4Chan Hackers Claim To Have Remotely Wiped John Podesta's iPhone and iPad (gizmodo.com) 269
An anonymous reader writes from a report via Gizmodo: For the past several days, WikiLeaks has been publishing thousands of emails belonging to Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta -- and the leaks are starting to cause some serious damage. Gizmodo reports: "Many of the leaked emails contained contact info, cell phone numbers, and account data, none of which was redacted by Wikileaks before being posted. With this information accessible to anyone with the time and energy to read through it all, users on 4chan's /pol/ (politically incorrect) board were able to gain access to Podesta's Twitter account, tweeting a message in support of Trump. Imageboard posters also stumbled on an email containing Podesta's Apple ID -- and appear to have exploited it. 'iPad/iPhone info and data wiped out,' a post on Endchan claimed, show screenshots of what seems to be the hacker gaining access to Find My iPhone using Podesta's credentials. If Podesta's Apple ID was compromised, it stands to reason that his iCloud account was similarly vulnerable. And sure enough, Redditor's on r/The_Donald claim Podesta's iCloud data was downloaded. A hacker known as CyberZeist also appears to have uncovered the passwords to dozens of senators' email addresses, as well as social security numbers and credit card info for many Democrats including Vice President Joe Biden, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, and acting Chair of the DNC Donna Brazile. The information was posted to pastebin.
personally, I think infosec jackass said it best (Score:2, Funny)
https://twitter.com/infosec_jackass/status/786357961794785280
More evidence... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Nyet!!!
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
change them all so the hackers can't get ya (Score:3)
I use "asswordP" myself. they'll never guess ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently Podesta's password is "password". That's why "the Russians" have all his email, you know.
no his password is "((((((password))))))" surely :P
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Bill uses two.
pleasef**kme and slickwillie
Re: (Score:3)
She changed it. It's now 'withacloth?'
Re: (Score:2)
Podesta is a lisp programmer?
Re: (Score:3)
The ((())) tag is used by alt-righters to signify somebody they're supposed to hate.
erm.. the ((())) is used to infer an SJW type echo chamber... btw i am not an Alt-righter , I just know a few of them.
Re: (Score:2)
He likely uses AOL like the rest of the government buffoons.
How long has Podesta's email been compromised? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? (Score:5, Informative)
Doubly so when iCloud password he was using was sent to him via email by one of his staffers... an email that was part of the Wikileaks dump: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-... [wikileaks.org]
Audit or not, if you have reason to believe someone has access to your stuff, best to change everything you can that might be referenced in that stuff (from a more secure device).
Re: (Score:3)
Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm surprised John Podesta hasn't been given a security audit by the campaign. Audit as in, replaced phone/email/computers with securely vetted stuff + had a security contractor audit and harden his accounts with better passwords/2factor/cleaning out cross referenced credentials.
These are people who can't be bothered with security when they're the Secretary of State for the USA - how much less do you think they'd care about the data for a political campaign?
Re: (Score:2)
I once worked at a defense contractor. "Company confidential" data was given more protection than official US govt. "Secret" data. So it wouldn't surprise me if the political campaign had better protection. If it doesn't, it means that they really just don't know what they're doing, and the defense of incompetence should be believed.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Given that the CIA director had an AOL account, and the average politicians is 60 years old and can barely use email let alone understand it. I just assume all politicians are idiots when it comes to tech in all forms.
I am Trying to tech a 63 year old now that he doesn't need to to print the PDF he received in his email, just so he can scan it to the file server. But he isn't happy without touching paper. And he earns twice what I do. Sure he knows a lot and has tons of practical experience. But damn g
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I just assume all politicians are idiots.
You didn't need any more than that.
Re: (Score:2)
My wife is measurably responsible for deforestation. She prints everything. She will literally print an email that has us both in the To: box to show it to me.
More annoyingly, she reloads the paper try to print the second side of paper so when I actually need to purposefully print something that has to be on paper, I will have to print it twice to get it on paper that doesn't have some email on the other side.
Re: (Score:2)
Deforestation happens mostly to graze cattle or grow other crops. Paper is mostly made from wood grown with sustainable forestry practices.
Think of it this way: trees consume carbon dioxide. Anything that encourages the growth of trees on 'managed land' (i.e. forestry for pulpwood) is good for the environment. Or at least neutral.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm in my mid 60's. And I know one hell of a lot more infosec than these clowns. Really, it's not hard. What is even easier is to hire some young'in or even a well known security firm and have them create a security structure for everyone. You can spend ten million dollars on a friggin commercial, you can spend a couple of million on security.
Maybe even get a Blackberry. We didn't have these problems when BB's were all the rage, did we?
It's all Apple's fault.
Re: (Score:2)
But part of the trouble is that just because someone advertises himself as knowledgeable doesn't mean he *is*. And if you don't know an area it's quite easy to get given a snow job.
Re: (Score:2)
I get invoices on my personal domain by email in
Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:5, Insightful)
The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.
In any case, the failure to redact phone numbers and other personal information suggests that Wikileaks cannot really be regarded as a reasonable way to leak data.
Finally, I suspect that the one-sided nature of the leaks is upsetting many people who would otherwise support Wikileaks.
Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:5, Insightful)
That does not excuse the bullshit that is in the Wikileaks emails. Many of us on the left where not planning on to vote for that warmonger in the first place but at leaks at the convention quite literally nuked any chance of support by many of us progressives. They made their bed, they can lay in it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You already knew that the DNC liked team-player, loyal soldier Hillary rather than independent, more-interested-in-protesting-than-governing Sanders. The e-mails conclusively proved only that. They did not show that sanders was cheated.
Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:5, Interesting)
Perhaps not the convention. In California, the night before the primary election, there was an announcement on the news that Clinton had won. Guess what, turnout of Democratic electors was lower than expected. And the claim that Clinton had already won: false. Was that false claim an accident? I don't think so.
Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:4, Funny)
In California, the night before the primary election, there was an announcement on the news that Clinton had won. Guess what, turnout of Democratic electors was lower than expected. And the claim that Clinton had already won: false. Was that false claim an accident? I don't think so.
Maybe that was the Russians too. Man those guys are everywhere.
Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:2)
Trump.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Why would anyone want to vote for someone simultaneously as corrupt and stupid/incompetent as clinton?
She's of the same cloth as bush 1/2 and Obama.
The last thing this country needs is another bush/Clinton dynastastic royalist idiot in office. Any office.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe it's the perception that she's corrupt, malicious, dangerous, untrustable and/or downright evil.
The FBI compromising their own integrity to protect her hasn't helped, either with public perception of her or in demonstrating that she hasn't broken the law.
She is a very experienced politician, a very smart and hard-working person, and an extremely honest (as far as politicians go) individual
Now that's just naive.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No doubt Trump supporters are chuckling at your realization of this... the same thing Republicans have known for ages about most of the media.
Or are we to believe it was pure coincidence that an 11 year old Trump tape came out just 48 hours before the debate, and that just days later, several publications had interviews with some of the victims?
It will be interesting to see/hear what other bombshells both sides have been sitting on for all of this time.
Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:5, Insightful)
We know it was held. The tape was from an NBC show. How did NBC get scooped if it was from their own show?
Answer: they held the tape back and were planning on releasing it closer to the election. When the Wikileaks leak happened, "someone" leaked the tape to the Washington Post, which published immediately.
So, yes, we know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the "p***y" tape was released to cover up the Wikileaks leaks.
I still find it weird how a guy saying "pussy" in private is worse than a literal rapist who raped multiple women, but I'm not a Democrat, so what do I know about faux outrage.
Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:5, Insightful)
The word 'pussy' isn't the problem. The problem is the word 'grab'.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Since he's talking about groping women he's never met before, explain how they grant consent.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
He doesn't have a chance. There is literally no precedent in the modern era of a candidate coming from as far behind as Trump is less than a month out. He's done, finished, kaput, and he seems to know it, as he transforms his campaign into some sort of bizarre attack machine lashing out at everybody and everything.
The reality is he never had a chance, and I doubt he ever believed he did. But a lot of rather angry people and some pretty incompetent competition during the Primaries handed probably the most un
Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps if Trump hadn't publicly bragged about doing what he is now accused of, his campaign wouldn't be crashing and burning.
Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:3, Insightful)
Publicly bragged while being accidentally recorded on a hot microphone that he wasn't aware of, while a borderline sleazy Access Hollywood guy egged him on with the "wink wink, elbow elbow" giggity routine off camera, supposedly in a trailer? I'm no rabid Trump supporter, but it's not like he was saying this stuff while at a campaign stop in Iowa.
Re: (Score:2)
The fact was he was bragging about sexual assault.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
When was grabbing women's genitals perfectly alright? And why are you an apologist for sexual assault? Have you no morals? Are you a sociopath?
Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:5, Insightful)
When the woman consents, maybe?
Trump was talking about how he was famous enough that women would let him "grab them by the pussy" (as he put it), not that he runs up and grabs random women. He was bragging about how attractive women found him and what they'd let him do.
I find it amazing how "outraged" people pretend to be about Trump saying the word "pussy" but how they flat-out don't care about a serial-rapist ex-president whose wife, as a defense attorney, helped get a rapist off by attacking the character of his victim.
But go ahead, go continue to pretend to be outraged about Trump saying "pussy" while refusing to acknowledge the victims of the Clintons.
Re: (Score:2)
Bragging about sexual assault that there is no firm evidence he committed. He was being a showoff. He is/was enough of a celebrity that women would actually throw themselves at him, so he didn't have to 'take' anything.
Which is beside the point. The hard evidence of sexual assault and a spouse who enabled it and attacked the victims to help her 'man' is with the Clinton couple. What a couple they have been.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Bragging to an "Access Hollywood" Reporter, on an "Access Hollywood" bus, right before shooting an "Access Hollywood" walk-in.
Then, the recording was kept for 11 years.
I'll agree that he never intended those comments be published, but saying it was "accidentally recorded on a [...] microphone that he wasn't aware of" is a bit of a stretch.
Re: (Score:3)
Perhaps if Trump hadn't publicly bragged about doing ...
The main thing I got out of it was: He said
- he'd made a pass at a married woman,
- she'd turned him down,
- and he took "no" for an answer.
What a pity the Clintons don't seem to do that. ... what he is now accused of,
It's the last four weeks of the campaign. There is no longer time for the truth of accusations to come out before election day. Now is the time when, historically, dishonest politicians and/or their supporters hav
Re: (Score:3)
No he just bragged about walking in models in various states of undress, grabbing women's genitals, and expressing his sexual attraction for his own daughter. He's a real genius alright.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah yes, the "sexual assault and depravity" crowd is out to support Donald "Cosby" Trump.
Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:4, Funny)
Trump has never said anything so stupid [...]
Err... have you been watching the same campaign as the rest of us have?
Re: (Score:2)
It's a lot like the Cosby scandal. A famous rich guy sexually assaults women for decades, gets away with it precisely because he's a rich celebrity, and even when some hint of scandal gets out, no journalist dares pounce on it for fear of the fires of legal hell raining down on them, thus encouraging the rich celebrity to continue behaving in that way.
Well, Cosby got outed by just a handful of accusers, and once you have a few, when you're dealing with a long-term sexual molester, well the dam bursts. Now i
Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:5, Funny)
The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests
That one candidate is doing enough leaking from his own mouth for it not to matter?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, like they will ever be anything other than an establishment megaphone. That's the only reason they even exist.
speaking of one-sided....
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Or maybe it's one-sided because one of the candidates is a crook
Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:4, Insightful)
The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.
Welcome to the real world. Wikileaks has ALWAYS had an agenda, but that was fine for some people when Assange was targeting those they disagreed with. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, it's suddenly a problem.
In any case, the failure to redact phone numbers and other personal information suggests that Wikileaks cannot really be regarded as a reasonable way to leak data.
You're kidding, right? If you're leaking data, you should redact it before you give it to someone else to do with whatever they please, because who is to say that the non-redacted data won't accidentally leak, much less purposefully?
Finally, I suspect that the one-sided nature of the leaks is upsetting many people who would otherwise support Wikileaks.
See point one above. There are plenty on the right these days cheering them on, because many of those people are hypocrites, too.
Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:4, Insightful)
>Wikileaks has ALWAYS had an agenda
Don't they just leak anything and everything they can get their hands on? And do not themselves get the leaks, just publish them? I don't think they are hacking Hillary campaign leaders themselves, or turning down juicy leaks from Trump.
Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:4, Interesting)
They used to edit the leaks before publishing them, but various governments have been applying pressure on Assange and on their finances and on any journalist that works with them, so now due to lack of resources they just dump everything.
In other words, attempts to shut down Wikileaks have only made the leaks that much worse.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you feel that way when Wikileaks was putting out U.S. military secrets, but not the military secrets of Al Qaeda, or China?
Re: (Score:3)
That's my point. Wikileaks only has what they're given, and people only complain about "one-sided leaks" when it's their side. The bias comes from the democrat fanboy, not from Wikileaks.
Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if Wikileaks had a bias, what's wrong with leaking the info of careerist establishment politicians?
Whatever Hillary is in relation to Trump, in absolute terms she's still a bought and paid for member of the establishment.
Re: (Score:2)
Whatever Hillary is in relation to Trump, in absolute terms she's still a bought and paid for member of the establishment.
And so is Trump.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, but after November he's just another tax-dodging, whoring member of the tasteless new money class.
Clinton will be President, which makes exposing her dirty laundry more important.
Re: (Score:2)
More like being whacked with wet lettuce at this point.
It might just be me, but over time it just seems the conspiracy theories about Clinton are just sounding more and more shrill and false. If those guys want to keep at it, then let them, they are only making a rod for their own backs.
Re: (Score:2)
The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.
I think that was the case from the beginning.
Are you coming to this realization just now?
When have they ever redacted anything? (Score:2)
I can't find any solid evidence of them EVER doing that?
A quick search shows something from the pentagon in 2010 which also has myth debunking stuff saying that never happened.
Re: (Score:2)
Not everyone has the same number or size of skeletons in the closet. It is just possible that Trump is not a multiple felon, or alternatively that he was competent at getting rid of the evidence. There is no reason that Hillary or Podesta could not of deleted all of this incriminating evidence from their own devices long before anyone hacked them.
Re: (Score:2)
The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.
In any case, the failure to redact phone numbers and other personal information suggests that Wikileaks cannot really be regarded as a reasonable way to leak data.
Finally, I suspect that the one-sided nature of the leaks is upsetting many people who would otherwise support Wikileaks.
Two possible reasons for this:
Insiders are doing the leaking
RNC break-ins happened and aren't interesting, exposing corruption isn't fun if there isn't any
Also note; conservative thought did not do SJW twat-juice battle against Anon and 4chan trying to enforce political correctness. i.e. they aren't angry at the RNC yet.
You are right, this is vindictive. Deliciously so.
Re: (Score:2)
The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.
Like Assange?
The US has been after him for years, all under Obama's administration.
Suppose Assange has appealed to Obama for leniency. Obviously, leniency hasn't happened.
Now suppose Assange approaches Hillary. And for whatever reason, she doesn't want to deal. Maybe she doesn't want to be tarnished by a relationship with Assange/Wikileaks coming out. Maybe Assange tried to blackmail her or force a deal, threatening to leak information if Hillary doesn't call off the hounds when she gets in.
What
Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:5, Interesting)
The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.
The murder of Seth Rich, along with the rumor that he was Wikileak's source for the DNC leaks, puts Assange in a tough position. Whether Seth WAS his source or not, public perception that Wikileaks sources may be killed and their leaked information thus suppressed could make his sources dry up.
To counter this he has to create the perception that, if you try to plug the leak by plugging the source, it will result in the leaks being more extreme and damaging, rather than less.
One way to do that is to publish more than would normally be published, and redact it less.
Perhaps that is what is going on: As with rule 804, where hearsay from a deceased person becomes admissible, insuring that leaks from (or perceived to be from) a murder victim are extreme might help make murder of leakers less likely.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:4, Interesting)
Doesn't matter who it is, failure to redact passwords, phone numbers, etc, is just wrong.
As my wife said:
"THEY read all of OUR communications. Why shouldn't WE read all of THEIRS?"
Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:5, Informative)
Well, you have Russian Trump on one end and Obama/Clinton picking a fight so they can blame the Russians. They're already talking about executing retaliatory cyber attacks (at least they're giving Russia advance warning). This might not evolve into a WW3 but with ISIS almost dead, the American leadership needs a new enemy.
Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? (Score:5, Funny)
If only Wikileaks had something on Trump so we could find out what he really thinks about women.
The Obvious Conclusion: (Score:5, Funny)
Those b-tard trolls on 4chan have always been tools of Putin and the Russian government, and they are trying to tilt the election!
Let's investigate the history of finance links between Moot and the Russians. Has he ever attended FSB (He's not old enough for KGB) training? ;) (for the blindly humor impaired)
Re:The Obvious Conclusion: (Score:5, Insightful)
So back when a 4chan user hacked Sarah Palin's personal email [wikipedia.org]... the hacker was doing the bidding of the Russians?
No doubt the Russian's were angry at the news that she could see them from her house!*
*Yes I know it's an SNL line, still useful at rare times like this.
Re: (Score:2)
Would you want Sarah Palin peeping in your back window? Sounds pretty creepy to me.
And Russia blocked 4chan 2 years ago (and 4chan blocked all of Russia for a time this year due to a DDOS).
Obviously this is all just a cover to throw us off the scent!
Re: (Score:2)
See! You just confirmed Moot's financial link to them!
It was all a conspiracy, I tell you!
Is this it? Is this how it begins? (Score:2)
...and so starts WW III
Or maybe it's just a storm in a teacup. Can't say quite yet.
Re: (Score:2)
The German side of WWII was started by a false-flag attack on a radio station and a suspicious fire on the Reichstag building. Minor things on their own, but were leveraged into a full invasion of Poland, and well, you know the rest.
Obama has previously declared that cyber intrusions may be dealt with in meatspace with real weapons. Given all the recent hubbub about supposedly russian h4xx0rz, would it truly be beyond reason that this could escalate hidden in plain view?
I used to think the tinfoil brigade
Re: (Score:2)
It would be nice if people trying to make historical comparisons actually had some knowledge of history. First of all, it was five and a half years between the burning of the Reichstag and the invasion of Poland. Second of all, Germany had in fact been planning the Second World War since the 1920s, when the Weimar Republic employed the supposedly disbanded General Staff as "civil servants" so they could spend their days planning for the lightning campaigns that would later become invasions of France and Rus
little people may dispense with encryption now (Score:2)
It's funny all the politicians railing against encryption so they can foil the next terrorist plot.
(or spy on their not-so-loyal significant other(s)).
But when THEY get hacked they'll need some strong encryption to prevent it for themselves.
Because they are big people-- much smarter than us-- that make the world go round.//end of sarcasm
Given the level of discourse it seems inconceivable that any party (other than libertarians) have given 1/2 a thought to what
nefarious legislation the three letter agencies
I find this pretty hilarious (Score:2)
Fake news to distract from stuff that matters (Score:5, Informative)
This is irrelevant. Hacked people supposedly got hacked again...
For actual news about the leaks you should go:
https://www.reddit.com/r/DNCleaks [reddit.com]
https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/575e37/new_wikileaks_podesta_emails_part_five_673_more/ [reddit.com]
https://twitter.com/wikileaks [twitter.com]
Sample:
Best Podesta leak pair: 1) HRC stating in 2014 that the Saud+Qatar govts fund ISIL and 2) Qatar giving Bill Clinton $1m for 5 minute meeting
ABC Exec Ben Sherwood Pledges "Any and All ABC Platforms" to Help Hillary.
CNN's Donna Brazile, now head of DNC, tipped off Clinton campaign about debate question
Algeria Donated to the Clinton Campaign in order to get off the Terror Watchlist, according to Joe Scarborough
Waiting time. (Score:5, Interesting)
Fake news, already debunked (Score:3)
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/786653209825861633 [twitter.com]
No they didn't. We checked that the credentials had already been changed.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't the link through some guy named Goldstein, and dates back to 1984?
Re: (Score:2)
That's why mine is 123456.
Shhh. (Score:5, Funny)
My password is ********. Seriously 8 *s, No one will ever guess/
Re: (Score:3)
My password is ********. Seriously 8 *s, No one will ever guess/
That looks like hunter2 on my screen. How did you know my password!?!?
Re: (Score:3)
Make sure your password is unbreakable, like 12345
obligatory spaceballs clip.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
So in other words, both acts are unimpressive and require no technical skill, but also both are illegal.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Why?
Genuinely curious.
Will their task somehow become easier if they "get the job" and win office? If they can't even handle *running* for office what makes you think they can handle the actual job?
As soon as THEY leave US alone (Score:3)
LEAVE THE DNC ALONE!
I'll be glad to leave them alone - as soon as they leave US alone.
Given their past behavior, I doubt they'll EVER do that.