LulzSec redux dumps data from military raid

Powered by SC Magazine
 

Hackers deface site after admin denies evidence of breach.

Hackers calling themselves "LulzSec Reborn" have claimed responsibility for two breaches that resulted in the dumping of personal information.

The attackers on Sunday exposed the email account information, including names, usernames, passwords and IP addresses, belonging to some 170,000 members of MilitarySingles.com, an online dating website, according to a Pastebin document. The site remains operational, but apparently to show proof of their hack, the intruders defaced at least one page on the site, which is still reachable.

A spokesperson at the company that owns MilitarySingles,  ESingles Inc., did not respond to a request for comment. But someone claiming to be an administrator posted a comment on the DataBreaches.net website, which chronicles information loss incidents, and said it's possible the breach claim was "false" but that it would investigate.

More spilled information, including private messages shared among members of the site, could be on the way, according to a tweet Tuesday from "Operation Digiturk," which appears to be affiliated with Anonymous in Turkey.

Meanwhile, LulzSec Reborn on Monday also has announced, via another Pastebin post, that it hijacked the database belonging to CSS Corp, a technology solutions provider. The hackers claimed to have ripped off the names, phone numbers, usernames and passwords of users.

It appears unlikely that the person or group responsible for these two hacks was part of the original LulzSec, which closed up shop last June and whose members have been arrested since then.

This article originally appeared at scmagazineus.com

Copyright © SC Magazine, US edition


 
 
 
Top Stories
 
 
IAG hands digital chief his own ‘Labs’ division
Enterprise ops chief squeezed out in restructure.
 
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...
Latest Comments
Polls
Should law enforcement be able to buy and use exploits?



   |   View results
Yes
  14%
 
No
  51%
 
Only in special circumstances
  17%
 
Yes, but with more transparency
  18%
TOTAL VOTES: 826

Vote