Their approach was quite unique, though. It surprises me how hackers trust each other enough to send money without proof, especially in an environment where you're expected not to trust anybody.
Escrow was pretty popular on Raidforums, high reputation forum users would not only escrow transactions directly but also do things like pseudo-publicly validate or invalidate claims by checking a sellers data or tools against their own collections (presumably the benefits of being a professional hacker escrow and seeing lots of data).
It’s just not a lot of money in most cases. Often in the hundred to few thousand range. And there is usually a data sample, such as the schema and the first 100 rows, or a demo. Of course, those aren’t strict guarantees but it does make faking it all more difficult.
In hacker world, the liability is distributed just like in corporations
the person hacking data isn’t usually the person turning that into money, the person turning it into money isn’t the person doing identify fraud, or breaking into users bank accounts etc
But whoever takes on the most liability stands to make the most money
But whoever trades the liability only gets a little bit
> Mogilevich says that it sold this material to eight buyers
Who are these buyers? Do they have criminal intent, or are they professional security conducting an investigation? Obviously the whole thing is just the word of someone who is either a hacker or a fraudster. I just like the idea of a half dozen government agencies buying any hacks they can find online.
For me, post truth is the belief that truth and lying don't exist or that the truth is less important than the belief. That's different from intentional and willed lying to get an end. They don't believe they are lying.
I once had a colleague who told me in very serious terms "the truth doesn't matter" in relation to his and many others shared perceptions of a political issue. I rapidly disengaged from working with him. It is deeply scary.
Readit News
And they say there is no honor among thieves
Their approach was quite unique, though. It surprises me how hackers trust each other enough to send money without proof, especially in an environment where you're expected not to trust anybody.
[0] Lying for Money: How Legendary Frauds Reveal the Workings of Our World
the person hacking data isn’t usually the person turning that into money, the person turning it into money isn’t the person doing identify fraud, or breaking into users bank accounts etc
But whoever takes on the most liability stands to make the most money
But whoever trades the liability only gets a little bit
I.e. pay for the first part to get the 2nd, and so on.
Who are these buyers? Do they have criminal intent, or are they professional security conducting an investigation? Obviously the whole thing is just the word of someone who is either a hacker or a fraudster. I just like the idea of a half dozen government agencies buying any hacks they can find online.
Well, if you know you know.
Nice way to commit suicide by a shotgun buckshot in the back.
For me, post truth is the belief that truth and lying don't exist or that the truth is less important than the belief. That's different from intentional and willed lying to get an end. They don't believe they are lying.
I once had a colleague who told me in very serious terms "the truth doesn't matter" in relation to his and many others shared perceptions of a political issue. I rapidly disengaged from working with him. It is deeply scary.
https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/538216/art-heist-stolen-...