Developer of hacked Snapchat web app says “Snappening” claims are hoax
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
umm.... so what's the story with the 13 gb torrent of snapchat images and videos? A torrent file so big, that it cannot be uploaded to TPB, you have to download a torrent of the torrent file...
https://thepiratebay.se/torrent/1119965 ... rrent_file
from what i understand it's about 90,000 images and 9,000 videos.
https://thepiratebay.se/torrent/1119965 ... rrent_file
from what i understand it's about 90,000 images and 9,000 videos.
Upvote
4
(14
/
-10)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27763907#p27763907:iwq3vau6 said:
The dev is saying the claims of personal information about the pics being available is the hoax. Obviously leaked pics are a thing.
Upvote
33
(33
/
0)
So they were examining each of the Snapchat images that went through their service. Sorry to imply that SnapSaved didn't respect our privacy.
Upvote
44
(46
/
-2)
So, they write an app specifcally designed to send and recieve pictures that people would otherwise not want the recipient to save, forward, archive, etc. and then everyone acts surprised that people (including kids and adults) are using it to send nude / pornographic pictures. Further, is it really shocking that someone developed a way to save these items? If you wouldn't want your items to end up on the front page of the newspaper then don't send them.
I am in no way victim blaming - however with the current state of data security on the internet then a breach is not just a slight risk, it is approaching the status of inevitable. Knowing this, people need to really think about what they are willing to send over an insecure communications medium. Of course, all the security in the world can't prevent the recipient of such pictures / movies from getting angry with the sender and posting it all online anyway.
Cheers!
-N
I am in no way victim blaming - however with the current state of data security on the internet then a breach is not just a slight risk, it is approaching the status of inevitable. Knowing this, people need to really think about what they are willing to send over an insecure communications medium. Of course, all the security in the world can't prevent the recipient of such pictures / movies from getting angry with the sender and posting it all online anyway.
Cheers!
-N
Upvote
17
(29
/
-12)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27763941#p27763941:3w131otl said:
Well, they resect their own. I'm still trying to track down the developers, who hid themselves behind a Whois guard to protect their domain registration data. I'd say it's possible that they built the site specifically for their own entertainment.
Upvote
66
(66
/
0)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27763937#p27763937:1uw3o7mz said:
I'm just not sure why 500mb is being referenced when everyone else is reporting ~13gb... It's like someone saying only 1 CD's worth of information was stolen as opposed to 26 CD's... That's quite the discrepancy.
Upvote
33
(34
/
-1)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27763965#p27763965:2w523gjq said:
From what I've seen (and I have not gone after the torrent myself), there are a number of claims about torrents of this data that are actually filled with other images and videos not from Snapchat. There are a number of conflicting claims. If anyone has downloaded the torrent and can confirm its size and the number of photos and videos, and wants to go on record about it, feel free to contact me.
Upvote
30
(30
/
0)
Upvote
26
(26
/
0)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27763937#p27763937:ujj30nb1 said:
Good thing that photographs of people are completely devoid of identifying information.
Upvote
47
(47
/
0)
I've just gotten an email from someone calling themselves "Riot," an "anonymous freelance security researcher," who claims to have done a data analysis of the Snappening files. He (I am assuming Riot is a he, but apologies for the gender error if not) says there are 6.8 gigs of images and 6.1 gigs of video. I'm going to update the story, with full disclaimers.
Upvote
23
(24
/
-1)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27763961#p27763961:harkpbl9 said:
If "If you wouldn't want your items to end up on the front page of the newspaper then don't send them." isn't the definition of victim blaming, then I don't know what is.
Upvote
10
(44
/
-34)
"In other words, SnapSaved was apparently manually reviewing the photos that passed through the website."
I wonder how legal that was.
I wonder how legal that was.
Upvote
37
(37
/
0)
I'm sure the owners of sites like reddit are going to be expending just as much effort keeping leaked pictures of ordinary people off their sites as they did for "the fappening" after the lawyers got involved. /s
Upvote
16
(17
/
-1)
Sounds insane. They should have client-side encrypted this stuff - let end users share passwords that never even make it to server. Or maybe they just wanted to sift through people's photos...?
Upvote
21
(21
/
0)
This story continues to get more mind-boggling. Reviewing their users' photos for inappropriate content?
Upvote
43
(43
/
0)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27764061#p27764061:101ibkyz said:
Read the rest. If there existed a place where you could trade whatever pictures you wanted in a totally secure way, then my attitude would be different. Clearly the direct cause of the problem in this case lies with the people who exploited the server and stole the data. My point was that the proximate cause is the lack of security present for these types of communication. Thus, knowing that the system is insecure there is a risk of sending questionable content to other people if you aren't comfortable with the fact that there is a high risk of exposure then you always have the choice to not send the item in the first place. My point is the risk is avoidable. Although in this case with people thinking that the pictures would be deleted and then having them surreptitiously archived on a web server shifts the risk somewhat.
Cheers!
-N
Upvote
7
(17
/
-10)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27764055#p27764055:1ewuf4rb said:
When I looked at the torrent, it was only 60% complete...
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
With all the recent breaches, only one thing is abundantly clear:
Cloud storage is not as safe and secure as the service providers' claim.
Any idea if SnapChat's EULA mentions their staff will be viewing user data for "inappropriate content" ?
Cloud storage is not as safe and secure as the service providers' claim.
Any idea if SnapChat's EULA mentions their staff will be viewing user data for "inappropriate content" ?
Upvote
-12
(3
/
-15)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27763963#p27763963:18ba1zww said:
I wonder if there was ever actually a breach at all...
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27764061#p27764061:34vd0cvw said:
We wouldn't want to blame victims, so we'll just tell teenagers, "Go ahead, explore your sexuality, send naked snapchats to cute members of the other sex for fun. Yeah, sure your name and naked pics will end up in a publicly searchable database on the internet, but it totally won't be your fault."
Upvote
28
(41
/
-13)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27763977#p27763977:1x3zs2oj said:
As someone who's been keeping up with "The Fappening" latest releases by reading the forums where they're released to the public, some of the initial "Snappening" talk was illuminating. One of the initial 12+GB bulk bittorrent leaks is said to have still had personal data attached and been distributed by Bittorrent Sync. Directory structure was by region or large city (e.g., Telemark, Nordland, etc.), then by name (usually first-name/last-initial), with all of a user's images and videos in the user's directory. Almost nowhere outside Europe is said to be listed. This archive was deprecated in favor of the one with no personally identifying information, with all the videos in one directory and images in another.
Most of the content is said to be nonsexual, just short clips or images from daily life. The NSFW content was quickly sifted out into the 500MB archive. Almost none of the NSFW content is said to feature minors, though a few downloaders on the forums have reported seeing a very small amount--less than 1% according to one commenter--of such content.
So, almost all of the "leaked" content is said to be European. The vast majority of the "leak" is said to be just personal snaps from daily life, not at all NSFW. Only a very small amount, less than 1%, of the NSFW content is said to feature minors.
Upvote
19
(19
/
0)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27764109#p27764109:3vcvjgwl said:
How are they going to figure out which pics to save to their personal jump drives unless they are reviewed for *wink* *nudge* "inappropriate content".
Upvote
18
(18
/
0)
Even if they knew the recipient's (their customer's) age, how are they supposed to know the sender's age? Can they really tell a 17year364day old from a 18year old?[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27764109#p27764109:3i00ugsp said:
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27764191#p27764191:2a1mlbcw said:
Giving people, in advance, sensible advice in how to stay safe is not victim blaming.
Telling people whose privacy has now been violated that it's their fault for not doing X, that is victim blaming.
It's not that difficult people.
Upvote
27
(33
/
-6)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27764191#p27764191:19qpgzs8 said:
This is America, suggesting the possibility of personal responsibility is Victim Blaming.
Before someone makes the idiotic comparisons between CC breaches and stolen pictures.
If someone steals your CC info, you get to deal with the wonks at the bank for a few weeks, then back to normal, lesson learned. If someone steals private/compromising pictures of you, those are out there forever, period.
Upvote
14
(31
/
-17)
Also lots of complaints that the 12gig zip file was corrupted and would not unzip. LOL all that download time for nothing. Makes you wonder if the whole thing is a hoax - has anyone seen any of these files?[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27764197#p27764197:dyrkxclc said:
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
This should be a reminder to all that the security of some data is not guaranteed if someone else also knows the encryption key.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27764243#p27764243:1oi0rskp said:
The Bittorrent Sync release is said to have not been compressed, just files in a directory structure--region or large city, then first-name/last-initial. It is said to no longer work, and is now effectively offline. The ~12GB archive now available, without such personally identifying information, is said to be compressed with 7zip and only decompresses properly when using 7zip--WinRAR and WinZip uncompressing is said to give errors.
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
I'm guessing that this is more of a not-thought-out CYA response, least someone come knocking on their door for having a bunch of kiddie porn on their servers. They weren't actually doing that, but in their minds, it sounded like a good thing to say at the time. Before someone mentioned that sifting through everyone's "private" photos is more disturbing than just blindly hosting those photos.[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27764109#p27764109:32l999el said:
Upvote
3
(4
/
-1)
So the person who posted the original SnapChat is victimized multiple times. Once by their "friend" who chose to surreptitiously save the Snap. Next by the "developer" doing occasional "QA" to weed out child porn. Then by the person who felt it was worthwhile to not only hack the content but post it on torrent. And then by the multiple curious Georges who feel the need to browse the stuff.
Sad state of affairs and sad to see so poor a showing of human nature.
Sad state of affairs and sad to see so poor a showing of human nature.
Upvote
15
(18
/
-3)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27764197#p27764197:3cr9o77z said:
so 5mb of child porn is now acceptable?
Will law enforcement be going after downloads of the nsfw torrent for distributing child porn? It's pretty obvious to me that it's well know it is there...
Upvote
-19
(6
/
-25)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27764295#p27764295:a1euiys4 said:
Where did I say that any of it was acceptable? I was just reading forums for news about naked celebrities when news about naked regular people broke, and am telling Ars what was said at the time.
Upvote
26
(26
/
0)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27764197#p27764197:28pxhj85 said:
In some places, a minor is a person who's under 18 years old. I doubt there are many people who can easily distinguish between a 17 year old (a minor) and an 18 year old (not a minor).
Upvote
24
(24
/
0)
The whole thing probably is a hoax. From trying to get at the big Wikileaks torrents, which also touched very large .torrent sizes, very few torrent clients will even handle them without freezing, crashing or otherwise fucking up.[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27764243#p27764243:1qhx9h3u said:
Upvote
-5
(1
/
-6)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27764353#p27764353:3q9r9n22 said:
I don't know whether µTorrent or any other client is good at handling very large files. As I said though, one of the earliest releases, the one with intact region/name directory structure, was made by Bittorrent Sync and was uncompressed. The ~12GB 7zip file currently being distributed through bittorrent, was initially uploaded to the filesharing service Mega before being torrented.
Upvote
-1
(0
/
-1)
[url=http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=27764275#p27764275:13awquts said:
But didn't you hear? It's their fault for taking the pictures in the first place.
Upvote
-16
(1
/
-17)
- Status