More nude photo leaks

[Matthew Jabour]

Why? What compels a person to take a picture of themselves naked? Surely, if you wish for someone else to view your naked body, you could show them the real thing?

Now, that's perfectly okay, there's no law against being weird, but why store them in unsafe places? Don't get me wrong, it's a sex crime to leak these things, but I would think, after taking a nude photo, you might put a little effort into concealing it? Because everyone should know by now, the digital world is not very secure.

When it was just the iCloud, that was reasonable. You have to store your photos somewhere, and it's not unreasonable to assume they would be safe with Apple. But now Snapchat? Come on, who could ever think that would be a safe place to store lewd photos?

Now, I won't lie: I have some photos on my phone that I would not like to see the light of day. But I put effort into making sure they don't see daylight. People are entitled to privacy, but in this day and age, you have to put some work towards that goal. Use some common sense, just like with those folders on your desktop marked 'stuff'. And unless you absolutely need to - say, for example, to draw in a yardstick for comparison - don't use Snapchat.

 

[LarsInCharge]

Why? What compels a person to take a picture of themselves naked? Surely, if you wish for someone else to view your naked body, you could show them the real thing?

Now, that's perfectly okay, there's no law against being weird, but why store them in unsafe places? Don't get me wrong, it's a sex crime to leak these things, but I would think, after taking a nude photo, you might put a little effort into concealing it? Because everyone should know by now, the digital world is not very secure.

When it was just the iCloud, that was reasonable. You have to store your photos somewhere, and it's not unreasonable to assume they would be safe with Apple. But now Snapchat? Come on, who could ever think that would be a safe place to store lewd photos?

Now, I won't lie: I have some photos on my phone that I would not like to see the light of day. But I put effort into making sure they don't see daylight. People are entitled to privacy, but in this day and age, you have to put some work towards that goal. Use some common sense, just like with those folders on your desktop marked 'stuff'. And unless you absolutely need to - say, for example, to draw in a yardstick for comparison - don't use Snapchat.

My friends (who were dating at the time) swapped nude pics for when they weren't able to see each other for long periods of time. So I understand why people do it.

The thing is, they have every right to do it and expect those images to be protected (especially since this is another case of them deleting the images and the site storing them anyway).

 

[Matthew Jabour]

Why? What compels a person to take a picture of themselves naked? Surely, if you wish for someone else to view your naked body, you could show them the real thing?

Now, that's perfectly okay, there's no law against being weird, but why store them in unsafe places? Don't get me wrong, it's a sex crime to leak these things, but I would think, after taking a nude photo, you might put a little effort into concealing it? Because everyone should know by now, the digital world is not very secure.

When it was just the iCloud, that was reasonable. You have to store your photos somewhere, and it's not unreasonable to assume they would be safe with Apple. But now Snapchat? Come on, who could ever think that would be a safe place to store lewd photos?

Now, I won't lie: I have some photos on my phone that I would not like to see the light of day. But I put effort into making sure they don't see daylight. People are entitled to privacy, but in this day and age, you have to put some work towards that goal. Use some common sense, just like with those folders on your desktop marked 'stuff'. And unless you absolutely need to - say, for example, to draw in a yardstick for comparison - don't use Snapchat.

My friends (who were dating at the time) swapped nude pics for when they weren't able to see each other for long periods of time. So I understand why people do it.

The thing is, they have every right to do it and expect those images to be protected (especially since this is another case of them deleting the images and the site storing them anyway).

Of course, they have every right to do it. But it's well known that most data is never really deleted, especially with cloud storage. All software has flaws, and eventually something will be leaked. At this point, it's almost naïve to take a picture, upload it to some central database, and then assume you can just make it disappear.

 

[Don Incognito]

At this point, it's almost naive to purchase something with a credit card, and then assume that your account is safe.

This is the world we live in. Take nude pictures, don't take nude pictures, whatever. The onus isn't on them to make sure their pictures are safe; the onus is on the assholes not to steal them in the first place.

 

[PdYyP1iWeJaWBnlafPe4]

The thing is, they have every right to do it [...]

That's the best part of a free country!

[...] and expect those images to be protected (especially since this is another case of them deleting the images and the site storing them anyway).

If you post something on Facebook, and then delete it later (say, 1 week from now), is it deleted? Are you sure? Do you know their tape backup procedure? Do you know their restoral process and how they account for deleted users?

If not, how can you say you expect these things to be deleted? Or is on a misunderstanding of what the internet is? If so, shouldn't more effort be put into educating users about how the internet works rather than demonizing security flaws that are bound to happen thanks to development by human beings?

-----

I just tell my friends, "the internet is relatively safe, but assume whatever you post will be leaked and used against you by everyone you know." It's neither factually correct nor factually wrong, the Schrödinger of Internetz, if you will. Education will stop these issues faster than secure systems.

 

[PdYyP1iWeJaWBnlafPe4]

Why? What compels a person to take a picture of themselves naked?

... Surely you meant to ask why people feel compelled to hack into online storage sites and troll them for nude photos of celebrities to release to the public? No? You just want to blame the victims for even taking those pictures in the first place? *disappointed sigh*

Captcha: Pipe dream

It certainly seems to be with a lot of people, captcha, it certainly seems to be.

Oh come on that is so intellectually dishonest and you fucking know it.

Surely you meant to ask why people feel compelled to use insecure systems and then ***** when security flaws are found? No? You just want to blame the developers for not finding every single security flaw in the first place?

YOU CAN'T LEAK THAT WHICH DOESN'T EXIST.

Even incompetent governments know this...

 

[laraem]

Why? What compels a person to take a picture of themselves naked?

... Surely you meant to ask why people feel compelled to hack into online storage sites and troll them for nude photos of celebrities to release to the public? No? You just want to blame the victims for even taking those pictures in the first place? *disappointed sigh*

Captcha: Pipe dream

It certainly seems to be with a lot of people, captcha, it certainly seems to be.

Oh come on that is so intellectually dishonest and you fucking know it.

Surely you meant to ask why people feel compelled to use insecure systems and then ***** when security flaws are found? No? You just want to blame the developers for not finding every single security flaw in the first place?

YOU CAN'T LEAK THAT WHICH DOESN'T EXIST.

Even incompetent governments know this...

Huh? The blame is on the hackers (which is what the post you quoted said) not the devs (which you pulled out of thin air) and certainly not the victims.

 

[LarsInCharge]

The thing is, they have every right to do it [...]

That's the best part of a free country!

[...] and expect those images to be protected (especially since this is another case of them deleting the images and the site storing them anyway).

If you post something on Facebook, and then delete it later (say, 1 week from now), is it deleted? Are you sure? Do you know their tape backup procedure? Do you know their restoral process and how they account for deleted users?

If not, how can you say you expect these things to be deleted? Or is on a misunderstanding of what the internet is? If so, shouldn't more effort be put into educating users about how the internet works rather than demonizing security flaws that are bound to happen thanks to development by human beings?

-----

I just tell my friends, "the internet is relatively safe, but assume whatever you post will be leaked and used against you by everyone you know." It's neither factually correct nor factually wrong, the Schrödinger of Internetz, if you will. Education will stop these issues faster than secure systems.

Let me ask you something. Do you own any property whatsoever (a game system, a computer, a car, a house, etc)?

If so, why are you taking the risk of owning it when it can be stolen at anytime. Obviously if any of it is taken, it is your fault for not protecting it better.

Oh wait... no that's bullshit. When you use any system, you place faith in that system to protect you. The blame for this goes 150% to the hackers.

 

[LarsInCharge]

Why? What compels a person to take a picture of themselves naked? Surely, if you wish for someone else to view your naked body, you could show them the real thing?

Now, that's perfectly okay, there's no law against being weird, but why store them in unsafe places? Don't get me wrong, it's a sex crime to leak these things, but I would think, after taking a nude photo, you might put a little effort into concealing it? Because everyone should know by now, the digital world is not very secure.

When it was just the iCloud, that was reasonable. You have to store your photos somewhere, and it's not unreasonable to assume they would be safe with Apple. But now Snapchat? Come on, who could ever think that would be a safe place to store lewd photos?

Now, I won't lie: I have some photos on my phone that I would not like to see the light of day. But I put effort into making sure they don't see daylight. People are entitled to privacy, but in this day and age, you have to put some work towards that goal. Use some common sense, just like with those folders on your desktop marked 'stuff'. And unless you absolutely need to - say, for example, to draw in a yardstick for comparison - don't use Snapchat.

My friends (who were dating at the time) swapped nude pics for when they weren't able to see each other for long periods of time. So I understand why people do it.

The thing is, they have every right to do it and expect those images to be protected (especially since this is another case of them deleting the images and the site storing them anyway).

Of course, they have every right to do it. But it's well known that most data is never really deleted, especially with cloud storage. All software has flaws, and eventually something will be leaked. At this point, it's almost naïve to take a picture, upload it to some central database, and then assume you can just make it disappear.

If you place money in a bank, and the bank gets robbed (let's face it, bank robberies happen a lot) do you blame the person for putting their money in the bank, since 5,000 bank robberies occurred last year (SOURCE: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/vc_majorthefts/bankrobbery) because in this age bank robberies are far more common than hacking incidents?

 

[PdYyP1iWeJaWBnlafPe4]

I own a car and a computer. The car is insured. The computer is not, but I do have my sensitive info encrypted and backed up to private & undisclosed accounts elsewhere.

My point with what I said was *not* to shift blame *off of hackers*, but to remind people that they have a responsibility for their actions. We are so far into the "that's victim blaming" mentality that we are so god damn close to reaching a government religion that absolves all individuals of personal responsibility, it's absurd. If your shit gets leaked, that's really fucking bad and you should sue. If your shit gets leaked, you should also know it couldn't have leaked if ... wait for it ... you didn't upload it in the first place.

When does it become "victim blaming" ? When 1% of fault is on the victim, 2%, 5%, 10%, 25%, 51%?? Where is the line? Do you *really* think state-sponsored hackers could give 2 flying fucks about you and your god damn feels if your account has sensitive info? Do you think anyone and everyone has your feels in mind with an attack? "You shouldn't drink and drive, you may kill yourself or innocents" ... somehow *that* is acceptable but "don't post things you don't want leaked online" isn't. Please fully describe the line and how exactly they are different, thanks

 

[PdYyP1iWeJaWBnlafPe4]

Because one is saying that you shouldn't engage in criminal behavior, and the other is saying you shouldn't engage in perfectly legal and understandable behavior because someone might target you as a victim of their criminal behavior if you do.

The point where it goes from sound advice to victim blaming is the point where you wait until after they are victimized to give them said advice, such as was done with the OP in this thread.

You're partly correct, imo (and it's only imo, so I could be totally wrong in your opinion).

Drunk driving is usually a local issue (different countries have different legal limits). However, does every country have the same law with regards to access to servers or files? If not, why are we ignoring the global aspect of how the internet changes law? If someone drives drunk in AUS, can a US individual have legal recourse? If an AUS individual hacks a server, does a US individual have legal recourse? I'm not saying that hacking/leaking private info is good under any circumstances.

But what I am pointing out is that drunk driving is a local issue whereas the internet is a global issue. When it becomes global, you have to account for actors outside of your judicial system. *That* part fails people.

 

[PdYyP1iWeJaWBnlafPe4]

No. Not at all. What I am suggesting is that you can't account for different laws in a different country on a physical road in the same manner as on the internet with countries that don't have the same laws nor extradition treaties. I'm sorry the internet is global and I'm sorry we're not under a NWO, but there are multiple countries with different laws and when they're all in the same space, they can be exploited (see: tax havens). Does it make it right? Not at all. Does it make it legal in that country? Technically, yes. Does that mean they're good people for exploiting the good nature of those they're exploiting? Fuck no, they're vile people. But that doesn't mean that gaps don't exist in knowledge and tech. The more we say, "that's victim blaming" the more we say, "education & responsibility isn't important".

Somehow people think taking personal responsibility means absolving the perp from their crimes. It doesn't. But it does inform you of actions for *next* time and for *others* whom are interested in how to avoid another's situation *before* laws and global social standards are corrected.

 

[PdYyP1iWeJaWBnlafPe4]

Again, wrong. You assume there is only 1 action possible as a response, and that is hilariously misguided.

* Why can multiple account access to financials be done over the internet for that company without more provisions?
* And if it is a bank, as a consumer, I shouldn't care too much since they're most likely FDIC insured and will offer identity theft monitoring services for free.

Does that mean that the bank is guilt free in what happened? Nope. They have security holes they need to fix. But luckily, that sensitive info is insured and protect by government regulations. Will those evil NK hackers be extradited before Glorious Leader kills them? Maybe, maybe not (most likely not). That's what you're trusting your tax dollars to fund: to protect against government and corporate sponsored attacks that threaten the (digital) infrastructure of our country. Can you show me your insurance for dick pics?

I just honestly cannot envision *any* scenario where private nudes are leaked and those that took the pictures (that never existed before their actions) to have 0% or less than 0% fault for those pictures (which never existed before their actions) being compromised by means of the most complex system of devices that has ever existed in the sum total of all of humanity for all time.

(hint: Polaroid + safe, or share public keys with your spouse)

 

[PdYyP1iWeJaWBnlafPe4]

I still don't see anywhere in there a response of "Corporations shouldn't own so much money in the first place if they don't want it to be stolen from them" as being a perfectly justified and understandable and reasonable reaction to something like that happening.

Funny, that.

Because you never asked about it. Would you like to make a question with regards to that?

 

[Jux]

I look forward to the day when stealing nude photos is looked at the same way as a pervert sitting in a tree taking nonconsensual pictures of people in their homes. These hackers are sexual predators, and should be treated as such.

 

[PdYyP1iWeJaWBnlafPe4]

Since you seem to have missed it, I said, and I quote:

Let me put it this way: If hackers from North Korea hacked into an online bank account of a multi-billion dollar corporation from America and stole millions of dollars from the company, you should be asking what can be done about these hackers from North Korea, not criticizing the corporation for having the money they stole in the first place.

Because you edited after the post. Come on here, let's be fair, ok?

I don't see how the $ amount has any relation. Foreign attacks can be brought up the chain of command from municipal to federal agencies with relation to foreign-sponsored attacks.

I think we're talking past each other. We both agree that those committing the attacks is pretty fucking despicable.

Where I differ from you is I believe that there is a non-0% fault to be attributed to those that performed the initial capturing of said property/images. It is by no means a majority percent, but it is still non-zero. This is similar to you seeing someone about to (possibly) drive drunk. You doing nothing isn't illegal, but you still did have a role in what did/didn't happen.

This is why I advocate for a dedicated educational class in school to explain the computers+internet. How data is stored, where it's stored, how it can be accessed, what is HTTPS, pub/sub relationships, social engineering, etc.

No matter how skilled the developer or sysadmin is, there is bound to be a weakness or exploit. If you are perfectly fine saying your entire system and architecture is immune from any and all attacks, please, by all means, use your platform for disseminating pictures (or nudes). Just remember, no matter what is posted on your system, it is entirely your fault and your fault alone for all weaknesses and exploits.

Exploits on a Polaroid are strictly physical. Once your Polaroid is created, you can show it to others, but without the negative, it can not be duplicated. If it is digital, it can be duplicated and transferred excessively easily. This material vs. immaterial difference is huge and changes many things.

Again, attackers are not correct. But people should understand the tools that they use before assigning blame.

 

[PdYyP1iWeJaWBnlafPe4]

Because you edited after the post. Come on here, let's be fair, ok?

... The part I edited was not that part, it was a whole separate paragraph made after that part. All of the paragraph I quoted of myself was kept 100% in tact and not edited in any way after the fact. So can you stop with the dishonesty, please?

And I notice the rest of your post also doesn't address my argument. Nice. But whatever. If you want to make a separate point completely unrelated to the problem I illustrated with the OP of this thread, go ahead, just stop quoting me and pretending like it's some kind of rebuttal to the argument I'm making.

I responded to you as soon as I saw that post. I did not see the additional paragraph. I refreshed post reply and saw it. Then I responded. Don't distort facts please. Thanks.

 

[SonOfAnarchy91]

Its not about sending nudes to people. These pictures were hacked from Cloud Services my qustion is why would save nude pictures of YOURSELF? Once you've sent the pic why on earth would you keep it? Are these people so narcissistic that they get off on looking at themselves naked?

Some of them ar being big babies about, Jennifer Lawrence especially. Saying that anyone who views the pictures are committing a "sex crime". Is she really so stupid? Why can't they all just laugh it off like Kaley Cuoco from Big Bang Theory? When she got asked about she just laughed and said "oh well whoever got them went through a lot of trouble to see me naked" and just shrugged the whole thing off not bitching and moaning like Jennifer Lawrence and even stupider Kelly Brook who gets her clothes off for a living!

I'm starting to think the whole thing is a HUGE Publicity Stunt. Because most people wouldn't even know about Jennifer Lawrences' pictures if she didn't say anything and made that big speech about how people looking at them are committing a "sex crime". Jen you're a celebrity if you can't handle alll the papparazi, news tabloids and the occasional photo leak then you should retire from acting all together, its obviously not for you. I think she's more mad that some of the pictures show what she really is a stoner idiot who's slightley bisexual and a bit of a nympho. If she kept her mouth shut the whole thing would have been forgotten about she only has herself to blame for making even more people aware of it.

 

[Fappy]

Thing is, people in general are not well informed about these things. A lot of these people simply don't think to protect something like this because, let's face it, it isn't your credit card information or something important like that. Who the fuck would want your random nudes? Trolls, apparently.

I think it's a good idea to teach people to be careful, but I find it silly that so many people are confused (some even mad) that these victims didn't know any better. Not everyone is as tech savvy as the people you regularly interact with online.

 

[PdYyP1iWeJaWBnlafPe4]

... Again, I ask, what does the second paragraph have to do with anything? The paragraph I quoted was the first one. The paragraph you responded to was the first one. The line I bolded and underlined was part of the first paragraph and was there when I first made the post, not edited in after the fact as you are trying to claim. In the future, you might want to make sure you have your facts straight before accusing someone of distorting them.

But for me, I'm done. If this is how you choose to debate people, if these are the tactics you use, you are not worth engaging and I will not make the mistake of doing so again in the future.

No, you see, I quoted your *original* post. I responded to your original post. My response was centered around NK and state-sponsored actors. Your additional paragraph (the 2nd paragraph), wasn't added until the edit which was after I had opened a new window to respond to. Your additional paragraph was never mentioned in my original or additional responses because I had already covered the first and merely pointed out that I did not reply to post-facto paragraphs.

As for your additional paragraph, I'll address it now...

Also, in regards to "informing you of actions for *next* time", I'm pretty sure they don't need people making smug, condescending "suggestions" that "maybe those servers weren't as secure as you thought they were" as the fact that their pictures were stolen from them already demonstrated got that point across far better than any suggestion made after the fact ever could, therefore making such suggestions completely unnecessary and unhelpful and do nothing more than add insult to injury.

This has nothing to do with anything. This assumes that the only time this is discussed with people is post-fact and not before-hand. That's a terrible assumption to make. I frequently remind my friends about internet issues because frankly, they don't have the same interest level as I do, but they know that I will inform them of really important things so they can keep being them, while still being informed. I would like them to inform themselves, but this is a semi-decent alternative.

Do you think that after an accident or manufacturing incident, someone says, "Shiiiiieeeet, guess the machine is fucked up, better fix it." and *not* look at the process that allowed a misengineered piece to enter the machine in the first place? No. When doing root-cause analysis, you look at *all* possible areas of exploitation and error (hacking/leaks), use facts, and debug until you find vulnerable sections (individuals) as well as the root issue (attackers).

This is not a zero-sum thing. The attackers are at fault. The victims could be better equiped in the future. Unless that is you leave everything unlocked with no keys anywhere. I mean, it can't possibly be your fault if you get robbed, it's only the robber's fault, and you leaving everything unlocked is 100% A-OK and no one should think anything lesser of you, you "protected" yourself "perfectly" you saintly individual you. No, people would say, "Holy fuck that sucks. Btw, this is the lock that I use on my door." It isn't to say, "omg this is your fault" but rather, "this is a mitigation strategy" and those mitigation strategies deter and (can) prevent attackers in the future (or in the first place).

Absolving individuals of all blame for their actions is such a slippery slope I really question society at large when that assertion is made. Oh well, I'll probably kill myself in the future so most wouldn't consider it a loss to society anyways, amirite?