Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by nullc 1989 days ago
Don't worry, the "hacked material" rule on twitter will prevent anything derived from this being posted on twitter.

Right???

2 comments

Applying the rules uniformly means Twitter should wait 4 yrs and then ban them. I am sure you will agree to that.
You're referring to 2024 when twitter will ban the NY Times for posting materials derived from the orange clown's taxes and the NY Post for posting materials derived from the President-elect's son's laptop?

Ah. Wait. They took one of these actions within an hour of it going up. :P I suppose it'll be no time at all until they take down the account of the person hacking Parler and live tweeting the content being discussed in this article... which they've been doing for that past ... 48 hours.

Since it's WARC and is going to end up on archive.org (archive.org is going to host it, but a different org 'archive team' are the ones who downloaded it), twitter isn't going to stop it from being posted since it's just going to show up as a link to web.archive.org. Arguably this isn't 'hacked data' since it's stuff that was wget'd and no security measure circumvention took place.
> no security measure circumvention took place

You don't consider exploiting 2fa fail-open being triggered by deplatforming by their 2fa provider being used to mass password reset accounts and vacuum up their private messages not a security circumvention?

What about using a arbitrary content type upload on their video subdomain to implement an XSS attack to allow them to download all videos, including ones sent privately between users?

https://github.com/ArchiveTeam/parler-grab/blob/master/parle...

There might have been other attacks in the way you describe, but it doesn't seem to be used by the team behind archiving the content.

https://archive.org/details/archiveteam_neparlepas

Why can't I download these files from archive.org? All of the interesting files are marked as "not available for download"
Maybe because it's still being imported, but the archive.org team probably needs to review it and make it more widely available (ie. on web.archive.org).
If "the team needs to review it", I guess we're going to have another gatekeeper?