7 ms·

Who else suspects this is retaliation for Twitter files?

hackernewds 4y ago
No one
_kbh_ 4y ago
> Who else suspects this is retaliation for Twitter files? There’s literally nothing to retaliate about in the Twitter files it’s entirely a nothingburger dressed up for outrage points. This data is also from 2021 to early 2022 before Twitter files was even a thing.
- brutusborn 4y ago
  How can you tell it’s from 2021? Even if it’s a nothingburger, putting out bad PR for FBI and CIA has got to make you some powerful enemies.
  - cmeacham98 4y ago
    From the seller in a reply: > Twitter patched this in early 2022 so breach data is 2021 to 2022
    - eternalban 4y ago
      The strawman of using the date of breach here is asserting that the breach was in response to another event. Timeline of releasing the breached data can be correlated with another event, but the date that they obtained the loot is irrelevant. They could have simply purchased this from an unknown 3rd party themselves. We simply don't know.
      - cmeacham98 4y ago
        It does matter, because it represents the difference between two different scenarios that don't have the same chance of occurring: 1. The FBI/CIA hacked Twitter and leaked their database in retaliation for the "Twitter files" 2. The FBI/CIA hacked Twitter (or someone else did and they obtained the data) back in early 2022 (for an unknown reason), and are now leaking the data in retaliation for the "Twitter files"
        brutusborn 4y ago
        Or it’s 3? 3. FBI/CIA hack Twitter as soon as they can compile enough justification. Use data whenever it is useful, including retaliation. Based on Snowden leaks, it wouldn’t surprise me if Twitter was hacked very soon after it was created.
        cmeacham98 4y ago
        This data was allegedly extracted using an exploit in the Twitter public API sometime in early 2022. The seller could be lying about that, but there is relatively strong circumstantial evidence that suggests they are telling the truth.
        brutusborn 4y ago
        What’s the evidence? It’s moot anyway, since they can always filter their stolen databases by potential methods of exfiltration, so the dump looks like it only used a certain vulnerability.
        _kbh_ 4y ago
        > What’s the evidence? To be honest the evidence for anything in this discussion is circumstantial and probably spurious at best.
        brutusborn 4y ago
        All we know for sure is that someone is attacking Twitter via blackmail via hacking just after Twitter released bad PR for some of the worlds most powerful hacking organisations. All the skeptic comments in this thread seem to worry about the veracity of the claims, but that’s irrelevant to the question of would FBI/CIA retaliate.
Ensorceled 4y ago
The “Twitter Files” showed Twitter was actually doing a better job at being balanced and fair than I thought they were. It’s embarrassing that anyone who read those threads came away thinking this was proof Twitter was doing evil things.
- rhaway84773 4y ago
  The irony of the Twitter Files, which showed Twitter leadership going through a painstaking process of determining what sort of actions they would take and the impacts in both directions of taking vs not taking an action, before coming with a decision, being released at the same time as ElonJet was banned, with a post-hoc made up BS policy of banning “doxxing” (which ElonJet wasn’t, by any definition of the word), followed by an arbitrary decision to ban certain 3rd party links with that arbitrary decision then being arbitrarily partially rolled back (?), was way too ridiculous.
- lhnz 4y ago
  The FBI and CIA were driving the removal or soft-censoring of speech that the US government didn't like. People spent a lot of the last decade saying that this never happened and that Twitter was just a private company operating on their own, instead of being the censorship arm of the government and in many cases staffed by ex-government... Also, I wouldn't call Twitter's original moderation fair or balanced. There were clearly voices within who thought they were trying to fit policy to decisions they'd already made post-hoc. (Unfortunately if anything it's even worse now.)
  - astrange 4y ago
    > The FBI and CIA were driving the removal or soft-censoring of speech that the US government didn't like. There’s no right to post CSAM or revenge porn on the internet, so of course the FBI “drives the removal” of that, it is their job. I’ve done legal compliance for this elsewhere, I have turned down government requests without being persecuted in return, and I know for a fact Twitter’s previous administration was one of the most aggressive at fighting back here and put a great deal of legal effort into it. Example of a more cooperative response would maybe be Amazon Ring. There’s also no right for foreign intelligence ops to post on US social media so of course the CIA has opinions on that, it’s their job. Etc. (Current example of this one: a Chinese group is flooding Twitter search for different Chinese city names with ads for sex workers, to block people searching covid news.) All these things happen under the rule of law, not random emails. If you don’t like it, change the law. I don’t know why you’d want to do that though. I agree people might’ve said something other than this, but those people are amateurs and are wrong; talk to the EFF if you actually need advice here.
theCrowing 4y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKYUxOQj5OA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKYUxOQj5OA
Febra33 4y ago
"Retaliation" for some already public dick pics or what? "ThE tWiTtEr fIlEs" are a nothing burger story to attract more idiots to Twitter.
jjulius 4y ago
What, in the Twitter Files, is worth retaliating against?
- brutusborn 4y ago
  Alleging the FBI and CIA are doing unconstitutional acts.
  - bboygravity 4y ago
    Also the US-army.
  - jjulius 4y ago
    Can you please cite an example of an unconstitutional act that occurred in the Twitter Files? And, who is doing the retaliating?
    - brutusborn 4y ago
      Censorship that violates the 1st amendment. I doubt that anything illegal happened, but that is the implication. FBI or “OGA”
  - clowd 4y ago
    Slight correction: alleging Donald Trump's government was doing unconstitutional acts. Which we know they did, in spades, in other contexts; but I've seen no evidence in the "Twitter files" to indicate anything illegal was going on in this context. The government briefed Twitter that they expected disinformation campaigns and to be on the lookout for them. The government also flagged a bunch of tweets as "hey, these are sus and might violate your rules, you ought to take a look" like anyone else can do. Whatever Musk and Taibbi are trying to cook up, they seem to have forgotten who was running the federal government at the time. It wasn't Joe Biden or tHe LiBeRaLs. The whole thing is stupid.
    - brutusborn 4y ago
      Thanks for the correction, it’s an interesting point. In terms of CIA and FBI involvement, why didn’t he put a stop to it if he could? How would the censorship have benefitted him? One thing I can’t get my head around is Twitter censoring joke accounts. Do you think it was because they were under so much time pressure that they erred on the side of trusting the Government suggestions?

No one

> Who else suspects this is retaliation for Twitter files? There’s literally nothing to retaliate about in the Twitter files it’s entirely a nothingburger dressed up for outrage points. This data is also from 2021 to early 2022 before Twitter files was even a thing.

brutusborn 4y ago
How can you tell it’s from 2021? Even if it’s a nothingburger, putting out bad PR for FBI and CIA has got to make you some powerful enemies.
- cmeacham98 4y ago
  From the seller in a reply: > Twitter patched this in early 2022 so breach data is 2021 to 2022
  - eternalban 4y ago
    The strawman of using the date of breach here is asserting that the breach was in response to another event. Timeline of releasing the breached data can be correlated with another event, but the date that they obtained the loot is irrelevant. They could have simply purchased this from an unknown 3rd party themselves. We simply don't know.
    - cmeacham98 4y ago
      It does matter, because it represents the difference between two different scenarios that don't have the same chance of occurring: 1. The FBI/CIA hacked Twitter and leaked their database in retaliation for the "Twitter files" 2. The FBI/CIA hacked Twitter (or someone else did and they obtained the data) back in early 2022 (for an unknown reason), and are now leaking the data in retaliation for the "Twitter files"
      - brutusborn 4y ago
        Or it’s 3? 3. FBI/CIA hack Twitter as soon as they can compile enough justification. Use data whenever it is useful, including retaliation. Based on Snowden leaks, it wouldn’t surprise me if Twitter was hacked very soon after it was created.
        cmeacham98 4y ago
        This data was allegedly extracted using an exploit in the Twitter public API sometime in early 2022. The seller could be lying about that, but there is relatively strong circumstantial evidence that suggests they are telling the truth.
        brutusborn 4y ago
        What’s the evidence? It’s moot anyway, since they can always filter their stolen databases by potential methods of exfiltration, so the dump looks like it only used a certain vulnerability.
        _kbh_ 4y ago
        > What’s the evidence? To be honest the evidence for anything in this discussion is circumstantial and probably spurious at best.
        brutusborn 4y ago
        All we know for sure is that someone is attacking Twitter via blackmail via hacking just after Twitter released bad PR for some of the worlds most powerful hacking organisations. All the skeptic comments in this thread seem to worry about the veracity of the claims, but that’s irrelevant to the question of would FBI/CIA retaliate.

Ensorceled 4y ago

The “Twitter Files” showed Twitter was actually doing a better job at being balanced and fair than I thought they were. It’s embarrassing that anyone who read those threads came away thinking this was proof Twitter was doing evil things.

rhaway84773 4y ago
The irony of the Twitter Files, which showed Twitter leadership going through a painstaking process of determining what sort of actions they would take and the impacts in both directions of taking vs not taking an action, before coming with a decision, being released at the same time as ElonJet was banned, with a post-hoc made up BS policy of banning “doxxing” (which ElonJet wasn’t, by any definition of the word), followed by an arbitrary decision to ban certain 3rd party links with that arbitrary decision then being arbitrarily partially rolled back (?), was way too ridiculous.
lhnz 4y ago
The FBI and CIA were driving the removal or soft-censoring of speech that the US government didn't like. People spent a lot of the last decade saying that this never happened and that Twitter was just a private company operating on their own, instead of being the censorship arm of the government and in many cases staffed by ex-government... Also, I wouldn't call Twitter's original moderation fair or balanced. There were clearly voices within who thought they were trying to fit policy to decisions they'd already made post-hoc. (Unfortunately if anything it's even worse now.)
- astrange 4y ago
  > The FBI and CIA were driving the removal or soft-censoring of speech that the US government didn't like. There’s no right to post CSAM or revenge porn on the internet, so of course the FBI “drives the removal” of that, it is their job. I’ve done legal compliance for this elsewhere, I have turned down government requests without being persecuted in return, and I know for a fact Twitter’s previous administration was one of the most aggressive at fighting back here and put a great deal of legal effort into it. Example of a more cooperative response would maybe be Amazon Ring. There’s also no right for foreign intelligence ops to post on US social media so of course the CIA has opinions on that, it’s their job. Etc. (Current example of this one: a Chinese group is flooding Twitter search for different Chinese city names with ads for sex workers, to block people searching covid news.) All these things happen under the rule of law, not random emails. If you don’t like it, change the law. I don’t know why you’d want to do that though. I agree people might’ve said something other than this, but those people are amateurs and are wrong; talk to the EFF if you actually need advice here.

theCrowing 4y ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKYUxOQj5OA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKYUxOQj5OA

Febra33 4y ago

"Retaliation" for some already public dick pics or what? "ThE tWiTtEr fIlEs" are a nothing burger story to attract more idiots to Twitter.

jjulius 4y ago

What, in the Twitter Files, is worth retaliating against?

brutusborn 4y ago
Alleging the FBI and CIA are doing unconstitutional acts.
- bboygravity 4y ago
  Also the US-army.
- jjulius 4y ago
  Can you please cite an example of an unconstitutional act that occurred in the Twitter Files? And, who is doing the retaliating?
  - brutusborn 4y ago
    Censorship that violates the 1st amendment. I doubt that anything illegal happened, but that is the implication. FBI or “OGA”
- clowd 4y ago
  Slight correction: alleging Donald Trump's government was doing unconstitutional acts. Which we know they did, in spades, in other contexts; but I've seen no evidence in the "Twitter files" to indicate anything illegal was going on in this context. The government briefed Twitter that they expected disinformation campaigns and to be on the lookout for them. The government also flagged a bunch of tweets as "hey, these are sus and might violate your rules, you ought to take a look" like anyone else can do. Whatever Musk and Taibbi are trying to cook up, they seem to have forgotten who was running the federal government at the time. It wasn't Joe Biden or tHe LiBeRaLs. The whole thing is stupid.
  - brutusborn 4y ago
    Thanks for the correction, it’s an interesting point. In terms of CIA and FBI involvement, why didn’t he put a stop to it if he could? How would the censorship have benefitted him? One thing I can’t get my head around is Twitter censoring joke accounts. Do you think it was because they were under so much time pressure that they erred on the side of trusting the Government suggestions?