Vote 2020 graphic
Everything you need to know about and expect during
the most important election of our lifetimes

Sarah Palin's Email Hackers' Sloppy Work Could Lead to Their Arrests

Illustration for article titled Sarah Palins Email Hackers Sloppy Work Could Lead to Their Arrests

By now you've probably heard about how the super-duper 1337 h4ck3r5 from anonymous busted into one of Sarah Palin's private email accounts and posted the contents for the world to see. Well, it looks like those h4ck3r5 aren't as 1337 as one might think, as they left themselves pretty wide open to get busted for what they did. You see, it appears that the hacker(s) used the proxy Ctunnel.com to access the account. Smart move, using a proxy! What was less smart was including the entire address in your screenshots, as that kind of defeats the purpose of using a proxy. Says Ctunnel.com owner Gabriel Ramuglia:

Usually, this sort of thing would be hard to track down because it's Yahoo email, and a lot of people use my service for that. Since they were dumb enough to post a full screen shot that showed most of the [Ctunnel.com] URL, I should be able to find that in my log.

Advertisement

Oops! If the hacker in question wasn't doing his work from an internet café or using a second anonymizing service, it shouldn't be tough to track them down. And since this was definitely a federal offense, anonymous might be getting a little less anonymous in the not-too-distant future. [The Register via Boy Genius]

Share This Story

Get our newsletter

DISCUSSION

The FBI's and teh NSA were/are reading people's emails every day without warrants (some of you may have heard of warrantless wiretapping and immunity for telecoms (who broke the law)).

Where's the outrage on that? Michelle Malkin is all over this "hack", but defends the right of the government (as long as it's repub) to spy on and render whomever they want.

The real story here is that Palin was taking a page from the Rove playbook and using her yahoo account for back channel communications. We only have the word of the "hacker" that there was nothing incriminating, and of course he/she couldn't read all the stuff that may have been deleted.