Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Wednesday August 19 2015, @01:30AM   Printer-friendly
from the find-your-own-torrent dept.

Multiple reports suggest that Impact Team has leaked around 9.6 to 10 gigabytes of data from the "cheating/affair website" Ashley Madison onto Tor sites (now available via BitTorrent). According to Ars Technica:

A 10-gigabyte file purportedly containing e-mails, member profiles, credit-card transactions and other sensitive Ashley Madison information became available as a BitTorrent download in the past few hours. Ars downloaded the massive file and it appeared to contain a trove of details taken from a clandestine dating site, but so far there is nothing definitively linking it to Ashley Madison. User data included e-mail addresses, profile descriptions, addresses provided by users, weight, and height. A separate file containing credit card transaction data didn't include full payment card numbers or billing addresses.

Rob Graham, CEO of Errata Security, said the dump also included user passwords that were cryptographically protected using the bcrypt hashing algorithm. That's among the most secure ways to store passwords, because bcrypt is extremely slow, a trait that requires crackers to devote vast amounts of time and computing resources. Still, it's highly likely a large percentage of the hashes will be cracked, given rampant use of weak passwords.

Ashley Madison officials have stopped short of confirming the published information was extracted from the breach.

"We have now learned that the individual or individuals responsible for this attack claim to have released more of the stolen data," they wrote in an e-mail to Ars. "We are actively monitoring and investigating this situation to determine the validity of any information posted online and will continue to devote significant resources to this effort. Furthermore, we will continue to put forth substantial efforts into removing any information unlawfully released to the public, as well as continuing to operate our business."

Previously: Adult 'Extracurricular Activity' Website AshleyMadison.com Hacked


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Disagree) by CirclesInSand on Wednesday August 19 2015, @03:12AM

    by CirclesInSand (2899) on Wednesday August 19 2015, @03:12AM (#224758)

    Marriage is not a legal contract.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   0  
       Disagree=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Disagree' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday August 19 2015, @03:19AM

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday August 19 2015, @03:19AM (#224762) Journal

    Care to make an affirmative statement* on what exactly you think marriage is?

    * the opposite of stating what is not

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 2) by CirclesInSand on Wednesday August 19 2015, @06:33AM

      by CirclesInSand (2899) on Wednesday August 19 2015, @06:33AM (#224851)

      If someone said "gravity is when things move towards the ground" and I said "no, it is not", would you respond with a full request for scientific definitions of gravity, with a full explanation of general relativity? Or do you think marriage is less complex than gravity?

      So no, I wouldn't care to pretend to give a decisive definition of marriage, that would be pretentious.

      To move from "there are legal contracts imposed on marriage" to "marriage is a legal contract" is tremendously unsound. Do you really think that marriage evolved in humans after legal contracts? If a judge said "oh you didn't fill out the paperwork properly, you aren't married" would you expect married people to just shrug their shoulders and go their separate ways in life? I realize it's human nature to support cynical statements, but that doesn't make them true.

      • (Score: 1) by szopin on Wednesday August 19 2015, @07:41AM

        by szopin (5710) on Wednesday August 19 2015, @07:41AM (#224874) Homepage Journal

        Funny you mention that, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consummation [wikipedia.org]

        'in some legal systems a marriage may be annulled if it has not been consummated. Consummation is also very relevant in the case of a common law marriage.'

        What you seem to be arguing is that people choose to live in pairs, for which no legal contract is needed indeed. But marriage is actually defined as a contract (confirmed by someone, whether religious person or civil servant, that makes it legally binding, or would you assume that two people telling each other they love one another is marriage?)

      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday August 19 2015, @09:11AM

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday August 19 2015, @09:11AM (#224891) Journal

        To move from "there are legal contracts imposed on marriage" to "marriage is a legal contract" is tremendously unsound

        I like this much better than a simple "legal matter has nothing to do with marriage" (I couldn't discount such an interpretation of your first reaction).

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
  • (Score: 2) by gnuman on Wednesday August 19 2015, @03:22AM

    by gnuman (5013) on Wednesday August 19 2015, @03:22AM (#224765)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage [wikipedia.org]

    Marriage, also called matrimony or wedlock, is a socially or ritually recognized union or legal contract between spouses that establishes rights and obligations between them, between them and their children, and between them and their in-laws

    • (Score: 4, Interesting) by CirclesInSand on Wednesday August 19 2015, @06:20AM

      by CirclesInSand (2899) on Wednesday August 19 2015, @06:20AM (#224846)

      If some authoritarians got all kinds of laws passed saying "You are allowed to have sex on Thursdays and Fridays, but no other day. And you get a tax break for having no sex for a week. And you are only allowed to have sex in certain ways." That doesn't make sex a legal institution, it just makes everyone who considers it a legal institution an asshole.

      Similarly for marriage, imposing a disgusting amount of legal codes around marriage doesn't make it a legal contract, it just makes the supporters of this assholes. If all the lawyers, legislators, and police in the world died, many of us wouldn't consider that marriage has changed at all. For those who do, I really pity you.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 19 2015, @06:37AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 19 2015, @06:37AM (#224854)

        When have there not been legal codes around marriage? Sometime pre-Old Testament, I guess?

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 19 2015, @10:41AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 19 2015, @10:41AM (#224912)

        If you want the state to recognize you're married, there are certain procedures you must follow. If you want some personal marriage, you're to get it. Why can't there be both?

        But frankly, all of the legal benefits you get with marriage shouldn't be limited to marriage.

        If all the lawyers, legislators, and police in the world died, many of us wouldn't consider that marriage has changed at all.

        It wouldn't change for me either. It would remain as some worthless social ritual that I'll never participate in.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 19 2015, @04:49AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 19 2015, @04:49AM (#224801)

    Marriage is not a legal contract.

    The fuck its not. Its a legal contract by definition. Thats why the government is involved. Its sure as shit not anything else, like anything at all to do with religion. The only reason marriage was pushed as a religious thing was to assuage women's potential issues with the fact that they were literally being bought and sold like property.

    • (Score: 2) by CirclesInSand on Wednesday August 19 2015, @06:08AM

      by CirclesInSand (2899) on Wednesday August 19 2015, @06:08AM (#224840)

      If everyone in the government died, and a disease spawned which killed anyone who asserted governing authority 200 milliseconds after making the claim; even then people would still get married.

      Governments are not necessary for marriage.

      The fuck its not. Its a legal contract by definition.

      I could just as easily say: "You're wrong. By definition." That's the thing about definitions. You can choose your own, but you'll only be talking to yourself.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 19 2015, @11:01AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 19 2015, @11:01AM (#224919)

    You're right. Neither party offers anythig to the other in the wedding vows. Likewise, neither party accepts that non-existent offer (don't be fooled by the words "I do", "do" is just legalese jargon that means nothing). Likewise, neither party intents the marriage to be legally binding, that would be absurd. And finally, neither party has anything of value invested in the deal, so there's no consideration either.

    And finally, the most damning proof that marriage is not a contract is that the phrase "marriage contract" has never ever been uttered, written, or otherwise communicated.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 19 2015, @12:13PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 19 2015, @12:13PM (#224934)

    Yes, it is. You can live together as couple and do everything married people do without being married. And you can live separately as if you were single despite being married.

    Being married is a legal contract, and only a legal contract. Note that entering a legal contract can very well be a very emotional thing. But that doesn't change its nature as legal contract.