HideMyAss provides FBI with logs for LulzSec

http://www.thetechherald.com/article.php/201138/7643/Proxy-logs-helped-FBI-track-and-arrest-LulzSec-member

 

I guess you can't really get what their name suggests.
CYOA always applies.

Would chaining have helped make it more difficult to uncover their a's?

 

"According to HideMyAss.com, '…services such as ours do not exist to hide people from illegal activity. We will cooperate with law enforcement agencies if it has become evident that your account has been used for illegal activities.'"​

Steve, I believe your old service, XeroBank (is it still operating?) said much the same thing on its website. Or, were you hiding people from illegal activities? You always said you weren't.

In other words, this is a cheap shot and hypocritical post if you're suggesting HMA did something wrong.

 

It's just privacy news, interpret it how you want to, no need for spin.

FYI, you won't ever find any stories about XB cooperation because the system isn't designed to keep logs. XeroBank Privacy Policy.

 

Steve, May I direct your attention to http://ip.xerobank.com/company/privacy-policy/ (a different page than the one you provided, but still on your own site!) where it is written:

"In the case that such authorities can validate claims of violation of XeroBank's Terms of Service, we may attempt to terminate the client account from which the abuse originated. If XeroBank is served with court orders of all applicable jurisdictions for all specific servers, we may be forced to attempt to trace live data connections. Violation of XeroBank's Terms of Service invalidates the privacy policy and enables XeroBank's prerogative to log offending traffic. XeroBank will not aid or protect criminals. If fraud or hacking is detected within XeroBank's networks, we will proactively notify and assist authorities with tracking and identification of the criminals involved. XeroBank is not a service to mask abusive or threatening activities; thieves and criminals beware."
​

What was that about not finding any info on cooperation with LE because the system isn't designed to keep logs?

How is it that every time you show up here, you dig yourself a deeper hole? The above is no different than the HMA statement on the story in question.

To think I once trusted you.

 

To make it easier:

HideMyAss.com:

"...services such as ours do not exist to hide people from illegal activity. We will cooperate with law enforcement agencies if it has become evident that your account has been used for illegal activities."

XeroBank.com:

"Violation of XeroBank's Terms of Service invalidates the privacy policy and enables XeroBank's prerogative to log offending traffic. XeroBank will not aid or protect criminals. If fraud or hacking is detected within XeroBank's networks, we will proactively notify and assist authorities with tracking and identification of the criminals involved. XeroBank is not a service to mask abusive or threatening activities; thieves and criminals beware."

Good try, Steve.

 

lol, yes, companies that provide a service don't want you throwing around child porn or using it to hack a site or download illegal content

and yes, they will cooperate with the government AS THEY SHOULD

oh privacy* board, you've done it again

 

Absolutely.

It's absurd for a provider to come here on Wilders and suggest otherwise; especially when their own site says something to the contrary.

 

I don't usually bother to read privacy boards so I have no clue who anyone is lol but obviously if someone uses your service you don't want them doing illegal things and you'll naturally cooperate with the government.

 

Wow steve finally came back from hiding. :O

Anyways if you want a system where no one can or will do this use TOR or I2P. (and use common sense when using them; if you don't know how to do it use TAILS Live CD).

 

Not necessarily. Some VPNs advertise to hackers and malware vendors.

There is a big difference between handing over logs which are routinely kept and a non-logging VPN being forced to log through legal action. The latter I believe is extremely rare, esp. when it involves multiple jurisdictions. Anonymous got away with DDoSing through Perfect Privacy because they kept no logs. It had nothing to do with proxy chaining or Tor. As this article shows, using the wrong VPN can mean going to jail for a very long time. When you have a less-than-cooperative VPN (e.g. one which advertises on hacking forums) and less-than-cooperative jurisdictions (non-EU) the chances of something like this happening are very small.

 

Homeless hacker arrested by FBI in LulzSec/Anonymous investigation

Homeless hacker arrested by FBI in LulzSec/Anonymous investigation

 

Yes, at first sight this seems obvious but actually I don't think it's that simple. Not all law breakers have criminal intentions. What's illegal is not necessarily immoral or unethical - in some cases it may even be percieved as ethically mandatory to break the law by quite a few people. I'm thinking in the line of some of those American draftdodger exiles we saw in Europe during the Vietnam war, or of those who keep hiding unapproved refugee immigrants, or of those who illegaly went to Spain in the thirties to help fight the fascist insurgency. People who have stronger feelings about right and wrong and humanity than they have for the law. So breaking the law may sometimes be justified and honourable. Still there's a need to maintain the rule of law. Providers have no real choice but to comply if they want to keep their fees at a reasonable level, but shouldn't they rather be considered just neutral conveyors with no obligations to LE authorities? I do realise we'd have to take the bad with the good, and I'm not the man to figure out the end sum of that. But there's a similar problem with the law itself, isn't there? In all democracies (I hope) it's a fundamental principle that it's better that a guilty person goes unpunished than to punish the innocent. So it wouldn't be such a big deal to relieve providers of most of their duties to LE.

 

emmpe, you have a point. Some countries have some very immoral laws in which their own people are being abused by the Governments themselves. I'm not going to name any countries here because I don't want this thread to end up being locked.

 

Well, at least he was somewhat intelligent using it in the first place.

 

LulzSec Fiasco - HMA Blog

 

It's really sad Steve you show up here, and have time to post at Wilders when you very rarely will respond to any questions from your paying customers on your own forum. I would say 90 percent of questions on your own forum never get answered. When you do respond you only dodge the question by giving very vague information. Steve start responding to questions on your own forum before you take time to post here. I once was foolish enough to take up for you when people bashed your company. I really do want to see you deliver on your quality of service. I really do want to see Clarion up and running flawlessly, but you never deliver on your promises. If you want to be taken seriously here at all then stop abusing your customers, and learn how to run a business. How can anyone depend on your services based on how irresponsible you are. Are you responsible enough to make sure your services are functioning properly, and not leaking the identity of your users? It could mean someone's very life. You offer a service that is crucial in some parts of the world where people are desperate, and need support due to cruel immoral governments. What if someone needs to release sensitive data on the web just because it's the moral thing to do? Can they depend on you? Anyways, you can start by answering questions on your own forum.

 

Lets stay to the topic.

If you trust your identity to a third party, then don't expect to stay anonymous. Simple.
Use Tor or public wifi spot and change it often, but that is not a concern here.
Similar if you intrust your data and let some cloud company to encrypt your data and then wonder when they abuse your trust.

If i paraphrase from Dirty Harry: You know how they say "f* you" in this business, "trust me"

 

Well you can unless your doing what those losers did!

 

so nonsense !!!!!

instead of spending time on own business, the first thing, he does is to post news of other vpn....

where is the resident helpdesk at wilders?

 

Wow he got caught with his own words (I mean the OP)

 

This is funny, because i just bought a pro package from HAM today.

And basically, HAM says "if there is a court order, i will give your details."

Do you want to know why i bought a pro package?

In my country, if you write (on a random forum for example) something defending evolution theory and not accepting the religional Adam/Eve theory, someone can make a complaint against you and you can be legally charged.

This has happened. It is not a joke. You write something on the internet about you not accepting religional theory of evolution, some freak makes a complaint against you and your ISP gives all the details about you to the Court.

I was thinking HAM can be an answer to this but appreantly.. it is not.

Cancelling my sub right away.

Sorry for the bad english btw.


Edit: Oh and here is a excellent example of hypocritism from HAM blog: "A prime example of this would be the Egyptian revolution for which our service played a key role for protesters gaining access to websites such as Twitter which were blocked by the government, we experienced record traffic during this time." They are telling this like HAM is a true believer in democracy and freedom, like they are fighters of justice. Lets say that revolution didn't went well.. Will HAM still give the details about protesters if there is a Court order?

Edit 2: "Regarding censorship bypassing, some have stated it is hypocritical for us to claim we do not allow illegal activity, and then claim our service is used in some countries to bypass censorship illegally. We follow UK law, there isn’t a law that prohibits the use of Egyptians gaining access to blocked websites such as Twitter, even if there is one in Egypt …" Now this is just.. silly. So basically we are freedom fighters but we dont fight if it is illegal in UK. Wow.

 

I'd really like to know why anyone would think any of these services would truly protect you anyway. I mean, do you really think these service providers are going to protect you over themselves? Btw, I also found it hilarious to go on about "systems not designed to log" and there in black and white, it says that rule doesn't apply unless you're a good boy or girl.

Once again, I'd like to point everyone to the fact that privacy policies are not that enforceable, and they only count so long as you aren't causing the provider any problems. If the FBI or higher shows up, or, in the case of some countries, some guys come in with AK-47s and demand things, guess what, your ass isn't gonna be hidden for too long.

 

Basically the internet is NOT anonymous

 

It really shocks me that people thought it was. There are certainly tools to help with basic issues such as tracking across websites, but other than that, there isn't anything you can do. It's nothing more than a bunch of servers connected together across the globe, that's it. Somewhere, someone has your information. It's who they are and what they are afraid of that determines whether your information is safe, not how many "hops" there are or anything else.