Ashley Madison Accounts Leaked; 15k of them were .mil or .gov accounts. What would you do if it was your subordinate or leader?

2015-08-19T08:35:35-04:00

So 15,000 accounts are linked to .mil or .gov email addresses. I wonder if anyone will data mine these addresses and look into any violations of UCMJ. It would be hard to prove, for sure.

What would you do if you knew one of your subordinates or leaders had one of these accounts?

--
Hackers claimed Tuesday to have leaked personal data of millions of people that was stolen in a cyberattack on the parent company of Ashley Madison, an online dating site aimed at people who wish to have extramarital affairs.

WIRED reported that a group called the Impact Team, who claimed responsibility for last month's hack, posted 9.7 gigabytes of stolen user data on the so-called "dark web," a reference to a part of the Internet that can only be accessed through a specialized browser.

According to WIRED, the leaked data includes customer names, login details, street and e-mail addresses, and details of transactions that date as far back as 2007. However, WIRED reported that the data does not appear to include full credit card numbers. In all, approximately 32 million accounts at Ashley Madison and Established Men, a site aimed at women looking to date wealthy men, are believed to be affected.

It is not clear how much of the data belongs to real customers or are from fake, so-called "burner" accounts. However, WIRED reported that approximately 15,000 leaked e-mail addresses use .gov and .mil domains, meaning that they are hosted by U.S. government and military servers.

Toronto-based Avid Life Media, Inc., the parent company of both websites, said in a statement obtained by the Associated Press that it was aware of the group's claim and was investigating.

"The criminal, or criminals, involved in this act have appointed themselves as the moral judge, juror, and executioner," the company said, accusing the hackers of seeking to impose "a personal notion of virtue on all of society."

Security analysts who examined the leaked data said they believed the information dump to be genuine. Brian Krebs, a former Washington Post reporter who writes a blog on computer security and broke news of the initial hack last month, reported that he had spoken to three sources who reported finding their last names and credit card information in the database.

The hack was made public July 20, the day after Krebs' initial report was posted online. The Impact Team demanded at the time that Avid Life Media shut down Ashley Madison and Established Men. The group claimed to have targeted the company over its alleged fraudulent business practices, saying that Ashley Madison and Established Men's "full delete" tool does not remove users’ personal information for a one-time $19 fee, as promised by the sites.

"Shutting down AM and EM will cost you, but non-compliance will cost you more," a statement warned. "We will release all customer records, profiles with all the customers’ secret sexual fantasies, nude pictures, and conversations and matching credit card transactions, real names and addresses, and employee documents and emails."

WIRED reported that the Impact Team introduced the new data dump with a statement titled "Time's Up!"

"Avid Life Media has failed to shut down Ashley Madison and Established Men," the statement read. "We have explained the fraud, deceit, and stupidity of ALM and their members. Now everyone gets to see their data.

The statement continued: "Find someone you know in here? Keep in mind the site is a scam with thousands of fake female profiles. See ashley madison fake profile lawsuit [sic]; 90-95% of actual users are male. Chances are your man signed up on the world's biggest affair site, but never had one. He just tried to. If that distinction matters.

"Find yourself in here? It was ALM that failed you and lied to you. Prosecute them and claim damages. Then move on with your life. Learn your lesson and make amends," the statement concludes. "Embarrassing now, but you'll get over it."

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2015/08/19/hackers-say-theyve-posted-data-adultery-website-ashley-madison-users-online/?intcmp=hpbt3

Hackers say they've posted data of adultery website Ashley Madison users online

Hackers claimed Tuesday to have released data stolen in a cyberattack on the parent company of Ashley Madison, an online dating site aimed at people who wish to have extramarital affairs.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 19 at 2015 8:41 AM

2015-08-19T08:41:20-04:00

I don't think there is any option of what needs to be done. You cannot knowingly look the other way if their is proof someone violated the UCMJ.

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Aug 19 at 2015 8:47 AM

2015-08-19T08:47:46-04:00

1. The government has better breaches to spend their time data mining, the recent OPM breach comes to mind. 2. Chain of custody of this a PII is non existent. It would be a legal nightmare to prove a soldier's name on this list constituted a violation of the UCMJ beyond a reasonable doubt. The hackers could easily have added additional names to the list, or generated entirely false ones.

Response by MAJ Bryan Zeski made Aug 19 at 2015 9:06 AM

2015-08-19T09:06:32-04:00

I wouldn't care. The days of the military being responsible for the morality and private affairs of it's employees should be over. It's not. But it should be. When Congress and the Presidency decides to set the example on personal affairs, then I'll pay attention - until then, it's an archaic "tradition" that should go far far away.

Response by MSgt Michael Durkee made Aug 19 at 2015 9:24 AM

2015-08-19T09:24:41-04:00

As many have stated, proving the case for actual adultery would be a stretch, my concern would be the abuse of .mil and .gov email for other than official business.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 19 at 2015 10:12 AM

2015-08-19T10:12:01-04:00

So to expound on my original concern: If your Core/Division/Brigade/Battalion Commander has an account on this site with pictures of his/her unmentionables, how does the unit/staff see that leader from that point onwards?
Even if there are no reveling pics, wouldn't the idea cause concern?

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Aug 19 at 2015 11:18 AM

2015-08-19T11:18:53-04:00

Capt Richard I P. hits it right on the head! How genuine is the data that went public?

Any internet site is "use at your own risk" regardless of any security claims and disclaimers. If one choose to do something like joining an internet site for having an extra marital affair and that information becomes public domain - oops! Not that the breach is right, but be aware of the fact that "most things will live forever in cyberspace" Before I'd rat the SM out to the CofC I'd make sure the spouse got it first. That kind of justice will probably far out weigh what USMJ does to them. Bwa, ha, ha, ha, ha :-)

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 19 at 2015 12:07 PM

2015-08-19T12:07:43-04:00

I wouldn't take relationship advice from them.....?

Response by SSG (ret) William Martin made Aug 19 at 2015 3:41 PM

2015-08-19T15:41:56-04:00

The last time I recall adultery was pretty hard to prove in the military. You must have an admission of guilt, pictures or videos. Having someone's name on a list or membership is circumstancial evidence at best. Additionally, knowing that data was illegally obtained which is a federal crime in the U.S., I am not sure if I want to tell someone, as a leader that I was viewing illegally obtained data. It is best to leave it alone. I believe this data is part of the poisonous fruit doctrine.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 19 at 2015 5:16 PM

2015-08-19T17:16:09-04:00

I agree it would be hard to prove adultery, but misuse of govt equipment, or conduct unbecoming...

Response by LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow made Aug 19 at 2015 5:40 PM

2015-08-19T17:40:40-04:00

I just saw this. Given that the UCMJ still prohibits adultery, I'm pretty disappointed, but not surprised, to hear about this...

Response by SCPO David Lockwood made Aug 20 at 2015 9:51 AM

2015-08-20T09:51:21-04:00

Sir, this is a cheating website and may ruin reputations or marriages. And who knows who is on this website!

Response by SSG Richard Reilly made Aug 20 at 2015 9:57 AM

2015-08-20T09:57:33-04:00

Becuase about 15000 husbands are shitting their pants as their wives check it.

Response by Maj Mike Sciales made Aug 20 at 2015 9:58 AM

2015-08-20T09:58:48-04:00

It really isn't my concern about what people choose to do with their own time. While adultery is illegal under the UCMJ, I think our resources are better used to other purposes. The only question Imhave is when the numbers came out - why was the USAF so low in members? In the old days they'd have been right behind the USMC as horn dogs. Times are changing.

Response by SGT Ben Keen made Aug 20 at 2015 10:03 AM

2015-08-20T10:03:36-04:00

Simple answer.....sex sales.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 20 at 2015 10:34 AM

2015-08-20T10:34:14-04:00

One of my friends is a CO, the excuse a subordinate officer gave him for being on the site was that was the only way he could comunicate with his detailer.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 20 at 2015 10:56 AM

2015-08-20T10:56:11-04:00

I think that we have to do something. I don't think having an account in and of itself is "proof" of anything but if someone does, it definitely needs to be looked into and addressed. At the very least there is intent, or at least the thought of intent. There is no purpose as I understand it for the website other than having an affair.

As far as prosecution goes, anyone using government resources is easily in line for an investigation into more wrong-doing and at least prosecution under UCMJ for that.

As far as people saying we aren't morality police, I hate to say it you're wrong. Sure we can't make sure all the people working for us are "good people." That said, adultery is a very clear violation of UCMJ and whether you agree with a law or not, does not excuse you from obeying it. True in the military and outside it.

Sorry for reposting the story originally by the way. It seems I'm getting worse at that, so thanks whoever combined. I need to figure out some different ways to search since nothing came up when I checked.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Aug 20 at 2015 11:03 AM

2015-08-20T11:03:15-04:00

I would bring them to my office and cuss at them, and order them to delete their profile.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 20 at 2015 11:13 AM

2015-08-20T11:13:30-04:00

I think this is one of those situations where the time/energy/money to pursue will not be worth the effort. 15,000 accounts that could be fake addresses, real addresses with fake accounts (Its already been reported that the site has created fake accounts), or actual accounts. Then you are getting misuse of government equipment at best unless you put a lot more effort into this. We are undermanned as is, who is going to do this research? While I do not agree with the actions of any individuals who took part in this, I would not be surprised to see a lot of verbal counseling sessions to close this out.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 20 at 2015 8:18 PM

2015-08-20T20:18:03-04:00

If an individual is stupid enough to use a mil or gov email then he deserves to be investigated, if he had clearance then that clearance needs to be revoked on bases of stupidity

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 20 at 2015 9:42 PM

2015-08-20T21:42:41-04:00

I say that there is going to be a lot of alimony payments going on soon. Finance better get ready.

Response by SrA Edward Vong made Aug 20 at 2015 10:25 PM

2015-08-20T22:25:16-04:00

Putting UCMJ and ethics aside, what one does in their personal life should be of no concern to military leaders. Unless their membership brought down unit morale or adversely impacts the mission.

I can see this as a way to downsize the force.

Response by SPC Chelsea Fernandez made Aug 21 at 2015 7:06 PM

2015-08-21T19:06:11-04:00

I don't know.... but my email address was not on the list therefore its none of my business

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 22 at 2015 10:50 AM

2015-08-22T10:50:44-04:00

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member I think the real question is what direction is the moral compass of an average service member pointing and how far into our bedrooms the government should be. You could fill volumes on the subject. I suspect there is quite a variety of what is deemed "appropriate" in the confines of one's bedroom. Perhaps the real question is this, "If a large minority of people routinely violate the UCMJ with extramarital affairs and the regulation is only selectively enforced, should we advocate the removal of the regulation or advocate consistent enforcement?"

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Aug 24 at 2015 4:42 PM

2015-08-24T16:42:35-04:00

There is now a $600 million lawsuit filed against the company and Canada reports that 2 suicides have been linked to the scandal (Newsmax tv, AUG 24). Fidelity saves lives.

Response by LT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 27 at 2015 10:53 AM

2015-08-27T10:53:33-04:00

Adultery is against the UCMJ, I don't think we as a military need to make an example of everyone but I do believe that everyone should be held accountable despite the outcome.

Response by Maj Mike Sciales made Aug 30 at 2016 1:06 PM

2016-08-30T13:06:54-04:00

Ask how the service was.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 30 at 2016 3:25 PM

2016-08-30T15:25:35-04:00

Call them a dumbass and keep it movin'.