Extremely scuzzy website hacked

[pchang]

Because most of them don't know how.

[Elok]

Well, first you have to host a file that size--about 40 million entries, if the hackers are telling the truth. It can be broken down alphabetically, of course, but even with a LOT of breakdowns you're talking ten thousand entries or more per file. Second it has to be readily available for any bozo looking for it, without being taken down by lawyers from AM and/or the government. Third it has to be easily searchable--I don't know if there's any technical barrier to doing Ctrl-F with a file that size, but most people are not even that tech-savvy. Bear in mind this particular group of people were in a sense selected for lack of savvy, insofar as all the ones who are justified in their suspicion married people who gave their real names and financial information to a world-famous provider of socially illicit services. Fourth you have the disincentive factor attached to all illegal info transfers: they're natural vectors for malware. Fifth, this is going to be a temporary thing; unlike, say, naked pictures of Jennifer Lawrence, these bulky-ass files are only going to be interesting enough to propagate so long as they stay in the media. I give it four, five weeks tops. Sixth, the sheer number of flop-sweating adulterers out there practically guarantees that there will be scads of people vigorously scouring the net to take it down. Probably the overwhelming majority will never be caught.

EDIT: Seventh, the info is being released in small clumps by the hackers responsible. The story will likely be old news long before they get around to releasing all the info, let alone by the time someone compiles them into an omnibus.

[BlackCat]

(are suspicious wives going to download all the revelations in an enormous Access file and query for Hubby?)

It's quite funny that you apparently belives it's the husbands that join that site - I wouldn't be surprised if more that 50 % were married women.

[pchang]

Based on papers prepped for their IPO attempt, women don't have to pay. Thus, it is unlikely they have CC data to be hacked.

[Elok]

It's quite funny that you apparently belives it's the husbands that join that site - I wouldn't be surprised if more that 50 % were married women.

I think of promiscuity as more attractive to men in general, since it's substantially more dangerous for women, but of course I could be wrong. Certainly there have to be a large number of unsatisfied women on there for the company to stay in business, unless they're catering almost entirely to closeted gay guys. Anyway, I don't see the average wronged husband being significantly better at sifting databases than the average wronged wife.

[Dauphin]

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-33592594

Famous adultery-facilitating website Ashley Madison has been hacked. The hackers claim they have basically everything, including credit card numbers and sexual fantasies, and intend to release it in bits and pieces until such time as the site is shut down. Most interestingly, they claim to have information even on users who paid to delete their accounts--AM kept some of their information back. Comments on a security site linked to by the article suggest that perhaps they kept billing info to prove someone had paid to have their account deleted, which sorta defeats the whole point. Dunno. The hackers, as usual, posted a long manifesto explaining their reasons, which AFAICT boil down to:

A. That 'delete' thing is fraudulent.
B. You guys are all *******s and deserve this anyway.

Probably both are true, though I feel obligated to say, reluctantly, that yes, the hackers should be prosecuted.

I would have thought it would boil down to:

1) ****s and giggles - bragging rights in their community and the resulting general smugness. They simply chose a target that few people have sympathy for and so the story is less about the hack and more about the victims business.

Or 2) the hackers used the site and didn't get any like they were promised and wanted revenge, or their partner used the site and they want revenge.

[Elok]

Well, yes. I should have said "purported reasons." I meant both were true in that they likely didn't delete data properly and anybody who signs up for adultery is by definition something of an *******. Whether or not they quote-unquote "deserve" this is a more complicated matter, especially since I don't really believe in the whole idea of desert.

[BlackCat]

I think of promiscuity as more attractive to men in general, since it's substantially more dangerous for women, but of course I could be wrong.

That's your cultural "training" speaking, not your knowledge about women.

[Elok]

What, that it's more dangerous for women? Of course it is. Men are seldom raped by women, don't get pregnant, and are far stronger on average. This is setting aside cultural factors, which I assume are different in Denmark, not that it matters since AM is hosted in America. Finally, there's the matter of payoff; a man can have a fairly incompetent sexual partner and still get off, not so for a woman. Promiscuity makes more "sense" for men. But like I said, I don't know whether the statistics reflect that.

[I AM MOBIUS]

So, in the other thread Elok was being a racist douchebag, and in this thread he's being a sexist douchebag...

[Sava]

he's an idiot

par for the course

[BlackCat]

What, that it's more dangerous for women? Of course it is. Men are seldom raped by women, don't get pregnant, and are far stronger on average. This is setting aside cultural factors, which I assume are different in Denmark, not that it matters since AM is hosted in America. Finally, there's the matter of payoff; a man can have a fairly incompetent sexual partner and still get off, not so for a woman. Promiscuity makes more "sense" for men. But like I said, I don't know whether the statistics reflect that.

Do you really think that when women go hunting, that their first worry are that they may get raped ? That will probably be their way last if they give it a thought at all.

Concerning the "payoff"- I bet that most married women are quite accustomed to not getting something, so I think they consider it a benefit when they get it with a stranger.

Women is just as (if not more) promiscious than men.

[giblets]

Rapists probably post ads on Cragslist instead of paying to join an adultery website.

edit:

A McKinney man convicted of sexually assaulting a woman who responded to his Craigslist apartment ad will spend 20 years in jail.

Roger Stulce Jr., 41, received the maximum amount of time in jail from a Collin County judge on Friday. Stulce will also pay a $10,000 fine.

Stulce was convicted of raping the woman who had subleased an apartment from him by a jury earlier in December.

Stulce posted the ad on Craigslist, offering the woman free rent at a McKinney apartment in exchange for housework.

When the woman responded and met him, he raped her. Stulce was arrested in June 2012.

Stulce also faces three other sex assault charges involving similar allegations that date back five years.

http://www.fox4news.com/story/24316109/mckinney-craiglist-rapist-gets-20-years-in-jail

[Elok]

Okay, is this argument going anywhere? I've already conceded that my post was based on a largely unconscious assumption which may or may not be reflected in facts. I don't care enough to dig up said facts, assuming they exist. If you do, more power to you. If not, this appears to be a somewhat roundabout way of haranguing me for not sharing your beliefs about . . . something. Women? Feminism? Culture? As we've never exactly been best buddies, I'm not going to wear myself out trying to redeem myself here.

Xpost

[BlackCat]

As we've never exactly been best buddies

Please explain - my opinion of you is that you are one of the more sane posters here.