Anonymous Takes Down Massive Child Pornography Server, Leaks Usernames

[kpete]

In a move that we can all get behind, hacker group Anonymous has announced that they have taken down a huge cache of child pornography and released 1,589 usernames of the website’s patrons. The action came as part of Operation Darknet, which targets illicit websites that are part of an unindexed and therefore unsearchable corner of the Internet.

The server in question is owned by Freedom Hosting, and apparently services over 40 child pornography websites. The largest of these, disturbingly called Lolita City, was said to contain over 100gb of child pornography.

.......................

According to their timeline, the hackers first became aware of Lolita City while leading a related campaign against a portion of the Hidden Wiki which included links to child pornography. While working to suppress the Hidden Wiki for linking to child pornography, the group turned their attentions to the websites linked on the Wiki. Through their investigations, they discovered that many of the sites shared a similar “fingerprint” in that they were supported and hosted by a company called Freedom Hosting.

The group then issued an ultimatum to Freedom Hosting to remove the content, or be shut down through their attacks. Freedom Hosting refused, and has since been the target of the hacker’s ire.

MORE: http://www.geekosystem.com/anonymous-child-porn-takedown/

[Zorra]

1. 1,589 usernames of the website’s patrons.

I don't care what the government says.

Anonymous rocks.

[justiceischeap]

3. Is it only usernames they've acquired or real names too?

I read the article but didn't follow any of the links.

[Ruby the Liberal]

22. One would think billing information was stored somewhere

and linked for account access purposes. Isn't like outfits like this are using disconnected systems like PayPal or Authorize.net (or one wouldn't think...)

[Swagman]

137. and what proof is there that there was such websites or 1589 users?

I recall the odious AG Gonzales claimed there were a "billion child porn sites" on the web.

These claims are easy to make and difficult to prove. I have no beef against Anonymous but I am always wary of the 'kiddie porn' sensations that so easily arouse people's passions.

This is just a 'report' without a scintilla of proof yet people are saying all sorts of things as though they know the details (ie-seen the proof )

and I know it's a tiresome concept these days but what proof is there that the 'usernames' are guilty of something ?..or does the concept of innocent unless proven guilty not apply in these cases.

[The Doctor.]

143. Just chill, a word of advice;

Don't worry, I'm sure your username wasn't among those released.

Feel better now?

[roguevalley]

139. ditto times a trillion

[pipi_k]

2. I haven't always agreed

with everything Anonymous has done, but this is excellent.

[michnied123]

57. ditto

but I do agree with almost everything anonymous has done.

[The Doctor.]

66. Serious question;

'What has Anonymous done that you did not agree with?'

I ask this only because it's likely that if you disagreed with it, it wasn't Anonymous.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

83. me three.

They are important to a civilized society, as is wikileaks.

[CountAllVotes]

4. Freedom Hosting

Gee I wonder who is behind (no pun intended) Freedom Hosting? Same suspects as usual dare I suggest? :grr:

:dem: :kick: & recommend!

[RC]

7. The FBI Sting Operations Division?

There I said it.

[jorno67]

12. Freedom Hosting?

Is that by the same people who brought us Freedom Fries?

[caveat_imperator]

49. Or whomever runs Freedom Works.

[greiner3]

85. Rush Limbaugh?

[yurbud]

86. like the guys that took their teen male prostitutes on a tour of White House in '89?

http://www.voxfux.com/features/bush_child_sex_coverup/franklin.htm

[Ohio Joe]

5. Nice headline but in the long run a stupid move

If anonymous were real hackers and really took the website out, that would be great but the fact is they are a bunch of script kiddies that use tools and tips readily available to pretty much anyone for their stunts. All they did here was take down a website for a little bit and then give it massive publicity. The scumbags will scurry off to another dark corner and take with them a crap load of new members who never knew they existed before or how to find them.

Yay script kiddies :sarcasm:

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[anamandujano]

28. New members to worry about their names going public?

Possibly not.

[Ohio Joe]

29. I don't think so

I don't see any names going public and I find it unlikely anyone would use their real name anyway.

[RaleighNCDUer]

37. How do you make an on-line credit card payment using a fake name?

Just curious.

[Ohio Joe]

40. The list is in post #32. No real names.

If they are/were a pay site, payment is done over secure site and not their regular servers. Script kiddies are not getting into that.

[boppers]

97. Uhm,... payment sites get exploited all the time.

You might be surprised at how few true air-gap systems exist, especially when the architecture of a system is designed by criminals who usually are (by definition) too lazy to follow existing laws and best practices.

[Swagman]

138. simple. You just stupidly buy something with your credit card as I

did in Thailand in a dodgy shop and then watch charges roll in for the next 2 months all over Asia.

Fortunately none were for porn sites.

Ever heard of Operation Ore in the UK ?.

[sabrina 1]

39. Yeah, they should have left it there.

As for 'script kiddies, I don't think HBGary thinks that anymore. Airc, they did sort of say something like that before they found out the hard way, that 'script kiddies' can uncover your corrupt, criminal activities if they put their minds to it.

My feeling about Anonymous is that they are not what they want people to keep thinking they are. So they are probably okay with your going along with that 'kiddie' image.

All I know is they are on the side of the people, and there are not many others who are. Certainly not anyone in DC.

[Ohio Joe]

43. No, they should not

They should have sent what info they got to someone who could actually do something about it. Instead, they just gave them a boatload of free advertising and sent them to a new hiding place. They accomplished nothing and only made the problem worse.

[sabrina 1]

45. No, they didn't. They exposed them, released their info

and now the FBI or whoever is supposed to do what Anonymous just did, FIND THEM, can do the rest. Citizen action, doing what citizens ought to do whenever they discover a crime in progress. The FBI can't be everywhere, I'm sure they appreciate the help fro Anonymous.

[Ohio Joe]

46. Show me those real names

A username reveals nothing.

[sabrina 1]

52. How does the FBI

usually get real names when people are using anonymous handles? They do it all the time. I'm sure if they want to now they have enough info to do so.

[Ohio Joe]

53. No, they don't

All that has been published is a list of user-names. They child pron people are now scurrying into another dark corner and hiding once again. Now... If they had not advertised what they had and turned it over to the police/FBI, something could have been done. An attention seeking stunt that did nothing.

[sabrina 1]

58. They have their server address.

What more is needed by the FBI?

[Ohio Joe]

59. Their new server address

Which they don't have. The old one points to a company in South Africa... Not much the FBI can do. No IP addresses for the user-names = No real names. Reality - There is nothing there for any law enforcement to go on. Anonymous gave them free advertising, sent them to a new hiding place and delivered nothing of interest. oh... Except for some headlines for themselves. Thinking people should see through it IMO.

[rhett o rick]

67. You seem to be going out of your way to disparage Anonymous.

Who's to say they didnt turn their info over to the FBI prior to going public including IP addresses of users. By going public they will put the scare into many of the users or potential users. I bet there are a lot of users working in sensitive jobs that will be scared off.

[Ohio Joe]

68. Anonymous are a bunch of phonies

Script kiddies that want to be hackers. A DDOS attack and entering servers through well known exploits with tools found on the web does not a hacker make. The sickos they "exposed" are used to moving from place to place, putting out their disgusting user-names will not scare a one of them. If they did notify someone and then a week later made it public, they are even stupider then I think because they fucked up any type of investigation.

Yes, I disparage them. I have no idea why anyone thinks they are doing anything useful. They make grandiose proclamations that never come to anything and people always gush over them as though they are doing something. Taking down someones website for 5 minutes is neither very impressive nor very useful.

[boppers]

102. Ah, I think I get it.

Pray tell, how would you define a "hacker"?

Oh, and FWIW, the site owner was handing out death threats because his clients got scared about being exposed. Perhaps you missed that.

[Ohio Joe]

114. You do not know the difference between a hacker and a script kiddy?

A sad state of affairs.

Death threats? Got a link?

[boppers]

118. LOL, I asked for your definition, you evaded the question.

You know how Mitnick broke into the San Diego Super Computer Center? He "DDoS'ed" a r-services auth server, and then issued auth credentials from his own controlled machines.

On the death threats, I'll look it up, it was a pretty hilarious chat when the site admin found his way to an IRC anon channel.

So, is Mitnick a hacker or not? RMS? ESR? thejester (however you leet his name)? Who would you call a "hacker" (hollywood hilarity doesn't count).

How do you define hacker?

Here's wikipedia's definition:
http://tinyurl.com/9egzbc

How do you define hacker?

[Ohio Joe]

122. What has anonymous done to deserve hacker status?

Nothing. Bring down a few web sites for a few minutes with DDOS attacks... hack-tastic. Use a few well known exploits... super-hack-tastic. Self promote themselves publicly with their brave efforts... yes, every hacker does that.

You should be ashamed comparing them to real hackers.

You are going to prove death threats by using anonymous irc channel... The self promoters... The ones who make claims then don't deliver... The ones who way overstate about what they have done and what they will do... Yeah... Sheesh.

[boppers]

124. Not all of anon deserves it. But not all of anon should be denied it, IMO

"You should be ashamed comparing them to real hackers."

No definition offered, again.

I guess it's pointless to find the IRC log, so I won't bother.

How do you define hacker?

You keep evading this question.

How do you define hacker?

[Ohio Joe]

125. What have they done?

You keep avoiding that question.

As for avoiding yours, you were able to name real hackers, you do not need a definition. You should though, why should anonymous be there?

[boppers]

126. "why should anonymous be there?" HBGary is my evidence.

1. Social hack.
2. Auth escalation hack.
3. Win32 hack.

And you still fail to offer any definition.

How do you define hacker?

You want some clay to mold it with?

How do you define hacker?

[Ohio Joe]

127. So they have done nothing

Get back to me if they ever do go beyond script kiddy.

[boppers]

128. Again, no definition from you.

This has become transparent for every human who reads these words.

Ever.

[Ohio Joe]

129. Again, nothing anonymous has done from you

Yes, very transparent.

[boppers]

130. Have you stopped beating your wife?

PS: How do you define "hacker".

[Ohio Joe]

131. I'm not married

Has anonymous ever done anything beyond script kiddy shit?

[boppers]

132. LOL

1. Already answered.
2. WHAT ARE YOUR CRIMES?!
3.:
Holden: Maybe you're fed up. Maybe you want to be by yourself. Who knows? You look down and see a tortoise, Leon. It's crawling toward you...
Leon: Tortoise? What's that?
Holden: You know what a turtle is?
Leon: Of course!
Holden: Same thing.
Leon: I've never seen a turtle... But I understand what you mean.
Holden: You reach down and you flip the tortoise over on its back, Leon.
Leon: Do you make up these questions, Mr. Holden? Or do they write 'em down for you?
Holden: The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over, but it can't. Not without your help. But you're not helping.
Leon: What do you mean, I'm not helping?
Holden: I mean: you're not helping! Why is that, Leon?

Holden: They're just questions, Leon. In answer to your query, they're written down for me. It's a test, designed to provoke an emotional response... Shall we continue?

4: How do you define "hacker"?

Turing test fail.

[Ohio Joe]

133. Still can't name anything they have done?

oh yeah... The dumb asses got arrested for a DDOS... hack-tastic!

[boppers]

101. They have multiple usernames. That's enough to get *some* of them.

Usernames get re-used, and any re-use of *any* of those usernames is now sniffable, and checkable on the wire, as well as in any logs of seized equipment.

Nab a few of them, offer "deals" in exchange for exploiting the perp's community trust, nab a few more, etc.

[cui bono]

61. They can track user name IPs. Most people probably aren't using proxies.

And I just read further down that a lot of email addresses were military and a lot of zip codes too. They can find the people without real names.

[Ohio Joe]

64. No IP's, No emails, nothing to go on.

Look for yourself at the list from anonymous in post #32. There is no way to track these people now.

[cui bono]

74. Oh... the post I had seen was a situation from 2010...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2175603&mesg_id=2177496

Are we sure there's no other info? Just user names?

[Ohio Joe]

77. Check the link at #32 yourself

A good opportunity wasted for self promotion, for once they could have done something and they blew it.

[2pooped2pop]

140. I agree

they did their part. The police can get the names and info that match those ID's. Keep it up Anonymous.

[boppers]

99. The people they could send it to are notorious for being corrupt.

If the list included, say, a name that led to KKKarl Rove, the case would vanish.

[wickerwoman]

65. Respectfully disagree.

What they did accomplish was to undermine confidence in the security of these sites.

There may be a hardcore group with the computer security skills to hide their activities, but I suspect the majority of patrons of these sites were depending on the security of the site to protect them from prosecution. Now that it's been shown that the system is vulnerable, I bet a large number of people are thinking twice about going to these sites.

It's not going to wipe out child porn on the internets but it is going to scare away a lot of the customer base.

[Ohio Joe]

75. Non-sense

These scumbags are not overly concerned with their web site security, they are bare bones operations ready to move quickly to another dark site. Nothing was accomplished when something could have been.

[wickerwoman]

89. It's not the people running the site, it's the people visiting them.

The people running the site may be able to quickly and easily move them. But the people who visit them aren't necessarily as tech-savvy and the fact that getting caught means jail time and very likely being unemployable and socially shunned for the rest of their lives would tend to make them cautious about participating on sites where there is any chance that something might be traced back to them.

If nothing else, Joe Kiddyporn-Newbie will probably think a few more times about what he types into his search engine, where he signs up for memberships, who he gives his credit card details to, and what he downloads. And that's a good thing. Child porn only flourishes because people think there's a fairly good chance that they can access it anonymously without getting caught. Reduce that certainty, and reduce the number of people willing to risk it.

[Ohio Joe]

92. It is easy to join pretty much any site anonymously

Even DU can be joined without giving them your real information, just mail in a money order. If it was even a pay site, it was certainly set up giving people exact instructions on how to join without giving personal information.

[boppers]

104. DU doesn't require payment to join, FWIW.

Oh, and your suggestion about "mail in a money order" works poorly to maintain anonymity, unless you're laundering through the human equivalent of proxies... money orders often involve locations that usually have cameras. Oh, and you can't repeat your human proxies too much, because those proxies then become the next point in the chain that gets observed. (This, BTW, was bin Laden's tactical mistake, regular re-use of a proxy).

[Ohio Joe]

105. To get a star you have to pay

I thought that was obviously what I meant but I guess not. A money order is easy enough to get without a proxy or camera getting you.

[boppers]

109. Wrongo.

I've had several stars over the years. Never paid for one of my own.

See how that works? The source of the funds is detached from the recipient/user.

[Ohio Joe]

110. Someone paid, they are not free. Nice game though.

Let me know if you ever get any facts.

[boppers]

113. Sure!

Fact one: You were wrong about having to pay for DU.
Fact two: You were wrong about having to pay for your own star.

[Ohio Joe]

115. Games Games Games

You know what was meant but please, keep showing your ignorance.

[boppers]

119. Well, I'm psychic and all, of course!

I knew that I would think that.

IN THE FUTURE!

:evilgrin:

[Marrah_G]

100. Seems like you really, really hate them

I can understand not agreeing with them, but you talk about them like they stole your wife or something.....

Yikes.... relax.... since you think they are just harmless kiddies, why get so worked up. It's just the internet :)

[Ohio Joe]

103. nah, I don't hate them

Just spreading the truth about them. I actually agree with a fair amount of their goals but they make claims that are not true about themselves as well as what they are doing/are going to do. I don't see why so many have this blind faith in them when they have delivered nothing and proven nothing.

[boppers]

106. "delivered nothing and proven nothing"

Here you go:
http://tinyurl.com/266ttj

I suppose the arrests made are because nothing has been done? Is that your chain of thought?

[Ohio Joe]

107. Arrests were made because they commited crimes

Breaking into someones seever is a no-no, even when you use readily available tools to do it.

[boppers]

112. Is it more than "nothing"?

You set a pretty low bar, there.

[Ohio Joe]

116. Nothing compared to what they promise to do

But still a crime and committing a crime does not mean one accomplishes anything.

[boppers]

120. Wow.

"committing a crime does not mean one accomplishes anything."

Well, it seems to indicate that one has accomplished a crime.

[Ohio Joe]

123. ok... They have accomplished being dumb asses

So... They have that going for them.

[Enthusiast]

142. Spread the truth about some heinous

right wing group, there's plenty of them around. You've kind of hijacked the entire thread. We were all kind of cheering the idea that 'one of ours' accomplished something good and here you come to throw a blanket on it.

[The Doctor.]

72. Still don't know what Anonymous is, do you?

These may have been 'script kiddies'.

And I agree, this might have been pointless. Although the scumbags were more than just 'mildly inconvenienced', it is likely they have far more exposure than they can survive.

This is an action consistent with 'Anonymous', which is not 'kiddies' or 'people' or a 'group'.

You're still behind the curve on this.

[Ohio Joe]

76. What has anonymous done beyond script kiddy stuff?

Nothing, nadda, zilch. They talk a good game, I'll give them that but they accomplish nothing.

[The Doctor.]

79. You keep saying "They".

That makes a fact of your lack of understanding.

I'm not going to disagree that, right now, most of what we've seen is 'script kiddie' stuff.



Still, you have no idea just what this is. Your words prove it.

[Ohio Joe]

82. I understand what they want people to believe about them just fine

It has all been hype though, they have done nothing to back up the words. If they do, I'll change my tune and admit I was wrong but until they do more then script kiddy shit and claim their might, I'll not buy into it.

[boppers]

108. Hmmmm... I sense a familiar pattern...

Do you know what "Bull Baiting" is?

[The Doctor.]

141. This is so far over your head.

Maybe you'll pick it up one day, but for now, you're clueless.

There is no "They".

No persons or people are Anonymous unless their actions fall into the parameters of Anonymous. It doesn't matter 'who' does 'what' so long as it can be determined to be within or without the bounds of Anonymous.

Every time you say 'They', you've demonstrated your ignorance.

[TroglodyteScholar]

88. Their tactics may not be that impressive, but sometimes their strategy can be...

I'll point you to your own words about the website they attacked. They gave it "massive publicity." Now, do you think that's the kind of web site for which any publicity is a good thing?

[boppers]

96. You are confused about the abilities, and capabilities, of Anonymous.

Think of how a decentralized rebel army works: you have infantry, you have specialists, you have experts, you have intelligence, and you have no real leadership. Yes, some (the infantry) are script kiddies. Some are writing 0-day code for research and bounties (specialists and experts). Some are actively exploiting human weaknesses (intelligence).

[Ohio Joe]

98. What have they done beyond script kiddy stuff?

Nothing. There is not a real hacker among them though they would have people believe otherwise. As I've said before, they talk a good game but have done nothing to back up their words yet people buy this whole 'we are an army' shit.

[boppers]

111. See #102.

I am curious as to how you frame "hacker" and "script kiddy".

It's okay if you use highly technical verbiage and industry colloquialisms, chances are I will follow you.

Is Kevin Mitnick a script kiddie?
Richard Stallmann?
Adrian Lamo?

[deacon_sephiroth]

135. more than you n/t

[Scuba]

6. I love Anonymous!!

[fasttense]

8. I tried to go to the link but keep getting a Microsoft internet explorer error message.

I suspect that Freedom Hosting is owned by some rich RepubliCON CEOs or corporate whore no doubt.

Glad to hear they are attacking the server.

But if anonymous can find it, why haven't our justice agencies found it?

They can spy on our e-mails but ignore huge child pornography sites.

[CountAllVotes]

9. Freedom Hosting is owned by some rich RepubliCON CEOs

*ding ding ding*

You win!

Freedom Hosting = a site were a bunch of pervert Repukes hang out DARE I SUGGEST?

:kick:

[justiceischeap]

10. That would have been the most helpful information, really.

The names of the owners of the hosting company and the name of the owner of Lolita City.

[Ruby the Liberal]

23. Only a political junkie would think that, IMO

Pretty much anything of the NAMBLA nature is going to harp on their "freedom" to pursue their perversions.

[Festivito]

11. Is our FBI busy searching or just furiously checking for embarrassing names on the list.

There are several freedom hosting websites. Found on in South Africa, another in Germany. I image there are more. The one below is down and pending deletion since .. yesterday.

Domain Name: FREEDOM-HOSTING.COM
Registrar: ENOM, INC.
Whois Server: whois.enom.com
Referral URL: http://www.enom.com
Name Server: DNS1.NAME-SERVICES.COM
Name Server: DNS2.NAME-SERVICES.COM
Name Server: DNS3.NAME-SERVICES.COM
Name Server: DNS4.NAME-SERVICES.COM
Name Server: DNS5.NAME-SERVICES.COM
Status: pendingDelete
Updated Date: 19-oct-2011
Creation Date: 07-aug-2009
Expiration Date: 07-aug-2011

>>> Last update of whois database: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 19:27:39 UTC <<<

[jberryhill]

16. That's because it hit the delete cycle commenced on September 18

There's something here that doesn't add up.

Looking at the whois history, back in August it looked like this:

--------
Domain: freedom-hosting.com - Whois History
Cache Date: 2011-08-05
Registrar: ENOM, INC.
Server: whois.enom.com
Created: 2009-08-07
Updated: 2011-02-04
Expires: 2011-08-07

Domain name: freedom-hosting.com

Administrative Contact:
Whois Privacy Protection Service, Inc.
Whois Agent ([e-mail])
+1.4252740657
Fax: [phone]
PMB 368, 14150 NE 20th St - F1
C/O freedom-hosting.com
Bellevue, WA 98007
US

Technical Contact:
Whois Privacy Protection Service, Inc.
Whois Agent ([e-mail])
+1.4252740657
Fax: [phone]
PMB 368, 14150 NE 20th St - F1
C/O freedom-hosting.com
Bellevue, WA 98007
US

Registrant Contact:
Whois Privacy Protection Service, Inc.
Whois Agent ()

Fax:
PMB 368, 14150 NE 20th St - F1
C/O freedom-hosting.com
Bellevue, WA 98007
US

Status: Locked

Name Servers:
ns1.googleghs.com
ns2.googleghs.com
ns3.googleghs.com
ns4.googleghs.com

Creation date: 07 Aug 2009 06:06:18
Expiration date: 07 Aug 2011 06:06:18
---------

Then, it hit the automatic one-year registry renewal:

------
Cache Date: 2011-08-09
Registrar: ENOM, INC.
Server: whois.enom.com
Created: 2009-08-07
Updated: 2011-08-08
Expires: 2012-08-07

Domain name: freedom-hosting.com

Administrative Contact:
Whois Privacy Protection Service, Inc.
Whois Agent ([e-mail])
+1.4252740657
Fax: [phone]
PMB 368, 14150 NE 20th St - F1
C/O freedom-hosting.com
Bellevue, WA 98007
US

Technical Contact:
Whois Privacy Protection Service, Inc.
Whois Agent ([e-mail])
+1.4252740657
Fax: [phone]
PMB 368, 14150 NE 20th St - F1
C/O freedom-hosting.com
Bellevue, WA 98007
US

Registrant Contact:
Whois Privacy Protection Service, Inc.
Whois Agent ()

Fax:
PMB 368, 14150 NE 20th St - F1
C/O freedom-hosting.com
Bellevue, WA 98007
US

Status: Locked

Name Servers:
dns1.name-services.com
dns2.name-services.com
dns3.name-services.com
dns4.name-services.com
dns5.name-services.com

Creation date: 07 Aug 2009 06:06:18
Expiration date: 07 Aug 2011 06:06:18

---------------


Notice that, as with all expiring domains, Enom switched the nameservers to its internal traffic-testing system. The site, if any, wasn't working as of August 9.

Then, it goes into the redemption grace period, and hits the five-day delete cycle:

-------
Cache Date: 2011-10-20
Registrar: ENOM, INC.
Server: whois.enom.com
Created: 2009-08-07
Updated: 2011-10-19
Expires: 2011-08-07

Domain name: freedom-hosting.com

Administrative Contact:

Reactivation Period ([e-mail])
+1.4252744500
Fax: [phone]
15801 NE 24th Street
Bellevue, WA 98004
US

Technical Contact:

Reactivation Period ([e-mail])
+1.4252744500
Fax: [phone]
15801 NE 24th Street
Bellevue, WA 98004
US

Registrant Contact:

Reactivation Period ()

Fax:
15801 NE 24th Street
Bellevue, WA 98004
US

Status: Locked

Name Servers:
dns1.name-services.com
dns2.name-services.com
dns3.name-services.com
dns4.name-services.com
dns5.name-services.com

Creation date: 07 Aug 2009 06:06:18
Expiration date: 07 Aug 2011 06:06:18

--------


And it goes from there to the drop.

The bottom line is that the domain name has been non-functional since August, and there is nothing exceptional about the remainder of the registration life cycle up to the delete.

[justiceischeap]

17. Are you certain this is the same Freedom Hosting? nt

[jberryhill]

20. Nope - just following up on the previous post relative to that domain name

Domain WHOIS data is generally useless in relation to criminal activities. It's not as if someone running a child porn server provides accurate contact data.

...or uses a domain name at all, really.

[justiceischeap]

33. so true. I use the privacy crap for my personal domains

and I'm not doing anything illegal. I just don't want people knowing my personal info.

[kpete]

18. tee hee

[RaleighNCDUer]

38. Why haven't our justice agencies found it?

I suspect that Freedom Hosting is owned by some rich RepubliCON CEOs or corporate whore no doubt.

You asked?

[boppers]

117. If you think US schools are bad, try looking at our police. It's magnitudes worse.

Ever wonder why we don't have (many|any) Phd. police officers?

Of course, you referenced "justice agencies", and my recent experience with them indicates that:
1. They don't require basic computer literacy to get a job.
2. They don't train their own people in computer literacy (3).
3. They consider computer literacy to be using a web browser and typing.

Justice tends to be full of people who write their password on a post-it and stick said post-it to their monitor.

[Lucian]

13. Anonymous is awesome.

K&R

[WinkyDink]

14. I have zero doubt that there are HUGE names involved: govt; business; entertainment. Jaded men, all.

[CoffeeCat]

34. I just saw the list--it's usernames...

I saw a big list of usernames. Most of the usernames were disgusting
and so rage-inducing. These sites need to be nuked from orbit for
so many reasons--and one of the reasons is that these parasitic, delusional
predators feed off one another and reinforce each other's sick, selfish
choices.

It would have been nice to see REAL names. People who look at this stuff
deserve to be outted.

[Initech]

81. What if there's some really high profile execs and members of Congress involved?

I mean an exec who worked at the same hospital my aunt does got five years for child porn on Facebook. It can happen to anybody.

[Firebrand Gary]

15. Good for them.

[OneGrassRoot]

19. That could wipe out a third of Republican politicians and right-wing...

public figures.

[bluestate10]

84. That would be the best outcome, by far. nt

[Contrary1]

24. Here's another interesting article about it:

"...The so-called "darknet," from which this "Operation Darknet" hacking campaign takes its name, is any part of the Internet that is hidden from view — not just hard to reach, but deliberately concealed. In this instance, a darknet appears to have grown out of the free TOR routing service, which offers anonymous, encrypted Web browsing to any user.

The TOR-based darknet has reportedly grown into a private, encrypted constellation of websites offering a variety of shady and illegal services, from fake IDs and steroids to email hacking and tip on how to call in police raids as pranks. There's even a hidden site called "The Last Box" that bills itself as an "Assassination Market."

http://www.securitynewsdaily.com/anonymous-hackers-child-porn-sites-1260/

[sabrina 1]

48. How can someone set up something like that?

And don't the FBI have skilled enough people to be able to find these 'darknets'? If Anonymous can find them, why can't they? It's like a cop on duty checking dark corners in alleys where there is often crime being committed. Maybe the can, but can't find all of them?

[hunter]

60. Tor was originally sponsored by the US Naval Research Laboratory

TOR -wikipedia

Both good guys and bad guys sometimes need a place to hide out...

[sabrina 1]

69. Thanks, interesting.

[Initech]

25. This is a definite win.

[Whisp]

26. I send my love to Anonymous. yeeeehaaaaa!

this makes me sooooo happy that those scum sucking predator assholio shitstains might be outed.

[Tsiyu]

27. Thank you Anonymous

:loveya:

A big :grouphug:

:headbang:

[-..__...]

30. Did they take into consideration...

that taking down one, or any, of these websites could have interfered with, or severely hampered any ongoing investigations by the FBI, Interpol or any other law enforcement agency?

It's not like any of these agencies have ever seized CP/child exploitation websites, then utilize them for their own purpose.

[CoffeeCat]

31. Where can we see the list of names?

Does anyone know how a person can see the list of people who were using these child pornography sites?

[-..__...]

32. Pastebin

http://pastebin.com/88Lzs1XR

The names and passwords from The Boston PD hack are on there also.

[CoffeeCat]

36. I saw a list...of usernames...

...but these usernames certainly do not reveal any identities.

Which is quite a shame--because sunlight is exactly what these warped pedophiles
need. Their crimes continue as long as they delude themselves into believing
that what they're doing is ok, or not harmful to their victims.

They need to be outted--big and bad. Disappointed.

[-..__...]

41. Yes...

but oftentimes people are careless (even pedophiles).

They'll use the same username that can be Googled to locate in other legitimate forums.

Doesn't work out so well if it's a common username... but for off beat ones, it can be revealing, and at the very least can be a starting point
to work through a process of elimination.

As recently as two days ago, there was a list of real names, address and websites, but for some reason, it's gone, or I simply can't locate it.

Currently, these are all the Opdarknet announcements (and scripts), hosted on Pastebin

http://pastebin.com/u/opdarknet

[napoleon_in_rags]

95. " to locate in other legitimate forums"

You got to be careful with that too, I remember Googling 'napoleon_in_rags' (my name here) and I found a user somewhere else with the exact same name, and Lee Harvey Oswald as the avatar. Its totally possible I pissed off some lurker here and he did that deliberately. Anonymity is anonymity.

[Poll_Blind]

44. No, but in some instances they can be used to cross-correlate with other...

...users on other websites. For instance, just using DU as an example (but not for any reason excepting that it has a really big userbase), Skinner or somebody could take the usernames and compare them to the DU member list. They could also cross-check by password. For users who have a unique or nearly unique username and also the same (presumably unique, non-simple) password, a person (or law enforcement agency) would have http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_suspicion">reasonable suspicion and arguably http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probable_cause">probable cause to act on that intersection in some way.

For instance, I just pulled up username from the list of users which also appears to be unique-ish. I plugged it into google and only pulled up 5 results- but one of them was a MySpace page.

So, a law enforcement agency could possibly get a judge to sign a warrant which they could deliver to MySpace based on that. Lord knows, I've seen warrants based on flimsier connections.

Does that sort of clear things up a bit?

PB

[CoffeeCat]

47. Thanks PB...

...that makes sense.

:)

[Aaria]

50. so lets take one of the strangest user names and do a google search. I've done it with

some and you would be surprised at what comes up. Old emails, forum postings, blogs, never tell what an idiot like that will sign there handle to.
.

[-..__...]

55. Here...

try it with this one -..__...

See what you come up with B-)

[Aaria]

144. 47,00 results in .23 seconds. You've been busy.

[Poll_Blind]

56. I would caution that this sort of thing not be done on DU. There are other places on the web...

...where it's now being done. Remember, as slight as the chance may be, accusing someone of a crime without having evidence of that crime is a crime. No reason for users here or DU to get mixed up in any of that.

There are other venues for these sorts of explorations which are far more appropriate than DU.

Just sayin'

PB

[Poll_Blind]

35. 9/3/2010: Pentagon declined to investigate hundreds of purchases of child pornography

From http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/upshot/pentagon-declined-investigate-hundreds-purchases-child-pornography.html">Yahoo:

A 2006 Immigration and Customs Enforcement investigation into the purchase of child pornography online turned up more than 250 civilian and military employees of the Defense Department -- including some with the highest available security clearance -- who used credit cards or PayPal to purchase images of children in sexual situations. But the Pentagon investigated only a handful of the cases, Defense Department records show.

The cases turned up during a 2006 ICE inquiry, called Project Flicker, which targeted overseas processing of child-porn payments. As part of the probe, ICE investigators gained access to the names and credit card information of more than 5,000 Americans who had subscribed to websites offering images of child pornography. Many of those individuals provided military email addresses or physical addresses with Army or fleet ZIP codes when they purchased the subscriptions.

Much more at the link.

Who the government finds "too big to bust", Anonymous apparently handles without such reservations. I ask you all to consider the reality of this for a few moments.

PB

[redqueen]

54. That is chilling. (nt)

[cui bono]

63. I would have hoped that we had smarter people in our military. Especially if they are high ranking.

The fact that they had high clearance and were not prosecuted is pretty creepy. About both the perp and the people deciding to let it slide. Shows you how much a human life is worth to some people.

[BlueIris]

70. AWFUL.

I don't think I've read anything worse this week. Maybe this year.

[BeHereNow]

134. Incredible...

I'm sorry, but I have ZERO tolerance for any human being who
would participate in creating a demand for such SICK abuse
of children.

They should all be held accountable
and given a trial in the World Court.
Pedophiles don't last long in prison housing.
BHN

[WillyT]

42. HUGE K & R !!!

:kick:

[Soylent Brice]

51. K&R

[bongbong]

62. Republicans

This has to be scary for Republicans, since almost all convicted pedophiles with an identifiable political bias are Republicans.

http://armchairsubversive.blogspot.com

[defendandprotect]

71. Evidently our law enforcement officials couldn't find these child porn sites -- ??? ROFL

Great work by Anonymous -- and sadly COMCAST is one of the largest internet

dealers in pornography, increasing their profits by a billion or more each year!

This is the rise of the RW -- and its sexual perversions based on domination --

of women and children!!

And how many have they convinced that "domination" of women and children is a turn on?



:puke:

[valerief]

73. Gotta love Anonymous! nt

[Rex]

78. Good!

I'm sure someone will come along and find a way to spin this in a bad way. :eyes:

[liberation]

91. "Will?"

you're using the wrong tense, look up...

[reggie the dog]

80. i like this

this seems like hacking for justice

[Initech]

87. They should leak the IP addresses attached to the user names as well.

The usernames can be deleted - the IP addresses cannot. And yes I am giving them pointers. :evilgrin:

[TransitJohn]

93. TOR doesn't work that way, that's the point.

It's an anonymizing, encrypted service. You'd just get an IP address from a server set up as an exit node.

[Renew Deal]

90. I wonder if it damaged an investigation.

Is the evidence dug up by Anonymous usable in court? Also, what if it got names wrong? They are basically convicting people without a trial. Typically this type of vigilantism is frowned upon. I'd love to see that list of names.

[-..__...]

94. They could be skating on thin ice here...

http://pastebin.com/TDzM5G2y

Some of their info could be legit, then again, in their haste for retribution, Anon has gotten it wrong in the past and set their sights on the wrong people before.

I'm assuming they used the practice of cross checking usernames (mentioned previously), via Goggle.

One thing that really sucks, is that if wrongfully named (as if being publicly accused of being a pedophile isn't bad enough),
the victim has no legal recourse or remedy.

How do you sue an organization or leadership that doesn't exist on paper?

[boppers]

121. People who were not on the original list *WERE* added.

I think the point there was to emphasize that, well, evidence that can be altered is always suspect.

[deacon_sephiroth]

136. good job anon. +1 n/t