Thunderfoot hacking FtB - Allegedly

[Pappa]

Can someone please clear something up for me. From what I understand TF was booted off FtB and removed from their email list. Some time after that he signed up to their email list with a new email address and started receiving emails again. After that he let people know about what topics were being discussed on the list. Is that correct?

[Coito ergo sum]

Can someone please clear something up for me. From what I understand TF was booted off FtB and removed from their email list. Some time after that he signed up to their email list with a new email address and started receiving emails again. After that he let people know about what topics were being discussed on the list. Is that correct?

That is my understanding.

FtB thinks that since he was kicked off the list, the fact that he tried to sign back on to the list means he did something wrong.

They also claim that by signing on the second time without their "knowledge," he was gaining access to information he shouldn't have access to, particularly real names, identities, addresses, and whatnot. They claim they were afraid he would disclose it. However, they do not explain why this was not already an issue, given that he had access to all that info when he was admitted to FtB in the first place... and, they don't care that he never disclosed anything, and said he would not disclose anything, of a personal nature like real names, addresses and such.

My understanding is that the only thing he did do was disclose the content of some nasty emails which prevented FtB folks from being able to claim innocence when they were, in fact, up to no good.

[Robert_S]

Can someone please clear something up for me. From what I understand TF was booted off FtB and removed from their email list. Some time after that he signed up to their email list with a new email address and started receiving emails again. After that he let people know about what topics were being discussed on the list. Is that correct?

That is my understanding.

FtB thinks that since he was kicked off the list, the fact that he tried to sign back on to the list means he did something wrong.

They also claim that by signing on the second time without their "knowledge," he was gaining access to information he shouldn't have access to, particularly real names, identities, addresses, and whatnot. They claim they were afraid he would disclose it. However, they do not explain why this was not already an issue, given that he had access to all that info when he was admitted to FtB in the first place... and, they don't care that he never disclosed anything, and said he would not disclose anything, of a personal nature like real names, addresses and such.

My understanding is that the only thing he did do was disclose the content of some nasty emails which prevented FtB folks from being able to claim innocence when they were, in fact, up to no good.

If he can dodge the CIA hookers and avoid engaging in surprise sleep sex, he just might make it out of this one.

[A Hermit]

Can someone please clear something up for me. From what I understand TF was booted off FtB and removed from their email list. Some time after that he signed up to their email list with a new email address and started receiving emails again. After that he let people know about what topics were being discussed on the list. Is that correct?

Not exactly; here are the technical details:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... d-and-how/

He continued tying to gain access after his unauthorized entry to the system was discovered, and he didn't just "let people know what topics were being discussed." He actually threatened to "out" at least on member of FtB whose life could be very adversely affected by haveing her identity revealed. http://freethoughtblogs.com/nataliereed ... 10/all-in/

John C Welch, who is no fan of FtB, explains in the comments why this IS a big deal here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... ment-75731

and here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... ment-75748

In Welch's words (because he explains it better than I can, bolded for emphasis by me):

What Thunderf00t did was wrong. Period. My personal opinion of you or the rest of the FTB FC5 as I call them doesn’t justify what he did, nor does his own excuses for it. Regardless of how easy or hard it was, I find it unbelievable that he could have thought he had any reason to be on that mailing list. He’d been kicked off, that’s a pretty clear sign he wasn’t welcome. At the *very* least, he owes FTB a public apology, and not some bullshit nonpology either. His actions were sleazy, and if FTB decides to pursue legal action against him, that’s certainly justified. IANAL, but I do have *some* IT experience, and while getting the authorities to take this incident seriously may be difficult, (you can barely get them to take you seriously when someone’s gone in and wiped servers, but that’s another problem) at the very least, I’d report him to hotmail. That isn’t a legal action at all, that’s just administrative, and I think he’s earned that at least.

Third, and this is something I’ve been dealing with professionally for two decades: the misconfiguration of mailman no more excuses what thunderf00t did any more than forgetting to lock your door excuses a random hobo from walking into your living room. He was kicked off the list. He didn’t ask to return, he just took advantage of an unlocked door and walked in to a place where he clearly wasn’t wanted. That’s not FTB’s fault, that’s not Ed’s fault, nor is it PZ’s, yours, greta’s, natalie’s, zvan’s or ophelia’s. The victim-blaming that happens because OMG, you didn’t have unassailable security and someone broke in is both stupid and inexcusable. FTB shouldn’t have HAD to lock that door, Thunderf00t knew he wasn’t welcome. Any and all blame for his actions in this case reside solely with him, no one else.

Basically he's doe exactly what the climate change deniers did in "climategate" gained unauthorized access to private communications, made unauthorized copies of those communications and selectively excerpted them to try and smear the people he was snooping on.

There's simply no way to reasonably paint this as anything but unethical at the very least.

[Jaygray]

There's simply no way to reasonably paint this as anything but unethical at the very least.

...though not without a certain entertainment value.

[PsychoSerenity]

Can someone please clear something up for me. From what I understand TF was booted off FtB and removed from their email list. Some time after that he signed up to their email list with a new email address and started receiving emails again. After that he let people know about what topics were being discussed on the list. Is that correct?

From what I read he used the same email address. The sign-up ticket they originally emailed to him was set to never expire, so he just clicked the link in his inbox again. But yes after that he let people know about what topics were being discussed and I think specifically a particular individual, who had made some comment, and the FtB'ers were apparently discussing what they were going to do about him.

[tantamount]

Can someone please clear something up for me. From what I understand TF was booted off FtB and removed from their email list. Some time after that he signed up to their email list with a new email address and started receiving emails again. After that he let people know about what topics were being discussed on the list. Is that correct?

Answer, in the form of a Mastercard ad proposal:

"Working title: FTB and TF: A Love Story"

Egos Bruised: 1.
Egos Swollen: 36.
Days of Unauthorized Listserv Access: 30.
Emails transferred: Several.
Ethics Compromised: Surely.
Legal Ramifications: None.
Ability by FTB to play victim card: Priceless.
For everything besides free thought there's: http://freethoughtblogs.

[Coito ergo sum]

Can someone please clear something up for me. From what I understand TF was booted off FtB and removed from their email list. Some time after that he signed up to their email list with a new email address and started receiving emails again. After that he let people know about what topics were being discussed on the list. Is that correct?

Not exactly; here are the technical details:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... d-and-how/

He continued tying to gain access after his unauthorized entry to the system was discovered, and he didn't just "let people know what topics were being discussed."

The access was not unauthorized. If it was unauthorized, the system would not have let him back on.

He actually threatened to "out" at least on member of FtB whose life could be very adversely affected by haveing her identity revealed. http://freethoughtblogs.com/nataliereed ... 10/all-in/

He did not threaten to disclose her real life identity. The article you linked to does not substantiate that allegation.

John C Welch, who is no fan of FtB, explains in the comments why this IS a big deal here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... ment-75731

and here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... ment-75748

In Welch's words (because he explains it better than I can, bolded for emphasis by me):

What Thunderf00t did was wrong. Period. My personal opinion of you or the rest of the FTB FC5 as I call them doesn’t justify what he did, nor does his own excuses for it. Regardless of how easy or hard it was, I find it unbelievable that he could have thought he had any reason to be on that mailing list. He’d been kicked off, that’s a pretty clear sign he wasn’t welcome. At the *very* least, he owes FTB a public apology, and not some bullshit nonpology either. His actions were sleazy, and if FTB decides to pursue legal action against him, that’s certainly justified. IANAL, but I do have *some* IT experience, and while getting the authorities to take this incident seriously may be difficult, (you can barely get them to take you seriously when someone’s gone in and wiped servers, but that’s another problem) at the very least, I’d report him to hotmail. That isn’t a legal action at all, that’s just administrative, and I think he’s earned that at least.

LOL -- legal action. Frivolous, if they decided to do it. He'd have the case dismissed on a pre-answer motion.

Third, and this is something I’ve been dealing with professionally for two decades: the misconfiguration of mailman no more excuses what thunderf00t did any more than forgetting to lock your door excuses a random hobo from walking into your living room. He was kicked off the list. He didn’t ask to return, he just took advantage of an unlocked door and walked in to a place where he clearly wasn’t wanted. That’s not FTB’s fault, that’s not Ed’s fault, nor is it PZ’s, yours, greta’s, natalie’s, zvan’s or ophelia’s. The victim-blaming that happens because OMG, you didn’t have unassailable security and someone broke in is both stupid and inexcusable. FTB shouldn’t have HAD to lock that door, Thunderf00t knew he wasn’t welcome. Any and all blame for his actions in this case reside solely with him, no one else.

[/quote]

It's not faulty security that got him on there. It's an invite they sent that did not expire. There is no crime in asking to be on a list by submitting your email address and presenting enter. It is no crime or offense of any kind, if someone says "I hate you and I don't want you on my list," and and you go to their page and enter in your email address and they let you on.

Basically he's doe exactly what the climate change deniers did in "climategate" gained unauthorized access to private communications, made unauthorized copies of those communications and selectively excerpted them to try and smear the people he was snooping on.

There's simply no way to reasonably paint this as anything but unethical at the very least.

Not basically at all. They hacked. He just entered in an email address an pressed enter.

And, it's not a "smear" if it's true. Let's not forget, that they really were talking about making a pariah out of him and "running him out of the movement" and all that. Let's not forget that they were scheming to do the same to someone else. By this "unethical" action it looks like he stopped them from pursuing an unethical and injurious course of action.

Good.

[A Hermit]

The access was not unauthorized. If it was unauthorized, the system would not have let him back on.

He had been booted off the system and set an e-mail telling him he was no longer permitted to use the system. If I tell you to stay out of my house you are not "authorized" to come in just because you happen to have a key. he did not have permission to be there, if that makes it clearer for you...

He did not threaten to disclose her real life identity. The article you linked to does not substantiate that allegation.

He implied that he might...Natalie says that when she expressed her concerns about her identity "he laughed and suggested that his treatment by PZ and FTB as a whole justified any actions he wanted to take." If I were in Natalie's position I would be inclined to err on the side of caution and take that as a threat.

Not basically at all. They hacked. He just entered in an email address an pressed enter.

You're splitting hairs. Break and enter is still a crime whether you break a window to get in or walk in through an unlocked door. Same principle applies here; if you don't have permission to take something you are wrong to take it, even if it was easy to do so.

And, it's not a "smear" if it's true.

T-Foot accuses them of trying to have Payton fired. This is blatantly untrue. They defended themselves against Payton's uncalled for attack, that's all. Should they just sit there quietly while the leader of a national organization puts them down? Everyone can talk smack about FtB but they aren't allowed to answer...is that it?

[DaveD]

...Natalie says that when she expressed her concerns about her identity "he laughed* and suggested that his treatment by PZ and FTB as a whole justified any actions he wanted to take." If I were in Natalie's position I would be inclined to err on the side of caution and take that as a threat.

(*My emphasis)
Was this conversation in person or on the phone, or was the laughter invented by Natalie, either deliberately in order to gain sympathy, or unwittingly as a result of paranoia?

[Pappa]

The way I see it, signing up again and dishing some (fairly dirty) dirt is about as unethical as being a whistle-blower. Wait... it is being a whistle-blower.

Out of curiosity, does the email list have ToS?

[cowiz]

I agree with everything everybody has said in this thread. Carry on the good work.

[Skeeve]

Can someone please clear something up for me. From what I understand TF was booted off FtB and removed from their email list. Some time after that he signed up to their email list with a new email address and started receiving emails again. After that he let people know about what topics were being discussed on the list. Is that correct?

Not exactly; here are the technical details:

He actually threatened to "out" at least on member of FtB whose life could be very adversely affected by haveing her identity revealed. http://freethoughtblogs.com/nataliereed ... 10/all-in/

You're a lowdown, dirty cunt lapping liar.

[JacksSmirkingRevenge]

[Robert_S]

The way I see it, signing up again and dishing some (fairly dirty) dirt is about as unethical as being a whistle-blower. Wait... it is being a whistle-blower.

Out of curiosity, does the email list have ToS?

Wouldn't that kinda depend on whether there are ethical breeches more important than poking into what's supposed to be private and the showing that private info to the whole world?