Slashdot Log In
"Anonymous" Hacks Palin's Private Email
Posted by
kdawson
on Wed Sep 17, 2008 06:34 PM
from the should-have-used-hushmail dept.
from the should-have-used-hushmail dept.
netbuzz writes "'Anonymous,' best known for its jousts with Scientology, has apparently hacked Sarah Palin's private Yahoo email account. Contents, including sample emails, an index, and family photos, have been posted by Wikileaks, which calls them evidence that the GOP vice presidential candidate has improperly used private email to shield government business from public scrutiny." Note that there is no easy way to tell if the material on Wikileaks is genuine or a hoax. Update by J : Genuine.
Related Stories
[+]
Palin Email Hacker Found 767 comments
mortonda writes to tell us that the person responsible for breaching Sarah Palin's private email account has been found. We discussed the breach last Wednesday, shortly before the hacker, a University of Tennessee-Knoxville student, posted a message detailing his methods. Wired has a story examining the potential legal consequences for the hacker.
[+]
Court Rules That Palin Must Save Yahoo Emails 412 comments
quarterbuck writes "An Anchorage judge has ruled that Governor Sarah Palin must save her emails, as they were apparently used for state business. Last week a Tennessee man was arrested over hacking one of her Yahoo email accounts. The Washington Post also reports that Sarah Palin, her husband, and officials had set up email accounts known only to each other."
[+]
IT: Study Shows "Secret Questions" Are Too Easily Guessed 302 comments
wjousts writes "Several high-profile break-ins have resulted from hackers guessing the answers to secret questions (the hijacking of Sarah Palin's Yahoo account was one). This week, research from Microsoft and Carnegie Mellon University, presented at the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, will show how woefully insecure secret questions actually are. As reported in Technology Review: 'In a study involving 130 people, the researchers found that 28 percent of the people who knew and were trusted by the study's participants could guess the correct answers to the participant's secret questions. Even people not trusted by the participant still had a 17 percent chance of guessing the correct answer to a secret question.'" Schneier pointed out years ago how weird it is to have a password-recovery mechanism that is less secure than the password.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
The crossed the line this time (Score:5, Interesting)
Attacking Scientology is one thing. We all know that it is a crock of crap. However, when somebody hacks a VP candidate, the FBI and Secret Service will react strongly.
Re:The crossed the line this time (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:The crossed the line this time (Score:5, Funny)
He and John are still in Stan Marsh's closet, so noone will hear them.
Parent
Alrighty then... (Score:5, Funny)
HEY TOM CRUISE!!!!
If you're reading this, then I tell you that your hokey sci-fi, pseudo-religion CULT is a crock of crap.
And I also think you're a faggot weenie too.
So there.
PS: Your acting sucks too.
Parent
Re:The crossed the line this time (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:The crossed the line this time (Score:5, Informative)
This was on CNN a few minutes ago and they confirmed that the Secret Service was already involved in the investigation.
Parent
Re:The crossed the line this time (Score:5, Insightful)
On one hand.. I agree they crossed the line.. on the other I kind of understand people's motives. Now I am in no way shape or form advocating hacking someone's email account, but there's something important to consider here. There's a great article at NY Times [nytimes.com] which talks about Palin's rise in politics. Here's one excerpt:
Interviews show that Ms. Palin runs an administration that puts a premium on loyalty and secrecy. The governor and her top officials sometimes use personal e-mail accounts for state business; dozens of e-mail messages obtained by The New York Times show that her staff members studied whether that could allow them to circumvent subpoenas seeking public records.
If she does infact use her private email address for correspondence with other staff members or governmental bodies, can you really consider it a private email account anymore? I'm not asking for response from slashdotters with analogies here, but if she does infact potentially use her personal email to avoid subpoenas then why the hell should it be considered personal. She is paid by the taxpayers and they have a right to know what is going on. Why have her staff members been studying the use of personal email accounts for official business anyways?
Maybe the deal with her using personal email for work is just a rumor, and maybe the whole deal with "Anonymous" is not true, but still things aren't just black and white here.
Parent
Re:The crossed the line this time (Score:5, Interesting)
I would imagine though that hacking into a yahoo e-mail account, even if it's a political figure, is not really going to get any serious penalties. It's not like they hacked into a government e-mail account. It's also not as if she has launch codes yet. McCain has to be elected, then die of a heart attack for her e-mail to be of much real importance. ... of course, if she did, they would probably end up in her yahoo account. And we'll be dead soon anyway. As Matt Damon said, someone who belives in creationism should not be an (old) heartbeat away from the football.
But I suspect secret service is investigating mostly to determine if there's a real security risk IE if she e-mailed out that there was a spare key to her house under a fake rock in the garden, or she was going to be in room 287 of the doubletree hotel.
Parent
Re:The crossed the line this time (Score:5, Insightful)
As much as I think Scientology is a dangerous cult, the actions of Anonymous to date have been demonstrating that they are just a group of dangerous radicals. Anonymous is dangerous because they attack and slander groups they disagree with and hide behind masks so that their opponents can not adequately defend themself. Now, I know many of the people who hate Sarah Palin and the Republicans won't see a problem with this, but for a moment imagine how you would feel if a similar group performed the same action on Barack Obama (or a political leader in your own country) and see how 'wonderful' it would be.
Parent
No way to tell? (Score:5, Interesting)
Translation: Wikileaks has been down for hours.... Wonder why?
Re:No way to tell? (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Confirmed by her campaign (Score:5, Informative)
It has been confirmed by her campaign and Amy McCorkell, the sender of one of the emails that has been posted.
History in the making (Score:5, Funny)
This might be the first time the Secret Service has encountered the Streisand Effect.
Probably Genuine (Score:5, Interesting)
Note that there is no easy way to tell if the material on Wikileaks is genuine or a hoax.
Wired has confirmed [wired.com] from one sender, Amy McCorkell, that the displayed message from her to Sarah Palin is genuine.
Hacking? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hacking? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Hooray for women's rights! (Score:5, Interesting)
Sarah Palin is proof that there is no glass ceiling for women, as long as you're not ugly, have fufilled your reproductive obligations, don't have any actual power, will be subordinate to a man, seem clueless, and hiring you will keep a black man out of the white house.
Re:Hooray for women's rights! (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Encryption, maybe... (Score:5, Insightful)
This wouldn't have even been an issue if she'd used encryption.
Maybe high-profile leaks like this will help convince the public at large that encryption is beneficial, even if you aren't doing anything wrong.
This is why you use official email systems (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a really good reason why they should NOT be using their private email. Sure, using the government systems opens them up to having their corruption on record, but having it on something like Yahoo mail opens it up to something like this, potentially exposing WAY more information than that. Not that government email is unhackable, but I'd certainly expect it to be at least a little bit more secure.
What will happen in retaliation? (Score:5, Insightful)
If this is true, I think it's possible that Anonymous has just painted a gigantic bulls-eye on a free internet.
I am all for ferreting out corruption, but what I worry about is how many will paint this: "Terrorist Rogue Hacker attacks Vice Presidential Candidate."
What limits are there on privacy now? I hope I am wrong.
Wow, no spam! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Who? (Score:5, Funny)
I'll pardon your ignorance if you pardon my advice to just fucking google it.
Parent
Re:I've looked. Check Gawker (Score:5, Informative)
I'm fairly certain that this is legit. I'm also fairly certain that members of Anonymous are not all based in the USA and may or may not have anything to fear from the Secret Service.
However, one of the features of a Yahoo Mail account is the ability to download a backup copy of your mailbox as a single file. I believe the file format is the one used by Outlook Express, rather than the more universal .mbox format, but still, if the "hackers" didn't think to grab everything, I would be shocked.
I'd be willing to bet that someone out in internet land has a copy of Sarah Palin's whole mail spool right now.
Parent
Re:I've looked. Check Gawker (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, there is proof...
What she said isn't the story, it's who she said it to.
Parent