Anonymous Leaked Account Data for 4,000 Bank Executives on a Government Website

Anonymous Leaked Account Data for 4,000 Bank Executives on a Government Website

gizmodo.com

After hacking up government websites last week, and the week before, Anonymous has pulled off another hack to push their agenda of reforming computer crime law in the wake of Aaron Swartz's suicide. This time, they've leaked names, addresses, and other information about over 4,000 bank executives. And they did it all on a government site.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Hi all sry if this has been posted I didnt see it
Some bankers are gonna be pissed about this if the info is true.. Im on the fence with Anonymous, but I gotta admit I love seeing them go after bankers..

Looks like the site they leaked it on is now down.. it was on the official Alabama Criminal Justice Information Center website..

The leaked info includes titles, addresses, phone numbers, emails, ID numbers, and hashed passwords of the affected bank executives, and while that may seem sort of tangentially related to computer crime reform, that's how Anonymous has been spinning it.[ex/]

gizmodo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

edit on 4-2-2013 by goou111 because: (no reason given)

Anonymous is a very evil group. People think they are cool just because they go after the government. But what about the 1000's of people that become victims in the process.
Seriously I can give you many reasons why 'Anonymous' is evil but it will probably break the tnc's.

What groups such as LulzSec and Anonymous do is attempt to stop the average person having a choice at all. In engaging in a Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack against a business, so-called hacktivists are not promoting freedom: they are using force to promote their views, and removing the choices other people would have made.

It’s one thing to attempt to convince people to change their view – but there are many ways of doing this. Some of the recent non-violent rallies against Walmart (in response to a sexual discrimination lawsuit) in the US are examples of one, non-dogmatic approach.

Force and coercion do not create freedom – they only create fear, uncertainty and doubt.

LINK

But what about the 1000's of people that become victims in the process.

huh?

ill tell you what idiot people tell me when i talk about government tracking and monitoring.

"if you havent done anything wrong, you've got nothing to worry about"

i hope every last one of those crooked CEOs gets a nice sodomizing from their cellmates

Now that Anon have stepped up their game once again, I believe they are on thin ice. As is the government that wants to introduce bills to censor the internet. Right now they are in a tug-of-war for the opinion of the general public.

If Anon manages to get enough attention and educate the masses into what is going on behind these shady curtains then they will certainly be a force for 'the greater good', which in my eyes, is a censor free internet and a government that is free of corruption (fairytales right?).

IF however the government gets there first and manages to persuade the general public that Anon is 'dangerous', which I think is rather difficult since most of their action seems to be denial-of-service attacks which as far as I am aware do little to no damage but is regarded more of a 'message'. However acts like these, with actual 'victims', this time bank executives, is just further proof for the government to use AGAINST anonymous.

I just hope the people make the right choice.

Its rather funny how so many people say that the government can pull off a 9/11 yet they can't even get rid of a small group of computer hackers.

Strikes me as a bit out of balance. Either the government is all that or they aren't.

reply to post by Spookycolt


That's the beauty of computer security. There seems to be an antidote to almost everything. Look at countries with very strict internet laws such as China or North Korea. Even people there manage to keep the government on it's feet when it comes to this topic and this is no different to the situation in the western world.

They find a flaw, it gets fixed, they find another flaw, it gets fixed. It's a never ending game and the people in charge of security always seem to be a step behind.

Originally posted by Swizzy
reply to post by Spookycolt

 

That's the beauty of computer security. There seems to be an antidote to almost everything. Look at countries with very strict internet laws such as China or North Korea. Even people there manage to keep the government on it's feet when it comes to this topic and this is no different to the situation in the western world.

They find a flaw, it gets fixed, they find another flaw, it gets fixed. It's a never ending game and the people in charge of security always seem to be a step behind.

The reason the security experts are always and will always be a few steps behind, is they get a salary. This means they have money to spend, a wife to "cuddle", children to take care of, a house and bills to pay etc. That takes up alot of time.

The hackers are mostly 100% commited to what they do, nolifers with very little money to spend as a consequence, giving them more time to find exploits and dig around on forums/irc with fellow hackers. More time to find the truth and educate themselves then the wage-slaves opposing them.

My question is why? Why post all the executive banker information? And who got there hands on it? We in America know there is a long lie of money that encompases the entire world. No matter what type of view you take, conspiracy or not.

So they stepped up there game and released executive banker addresses and personal info.... Have any of these bankers gone missising or vanish since the time they posted? Will it be used at a later time? I see no rise for surprise.

Might as well of uploaded there grocery list. I want to know what type of food is going to be the end of the bankers.

Don't know for sure what I think about this sorts of things, on one hand it seems fair that those who usually keep us in the dark are just a little exposed. On the other it could also serve to hasten the process for internet regulation..

Another thing I don't like is that the hacker group anonymous is confused with what anonymous used to represent on the internet, the faceless mass of internet humanity, very clever of them but is serves the MSM well too. Same word for two different things makes it very confusing.

reply to post by sulaw

To keep them on their toes I think, to inspire a little insecurity in those who probably feel very secure in their financial bubbles, hopefully it will remind them of world outside that space where the 99% lives.

Wait, just who compiled this list of bank executives and their financial info? Did Anon compile it, or was it already sitting around somewhere for them to "steal?"

Originally posted by jazzguy

But what about the 1000's of people that become victims in the process.

huh?

ill tell you what idiot people tell me when i talk about government tracking and monitoring.

"if you havent done anything wrong, you've got nothing to worry about"

i hope every last one of those crooked CEOs gets a nice sodomizing from their cellmates

To bad they always seem to be exempt.

Anonymous always reminds me of Batman, lol. The hated vigilante going after TPTB, while the media demonizes them.

I like keeping up with all of the Anonymous news, because it's more entertaining than any reality show. It's like a real-time comic book about hackers. Good stuff!

"Because Anonymous is the hero the world deserves, but not the one it needs right now. So, we'll hunt them, because they can take it. Because they're not our hero. They're a silent guardian. A watchful protector. A Dark Knight."

Originally posted by inj3ct0r
Anonymous is a very evil group. People think they are cool just because they go after the government. But what about the 1000's of people that become victims in the process.
Seriously I can give you many reasons why 'Anonymous' is evil but it will probably break the tnc's.

What groups such as LulzSec and Anonymous do is attempt to stop the average person having a choice at all. In engaging in a Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack against a business, so-called hacktivists are not promoting freedom: they are using force to promote their views, and removing the choices other people would have made.

It’s one thing to attempt to convince people to change their view – but there are many ways of doing this. Some of the recent non-violent rallies against Walmart (in response to a sexual discrimination lawsuit) in the US are examples of one, non-dogmatic approach.

Force and coercion do not create freedom – they only create fear, uncertainty and doubt.

Anon is hardly evil, they may stop you from buying the latest 'widget' on the internet for a few hours, but evil

The sensationalist article you linked to was regarding Anon's attack on Paypal and Mastercard etc back in 2011. This DDoS was in direct response to these institutions decision not to allow fundraising for Wikileaks (how things change in a couple of years ) which was probably at the request of Gov.

I like Anon's stance on a lot of things in principle, but when I step back and think about it for a bit I realise that a lot of what they say is idealistic and simplistic at best. For instance, Anon are presently attempting to make DDoS an act of free speech, they liken it to a 'virtual sit-in', this is in itself a dangerous move as its not only Anon who make use of DDoS.

Last year Russia was severely attacked in the run up to the elections - the sites attacked were anti-Putin and it could easily be argued that the originators of these attacks were government backed and sanctioned.

Force and coercion do not create freedom – they only create fear, uncertainty and doubt.

I can think of many governments who've been pushing this particular agenda for years.

BUT when they go for the bankers I'm fully behind them and screw the consequences - they deserve EVERYTHING thats coming their way.

They do some things that are good. They went after Scientology which I wish they would do more of. That organization is the personification of evil.

Originally posted by Grimpachi
They do some things that are good. They went after Scientology which I wish they would do more of. That organization is the personification of evil.

They also brought to light the corruption in the Steubenville rape case, it could be argued that they have hurt the prosecution, but no more so than sweeping it under the rug would have done......

The problem stems from thier Anonymity however, anyone can be "Anonymous" which means that eventually someone is going to get the idea to do something truly evil wearing a V for Vendetta mask and then the Government will have a new boogeyman terrorist group to wage war on no matter how much they deny the person who did the evil deed was one of them......

reply to post by Severin

I like Anon's stance on a lot of things in principle, but when I step back and think about it for a bit I realise that a lot of what they say is idealistic and simplistic at best. For instance, Anon are presently attempting to make DDoS an act of free speech, they liken it to a 'virtual sit-in', this is in itself a dangerous move as its not only Anon who make use of DDoS.

Ddos is a form of peaceful protest. No different than a crowd turning up outside a bank to protest. The only difference being is one is digital in nature and the other analogue. We are now seeing hackers getting longer prison sentences than rapists. Something is wrong.

Originally posted by Darkphoenix77
The problem stems from thier Anonymity however, anyone can be "Anonymous" which means that eventually someone is going to get the idea to do something truly evil wearing a V for Vendetta mask and then the Government will have a new boogeyman terrorist group to wage war on no matter how much they deny the person who did the evil deed was one of them...

I think you've hit the nail squarely on the head there. In its present form Anonymous is so easy to demonize and I'm sure the spin doctors in government are working hard to this end.

reply to post by Spookycolt


yea right. They can't be both incompetent and brilliant. It's got to be one or the other.

I notice that conflict arises often in conspiracy memes.

Originally posted by purplemer
Ddos is a form of peaceful protest. No different than a crowd turning up outside a bank to protest. The only difference being is one is digital in nature and the other analogue. We are now seeing hackers getting longer prison sentences than rapists. Something is wrong.

I agree wholeheartedly with what you are saying, it is a legitimate form of protest in my opinion, but the other side of the sword is that it can be used as a tool of political oppression in the wrong hands as I mentioned in my previous post.

Here are more details on it...Anti Kremlin Attack