July 15, 2009

Twitter vs. TechCrunch: Heads in the clouds... and elsewhere

When a hacker steals corporate information, is it ethical for a news site to post it? That's today's kerfuffle engulfing Twitter and TechCrunch. Cringe has a few thoughts

Whenever Michael Arrington posts anything on TechCrunch with a theme of "Ethics 101," you know you're in for some unintentional high comedy. Such was the case today when someone calling himself "Hacker Croll" dumped a carton of internal Twitter documents on TechCrunch's doorstep.

Apparently Twitter keeps all its corporate docs in a Google cloud, and some hacker with a lot of time on his hands was able to use Google's password recovery tools to gain access to the goods. But Croll didn't just grab official Twitter memos; he (she?) managed to hack Twitter founder Evan Williams' PayPal, Amazon, Apple, and AT&T accounts, as well personal information for other Twitter employees and the names of people who've interviewed for jobs there.

[ This isn't the first time Cringely and the 'Crunch have tangled. See the earlier post: "Conversation? What conversation?" | Stay up to date on Robert X. Cringely's musings and observations with InfoWorld's Notes from the Underground newsletter. ]

In a blog post, Captain Crunch publicly debated whether to post some of the documents, many of which were of a highly personal nature. Then he decided to publish some of them anyway (though he says he would not publish overtly personal information).

The funny thing is, lots of TechCrunch readers -- most of whom are loyal to Arrington in a way unmatched by anybody this side of Rush Limbaugh fans -- didn't want him to publish any of it. The Guardian's Charles Arthur puts it nicely:

His readers were less impressed - and if TechCrunch's readers aren't impressed, you can bet that what has been done is really unimpressive.

In a Twitpoll (yes, there really is such a thing) posted by Felipe Coimbra, roughly 54 percent of Twitter responders said publishing the docs would be unethical. Only a third supported putting the docs online.

Yet did that deter the Arringtard? Not a bit. In a response to the responses, he wrote:

White Paper

D2D Virtual Tape Library Replication Primer

This whitepaper explains the terminology and concepts behind Data Replication technologies and establishes some sizing rules through worked examples. Learn the new paradigm in disaster tolerance—protect data anywhere.

Download now »

White Paper

An Alternative to Virtualization for Datacenter Cost Savings

Server virtualization is a popular option for dealing with mounting datacenter costs. Another equally promising approach is the use of an Application Delivery Controller. Citrix NetScaler provides a low-cost way for organizations to reduce their server count and accrue cost savings from a reduction in space, cooling, power and personnel.

Download now »

White Paper

Why Your Firewall, VPN, and IEEE 802.11i Aren't Enough to Protect Your Network

The emergence of WLANs has created a new breed of security threats to enterprise networks.

Included in HP ProCurve WLAN solutions is security technology that alleviates threats from WLANs through:
* Monitoring wireless activity inside and out of the enterprise
* Classifying WLAN transmissions into harmful and harmless
* Preventing transmissions that pose a security threat to the enterprise network
* Locating participating devices for physical remediation

Download now »

White Paper

Bringing the Edge to the Data Center

Effectively address data protection challenges, implementing solutions that help store and protect business–critical data while cutting costs and improving efficiency and reliability.

Download now »
aaugh 15-Jul-09 9:49am
It brings up an advantage of using public clouds. It's a convenient scapegoat for security breaches -- it's the cloud provider's fault. It would be interesting to see a legal case to see how liability would be allocated. Also, the "ethical" constraints may be looser. If the information had been stolen from Twitter's own servers, would TechCrunch be as quick to publish it?
KevinH 15-Jul-09 10:13am
Hmmm. If Arrington's head is indeed stuck in a "somewhat more earthbound extremity" then it is he who should "hold his breath." *does drum roll, hits cymbol*
KevinH 15-Jul-09 10:14am
(...cymbal...) grrrrr
neils 15-Jul-09 10:46am
1 reply
Public good? Do you want to define that? Who, exactly, is this public that you want to benefit? The majority? A minority? You? Me? Or is this like porn (you can't define it but know it when you see it)? Let's get real... There is no such thing as "public good" and journalists are no more ethical than anyone else. Newspapers print what they believe their readers are (or sometimes should be) interested in. Bloggers do the same.
Robert X. Cringely 17-Jul-09 5:36am
you're right, you can't easily define "public good." that's why I say it's a judgement call. journalists aren't more or less ethical than other professions, but every publication (and blogger) defines a line it will or won't cross. the line at TC seems to be drawn with an Etch-A-Sketch, and seems to be based mostly on whether The Man is worried someone else will publish this info before they do. they aren't the only ones who do this, but that's not how most reputable publications operate.
peace out,
rxc
cynthiaholladay 15-Jul-09 11:47am
1 reply
If you stand for nothing, you'll fall for anything.
Robert X. Cringely 17-Jul-09 5:30am
I love that.
Rey_Carr 15-Jul-09 12:03pm
Hit the target. Might TechCrunch have contacted Twitter before going public; alerted them to the story, asked for comment reaction to include with story? What would Woodward & Bernstein have done with DeepThroat's revelations, had they gone to Nixon first before publishing the story? Can't be done; must maintain independence of the press and not taint story with spin by source.
xeniar 15-Jul-09 12:08pm
Greate cringe read! Much more fun than the original "news". Thanks!
cm1234567890 15-Jul-09 11:01pm

I had to admit I registered with Infoworld only to submit a comment, as this is really outrageous.

First: thanks for serving the public with this post. This is the kind of news I would expect from a sound person. I might not always agree with your comments, but I have not yet seen an instance where you hadn't applied your lithmus test of serving the public.

Second: Michael Arrington's comments justifying his acts are a disgrace to journalism (since when newspaper magnates define journalism ethics?). After his corrupted view admission I had to reclassify his writings from the "useful information" to the "tabloid news" category to avoid taken for granted some unresearched topic he might have published in the past. This is similar to when a CSI is shown to be corrupt: all previous cases are nullified as the evidence can't be trusted.

Now I wish I had a mental "search and reclassify" to find all bits of information I got from him....

rcprimak 16-Jul-09 2:53pm
The real story here is how easily the Google Password Recovery System was pwned. Hackers can get into accounts, steal documents and e-mails, hijack G-mail accounts to send out truckloads of spam, and the list goes on and on. Partly because of Google (and other Web Service Providers) switching over to Single Log In, so that one cracked password gets the hacker into everything the account owner has done anywhere at the Provider's site(s). Great security, Google!

And this is the Company which wants to own your next Operating System! HAH!! I think I'd better check my Yahoo Account now, and see who's pwning it today.

Wretched 20-Jul-09 6:05pm
Another example of someone profiting by receiving stolen property. And thats all it was about: profit. What a slut.
falsecut 24-Jul-09 7:50am
Cringe, since you posted about nude photos of Arrington, we now have nude photos taken of the ESPN reporter Erin Andrews. Any comments about that? And the NY Post publishing 'stills'? I thought ESPN had a good response to the Post, banning them from their station.
BigRonG 27-Jul-09 1:19pm

Frankly, nude photos wouldn't dent the daily Internet din. It would be the 'action' in the photos that would create interest. If they were 'artsy fartsy', what would be the point? If he was molesting a 15 year-old, it would be porn and probably the authorities would investigate. If he were performing some bizarre act, it would cause comment and questions. So the example wasn't all that great. Now if you came into possession of his bank records and published them (removing his SSN and bank numbers) - well, then you have a story and an ethical debate!

Sign up to receive Web Services Resource Alerts

Subscribe to the Robert X. Cringely: Notes from the Trenches Newsletter

The one-stop resource center for IT professionals.

©1994-2009 Infoworld, Inc.