ksl.com: Cheating website Ashley Madison hacked, personal info posted

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I'm sure there are a lot of single guys on the list that signed up just because it seemed like an easy way to get some action. Who knows or cares if they're really married. It's a hookup site. A million guys would want to signup married or not.

So I doubt everyone on that list is a cheater. If that means anything.

 

I think that would be the single-worst possible "dating" site to join if you were a single dude. It's notoriously expensive and filled with hookers.

 

Run of the mill dating sites would probably get you laid a hell of a lot more.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

I think that would be the single-worst possible "dating" site to join if you were a single dude. It's notoriously expensive and filled with hookers.

Run of the mill dating sites would probably get you laid a hell of a lot more.

I mean, it seems like automatic hookups and I still don't quite get how a dude isn't going to realize it's prostitution, if that's going on. Besides, how many guys do you think would pay for prositutes if it was discreet, easy to find and didn't run the risk of police? I bet a lot.

On that note, how many were single when they signed up and are now married?

True, though if they aren't active they should probably be on top of their finances a little better and not get hit with these monthly charges. Otherwise, their wife isn't going to buy that story.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I mean, it seems like automatic hookups and I still don't quite get how a dude isn't going to realize it's prostitution, if that's going on. Besides, how many guys do you think would pay for prositutes if it was discreet, easy to find and didn't run the risk of police? I bet a lot.

 

 

I don't know. How many guys use the Casual Encounters section of Craigslist, which is free and filled with hookers?

[Gamebreaker]

Nothing will happen to them. Do you really want to invite other groups like Anonymous to rally around against you? I wouldn't. It will just make it worse. Of course, that might not be enough deterrent to a CEO of a multinational corporation who could hire a death squad to hunt them down.

If they were careful enough, the only way they could be exposed is if they started bragging about it.

[tshile]

If they were careful enough, the only way they could be exposed is if they started bragging about it.

 

Yeah but the problem is that rarely is anyone careful enough, especially when they do it with a group of people.

 

My dad, retired from law enforcement, used to joke that the dumbest thing a criminal could do was involve someone else in their crimes

 

The real question is how badly someone wants to find out and what their resources are.

 

Dude who was outed and has millions in net worth? Probably not going to get very far and just burn up a lot of his money.

 

Federal government with National Security Letter authorizations and some of the best (and highest paid) people in the industry? They can probably find them given enough time.

 

Hell, they got the guy from Silk Road because when he was developing the precursor to silk road he published the code to a blog years an years before he ever became a wanted criminal...

[Gamebreaker]

But I tend to hang with godless multi-culturalist libertines so your mileage my vary.

What does this have to do with anything? I know married Christian couples who've dealt with multiple affairs and they stayed together.

[Destino]

I guess the fundamental question here is: Should cheaters - regardless of their motives - be publicly shamed?

 

Who are we to answer it?  No matter what answer we give we are essentially answering for the affected families.  There is no option to "only tell the spouse" so we're essentially weighing in on "should the secret be kept" (from everyone) or "should it be exposed".  Not our place to say, and it places the responsibility for this humiliation on the hackers instead of the on the people that willingly provided their information, and money, for a service they didn't want anyone to know about. 

 

When someone engages in acts that they're not proud of they create the risk of humiliation through discovery.  The more risks they take the larger the likelihood that one will end badly.  That's the game and no one is forced to play it.  The losers have no one to blame but themselves.  

[Gamebreaker]

The real question is how badly someone wants to find out and what their resources are.

I can agree with that. The actual method of hacking into their network may be untraceable, but finding chatter among the hack team before it happened is possible if you devote the resources to it.

I've just tend to notice these types get caught not for the actual hack, but their activities and/or behavior before and after the deed was done.

[Springfield]

No, Ashley Madison needs to be sued back the stone age for lying about deleting accounts and then not protecting that information.

You studied law, correct?

Theoretical question. Say douchebag A signs up for AM and has his affair. He cancelled his account and carried on with his wife like he had been. Then this comes out, the wife divorces douchebag A and takes half of his money ($1M for example).

Can douchebag A hold AM responsible and sue for $1M in damages? Or really the question is, do they have any sort of case?

[Springfield]

I guess the fundamental question here is: Should cheaters - regardless of their motives - be publicly shamed?

What about general porn surfing?

What if our SO's or wives were privy to our porn viewing. Al of it. Even if we clicked on the tranny porn just to see what's up. Or when they were stretching chicks assholes so far that they could fit four bowling pins. Or when three dudes fit into two holes...

I'd assume that there is at least some aspect of your porn viewing, either recent or years ago, that you'd rather they not be privy to.

[TMK9973]

I'd guess no. The guy would win the cost he paid to have the account deleted. That makes him whole.

The divorce was a result if the affair, not the hack.

[PokerPacker]

I'd guess no. The guy would win the cost he paid to have the account deleted. That makes him whole.

The divorce was a result if the affair, not the hack.

Wouldn't that be like an insurance company just paying back all the insurance premiums you paid after you got cancer or something instead of paying for your health coverage? That would make you whole again.

[TMK9973]

No. Insurance companies core business is to pay your health costs. So if they don't do that, they neglected to do their core duty.

AMs was to help you have a affair. They did that. Your argument that because they failed to delete your info as promised they were negligent and caused your divorce. They would argue they didn't cause your divorce and they provided you with most of the service you bought from them.

If you buy nationals season tickets for 81 games, but the 8th is canceled, they simply will owe you the cost of that one ticket. You couldn't sue them because you had big plans for that one game.

[PokerPacker]

No. Insurance companies core business is to pay your health costs. So if they don't do that, they neglected to do their core duty.

AMs was to help you have a affair. They did that. Your argument that because they failed to delete your info as promised they were negligent and caused your divorce. They would argue they didn't cause your divorce and they provided you with most of the service you bought from them.

If you buy nationals season tickets for 81 games, but the 8th is canceled, they simply will owe you the cost of that one ticket. You couldn't sue them because you had big plans for that one game.

Is discretion not a core part of their business?

[TMK9973]

Nope..in fact, the entire site is based on that they will share your info with other users so you can met them.

[PokerPacker]

Nope..in fact, the entire site is based on that they will share your info with other users so you can met them.

That does not mean indiscretion. That's like saying secrecy is not a core part of a secret meeting because you are meeting people. If there was no expectation of privacy, would they use the site?

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

I mean I'm also judging POUNDITNRUN@yahoo.com for his (her?) awesome email address and smarts to use a gift card with no name instead of a credit card, but for totally different reasons. .

Oh thanks man. I was hoping somebody was gonna notice that.

[TMK9973]

That does not mean indiscretion. That's like saying secrecy is not a core part of a secret meeting because you are meeting people. If there was no expectation of privacy, would they use the site?

I feel like we gone of the rails. The question is could some one sue am for the result of the hack.

I argue no because the damages were prob the result of the affair.

[PokerPacker]

I feel like we gone of the rails. The question is could some one sue am for the result of the hack.

I argue no because the damages were prob the result of the affair.

It's not just the result of the hack. It's the result of them taking your money for a service to expunge your data so that in the event of a hack, your data would not be out there. The hack exposed that the website was committing fraud by not deleting the data that it had been paid to delete. This fraud resulted in damages from your information getting out. You can't just take money for a service, not perform it, and then be off the hook for the damages that result from you not performing the service you were paid to perform.

[alexey]

What if our SO's or wives were privy to our porn viewing. Al of it. Even if we clicked on the tranny porn just to see what's up.

...

Yeah, just to see what's up

 

 

[twa]

they are being sued for 458M fwih, but I agree the individual example used earlier is lacking.

ya might recover a bit,but not enough for the trouble

 

Divorce lawyers everywhere are salivating though

[Forehead]

I guess the fundamental question here is: Should cheaters - regardless of their motives - be publicly shamed?

 

 

Wow. I just can't get behind that.

 

 

Hmmm...perhaps I should put away my nun outfit and shaming bell.  I had a whole list of local addresses too.....

 

[China]

Can feds be fired for adultery?

 

The government is combing through thousands of e-mail addresses that turned up in the Ashley Madison leak

Now that the Ashley Madison hack has outed as many as 15,000 federal employees and active duty military, government agencies say they’re combing through the e-mail addresses of possible adulterers to see if their extramarital activity on work time amounts to anything punishable.

 

The rules of the game for morality in federal offices may be straightforward for pornography (watching it can definitely get you fired) — but the kind of skeleton in the closet that showed up in the trove of 36 million users exposed on the cheating Web site presents officials with a murkier problem, experts say.

 

The rules vary on the kind of personal use of work computers that’s allowed on government time. Mostly, they’re more restrictive than a private company’s. It’s okay to make a doctor’s appointment, call the babysitter, tell your spouse you’ll be home late. It’s okay to check on your investments during the stock market’s current nosedive. These are technically called “private use” exceptions to authorized uses of government property.

 

Things you can’t do from your government e-mail address: Endorse a product or service, sell a product for profit, advertise or do anything else that “interferes with the agency’s mission or brings discredit to the agency.” Pornography, by being sexually explicit, falls into this category.

 

.....

 

Those who used military addresses to access the site could face disciplinary action, since adultery can be a crime under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

 

.....

 

Government officials and employment attorneys agreed that the likelihood of getting hit with a misconduct charge could depend on how much time the employee has spent on the site and how sexually explicit the e-mails are.

 

.....

 

DHS, in a statement. called potential violations “both a personnel and security matter.” The agency considers “viewing, downloading, storing, transmitting or copying materials that are sexually explicit or sexually oriented, related to gambling, illegal weapons, terrorist activities, or any other prohibited activities” an “inappropriate personal use” of government office equipment.

 

Click on the link for the full article

[skinsmarydu]

Apparently, only 3 zip codes in the country were exempt from an account.

****in' WOW.

http://hsrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=A2KJywkrqt1VWV8AlBGbvZx4;_ylu=X3oDMTRmMWdhaWFhBGJwb3MDMQRjY29kZQNnYV91cF9zcF9zaGVycGFfRVJSXzEEY3BvcwMxBGN0AzEEZwMwZDZiYWJlYi1mMTYwLTM5NWItOGIzYS04Nzc0YWRmNGIyMWYEaW50bAN1cwRpdGMDMARwa2d0AzQEcG9zAzEEc2VjA3RkLXN0cm0Ec2xrA3RpdGxlBHRlc3QDNzQ3/RV=1/RE=1441799980/RH=aHNyZC55YWhvby5jb20-/RO=2/RU=aHR0cDovL2ZpbmFuY2UueWFob28uY29tL25ld3Mvd2VyZS1vbmx5LTMtemlwLWNvZGVzLTE3NTk1NjY2MS5odG1s/RS=%5EADAczojAb4ZIMSxOqpqxirOnJ05SWg-

[Zguy28]

Apparently, only 3 zip codes in the country were exempt from an account.

****in' WOW.

http://hsrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=A2KJywkrqt1VWV8AlBGbvZx4;_ylu=X3oDMTRmMWdhaWFhBGJwb3MDMQRjY29kZQNnYV91cF9zcF9zaGVycGFfRVJSXzEEY3BvcwMxBGN0AzEEZwMwZDZiYWJlYi1mMTYwLTM5NWItOGIzYS04Nzc0YWRmNGIyMWYEaW50bAN1cwRpdGMDMARwa2d0AzQEcG9zAzEEc2VjA3RkLXN0cm0Ec2xrA3RpdGxlBHRlc3QDNzQ3/RV=1/RE=1441799980/RH=aHNyZC55YWhvby5jb20-/RO=2/RU=aHR0cDovL2ZpbmFuY2UueWFob28uY29tL25ld3Mvd2VyZS1vbmx5LTMtemlwLWNvZGVzLTE3NTk1NjY2MS5odG1s/RS=%5EADAczojAb4ZIMSxOqpqxirOnJ05SWg-

Sad statistic. But even sadder is that its not surprising.