Soooooo, reading someone's password then using it is "hacking" now?
Yours,
Schwim, Master Hacker
Soooooo, reading someone's password then using it is "hacking" now?
Yours,
Schwim, Master Hacker
Maybe I'm misunderstanding something because no one here has mentioned the obvious:
Did we acquire the full unredacted set of his emails ?
Seriously, wouldn't this be kind of huge news if we suddenly had access to the evidence they tried to hide? Too bad this is a news article and someone probably changed the password by now.
There's no news on it and I have to assume it's because if that is the full unredacted email there's probably a ton of CSAM. If so it's technically illegal to own and anyone who is downloading it might be opening themselves up to arrest or legal challenges, even if they're a journalist.
I would presume IF this is a full release of the Epstein GMail account, and IF it's not a honeypot op of some kind from CIA/IDF/SVR/whoever, and IF it's legit... then this is big. Nearly all American news orgs have been gutted though, and I doubt any billionaire that owns the news orgs would be ok with having their wealthy cohort exposed.
Whoever might be investigating this would almost certainly keep quiet until all of their ducks are in a row because the second they publish, they're going to be arrested for CSAM. Unless they're in a country with no extradition treaty with the US. And even then they'll be subject to extraordinary rendition cause Trump don't care about US law, why would the lack of an extradition treaty stop him?
It's ridiculous that evidence of the crimes they committed is going to be used to arrest anyone who tries to uncover evidence of who committed those crimes. By ridiculous I don't mean I don't think it will happen. I think you are right about that.
I mean, I know there are some people who would definitely do the wrong thing and that's why it needed to be released carefully to avoid this kind of mess and why normally this kind of digging would be done by the government or trusted investigators, but it's troublesome because the established power structure (regardless of party) are some of the same people who committed these crimes and we clearly can't trust them to do the right thing.
From what I remember, the guy said that not much was left and most of the emails were deleted
Nobody hacked anything
People found account credentials and tried using them. Nothing nhogh tech here
Many hackers agree that the best way to hack someone is through social engineering to just have them tell you your password.
My favorite is when this security researcher showed on camera how she did it. She took out her laptop and pulled up a soundboard. She pretended to be mom with a crying baby, and begged the customer support to change her account email and reset her password. When they did try to ask for some verification, she played the baby crying sound effects louder. Feeling bad for her, they did what she asked and she "hacked" into the account.
Its technically hacking due to it not being your account. Unauthorized access.
Hacking is very wide and can include things like this. It does not have to be as technical, hard or clever as most gatekeep it to be.
Source: 20 years of experience in the space
ex. password stuffing brute force is hacking
Unauthorized access to a computer system is hacking. It's trespassing.
This comment should be deleted soon
All I can see is *******
yep, no matter how many times you type hunter2, it will show to us as *******
So every other child rapist's name gets redacted but they can't even do a scan for passwords?
They were so busy hunting for the rapists they completely forgot about passwords......or we've got some decent folks weaponizing "incompetence"
I'm convinced they used AI to redact everything, and didn't double back and check them until after a particular page made headlines.
I've seen numerous videos where they program a script to remove the 5-6 different ways "redactions" were added and they make no sense from a technical stand point, leaving me to believe that someone non-technical told AI exactly how they wanted to redact, and then put those files in their outbox.
They uploaded the Bash 3.3 reference manual and even that had some redactions so your theory is almost definitely correct
Apparently the word “don’t” can also be found redacted.
Because they did a regex for Don(.)T and didn’t bother to check
They did bother to check, they are just sloppy. It seems like it's more that one slipped through the cracks. There are plenty of unredacted "don t" in the files. Looks like they did blanket redactions of "Don T" (and other Trump related names) and then went through manually and unredacted false positives to cover their tracks. But they missed one. It's still a smoking gun, though, as there's literally no reason to redact "don t".
The mods have posted a followup about this: https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/1qwt4pb/epstein_deleted_posts_and_our_thoughts_moving/
*******
Huh?
Let's see some names. Time to burn these sadist pedo billionaires.
Surprised a Lemmy instance doesn't have it honestly
If they'd stop talking about Linux or posting furry porn for a minute they would.
/s
No /s needed here
The hacker should send Trump an Epstein Island invite ... the old pedo pervert may have a stroke from it.
top 50 comments