So just to clarify
Did they probe Scartlett Johansson as well?
The FBI is probing hack attacks on celebs after nude photos of Scarlett Johansson were leaked onto the web last night. "The FBI is investigating the person or groups responsible for a series of computer intrusions involving high-profile figures," Laura Eimiller at the Federal Bureau of Investigation office in Los Angeles told …
This post has been deleted by a moderator
Whilst not as blatent as Kim Kardashian's awful sex tape, a cynic might suggest Ms Johansson won't be too upset at the publicity seeing as she seems to be struggling to make the Hollywoood A-list. Her recent movie roles haven't exactly been top-line, she even only landed the Black Widow role in Iron Man2 as second choice to Emily Blunt, and her more "serious" roles have been over-shadowed by more accomplished actresses like Natalie Portman and Jennifer Connelly. I can't understand why she gets such high scores in the annual "sexiest actress" polls, but maybe Scarlett has decided to sell herself on the assets that seem to have got her into the business in the first place.
Whilst all very nice, the more interesting info would be who the pics were emailed to, especially if they post-date her seperation from Ryan Reynolds.....
/Daily Mail mode off.
Personally, I think it's all a conspiracy by those nasty capitalists Kimberly-Clark, to drive up sales off Kleenex tissues, all in league with the bankers that wrecked the economy!
/loser rant mode off.
Oi-yoyyoy, this is what happens when nice Jewish grils date Canadians!
/Joan Rivers mode off.
This just goes to show that iPhones are serially insecure, and that what we really need is government intervention to set real security rules for people like Jobs and Balmer and those FOSS commies to stick to, 'cos I don't want my pics ending up on the Interweb!
/non-techie mode off.
Phew! Think I'll take a break and go look for some real news on the 'Net.
Real network administrators have a personal any-any firewall rule for themselves. Or, if that's too obvious, its the 2nd network port in their office that gives them a connection on the outside of the firewall/filter.
Or the window office and the 15dB wifi antenna pointed at the building down the street...
I remember a story a couple of years ago of a well known TV celeb who sold her old laptop on eBay. The person who bought it discover the waste basket was full of videos of her enjoying herself and the company of some well know men (note the use the plural).
Most people have no clue about how any of this stuff works. Where files and data might be, how to delete any of it or any idea that once these things are taken (seemed like a good idea at the time) just how difficult it is to make them go away.
Not really, sorry.
IIRC she has done nude posing previously (there is a tasteful one of her and Keira Knightly which shows as much or more than the leaked arse one and there are barely covered topless ones that are actually far sexier than the leaked booby-shot) so I see no real problem with the fact that we now get to see naked pictures of a celebrity who has already published naked pictures available.
That and the fact that these pictures are particularly tame indicates this is more likely publicity stunt than cyber crime, and surely we have seen no more of the highly pretty but less than averagely talented actress Scarlett Johannson than was already available.
No, whilst the sexist angle is getting a bit boring, it does at least give an IT angle - and of course for every described network loophole being penetrated there's another admin busy blocking it.
I think the majority view here is that it will be career-enhancing for her, so not really appropriate to feel sorry for her.
The more cynical here will be wondering whether she had a hand in their release.
I'm not out for the 'disgusting pursuit of personal gratification' as you put it (or as I'd put it, I'm not going looking for the pics), but I don't feel the least bit sorry for her. If you're famous and even moderately attractive and you're foolish enough to allow nude photos of yourself to exist then you really shouldn't be suprised when they eventually find thier way onto the net. If it hadn't been a hacker it would have been a disgruntled ex.
Being somewhat a fan of old movies, I've found it interesting to look up the bios of the actors. Noted that an older actress in a minor Mercahnt-Ivory flick had to rush from her job at a lost and found in NY for a role. The point being that only a very few actors, even of those that make films, make a fortune at this. Those that do, do so because of celebrity. Live by the sword.....................
No, but what I do find funny is that in the last 2 pages we have had:
Tips for avoiding work firewalls
We know she hasn't changed her wallpaper since an old real estate ad was posted
We know she hasn't got a half decent phone
We know she did pics with Keira Knightly
We know she has also posed in other mags either topless or near as damn it.
And we have had several links to the pics offered.
I haven't even started looking myself yet.
God forbid if a non-techy came here and found out that between us we have the knowledge to get all this info without leaving the work pc and leave very little trace in the process.
The fact that Scarlett Johannson has previously released pictures isn’t relevant. The fact that somebody has released these pictures on her behalf is a disgusting violation of her rights. It is the same argument that because a woman walks about in a short skirt ………
@AC 15th September 2011 22:26
I will be reviewing the position within my team with regard to these points. Hopefully we will be able to at least close these down.
For fuck's sake get some perspective.
Even if these pictures were in some way more personal than what was already in the public domain (put there by the lady herself for financial / publicity reasons) equating posting naked pictures of someone is hardly in the same class as rape.
But, to address the "violation" part, get with the facts:
Stolen material leaked: Boobage, booty, contents of bedroom
Material freely given: Boobage, booty, contents of bedroom
But again, you really need to chill out and get some perspective, equating the posting of semi-nude pictures of a celebrity with condoning rape is deeply wrong on so many levels.
"...the slightest bit sorry for this woman"
Ms Johansson is a professional actress near the peak of her profession, enjoying the fame and fortune that accompany her success. As such, she is likely to have number of people employed to help her maintain her fitness, appearance and public image - their advice and her own experience should tell her:
a) not to have any nude photographs of herself anywhere;
b) if she must have nude photographs of herself, keep them somewhere very safe.
No doubt there are many other attractive and talented young actresses who would like to have some of the opportunities enjoyed by Ms. Johansson and who would be prepared to take more care of their public image.
First rule: Don't record ANYTHING you don't want on the 6 o'clock news. Not on your phone. Not on video. Not on film. Not on audio tape. Not in your handwritten journal you hide in a ziplock bag in the toilet tank. No-where.
Because no matter what, as soon as that information leaves your brain, it CAN be accessed by others. Maybe not easily, maybe it's unlikely, but it is NOT impossible.
So you have to decide what you wouldn't object to being on the 6 o'clock news - maybe you don't care if they see you eating cake, but not your beergut hanging over your speedos. Or maybe you are find with the beergut (please! think of the REST of us!) but you have a problem with the world seeing that "things don't grow in the shade" IYKWIM. But whatever your personal boundaries are, you should give them thought before you hit record.
Honestly I dont see what all the fuss is about. I've seen the pics online, shes a nice girl, shes got a lovely bum and great boobs. She should be proud that so many men and women want to ogle her. I cant write here what i woudl do with her assets but they would be done with the utmost respect.
This is all PR. With the way the internet is anyone would know once these pictures are out they are out.
Sites like thedirty.com took the pictures down as part of a calculated measure to make the pictures even more in demand.
You cannot "steal" someones nude pictures and claim they were copywritten.
Everything you do in the united states is not copywritten. You have to pay for copyright protection and I doubt Scarjo was buying copyrights for her naked pictures that im sure she took herself.
She looks like hell naked, nobody wants to see that.
I have the pictures, if I had the lawyers i'd post em and ask them to show me the copyrights on them.
Glad to see the FBI is hard at work. Maybe ICE can get involved as well.
@James Woods: "Everything you do in the united states is not copywritten. You have to pay for copyright protection..."
Wrong. The very act of creating a creative work grants copyright protection in the US - no filing needed. It did not USED to be this way, but the law was changed.
Now, IF you don't correctly mark your new work (e.g. "This post copyright © 2011 David Hagood, all rights reserved") you will have problems with enforcing that copyright. Moreover, if you DO NOT register your copyright, you will limited in what damages you can collect vs. a registered item.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020