Vanguard Defense Industries Hacked By 'Anonymous'

reply to post by AnonymousVan


Awh yea. Anon is kicking #in' ass.

This is to all fellow Americans: I'd be careful downloading any of those Vanguard files if you are in America because I'm sure it's only a matter of time before they track down IP's that were leeching the file...Basically if you were to be caught sharing or in possession of Confidential material you would more than likely be considered a terrorist or Conspiracy against the Government or maybe even Treason. So justa heads up this stinks of a trap

reply to post by highpriestess


I was replying to this comment:

yeah, why in the sam hill would he have a gmail account?! gmail is for people that can't afford the internet in the first place. ISPs provide an email address associated with the ISPs name. bizarro.

Which is blatantly untrue.

I had a look at a few of the e-mails on a link provided in the pastebin for this release, and although messages in the inbox seemed to say they were sent to his gmail, messages in the sent items said they were sent from his vdi email address. Additionally there are messages in folders, which is not even possible on gmail. Unless they somehow converted labels into folders, which seems unlikely to me.

I suspect that the emails released are a combination of gmail and vdi emails, but I haven't downloaded the full release to confirm. If there were company (and secure) emails on his gmail account then that alone is an incredible level of stupidity on his part. The whole thing definitely seems odd.

My point was simply that gmail, and webmail in general is not just for people who can't afford the internet.

May I remind everyone that the Indian government couldn't crack Blackberry Messenger. Oh, and there is no shortage of smart people in India.

If you handle sensitive data, you do it on FIPS rated systems.

Using gmail in general is stupid. The Gmail man reads your email.

www.youtube.com...

For those who have made the ill-advised decision to download the documents in question, the follow-up most ill-advised thing you could do is talk about it in a public forum.

Please. Keep it to yourselves.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
For those who have made the ill-advised decision to download the documents in question, the follow-up most ill-advised thing you could do is talk about it in a public forum.

Please. Keep it to yourselves.

Absolutely

Originally posted by TheStev
reply to post by highpriestess

My point was simply that gmail, and webmail in general is not just for people who can't afford the internet.

ok, i gotcha. i thought you meant that it wouldn't be uncommon for someone to use webmail for business, when your business deals with highly sensitive information. thanks for clarifying. all good.

reply to post by Enlightenme1111


Internet legislation is coming with or without anon. The whole point of Anon is to force the governments hand so when the net legislation comes the people will be paying attention and see it. Without Anon the legislation would pass in the middle of the night and be in effect before anyone knows. This way people are watching and will take a stand.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord

I agree 100%


Now to everyone else. This Anon info being leaked can be tracked. It is easy to be labeled a terrorist when you are in possession of stolen files. Stay away from Anon and all Anon related files. If you choose not to you may end up sitting in Gitmo. Don't say you weren't warned.

Just have to point out that Vanguard was not hacked at all. If the story is even true at all, then they hacked G-mail. And I can guarantee that a company like Vanguard does not use g-mail as its mail service. And furthermore if some company official had classified material on his G-mail account the hack by anonymous is the least of his worries. His next few years will be spent in federal “PMITA” prison.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Enlightenme1111

 

Internet legislation is coming with or without anon. The whole point of Anon is to force the governments hand so when the net legislation comes the people will be paying attention and see it. Without Anon the legislation would pass in the middle of the night and be in effect before anyone knows. This way people are watching and will take a stand.

No. The internet legislation is easier to pass when you have false groups like anonymous attacking the internet. They would not pass such legislation, "in the night", as you say because it is such an impacting law. Please stop playing the American citizen's for fools. I know I'm not anonymous when I make these posts, and I don't care. I'm simply taking a stand for what I believe, and if that means punishment in this country, then that is also another wake-up call.

reply to post by Enlightenme1111


No.. it will never be hard to pass.
Think about all the liberty trashing legislation that has gone through without anything like anonymous. It will happen with or without. At least this way it will get national attention and be highly disputed.

The majority of Americans are fools. Look what we have let out country come too. That isn't because we are brilliant. It's because we enjoyed so much success earlier that we could afford to be dumbed down. We got too comfortable. Now we are uncomfortable, restless, and waking up.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Enlightenme1111

 

No.. it will never be hard to pass.
Think about all the liberty trashing legislation that has gone through without anything like anonymous. It will happen with or without. At least this way it will get national attention and be highly disputed.

The American citizens have been lied to so much. The patriot act was passed under the spell of 9/11. When the mind is tricked, it's easy to follow. This isn't 2001. Most honest folks are well aware of the trick now. You speak so confidently, as if you know the legislation would pass, which tells me it's a script, and money is the ink.

reply to post by Enlightenme1111


You sincerely think it wouldn't?

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


No one listen to this guy. He is obviously some sort of Anonymous lacky hell bent on starting a false flag operation to make Alex Jones look bad and protect the reptilians! I bet he even rigged the ATS poll to make Ron Paul lose! Nothing about this fella feels right... I'm going to have to contact a mod.

I've already read the confidential wikileaks files so I am already guilty.

Password security is a real problem. Everywhere.

reply to post by hadriana


I must admit I thought the same thing when I read SO's post. Not really any different from reading the wikileaks docs in principle.

No internet control law will pass without an immediate threat to the security of the public. I realise some of these hacks have endangered law enforcement officials, but in the eyes of most people (and technically) these are agents of the government, not part of the public.

That said, there's enough buzz and enough awareness that it would only take one serious attack on the public for the people's opinion to swing in favour of tighter internet controls. I just can't see that attack coming from Anon, as they only (mainly) seem to be targeting government and government affiliated organisations. That's why they've got my respect.

reply to post by Enlightenme1111


you never went to school and just like replying with an uneducated opinion, right ?

Clever!

These rat traps are getting more sophisticated and irresistible.... When all of their traps have reached full capacity.

Expect them.

reply to post by Domo1

You nailed it! Just heard about 20 minutes ago that this "Vanguard Defense Industries Hack" was BS. Apparently the FBI and Interpol's Cyber Crime Centre used Vanguard to bait groups out especially AntiSec. Our first clue was that the hack claimed to get into "sensitive files" but it was restricted to Gmail and vdicorporation.com addresses. First off, defense contractors in the U.S. are prohibited from using gmail as a corporate governance issue due to the lack of security protocols. Secondly, we checked out vdicorporation.com email and that is a "bravenet.com" hosted platform. Once again prohibited from use by defense contractors. I read some of the emails and they look more like press releases and the "schematics" are also BS. Those are specification sheets which have been on their website since early 2010. Honestly, I'm not sure at all at this was AntiSec to begin with but it sure drew a lot of mates out into the open via IP addresses. Lesson learned, If it seems too good to be true then it probably is! I'd keep a very low profile for a very, very long time.

Cheers!