

Lulzsec and Anonymous Hackers leak over 10GB of Law Enforcement Agency Details - canistr
http://www.invisblenandu.com/2011/08/lulzsec-and-anonymous-hackers-leak-over.html

======
flatline
Ugh, the personal data and "snitch list" seem particularly bad to release. It
does raise the question as to why this stuff is on remotely accessible
servers, but still, it seems like this is just a freebie handout to identity
thieves and perhaps worse for the snitch list?

~~~
burgerbrain
From the release:

 _"We have no sympathy for any of the officers or informants who may be
endangered by the release of their personal information. For too long they
have been using and abusing our personal information, spying on us, arresting
us, beating us, and thinking that they can get away with oppressing us in
secrecy. Well it's retribution time: we want them to experience just a taste
of the kind of misery and suffering they inflict upon us on an everyday basis.
Let this serve as a warning to would-be snitches and pigs that your leaders
can no longer protect you: give up and turn on your masters now before it's
too late."_

You must remember, despite what the police would like you to believe most
"snitches" are _not_ little old ladies reporting violent crimes.

Edit: Yeah, just read through about half of these. Most of them are along the
vein of _"My neighbours keeps to themselves, therefore they do drugs"_. Fuck
these people.

I did get a chuckle out of "jessica bruno - knows who set fire to land
excavator equipment" though. The thought of setting a bulldozer on fire
absurdly amusing to me for some reason ;)

~~~
tptacek
"Yeah, just read through about half of these. Most of them are along the vein
of "My neighbours keeps to themselves, therefore they do drugs". Fuck these
people"

If anyone wonders why I flag stories like this, here's a good example.

~~~
drivebyacct2
I don't understand? Why is this story needing to be flagged?

~~~
burgerbrain
I was assuming it's because it made me resort to the dreadful horrors of
profanity, but that's a good question. Why _does_ this quotation demonstrate
why these stories should be flagged?

------
Flam
Also on that site, I just noticed he posted admin and db info for MIT damn

------
palish
Someone who isn't me had this to say:

"Be careful, the mail archive contains dozens of .exe virus files. Verified by
SecurityEssentials. If you accidentally run them then you'll infect yourself.
(This implies many of the officers are using infected computers, since these
exes are in their email.)"

------
Estragon
Is there a list somewhere of all these different leaks? It is getting hard to
keep track, these days.

------
aj700
Isn't the main problem that technology moves so fast that the only way to have
an organisation (that must) be secure is to staff it with teenagers.

You can have incompetent but responsible adults or competent but irresponsible
teenagers. Choose one?

~~~
scotth
That's absurd. Why would a teenager know more than an adult about security?

~~~
aj700
The hackers are kids, the people getting broken into are adults, so apparently
they do know more.

~~~
nTsplnk
This is a really bad generalization. We don't know how old most of these
hackers really even are. But let's just say, for sake of discussion, they were
all kids. That doesn't necessarily mean they are more talented or know more.
They are more focused, perhaps? The US government has fallen behind in cyber
security. That doesn't mean the people they employ aren't as good as these
hackers. In fact, the government probably holds them back.

------
hugh3
Move over, Wikileaks, there's an even bigger group of cunts with even lower
ethical standards in town!

This will not end well.

------
Joakal
Are all these USA-only?

------
GHFigs
Why?

~~~
burgerbrain
Read the article:

 _"We hope that not only will dropping this info demonstrate the inherently
corrupt nature of law enforcement using their own words, as well as result in
possibly humiliation, firings, and possible charges against several officers,
but that it will also disrupt and sabotage their ability to communicate and
terrorize communities.

We are doing this in solidarity with Topiary and the Anonymous PayPal LOIC
defendants as well as all other political prisoners who are facing the gun of
the crooked court system. We stand in support of all those who struggle
against the injustices of the state and capitalism using whatever tactics are
most effective, even if that means breaking their laws in order to expose
their corruption. You may bust a few of us, but we greatly outnumber you, and
you can never stop us from continuing to destroy your systems and leak your
data."_

------
maeon3
Most people are going to says lulzsec is doing something illegal and immoral
here. Consider a different example:

A bank robber robs a bank, stealing hundreds of millions of dollars, then
proceeds to hand out the money to anyone who wants it. Who are you more mad
at? The bank robber who figured out a way to steal the money, or the bank who
has no clue how the money was stolen?

~~~
eric-hu
I was with them until the snitch list. These aren't exactly people abusing
power (AFAIK). If there was one particular person among the snitch list that
was interesting, they should've just cited that one. Releasing the entire list
can seriously endanger some innocent people.

Overall I still like that they're trying to wrest power from those who abuse
it, but I think it hurts their stance to cause collateral damage like that.

~~~
meatsock
the reason snitches talk is because they ran out of ways to avoid prosecution,
so i feel the innocent would be the minority in that group, as the police
wouldn't have anything on them to compel cooperation.

~~~
rbanffy
Regardless of why snitches talk, it's a basic assumption that their
collaboration will be rewarded by the protection against retaliation by those
they inform on.

If those snitches are helping the investigation of violent crimes, it's
really, really irresponsible to release their identities.

~~~
rhizome
I have to say this is the first time I've seen someone argue that confidential
informants receive special protection from Law Enforcement outside of the
Witness Protection Program, which is a federal thing and quite specific (and
limited) in its application. Do you have a reference for this "basic
assumption?"

~~~
rbanffy
It's only fair that you protect your sources. As a law enforcement agent,
would you be comfortable if you recklessly exposed your sources to harm? If,
for no other reason, you protect your informants so they continue to inform
you.

~~~
rhizome
I'd say that's an assumption (or agreement) some of the time, but I'd wager
just as soon that the "protection" offered is always post-hoc: someone gets
busted and drops dime, getting them protection from prosecution in their
instant case.

------
aysar
Shit just got real...

~~~
BasDirks
AFAIK shit's been real for quite a while. How is this worse than past
publications?

~~~
rbanffy
I'd finger the snitch list. If those are active in violent crime
investigation, they'd better run.

~~~
BasDirks
.. the Arizona publication?

