger. The gangs know there's informants in them, and have been for years.
- daeken 15y agoSo, it's known that gangs structure things such that any one member knows only a subset of the plans, misinformation is spread to separate parts of the organization so that leaks can be identified, etc. But this seems like it'd make communication overhead pretty significant. Does anyone have any resources on how gangs are actually structured, how well their communication works, etc? This seems pretty interesting to me, as it may have applications for structuring legitimate organizations/groups.
- 15y ago
- scythe 15y agoSo... do you think it's possible LulzSec is based in China or Russia? That's the only way I can imagine them doing this that doesn't involve being clinically insane.
- JonnieCache 15y agoBeing teenagers.
- killerdark 15y agoSame thing.
- esrauch 15y agoThere's probably a couple countries that they would honestly probably be better off in another country besides those. The guys who made the ILOVEYOU virus got off scot free because there were no anti-malware laws in the Phillipines at the time.
- mbesto 15y agoI believe their is a silent "angst" that brews between Europe and America. I wouldn't doubt that there is a certain amount of "Oh hi America you think you run the world - well you're no different than us, here's why.." If it gives my opinion any justification, I am American and I do live in Europe.
- danssig 15y agoWell, there's another explanation that would also not involve being clinically insane: false flag. Just sayin'
- armored 15y agoBased on the type of documents released and the fact that they only released a few email accounts & passwords you can tell that this was not a very sophisticated attack. Probably a brute force attack against the mail server, or passwords gleaned from individual officers rooted home computers.
- haakon 15y agoThat only makes it worse; most organization would succumb to a sophisticated attack, but a police dept. should be resistant against simple attacks at least.
- vailripper 15y agoIt's only a matter of time until the government starts reigning in the internet even more than they already have - and we have idiots like LulzSec to largely thank for it.
- jordan0day 15y agoI don't know... I believe a government (or corporate) reigned-in internet was on its way already. LulzSec may be accelerating that process, but it's completely naive to think that it wasn't coming anyway.
- bxr 15y agoNo, we have people like you to thank. Standing on the sidelines bitching about the bad things that will happen in reaction to lulzsec instead of even attempting to prevent the gov't from doing them.
- crizCraig 15y agoPoll: Do you agree with LulzSec's tactics? http://www.wepolls.com/r/848734/Do-you-agree-with-the-tactics-of-the-hacker-group-LulzSec-in-releasing-Arizona-Law-Enforcement-private-documents-in-opposition-of-SB1070 http://www.wepolls.com/r/848734/Do-you-agree-with-the-tactic...
- Zadoc 15y agoAs long as no one gets hurt.
- tlear 15y agoThis one makes me think they are most likely a chinese or russian group, I do not think anyone that FBI has decent chance of getting would be this dumb
- tpr1m 15y agoForced transparency in government... thanks LulzSec!
- moondistance 15y agoI wish you hadn't linked to a file containing passwords and other personal information - I was not expecting that and would not have opened it if I had known.
- kragen 15y agoI think it's worthwhile remembering where direct attacks on the authorities led to last time around. It started World War I, ended economic globalization for decades, and delegitimized anarchism to the point where it was essentially exterminated worldwide. In the US, new "conspiracy" laws were enacted which allow you to be prosecuted for talking to someone about how you could hypothetically commit a crime if they later go off and execute one of the steps in your plan. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_of_the_deed#Timeline_of_historical_actions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_of_the_deed#Timeline... I hope the kind of violent rhetoric they're spewing doesn't end up provoking similar violence this time around.
- Houston 15y agoTo those who actually downloaded the torrent: Did any of you happen to watch the 4-second-long video clip of what appears to be 4 men being gunned down by helicopter? Any theories on why it's there?
- woodall 15y agoOld video from Iraq of a gunship returning fire. These are passed along A LOT from police office to office. Nothing news breaking.
- Houston 15y agoJust seems kind of tasteless, I guess.
- woodall 15y agoI agree. Same could be said about passing on pictures of over weight people at Wal-Mart or ugly people with memes typed on them. Different strokes for different folks.
- Houston 15y agoWhile I understand what you're saying, I think the professional setting in which that material is being passed around warrants a discussion on whether or not it should be passed around at all. I might be making a mountain out of a molehill, but I can't help the fact it irked me that a video clip that shows the death of 4 men - most likely passed around as something "cool" and something to be glorified - is being passed around by law enforcement.
- mattdeboard 15y agoLots of cops are former Marines, soldiers, etc. Im guessing you've never hung around with guys like this? I was a Marine for ten years; stuff like this gets shared and no one's giggling about it. You are definitely making a mountain out of a molehill. I say that based on personal experience.
- ChuckMcM 15y agoI will say this for these folks, they seem to have gone 'all in.' One of the interesting thing about politics is how hard it is to change things. To get a bill passed or an amendment added you need to get other politicians on your side, you need a compelling plan, and then you need lots of follow through. Controversy is to politics like energy is to chemical reactions. The more controversy you have around it increases the 'energy' level, more politicians are willing to commit to a vote because some of their constituents are telling the 'you gotta do something about ...' The actions of these guys and wikileaks and anonymous are feeding a lot of energy into this system. I listened to a presentation by the East-West Institute [1] which was attempting to harness stuff like this to make 'cyber terrorism' a national issue. Groups like this take the energy that is out there and channel it into "policy workshops" which are really nothing more than telling the politicians that if they follow their recommendations it will address this growing need. They feed off this stuff. Nobody listens to you if they don't think there are any issues that need addressing (the old "Everything is fine! Why change anything?" dilemma). The truly fascinating thing about this is there was a great analysis on terrorist groups and whether or not they ever achieved their stated goals [2]. Basically terrorists who don't have a special interest group or political action committee (PAC) in place to harness the energy created by the terrorist acts for durable change are unsuccessful at making any change. Instead the energy they produce, the ability for the political system to make changes, is harnessed by others to make the changes that these other people want to make instead. Its a weird thing but when you look at how it has been done by PACs and SIGs it can be really enlightening. Its like security theater at the airport, everyone (even the people who do it), know that it does nothing to actually make people safer on planes. However what it does do is give another person their own mini-military unit (DHS) and a way to influence things. This happens on the small scale too, some horrible thing will happen due to some highly random event or events, and it causes great public sympathy and outcry. Someone comes along and taps that energy, promises it will "never happen again" if you do what they say, and they aren't really lying, the odds of that thing happening again could be extremely remote. To use a current example, people who are proposing their gear by installed in nuclear plants so that the next time a 9.0 quake + 40' tsunami hits the plant will be safe. Since the likelyhood of another 9.x quake + Tsunami happening again in our or even our grandchildren's lifetime is effectively 0 they could do anything and claim victory. Sell special "Tsunami resistant latex paint" which if you coat a building with this the water will go around instead. Its a crazy claim but someone will buy into "this will make the bad thing not happen again" and guess what? It doesn't happen again because the chance of it happening is so close to zero. Lulz here is dumping huge amounts of energy into the system. I don't see any 'good' guys lobbying effectively for tapping that to make for better network security or IT systems. I do see people like the DHS saying the need a budget appropriation of 50M$ to staff up a new department of expert counter-hackers to mitigate this new threat. When people with money say "We have to do something!" there will always be people who stand up and offer to do something in exchange for their money. [1] http://www.ewi.info/ http://www.ewi.info/ [2] http://english.safe-democracy.org/causes/ http://english.safe-democracy.org/causes/
- BasDirks 15y agoOther than the comments accompanying the recent defacing of SS's blog, has the underground spoken out yet on lulzsec?