25 ms·

Fallout begins for far-right trolls who trusted Epik to keep identities secret

rvz 5y ago
I wouldn’t be cheering this data breach on as if ‘Anonymous’ or other internet vigilantes are the good guys here (They are not). Rather than cause a complete exposure of everyone’s sensitive data, just report whatever illegal content you find to the authorities to force Epik to take it down. One day Anonymous is on your side and in the next day they are not. They can try to do this to anyone they don’t like, even if innocent users are involved. That is not something to celebrate or cheer about, is it?
- gerikson 5y ago
  I don't see any cheering. It's reporting on the consequences of a serious data breach.
  - busymom0 5y ago
    I am old enough to remember when a year ago, these same media companies censored the hunter Biden story falsely claiming it was Russian disinfo and result of hacking and thus didn't report it. Do you really believe this is about data breach and not about only political vendetta? The article is doing a lot of cheering if you read the article.
    - bildung 5y ago
      "After a scandal narrative [about Hunter Biden] failed to gain traction in the mainstream press, conservative media and personalities pivoted to a "meta narrative" that the press, social media platforms and the "deep state" were suppressing news of the scandal." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biden%E2%80%93Ukraine_conspiracy_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biden%E2%80%93Ukraine_conspira...
      - makomk 5y ago
        What it means by "a scandal narrative failed to gain traction" is that the mainstream press ignored the actual contents of the hack and focused entirely on falsely discrediting the information it contained as fake (a claim which fell apart almost immediately, at least for all the Hunter Biden emails which were politically interesting - something the non-conservative press has actually just started to notice), objections to the morality of using hacked data which are mysteriously absent here, and of course endless articles about how "conservative media" were using it. It's remarkable how whenever something happens that's politically inconvenient to Democrats, most of the US media coverage ends up being about the Republican reaction to it! In fact, that sentence from Wikipedia is a downstream consequence of this ... at least in theory, their policy is to just regurgitate the mainstream media narrative. Remember, too, that the Hunter Biden emails involved the future president of the USA and his family whereas this involves random obscure anonymous internet users that none of the Seattle Times' readers would even have heard of had prior to the press deciding to go after them. It takes an extremely partisan notion of newsworthiness to consider the latter worthy of reporting but not the former.
      - BoHerfVJrEsq 5y ago
        "failed to gain traction in the mainstream press" is an incredibly misleading way to relate what happened. The New York Post broke the story, and Twitter locked their account, ostensibly due to a "hacked materials" policy. But nobody ever actually thought that the materials were hacked. The MSM first said they weren't covering the story because it was Russian disinformation. Later they tried to rewrite history so that the story had simply escaped notice at the time. That's all completely false. It was an ongoing scandal for weeks on Twitter that the NY Post was locked out, and other news outlets were getting hammered on a daily basis for refusing to cover the story. So the story was successfully suppressed in the days leading up to the election. How'd it end up? The story was completely vindicated. It really was Hunter Biden's laptop, those really were his emails. They even had a witness who was a party to the email exchanges explaining who was who. Genuine story of great importance, buried.
      - naasking 5y ago
        Social media platforms literally were suppressing news of the story. That's literally, verifiably true, and the suppression was indeed a bigger scandal than the original story. All of the reasons other media outlets touted for not covering it, and social media touted for suppressing it, are obviously nonsense, as is clear by coverage of literally any other story based on leaked or hacked materials over the past 20 years, including this one.
  - rvz 5y ago
    Assuming you have read the article instead of the headline, the article mentions more than that and includes reactions from those who are relieved and cheering the news of the data breach. Or are you going to continue to deny that the article didn’t mention this?
  - rendall 5y ago
    Not really. Despite "domains affiliated with right-wing politics comprise less than 1 percent of [Epik's] users", the focus was emphatically on Epik's "right-wing" and "racist" users. There was zero reporting on the consequences to non-affiliated and left-wing users. Admittedly, the featured victims of the breech are unsympathetic characters, so it's hard to really be upset. Which is upstream's point: the article invites us as readers to indulge in schadenfreude which, let's be honest, is a kind of cheering. The downside of such articles for people of all political stripes is that it seems to imply that online anonymity, such as that supplied by Epik, benefits only reprehensible people peddling reprehensible views. It's easier to call for legislation that limits online anonymity if it is generally perceived to help only those who everyone can agree are awful. Throughout history, good people have needed anonymity from the government and even from popular consensus. The Underground Railroad, homosexuals, Jews, civil rights activists, anti-war demonstrators, to name just a few prominent examples.
h2odragon 5y ago
> The Post publicizes material obtained through hacking with caution, only after verifying its authenticity and ascertaining that there is news value in bringing such information to light. Sure you do. So let me just check here: Political purity as an employment requirement... Firing people for this is fine, right? What happens when the popular politics change? The "Moral Majority" folks were accused of wanting to be everything the Left has become.
- mcphage 5y ago
  I think criticizing people for running websites like “theholocaustisfake” is less like “attacking people for having bad thoughts” and a bit more like “attacking people for poisoning the well”.
  - notanzaiiswear 5y ago
    That's what you think. The person running that web site probably thinks differently. If they came to power, they would perhaps censor sites that promote the holocaust. See how that works?
    - KptMarchewa 5y ago
      That's why you need to stop them before they came to power. World learned that in 1933.
      - notanzaiiswear 5y ago
        Where you alive in 1933? I wasn't. So all I know about the Holocaust is just what somebody else wrote about it. I generally don't like taking things as gospel. I don't generally doubt the Holocaust (I have no reason to), but I think it should be possible to discuss even the details of the holocaust. To me it is rather the demand that certain beliefs may not be questioned that enables things like fascists rising to power. (To me it doesn't matter that much if the Holocaust was real or not - either way mass killings of people should obviously be avoided).
s9w 5y ago
I wonder if the headline would be the same if another group was the target.
faxc1001 5y ago
So we have a newspaper in a city with 67.30% Whites and 15.43% Asian doing a little virtue signaling. In the witch hunt they use illegally obtained information. How do we know that the data sets are even correct? Can one use information from a hack? Will these journalists be prosecuted like Assange for using such information? I don't like the websites that the witch hunt target participated in, but public shaming like this (of non-politicians) is worse.
- gerikson 5y ago
  The article was originally published in the Washington Post.
- Arnt 5y ago
  Well, that part says three things. First, that someone's name appeared in the Epik dump as having paid for some domains, and names the domains. Second, that the journalists spoke to that someone, and that he said certain things. Third (and implying that this was public knowledge before this article), that he was fired by his employer, also named. How do we know that this is correct? We can download the data via torrent and see that his name actually does appear, we have to trust that what he told the journalists is correctly quoted, and that he was fired? I've no idea, I suppose neither the employer nor the employee will be eager to talk about that, many people aren't. The journalists may be prosecuted, but for what? If that already was widely enough known that his employer fired him, what is the significant change of this article? And what else might they be prosecuted for?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
terracottage 5y ago
Funny, when this happens in the other direction it's called harassment. The guilt by association here is transparent, as is the implication that it's okay because it's hitting the "right" people, i.e. the right. Who are then immediately labeled far-right by fiat. Far left extremists are far too high on their own supply, and are torching the principles of free society left and right. And they still somehow think they wouldn't have been the baddies 80 years ago.
- user-the-name 5y ago
  Funny, they put bank robbers in prison but when I lock someone in my basement, suddenly I'm the "bad guy"!
MrGilbert 5y ago
Oddly enough, my data is also in this set (thanks to HIBP I know about that...) - and also thanks to HIBP, I know the domain trader that made me appear in this dataset. It's unfortunate, as I'd consider myself "leftist".
- kkoncevicius 5y ago
  That's one of the issues - the "far-right", depending on who is using the term, can range from someone advocating for genocide of anyone without blue eyes and blond hair, all the way to someone who says that Donald Trump wasn't that bad as a president.
  - wayoutthere 5y ago
    Americans have no context for left and right. They literally are both far right because that’s a political alignment, and one that Donald Trump absolutely fits. The ones advocating genocide are violent extremists on top of that. The democrats are a center-right party while the actual left is effectively frozen out of the political system and is currently focused on building alternate power structures for when the US government inevitably collapses. There’s not a lot of electoral participation on the left because when the choice is fascism or diet fascism, there’s not much point to an actual socialist.
    - Chris2048 5y ago
      If the "actual left" is "currently focused on building alternate power structures for when the US government inevitably collapses" - how would you define far-left? What are they doing?
      - wayoutthere 5y ago
        I would define “far left” as revolutionary communists, of which there are very few and they’re mostly very young people on Twitter. But the few actual revolutionaries I know are doing the same crap as the right wing militias, there are just a lot fewer of them. Your average leftist is simply disillusioned with electoral politics writ large; they’re tired of voting for guys like Obama who promise change but then still spend a trillion dollars turning brown children into skeletons. But there’s absolutely a feeling that we’re running out of time and more drastic solutions are on the horizon. Some join something like DSA which still nominally participates in the electoral system and others build mutual aid networks to circumvent capitalist control.
veeti 5y ago
Let's get the facts straight: - The Epik leak contains 15 million records [1], including scraped data of people who have never had any relation to Epik whatsoever. - Epik has operated as a seemingly ordinary domain registrar since 2009, and controls over half a million domains [2]. Their rise to infamy over far right wing hosting did not occur until around 2018 [3]. Despite this, the leak contains their entire historical user database. This is a case of doxxing millions of innocent people to expose a couple of assholes. The way I see it, if you celebrate this hack, you truly are a scumbag no better than any of the people behind "theholocaustisfake.com". [1] https://haveibeenpwned.com/PwnedWebsites#Epik https://haveibeenpwned.com/PwnedWebsites#Epik [2] https://www.domainstate.com/top-registrars.html https://www.domainstate.com/top-registrars.html [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epik_(company)#Hosting_of_far-right_and_illicit_content https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epik_(company)#Hosting_of_far-...
- iJohnDoe 5y ago
  This is actually pretty accurate summary of the situation. Doxxing people is never cool. It’s a great responsibility no one should have, especially when innocent people can get hurt in the process. Mistakes in correlating the data have already been made.
vmception 5y ago
> Alayon told The Post that he does not own the “racisminc,” Holocaust-denial or other web addresses but declined to say if he had owned them in the past Njalla is a registrar that allows purchase of domain names with Monero and other cryptocurrencies. So this will never happen to any domain squatters and enterprisers here, as there would be no identifying information such as the kind needed to process credit card transactions :) and Monero distinctly does not have further tracing to prior fund ownership. Just write whatever you want in the WHOIS information of course, and then still keep the free WHOIS privacy on. You can put contact information in the DNS information if you are just trying to sell the site. File this under yet another case of SHUM Should Have Used Monero
- user-the-name 5y ago
  This is what cryptocurrencies are good for: Protecting and helping the absolute worst of humanity.
  - vmception 5y ago
    and also everyone it is only happenstance that online purchases require name and address, as this is required to process over credit card networks at lower transaction fees (due to slightly lessened ability for payment fraud - which could be reversed - from the payment processor's perspective). As crypto currencies do not have reversal without nearly complete network consensus, such information is not applicable.
    - dariusj18 5y ago
      There's a certain sense to that. If it is effective for the worst of society who are constant targets, it will work for grandma. However that is assuming the technology can become user friendly/cheap.
      - user-the-name 5y ago
        No, there is no sense to that. The worst of society have a lot of tools that are effective for them, that your grandma has absolutely no use for. The worst of society will also put up with using some pretty weird things as long as they will help them break the law, that are incredibly awkward to use for anyone else.
b7a9a9a 5y ago
multi-million dollar newspaper, founded in 1877, owned by the richest person in the world, telling me what I really needed to know: the name, occupation, and location of the owner of the website "theholocaustisfake.com". salaried individuals sifting through data dumps to compile identifying lists of people to publish to their millions of readers in temporal perpetuity.
hemloc_io 5y ago
It's interesting to me how many people are ready to lap up this data, what's more surprising is these people aren't journalists but some weirdly named think tanks. Seems like there's a solid industry around mapping "hate" groups and studying them.(and potentially doxxing their members by the sounds of it)
- jareklupinski 5y ago
  and recruiting them :(
kescher 5y ago
To the bunch here that complains about their data being in there and them supposedly being leftists: You're not very much a leftist if you're doing business with a company owned by a person well-known to be a Neonazi.
rastafang 5y ago
so according to this, users of Epik are to blame, and not the hackers who published the data?
nieve 5y ago
> After the call, which Camp recorded and posted online, he boasted of “lying to the Washington Post” and began harassing a Post reporter via text and social media. That's one of the least subtle things I've ever seen and I've been following some of this for a while.

rvz 5y ago

I wouldn’t be cheering this data breach on as if ‘Anonymous’ or other internet vigilantes are the good guys here (They are not). Rather than cause a complete exposure of everyone’s sensitive data, just report whatever illegal content you find to the authorities to force Epik to take it down. One day Anonymous is on your side and in the next day they are not. They can try to do this to anyone they don’t like, even if innocent users are involved. That is not something to celebrate or cheer about, is it?

gerikson 5y ago
I don't see any cheering. It's reporting on the consequences of a serious data breach.
- busymom0 5y ago
  I am old enough to remember when a year ago, these same media companies censored the hunter Biden story falsely claiming it was Russian disinfo and result of hacking and thus didn't report it. Do you really believe this is about data breach and not about only political vendetta? The article is doing a lot of cheering if you read the article.
  - bildung 5y ago
    "After a scandal narrative [about Hunter Biden] failed to gain traction in the mainstream press, conservative media and personalities pivoted to a "meta narrative" that the press, social media platforms and the "deep state" were suppressing news of the scandal." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biden%E2%80%93Ukraine_conspiracy_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biden%E2%80%93Ukraine_conspira...
    - makomk 5y ago
      What it means by "a scandal narrative failed to gain traction" is that the mainstream press ignored the actual contents of the hack and focused entirely on falsely discrediting the information it contained as fake (a claim which fell apart almost immediately, at least for all the Hunter Biden emails which were politically interesting - something the non-conservative press has actually just started to notice), objections to the morality of using hacked data which are mysteriously absent here, and of course endless articles about how "conservative media" were using it. It's remarkable how whenever something happens that's politically inconvenient to Democrats, most of the US media coverage ends up being about the Republican reaction to it! In fact, that sentence from Wikipedia is a downstream consequence of this ... at least in theory, their policy is to just regurgitate the mainstream media narrative. Remember, too, that the Hunter Biden emails involved the future president of the USA and his family whereas this involves random obscure anonymous internet users that none of the Seattle Times' readers would even have heard of had prior to the press deciding to go after them. It takes an extremely partisan notion of newsworthiness to consider the latter worthy of reporting but not the former.
    - BoHerfVJrEsq 5y ago
      "failed to gain traction in the mainstream press" is an incredibly misleading way to relate what happened. The New York Post broke the story, and Twitter locked their account, ostensibly due to a "hacked materials" policy. But nobody ever actually thought that the materials were hacked. The MSM first said they weren't covering the story because it was Russian disinformation. Later they tried to rewrite history so that the story had simply escaped notice at the time. That's all completely false. It was an ongoing scandal for weeks on Twitter that the NY Post was locked out, and other news outlets were getting hammered on a daily basis for refusing to cover the story. So the story was successfully suppressed in the days leading up to the election. How'd it end up? The story was completely vindicated. It really was Hunter Biden's laptop, those really were his emails. They even had a witness who was a party to the email exchanges explaining who was who. Genuine story of great importance, buried.
    - naasking 5y ago
      Social media platforms literally were suppressing news of the story. That's literally, verifiably true, and the suppression was indeed a bigger scandal than the original story. All of the reasons other media outlets touted for not covering it, and social media touted for suppressing it, are obviously nonsense, as is clear by coverage of literally any other story based on leaked or hacked materials over the past 20 years, including this one.
- rvz 5y ago
  Assuming you have read the article instead of the headline, the article mentions more than that and includes reactions from those who are relieved and cheering the news of the data breach. Or are you going to continue to deny that the article didn’t mention this?
- rendall 5y ago
  Not really. Despite "domains affiliated with right-wing politics comprise less than 1 percent of [Epik's] users", the focus was emphatically on Epik's "right-wing" and "racist" users. There was zero reporting on the consequences to non-affiliated and left-wing users. Admittedly, the featured victims of the breech are unsympathetic characters, so it's hard to really be upset. Which is upstream's point: the article invites us as readers to indulge in schadenfreude which, let's be honest, is a kind of cheering. The downside of such articles for people of all political stripes is that it seems to imply that online anonymity, such as that supplied by Epik, benefits only reprehensible people peddling reprehensible views. It's easier to call for legislation that limits online anonymity if it is generally perceived to help only those who everyone can agree are awful. Throughout history, good people have needed anonymity from the government and even from popular consensus. The Underground Railroad, homosexuals, Jews, civil rights activists, anti-war demonstrators, to name just a few prominent examples.

h2odragon 5y ago

> The Post publicizes material obtained through hacking with caution, only after verifying its authenticity and ascertaining that there is news value in bringing such information to light. Sure you do. So let me just check here: Political purity as an employment requirement... Firing people for this is fine, right? What happens when the popular politics change? The "Moral Majority" folks were accused of wanting to be everything the Left has become.

mcphage 5y ago
I think criticizing people for running websites like “theholocaustisfake” is less like “attacking people for having bad thoughts” and a bit more like “attacking people for poisoning the well”.
- notanzaiiswear 5y ago
  That's what you think. The person running that web site probably thinks differently. If they came to power, they would perhaps censor sites that promote the holocaust. See how that works?
  - KptMarchewa 5y ago
    That's why you need to stop them before they came to power. World learned that in 1933.
    - notanzaiiswear 5y ago
      Where you alive in 1933? I wasn't. So all I know about the Holocaust is just what somebody else wrote about it. I generally don't like taking things as gospel. I don't generally doubt the Holocaust (I have no reason to), but I think it should be possible to discuss even the details of the holocaust. To me it is rather the demand that certain beliefs may not be questioned that enables things like fascists rising to power. (To me it doesn't matter that much if the Holocaust was real or not - either way mass killings of people should obviously be avoided).

s9w 5y ago

I wonder if the headline would be the same if another group was the target.

faxc1001 5y ago

So we have a newspaper in a city with 67.30% Whites and 15.43% Asian doing a little virtue signaling. In the witch hunt they use illegally obtained information. How do we know that the data sets are even correct? Can one use information from a hack? Will these journalists be prosecuted like Assange for using such information? I don't like the websites that the witch hunt target participated in, but public shaming like this (of non-politicians) is worse.

gerikson 5y ago
The article was originally published in the Washington Post.
Arnt 5y ago
Well, that part says three things. First, that someone's name appeared in the Epik dump as having paid for some domains, and names the domains. Second, that the journalists spoke to that someone, and that he said certain things. Third (and implying that this was public knowledge before this article), that he was fired by his employer, also named. How do we know that this is correct? We can download the data via torrent and see that his name actually does appear, we have to trust that what he told the journalists is correctly quoted, and that he was fired? I've no idea, I suppose neither the employer nor the employee will be eager to talk about that, many people aren't. The journalists may be prosecuted, but for what? If that already was widely enough known that his employer fired him, what is the significant change of this article? And what else might they be prosecuted for?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

terracottage 5y ago

Funny, when this happens in the other direction it's called harassment. The guilt by association here is transparent, as is the implication that it's okay because it's hitting the "right" people, i.e. the right. Who are then immediately labeled far-right by fiat. Far left extremists are far too high on their own supply, and are torching the principles of free society left and right. And they still somehow think they wouldn't have been the baddies 80 years ago.

user-the-name 5y ago
Funny, they put bank robbers in prison but when I lock someone in my basement, suddenly I'm the "bad guy"!

MrGilbert 5y ago

Oddly enough, my data is also in this set (thanks to HIBP I know about that...) - and also thanks to HIBP, I know the domain trader that made me appear in this dataset. It's unfortunate, as I'd consider myself "leftist".

kkoncevicius 5y ago
That's one of the issues - the "far-right", depending on who is using the term, can range from someone advocating for genocide of anyone without blue eyes and blond hair, all the way to someone who says that Donald Trump wasn't that bad as a president.
- wayoutthere 5y ago
  Americans have no context for left and right. They literally are both far right because that’s a political alignment, and one that Donald Trump absolutely fits. The ones advocating genocide are violent extremists on top of that. The democrats are a center-right party while the actual left is effectively frozen out of the political system and is currently focused on building alternate power structures for when the US government inevitably collapses. There’s not a lot of electoral participation on the left because when the choice is fascism or diet fascism, there’s not much point to an actual socialist.
  - Chris2048 5y ago
    If the "actual left" is "currently focused on building alternate power structures for when the US government inevitably collapses" - how would you define far-left? What are they doing?
    - wayoutthere 5y ago
      I would define “far left” as revolutionary communists, of which there are very few and they’re mostly very young people on Twitter. But the few actual revolutionaries I know are doing the same crap as the right wing militias, there are just a lot fewer of them. Your average leftist is simply disillusioned with electoral politics writ large; they’re tired of voting for guys like Obama who promise change but then still spend a trillion dollars turning brown children into skeletons. But there’s absolutely a feeling that we’re running out of time and more drastic solutions are on the horizon. Some join something like DSA which still nominally participates in the electoral system and others build mutual aid networks to circumvent capitalist control.

veeti 5y ago

Let's get the facts straight: - The Epik leak contains 15 million records [1], including scraped data of people who have never had any relation to Epik whatsoever. - Epik has operated as a seemingly ordinary domain registrar since 2009, and controls over half a million domains [2]. Their rise to infamy over far right wing hosting did not occur until around 2018 [3]. Despite this, the leak contains their entire historical user database. This is a case of doxxing millions of innocent people to expose a couple of assholes. The way I see it, if you celebrate this hack, you truly are a scumbag no better than any of the people behind "theholocaustisfake.com". [1] https://haveibeenpwned.com/PwnedWebsites#Epik https://haveibeenpwned.com/PwnedWebsites#Epik [2] https://www.domainstate.com/top-registrars.html https://www.domainstate.com/top-registrars.html [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epik_(company)#Hosting_of_far-right_and_illicit_content https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epik_(company)#Hosting_of_far-...

iJohnDoe 5y ago
This is actually pretty accurate summary of the situation. Doxxing people is never cool. It’s a great responsibility no one should have, especially when innocent people can get hurt in the process. Mistakes in correlating the data have already been made.

vmception 5y ago

> Alayon told The Post that he does not own the “racisminc,” Holocaust-denial or other web addresses but declined to say if he had owned them in the past Njalla is a registrar that allows purchase of domain names with Monero and other cryptocurrencies. So this will never happen to any domain squatters and enterprisers here, as there would be no identifying information such as the kind needed to process credit card transactions :) and Monero distinctly does not have further tracing to prior fund ownership. Just write whatever you want in the WHOIS information of course, and then still keep the free WHOIS privacy on. You can put contact information in the DNS information if you are just trying to sell the site. File this under yet another case of SHUM Should Have Used Monero

user-the-name 5y ago
This is what cryptocurrencies are good for: Protecting and helping the absolute worst of humanity.
- vmception 5y ago
  and also everyone it is only happenstance that online purchases require name and address, as this is required to process over credit card networks at lower transaction fees (due to slightly lessened ability for payment fraud - which could be reversed - from the payment processor's perspective). As crypto currencies do not have reversal without nearly complete network consensus, such information is not applicable.
  - dariusj18 5y ago
    There's a certain sense to that. If it is effective for the worst of society who are constant targets, it will work for grandma. However that is assuming the technology can become user friendly/cheap.
    - user-the-name 5y ago
      No, there is no sense to that. The worst of society have a lot of tools that are effective for them, that your grandma has absolutely no use for. The worst of society will also put up with using some pretty weird things as long as they will help them break the law, that are incredibly awkward to use for anyone else.

b7a9a9a 5y ago

multi-million dollar newspaper, founded in 1877, owned by the richest person in the world, telling me what I really needed to know: the name, occupation, and location of the owner of the website "theholocaustisfake.com". salaried individuals sifting through data dumps to compile identifying lists of people to publish to their millions of readers in temporal perpetuity.

hemloc_io 5y ago

It's interesting to me how many people are ready to lap up this data, what's more surprising is these people aren't journalists but some weirdly named think tanks. Seems like there's a solid industry around mapping "hate" groups and studying them.(and potentially doxxing their members by the sounds of it)

jareklupinski 5y ago
and recruiting them :(

kescher 5y ago

To the bunch here that complains about their data being in there and them supposedly being leftists: You're not very much a leftist if you're doing business with a company owned by a person well-known to be a Neonazi.

rastafang 5y ago

so according to this, users of Epik are to blame, and not the hackers who published the data?

nieve 5y ago

> After the call, which Camp recorded and posted online, he boasted of “lying to the Washington Post” and began harassing a Post reporter via text and social media. That's one of the least subtle things I've ever seen and I've been following some of this for a while.