Ashley Madison hacked - Is this a good or bad thing?

[Masked Bandit]

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/hackers-threaten-leak-ashley-madisons-37-million-clients-094809335--sector.html

A "dating" website that caters to attached people looking for a discreet affair. On one hand, their existence disgusts me. On the other hand, theft is theft. What say you beyond, are you for, against or indifferent to this event?

[codetrap]

.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[Xtrema]

The hackers also demanded the closure of another of Avid Life Media's sites, sugar-daddy site "Established Men", but did not target the company's "CougarLife" site, which caters for women members looking for "a young stud".

Damn cougar lovers.

[A790]

Of course it's a bad thing. Just because you disagree with something doesn't make it acceptable to break laws.

[carson blocks]

It's good news for IT security professionals..

[codetrap]

.

[01RedDX]

.

[JRSC00LUDE]

Originally posted by codetrap
But when you do a bad thing to people who are doing a bad thing... is that a bad thing? :nut:

Remember Danny, two wrongs don't make a right but three rights make a left.

- Chevy Chase

[shakalaka]

I think it should be shut down, it's such a freaking disgrace.

[01RedDX]

.

[jacky4566]

Originally posted by carson blocks
It's good news for IT security professionals..

Well you might be looking for an alternate career if you are head of security for AM..

So a website to promote cheating was hacked. Not sure how I feel about that. IT doesn't sound like they have the CC numbers tho. Just the transaction records.

[riander5]

37 million people freaking out right now + staff @ ashley madison

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by jacky4566
IT doesn't sound like they have the CC numbers tho. Just the transaction records.

The hackers aren't doing it for the money....yet anyway.

[A790]

Originally posted by codetrap
But when you do a bad thing to people who are doing a bad thing... is that a bad thing? :nut:
Yes.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by riander5
37 million people freaking out right now + staff @ ashley madison

The amount of blackmailing you can do with these info........

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by Xtrema


The amount of blackmailing you can do with these info........

That's what i was thinking as well, but it doesn't have to be blackmail.

Contact the cheater, tell them you know everything, and they'll likely offer you a wad of cash to keep quiet.

As long as money isn't demanded, it's not blackmail.

[codetrap]

.

[Canmorite]

What people do in their private life shouldn't be public. Bad thing. :thumbsdow

[JRSC00LUDE]

I think this is pretty cut/dry in that anyone who is "OK" with this is a complete and utter idiot.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE
I think this is pretty cut/dry in that anyone who is "OK" with this is a complete and utter idiot.

I don't think anyone is OK with this but anyone who throw their personal info anywhere on the net and expected total privacy is naive.

If you use Google, Chrome and Android, what you ate for dinner is probably logged somewhere.

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE
I think this is pretty cut/dry in that anyone who is "OK" with this is a complete and utter idiot.

Ok with hacking the site, or ok with cheating?

The latter could be considered betrayal, but a lot of people forget that the "cheater" might just give their spouse an STD.

[JRSC00LUDE]

No, with the hacking. If you're "OK" with it just because of what site it is then there is something wrong with your brain.



Originally posted by Xtrema


I don't think anyone is OK with this but anyone who throw their personal info anywhere on the net and expected total privacy is naive.

If you use Google, Chrome and Android, what you ate for dinner is probably logged somewhere.

Agreed (on the privacy angle) but I've seen people post things on social media today that are essentially saying "Good, I hope they release it." THOSE people are even more naive I would say. :dunno:

[codetrap]

.

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE
No, with the hacking. If you're "OK" with it just because of what site it is then there is something wrong with your brain.

I'm in a grey are regarding hacking that specific site.

I don't think the info should made public, but I suspect that anyone would want to know if their spouse was cheating on them. Again, not just for the betrayal aspect, but the possibility of giving the "victim" spouse an STD.

[HiTempguy1]

Not that I believe in karma, but I believe the saying is something about it being a bitch.

It's hard to feel bad for bad things befalling bad people. So I am neutral on it, leaning towards congratulating the hackers.

Adultery is the one thing you can do that doesn't run afoul of laws, but has the ability to destroy.

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE
Agreed (on the privacy angle) but I've seen people post things on social media today that are essentially saying "Good, I hope they release it." THOSE people are even more naive I would say. :dunno:

I think those are the people who think their spouses are cheating, lol.

[FraserB]

Originally posted by codetrap
But when you do a bad thing to people who are doing a bad thing... is that a bad thing? :nut:

So then so long a s a few people consider something to be a bad thing, it's ok to do whatever they want with that information? Including the possibility of destroying families, ruining reputations or getting people fired?

People need to learn to mind their own business and not try to stir up shit if it doesn't concern them. Even if they feel someone is doing something "wrong".

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE
Agreed (on the privacy angle) but I've seen people post things on social media today that are essentially saying "Good, I hope they release it." THOSE people are even more naive I would say. :dunno:

Idiots who think this will be released. This list is only worth something if it stay hidden. Unless the hacker lose it to other hackers with a different motive, it'll stay hidden.

[JRSC00LUDE]

I don't see the grey, it's no one else's job to become the self appointed morality police. Especially when it's just (as it appears) the result of picking an "easy" target from the extortion angle. "Shut it down" or we'll release the info. Who the hell are they to make such a demand?

If you're married to a cheating spouse that's your problem to deal with. :dunno:

[riander5]

The people on AM are definitely dirtbags, but its their choice to remain anonymous dirtbags

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE
I don't see the grey, it's no one else's job to become the self appointed morality police. Especially when it's just (as it appears) the result of picking an "easy" target from the extortion angle. "Shut it down" or we'll release the info. Who the hell are they to make such a demand?

If you're married to a cheating spouse that's your problem to deal with. :dunno:

Well, you probably already know how much I despise people inflicting their dogma on others, but this is a different situation.

Would you be ok if someone informed you that your spouse was cheating, or tell them to mind their own business?

[sputnik]

Originally posted by riander5
The people on AM are definitely dirtbags, but its their choice to remain anonymous dirtbags

Pretty hard to remain anonymous when you give your information to Ashley Madison.

[JRSC00LUDE]

Originally posted by Seth1968
Well, you probably already know how much I despise people inflicting their dogma on others, but this is a different situation.

Would you be ok if someone informed you that your spouse was cheating, or tell them to mind their own business?

That depends. I suppose if one of my/hypothetical her friends or family SAW it happening and told me about it then great. Same goes if the other person in the equation told me about it. Thanks for the heads up I guess.

Now if one of those persons came across that info. because they broke into her phone/computer and then told me about it, or broke into her house and hid in the closet to check it out, that's still wrong. They should be charged.

[JRSC00LUDE]

Originally posted by sputnik
Pretty hard to remain anonymous when you give your information to Ashley Madison.

How so? Unless AM decides to change their terms of service and release that info. Otherwise the expectation of privacy is still there is it not?

You at no point consent to someone stealing that info. and using it without your permission. It'll be interesting to see what happens with all this, I assume that they're fucked either way because if the info. goes public the lawsuits will bankrupt them into oblivion.:dunno:

[Seth1968]

There's two different issues on the topic. One is the legal aspect, and the other is the moral aspect.

I don't think the victim spouse would care as to how the informant got the info. I think they would be hurt, but grateful that someone told them the truth.

[JRSC00LUDE]

^ I get your point of view Seth but I still don't believe it justifies theft and extortion.

[sputnik]

Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE
How so?

If you wanted to remain anonymous would you trust a social networking website?

What makes anyone believe that AM is any more secure than Facebook or LinkedIn?

[Seth1968]

Not sure if AM is public, but if so, expect their stock to plummet. Ditto for similar sites.

[lasimmon]

I sort of wonder what % of their subscribers are not actually married/in a relationship..

[JRSC00LUDE]

Originally posted by sputnik


If you wanted to remain anonymous would you trust a social networking website?

What makes anyone believe that AM is any more secure than Facebook or LinkedIn?

I don't know, why not? I trust the RBC won't give anyone my info. even though I sign up for mobile banking and that TurboTax won't give anyone my info. even though I signed up and gave it all to them to file my taxes.

What's the difference? The expectation of privacy is offered and expected.

EDIT - unless their TOS states otherwise, like Fbook/Instagram. I've never looked but given the nature of that "service" I would expect that privacy is one of their biggest guarantees.

[NoPulp]

All spouses of hackers just shat themselves.

Hacking is hacking. It's not right. Could care less personally though, website is pathetic.

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by NoPulp
Hacking is hacking. It's not right.

Nothing personal, but I think that's a simplistic opinion.

Is hacking ok if it exposes government corruption?

Is hacking ok if it exposes American oil companies that basically rape other countries and kill people?

Is hacking ok if it exposes corporations desire to privatize water?

Is hacking ok if it exposes to a spouse that their other half is cheating and they might want to get checked for an STD?

[A790]

It's a fine moral line we walk, I think. I don't really support AM or its premise, but I recognize its right to exist and to exist free from illegal harassment and extortion.

It's the "I don't agree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death your right to say it" kind of dilemma.

[frizzlefry]

Part of their reason for doing this is that the AM site would charge members to remove all their information from the site but were not actually removing it. So, aside from being scummy, the site was essentially extorting their own members but never actually removing the information.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by Seth1968
Is hacking ok if it exposes government corruption?

Is hacking ok if it exposes oil companies American that basically rape other companies and kill people?

Is hacking ok if it exposes corporations desire to privatize water?

Is hacking ok if it exposes to a spouse that their other half is cheating and they might want to get checked for an STD?

Yes on all 3 because they involve government policies that I help paid for.

No on the last one. If I expect something is going on with my spouse, I'll hire a PI for MY spouse. I don't care about everyone else's spouses. And it'll be up to my PI to give me info that is admissible in court.

[max_boost]

Tiger Woods was the greatest golfer in the world when he was the alpha cheating bad ass. Now he sucks.

1. Let people do whatever they want.
2. Who are you to judge but it's okay we all have opinions
3. Don't fuck with the hackers haha
4. Any Beyonders on the list?

[Masked Bandit]

Originally posted by frizzlefry
Part of their reason for doing this is that the AM site would charge members to remove all their information from the site but were not actually removing it. So, aside from being scummy, the site was essentially extorting their own members but never actually removing the information.

That's a very good point. Their members paid for an extra level of privacy, supposedly erasing ALL info, which was not done.

[killramos]

Originally posted by lasimmon
I sort of wonder what % of their subscribers are not actually married/in a relationship..

:werd:

Easy hookups with people who get a rush out of the risk of it who will never want anything more serious than sex or a weekend at a cabin?

I can't imagine anyone who would be interested in that :rolleyes:

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by killramos


:werd:

Easy hookups with people who get a rush out of the risk of it who will never want anything more serious than sex or a weekend at a cabin?

I can't imagine anyone who would be interested in that :rolleyes:

You would think so, but...

It's a social taboo. As such, if the info goes public, said person could find themselves unemployed, or generally ostracized.

[FraserB]

Originally posted by Seth1968
There's two different issues on the topic. One is the legal aspect, and the other is the moral aspect.

I don't think the victim spouse would care as to how the informant got the info. I think they would be hurt, but grateful that someone told them the truth.

So as long as someone views someone else's actions as immoral, it's fine to broadcast that information no matter what the potential consequences.

Or does that standard only apply to things you personally consider immoral?

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by FraserB


So as long as someone views someone else's actions as immoral, it's fine to broadcast that information no matter what the potential consequences.

Or does that standard only apply to things you personally consider immoral?

I don't understand how that relates to my point that you quoted.

[FraserB]

Originally posted by Seth1968


I don't understand how that relates to my point that you quoted.

I'm challenging the assertion that there is a morally correct aspect to the actions that are taking place.

The actions that one person considers to be moral might be different from those held by someone else. Therefor, the actions might be moral in your mind, but immoral in someone else's opinion.

This is where people staying out of each other's business comes in.

[Cos]

.

[max_boost]

MYOB. Snitches get stitches.

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by FraserB


I'm challenging the assertion that there is a morally correct aspect to the actions that are taking place.

The actions that one person considers to be moral might be different from those held by someone else. Therefor, the actions might be moral in your mind, but immoral in someone else's opinion.

This is where people staying out of each other's business comes in.

I don't think you're referring to me specifically, as I made no such assertion.

My only assertion is that a spouse would want to know if their spouse is cheating on them, and won't care where the info came from. They're only going to care if it's true, and take action accordingly.

[sabad66]

Where do you draw the line on what type of website is "deserving" of being hacked?

What if this was a drug website? Or CP? Would you be happy to have the list of users for those sites leaked?

[A790]

Originally posted by sabad66
What if this was a drug website? Or CP? Would you be happy to have the list of users for those sites leaked?
That's not even a remotely similar comparison.

[codetrap]

.

[Cos]

.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by sabad66
What if this was a drug website? Or CP? Would you be happy to have the list of users for those sites leaked?

Both are illegal activities. Line are drawn pretty clear there.

You can argue they shouldn't be illegal but that's another discussion.

[01RedDX]

.

[BandW]

Originally posted by A790
Of course it's a bad thing. Just because you disagree with something doesn't make it acceptable to break laws.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Laws

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apartheid

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugitive_Slave_Act_of_1850

[Seth1968]

As our customers’ privacy is of the utmost concern to us, we are now offering our full-delete option free to any member, in light of today’s news.

So you have to pay AM for a "full delete"?

WTH?

[A790]

Originally posted by BandW


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Laws

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apartheid

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugitive_Slave_Act_of_1850
Ahh yes, the inevitable comparison between a website about cheating on your spouse and the holocaust. :rolleyes:

Nice contribution you've made there.

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by A790

Ahh yes, the inevitable comparison between a website about cheating on your spouse and the holocaust. :rolleyes:

Ha ha. I love that morbid yet proverbial comparison.

Especially when a politician calls another a Nazi.

[BandW]

Originally posted by A790

Ahh yes, the inevitable comparison between a website about cheating on your spouse and the holocaust. :rolleyes:

Nice contribution you've made there.

It's not my fault you made a false generalization.

[D88]

I'm ok with the events that are unfolding.

[A790]

Originally posted by BandW
It's not my fault you made a false generalization.
You know those people that everyone hates to get into any kind of discussion with because they're petty? You know, the people that would rather make a snide remark as opposed to a meaningful contribution?

Today, that's you! How excellent for you :)

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by 01RedDX
Contrary to current media reports, and based on accusations posted online by a cyber criminal, the “paid-delete” option offered by AshleyMadison.com does in fact remove all information related to a member’s profile and communications activity.

Funny, they hackers didn't say that, they said AM kept the persons name and credit information on file, which AM didn't refute in this statement. Nice attempt at deflection.

[BandW]

Originally posted by A790

You know those people that everyone hates to get into any kind of discussion with because they're petty? You know, the people that would rather make a snide remark as opposed to a meaningful contribution?

Today, that's you! How excellent for you :)

How is a false, sweeping generalization a meaningful contribution?

[A790]

Originally posted by BandW
How is a false, sweeping generalization a meaningful contribution?
Taken in context with the events I was quite clearly referencing, the statement I made makes complete sense. It is not within the realm of acceptance to expose the private information of 37 million people simply because you disagree with the premise of the website.

Trying to draw comparisons between my statement in reference to that and Apartheid/etc. is simply you being a pedant.

The fact that I have to even explain this to you only emphasizes my point, especially considering that you've been given opportunity to attempt to reinforce whatever stupid point you were trying to make in the first place.

[BandW]

Originally posted by A790

Taken in context with the events I was quite clearly referencing, the statement I made makes complete sense. It is not within the realm of acceptance to expose the private information of 37 million people simply because you disagree with the premise of the website.

Trying to draw comparisons between my statement in reference to that and Apartheid/etc. is simply you being a pedant.

The fact that I have to even explain this to you only emphasizes my point, especially considering that you've been given opportunity to attempt to reinforce whatever stupid point you were trying to make in the first place.

Exposing "the private information of 37 million people simply because you disagree with the premise of the website" is wrong not because it's illegal. That's the point.

[Robin Goodfellow]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok


Funny, they hackers didn't say that, they said AM kept the persons name and credit information on file, which AM didn't refute in this statement. Nice attempt at deflection.

Its bad enough that they'd charge folks to delete their information, and worse that they didn't follow through.

On these grounds, I'm somewhat glad they got hacked... but also feel bad for the many lives that may be ruined.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by Xtrema


Both are illegal activities. Line are drawn pretty clear there.

You can argue they shouldn't be illegal but that's another discussion.

Adultery is illegal in 21 states, so this is a good thing in those places, but a bad thing in 29 US states and Canada?

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok


Adultery is illegal in 21 states, so this is a good thing in those places, but a bad thing in 29 US states and Canada?

I am referencing to Drugs and CP as argument where to draw the line. Not cheating.

[beyond_ban]

Off topic addition: You guys should watch Mr Robot

[Tik-Tok]

Soooo, the hackers released the data tonight.

Regardless of the ethics of the hack, this election season should get interesting.

[finboy]

Based on 1 in 4 residents of Ottawa having an account, I'm interested to see what happens this election

[lilmira]

So the list is just the phone book then.

[roopi]

Searchable website. Just says if email address is there or not.

Note: You might want not want to enter your email address. Who knows what is being done with the data.

https://ashley.cynic.al/
http://www.trustify.info/check

Get your own copy:
http://geekbeat.tv/everything-we-know-about-the-ashley-madison-hack-plus-find-out-if-youre-on-the-list/

[sxtasy]

Plot twist: AM is in on the hacking to garner business for their new website servicing recently divorced and separated couples :devil:

[Mibz]

I mean, if there were ever a time to sign up...

[adamc]

Josh Duggar is the first big name to be outed as a paid member.

Looking forward to more.

[mr2mike]

Originally posted by Mibz
I mean, if there were ever a time to sign up...

It's a recession, who can afford to sign up?
Just start sending out emails to people on that list asking a/s/l and pic.

[01RedDX]

.

[CanmoreOrLess]

My wife told me "Ashley Madison was hacked" to which I replied "Who would hack into a furniture store?" Seriously, I am that far out of the loop.

[Xtrema]

lol, 90-95% members are dudes.

[C_Dave45]

Originally posted by Xtrema
lol, 90-95% members are dudes.
I don't understand this. Is this just your guess? What would be the purpose of a dude pretending to be some chick looking for a married man? It can't be the gay aspect. Shit, gays can get laid twice a day if they wanted. They don't need to look on a married site.

I can see the company putting up fake profiles on there. Forces guys to buy time to talk to them. But why would random guys make fake profiles?? :dunno:

[rage2]

Originally posted by CanmoreOrLess
My wife told me "Ashley Madison was hacked" to which I replied "Who would hack into a furniture store?" Seriously, I am that far out of the loop.
Better check her email... :rofl:

[Sugarphreak]

...

[gwill]

did anyone see the numbers on the number of calgary police service emails, edmonton police emails, canadian forces emails, or even govt of alberta or govt of canada emails that were part of the dump?

Pretty funny stuff.

[sabad66]

Anyone have time to filter out the Calgary accounts and put them in an access DB or spreadsheet? I am too lazy to download the 10 gig torrent but I am curious if some people I know are in there :D

[ipeefreely]

Originally posted by gwill
did anyone see the numbers on the number of calgary police service emails, edmonton police emails, canadian forces emails, or even govt of alberta or govt of canada emails that were part of the dump?

Pretty funny stuff.

Why would you use your work email??? :nut:

[gwill]

Originally posted by sabad66
Anyone have time to filter out the Calgary accounts and put them in an access DB or spreadsheet? I am too lazy to download the 10 gig torrent but I am curious if some people I know are in there :D

You can use the many websites to search emails one by one... Surprises me how many cheaters don't create a random cheater email that only those your cheating on will have. #dummies.

There are 263000 emails or so for canadians

[Kavy]

Most of the emails will have to be cross referenced with credit card info to be confirmed. According to the news there is no email verification so that means anyone can sign up any email.

At the office it's a regular occurrence to sign someone up for all kinds of websites. It funny to see the spam mail coming through but even funnier to see IT send out a memo that company computers should not be used for researching adult diapers or that penisland.com is not a pen customizing website.

[killramos]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak


So... is the 5-10% of women just a bunch of sluts hooking up with 10~20 guys each then?

Or sugar daddies to buy them things. Same as any dating website.

[Mitsu3000gt]

According to the hackers, who presumably have much better information than we do, 90-95% of the members are guys, and most of the female profiles are fake to attract more members.

Also anyone using names, emails, etc. known to anyone else but them on a website like this deserves to get caught. They also don't verify emails, so there are probably a lot of people who were signed up unknowingly as a joke or for revenge.

Divorce lawyers and PI's are probably quite happy about the leak haha.

[A790]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
Also anyone using names, emails, etc. known to anyone else but them on a website like this deserves to get caught.
:rolleyes:

Fuck privacy, amirite?