Stratfor Hacked, 200GB Of Emails, Credit Cards Stolen, Client List Released, Includes MF Global
This Christmas will not be a happy one for George Friedman (who incidentally was the focus of John Mauldin's latest book promotion email blast) and his Stratfor Global Intelligence service, because as of a few hours ago, hacking collective Anonymous disclosed that not only has it hacked the Stratfor website (since confirmed by Friedman himself), but has also obtained the full client list of over 4000 individuals and corporations, including their credit cards (which supposedly have been used to make $1 million in "donations" , as well as over 200 GB of email correspondence. And since the leaked client list is the who is who of intelligence, and capital management, including such names as Goldman Sachs, the Rockefeller Foundation and, yep, MF Global, we are certain that not only Stratfor and its clients will be waiting with bated breath to see just what additional troves of information are unleashed, but virtually everyone else, in this very sensitive time from a geopolitical point of view. And incidentally, we can't help but notice that Anonymous may have finally ventured into the foreign relations arena. We can only assume, for now, that this is not a formal (or informal) statement of allegiance with any specific ideology as otherwise the wargames in the Straits of Hormuz may soon be very inappropriately named (or halfway so).
Chronology of releases from AnonymousIRC starting early this afternoon:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/stratfor-hacked-200gb-emails-credit-cards-stolen-client-list-released-includes-mf-global-rockef
bemildred
(90,061 posts)More security theater exposed for the show business which it is.
UTUSN
(70,496 posts)Poll_Blind
(23,864 posts)PB
Bucky
(53,795 posts)Is it reliable to think of Anonymous just one person or one cell of people at this point? It seems like there'd be more than one party out there doing this for a variety of reasons.
I always like seeing the fat cats get screwed a little. But I don't really trust committed anarchists, either. They always seem to end up turning into little Lenins.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)This is where groups like Weatherman got into trouble back in the 60s. They turned to armed robbery in the name of "justice." It just never works.
And yes, anarchists tend to turn into despots with alarming efficiency.
The Doctor.
(17,266 posts)I'm not saying that corruption is impossible, but Anonymous is not a 'group' that can 'decide' to become corrupt or take advantage of 'their' power. The mission statement is the entity in itself in this case. Anything someone does that is not in line with the mission of Anonymous is simply not Anonymous.
That said, how besides robbing from and embarrassing them can we deal justice to those that live above the law?
frazzled
(18,402 posts)If you think that's a failing, you're welcome to your opinion. It's just a line I can't cross.
And no "decision" nor leadership is needed to become corrupt or take advantage of power. It happens quite spontaneously.
TalkingDog
(9,001 posts)in order to eat or feed their kids.
Not a comment on Anon... just a comment on the perception of "morality" as a quality that can be absolutely defined.
Quantess
(27,630 posts)+1
aranthus
(3,385 posts)"Moral" means treating people appropriately under the circumstances that apply at any particular point in time. Conditions change all the time, but the rules don't change. The difficulty is in the application.
The Doctor.
(17,266 posts)Moral are absolute strictures, as you have argued. But you've proven that you don't believe they are by this line:
"appropriately under the circumstances that apply at any particular point in time"
So different 'circumstances' require different 'behavior'? That's 'ethics', not morals.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)The Marquis and the French Resistance of WW2 were then guilty by your rigidly dogmatic standards. Guess it didn't work for them either...
frazzled
(18,402 posts)And anything goes. We (meaning we normal, non-military citizens) are not in a war.
And let's get clear that we are not in a situation like World War II France. Our country has not been occupied by a foreign government that has taken over the day to day running of our country, deporting our Jewish and gay citizens to concentration camps to be gassed or starved to death. Bombs are not falling out of the sky on us such that we have to take shelter each night in prolonged air-raid situations.
If you want to hyperbolize that we are at "war," there's no way I can dissuade you from your romantic notions. But it's not true. If we were in the situation of France in World War II I would not only steal but kill and lie and god knows what.
greiner3
(5,214 posts)I think you are missing the point of Anonymous. It is a call to the connected and able youth all across the globe. It is people such as these that the draconian laws are put into place by the governments to try to stop such cracking; the attempt to tie IP addresses to a person's name, getting ISPs to give up this info WITHOUT warrants. I cannot even mention what Homeland Insecurity may have up its sleeve via secret laws that are hidden within the Patriot Act, the ones we have been warned about by various politicians recently.
Just by going to sites such as;
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/stratfor-hacked-200gb-emails-credit-cards-stolen-client-list-released-includes-mf-global-rockef
reading the comments you get the sense of the pervasiveness of the sheer numbers of crackers who are involved. There is NO one group or person who is behind Anonymous.
Check out the IRC networks for another glimpse into the hatred these individuals have for the way the world is going.
BTW, the above link is to a page where the clients of Strafor are listed. Take a look at #s 3992 and 3993; Yum Brands. That's right, every time you get a pizza from Pizza Hut, a burrito from Taco Bell or a wing from the Colonel, you contribute to the problem.
What I find telling is a list of about 20 US universities that are listed.
Another interesting part of the list is about 20 phone numbers. I wonder if anyone would answer if called? I am sure by now those numbers have been canceled but imagine the fun some crackers would have had...
radhika
(1,008 posts)All I can imagine is they are involved in defense contracting and intelligence work - or their key faculty are.
Who knows the cost of an annual subscription? Do the Stratfor reports end up in a university library or some extra special place?
bemildred
(90,061 posts)And this being the good old USA, that decides the question.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Just like the drug war and the war on terror, etc. The only wars which are not horseshit are actual wars against large, organized, competent, and well-equipped military adversaries.
Our "leaders" love the war meme because they feel it gives them some sort of exception from accountablility and oversight, a ludicrous idea when you think about it.
boppers
(16,588 posts)People who less computer literate, well, I think there's a power problem there.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Generally they hate each other even worse than Capitalists and Commies. The Spanish Civil War is the classic case, Franco got a great deal of help from the Commies, who were more interested in putting the Anarchists down than defeating Franco.
starroute
(12,977 posts)It sounds as though you're saying the Communists supported Franco -- which of course they didn't. But they did do their best to suppress the anarchists -- even accusing them of being fascists -- and that infighting was one of the reasons that Franco was able to crush the Republic.
That said, I don't believe the dividing lines are as clear today as they were 75 years ago. Anonymous, at least, seems to include a whole spectrum of anarchists, anarcho-syndicalists, anarcho-communists, anarcho-libertarians, and whatnot.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)starroute
(12,977 posts)... since there are a lot of people these days who don't know the first thing about the Spanish Civil War. Even when I was in high school, it wasn't exactly part of the history curriculum -- except as part of a quick checklist along with the Japanese invasion of Manchuria and the Italian conquest of Ethiopia -- and I'm sure things have only gotten worse.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)You are quite right that people clump things that do not go together inappropriately, and certainly conflating anarchists with commies falls in that category; and that ties into the whole infantile, cliche "left-right" dichotomy which is endlessly shoved down our throats ike it was something real.
The commies in the Spanish Civil War were Soviet tools, as was the style back them in Commie politics, and they treated putting the Anarchists down way ahead of winning the war, that's quite clear, they were actively killing anarchists behind the lines. Orwell's "Homage to Catalonia" is good on that subject.
One must consider the Hitler-Stalin pact too, as evidence that the Soviets - and Stalin in particular - were willing to make common cause with anyone at all for expediency's sake.
So I have to disagree that they were not actively aiding Franco, not because the favored his politics, but because they preferred losing to Franco to winning with the Anarchists in power.
To be fair, there were a lot of other factors in how that war came out. One regrets that the liberal democracies did not intervene more enthusiastically, we might have been able to skip WWII.
Quasimodem
(441 posts)From what I understand, you would be better off thinking of Anonymous as an eddy.
Water courses along smoothly until some measure of it strikes an obstruction. If enough water is caught up, it swirls about until that smooth flow changes and its new conformation has an effect upon the action of the water -- something in the depths is thrown up, or something on the surface is drawn down.
Eventually, the energy in the currents set awry by the obstruction dissipates and the water flows smoothly again, until the next obstruction triggers another eddy. Whether one particular droplet participates in all eddies, some eddies, or no eddies is unknown, even to the other droplets in the stream.
Naturally, this is all quite poetical, but feels rather elusive to a pragmatist looking for an enemy to swat. The most this can do is inform him that another name for Anonymous is Eddy.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Excellent.
I would be inclined to say we ought not give TPTB any free clues, but it really does not matter whether they understand or not.
SecularMotion
(7,981 posts)Should be an interesting week ahead
"#Antisec has enough targets lined up to extend the fun fun fun of #LulzXmas throught the entire next week."
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)wordpix
(18,652 posts)Vanje
(9,766 posts)Boston_Chemist
(256 posts)Amateurs.
Shoe Horn
(302 posts)dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)One hacker said the goal was to pilfer funds from individuals' accounts to give away as Christmas donations, and some victims confirmed unauthorized transactions linked to their credit cards.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_HACKER_CHRISTMAS?SITE=MAQUI&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)tavalon
(27,985 posts)I guess they are right. If these credit cards belong to the 1%, I have no problem with this, granted, criminal activity. If they belong to the 99%, it's still criminal and I want them to stop right now.
PatrynXX
(5,668 posts)even more than the big guys.. thumbs up
chrisa
(4,524 posts)But bwahahahaha!
tavalon
(27,985 posts)They can be outstanding or awful and everything in between.
Today, they were outstanding.
tavalon
(27,985 posts)too bad for them.
7wo7rees
(5,128 posts)We bring you your meals.
We connect your calls.
We take out your trash.
We deliver your packages.
Do not fuck with us.
BTW, stealing from thieves is not theft; it is recompense. ALSO: this is not a theft. It is a security breach to embarrass Stratfor.
It is a pantsing.
Anonymous declares war on War.
IamK
(956 posts)maybe a few high level's will "resign" with nice compensation packages....
Ian David
(69,059 posts)... that things weren't right?
That seems to be the usual way of things.
reorg
(3,317 posts)I'm not getting it. Some Stratfor reports might contain interesting information worth to be made accessible for free, but who cares about the client list?
drgoodword
(19 posts)Stratfor has consistently provided some of the best realpolitik political and military analysis on the web in their free content. While they no doubt have a lot of corporate and government clients, they seem to be a neutral party. Furthermore, as some reports on this incident have indicated, the credit card info stolen from Stratfor includes cards held by a lot of ordinary people. I'm not seeing the Robin Hood aspect of this hack/crack.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)reorg
(3,317 posts)No doubt their focus tilts towards what may be of interest to clients willing to pay the subscription fee, and I stopped reading their reports when they started buying into and using the language of the bogus GWOT narrative. If you expose their bias and provide counter-analyses, more power to you.
But what's the point in publishing the client list, which is the only "news" I can detect here? Why would anybody be surprised that large companies, media, universities are interested in a newsletter providing daily reports on the situation in foreign countries? The whole thing seems like a useless prank, made worse by the fraudulent credit card transactions. What a stupid waste of time.
IamK
(956 posts)They steal from targets of opportunity, then try to justify the target afterwards.....
Ian David
(69,059 posts)santamargarita
(3,170 posts)KansDem
(28,498 posts)Maybe Anon will now find that missing $700 million?
Shoe Horn
(302 posts)For some reason, that bit of undercooked info is missing.
Why would the ol 'MSM' want to make Anonymous seem like simple CC thieves?
Hmmm....
"Why, Santa Why?"
[img][/img]
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)Whoever used Stratfor deserves what they are getting.
drgoodword
(19 posts)From the NYT Tech Blog:
There were also questions as to whether the Stratfor attack was really the work of Anonymous. On Sunday, someone claiming to represent Anonymous posted a message on Pastebin denying responsibility for the attack: The Stratfor hack is definitely not the work of Anonymous.
The confusion escalated Monday night when a separate note on Pastebin claimed that the authors of the first post were Stratfor employees and that the post claiming the Stratfor hack is not the work of Anonymous is not the work of Anonymous.
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/27/questions-about-motives-behind-stratfor-hack/
This blog post also questions whether the real goal of the hack/crack was in fact the millions of emails on Stratfor's servers. No doubt these emails contain communications from confidential sources which provide information used as part of Stratfor's research and analysis. If the emails were the real target, this could even be a covert operation designed to both secure intel and expose sources, and at the same time discredit Anonymous by making them look like common cyber-thieves with the credit card info theft and use.
In any case, as I said upthread, Stratfor is an odd target for activists. Somethings here aren't quite fitting together...