8 October 2010. Updated. See identities of alleged Cryptome hackers and consequences:

http://cryptome.org/0002/cryptome-hack4.htm

7 October 2010. This will be updated periodically.

Previous Cryptome hacks:

http://cryptome.org/cryptome-hack.htm
http://cryptome.org/0001/ms-spy-takedown.htm

Reports with sparse informative comments by Cryptome:

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/10/cryptome-hacked/ (the most recycled spin-doctoring)
http://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/cryptome-hack-it-prank-or-payback-100610

Cryptome Hack 3

8 October 2010

Earthlink Hacked

http://support.earthlink.net/contact/outages.php?cat=Email&id=69599

Note "Train Req" at the top. This nym was blamed for the Cryptome hack (below) but has denied it. It is likely Earthlink does not know it has been hacked or is trying to hide it from customers, futilely. This page was apparently triggered by our IP address. If you don't see it from your address, please send a note to cryptome[at]earthlink.net, if you dare (additional security added at this end but who knows, consider PGP - our PK). Screenshot 8 October 2010, 7:40AM ET, first seen about 3:30AM during the email outage, now "reolved." Hardly.

Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 12:46:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Marina <marin24a[at]yahoo.com>
Subject: www.yayo.org
To: cryptome[at]earthlink.net

http://www.yayo.org

It has come to my attention [via this file] that yayo.org may have been used by hackers as an outlet to brag their recent "accomplishments." I would like to make it clear that we do not endorse or encourage childish behavior such as hacking in this community, as stated in the board policy:

http://www.yayo.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3666.

Subsequently, I have permanently banned every user in suspected violation of aforementioned policy ("kryogeniks") and have no further comment for any news media or law enforcement organizations.

Kevin Padillac
Webmaster

Click here to enter the forum.

From: Paul Roberts <Paul.Roberts[at]kaspersky.com>
To: John Young <jya[at]pipeline.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 10:00:51 -0400
Subject: RE: Cryptome hack

Hey John. Saw the link to my report. Thanks. Follow up ?: do you know 
if Earthlink is reaching out to the FBI? My understanding from your post 
is that you aren't making any effort to involve law enforcement? Or are 
you? What can you tell me about the identity(ies) of those you believe 
are responsible? Interested in doing a follow up to this if there's enough 
to go forward with...

Paul

__________

Paul,

Earthlink is pushing for LE involvement, presumably in response
to Zetter's comedic hoot [journalist cant: "we take protection of 
sources very seriously"]. I told Earthlink Cryptome is often at odds 
with LE so not ready to go to diseased pervs until more sanitary 
tools are tried. 

IDs of the perps who allegedly shot-shit to Wired are known widely, 
and are known rats inanely sucking-up to Wired to be made infamous 
by the hacker-pimp metronomically.

Whether they are the Cryptome hackers or imposters fronting for
the true criminals, saw the perps' braggardy somewhere, made
up a fictional hack and forged screenshots and files or just the 
standard lame bullshitters phapping feverishly on BBs and chat 
rooms aspiring to be mini-Mitnicked by Wired is yet to be told.

The BBs claim the hackers are nut gargling, many-used vaginal
lickers, in apt praise of the special-eds. Insults which make Jon
Stewart, Wired, you and me extremely old fartish.

John

7 October 2010

Earthlink called to say we've seen the Wired report.

We said, Wired published no evidence for hack, just talk.

Earthlink said yes but we want to solve this matter.

Get evidence.

Oh ... right, absolutely right, Earthlink said.

Earthlink asked if Cryptome wanted to bring the FBI into the email hack.

Wait for evidence.

Earthlink asked if we had information on the hackers.

Allegations.

Earthlink asked if we would share those.

Not evidence.

Earthlink said we are a victim too and need to trace the hackers.

Hmm.

Earthlink asked to be kept informed.

Sure. (Is this being recorded?)

7 October 2010

Most recent news reports are based on Wired's unsubstantiated allegations of the Cryptome hack, luridly smeared "a breach of Cryptome's secret-spilling files on sources." Wired is known for its hype and distortion of "evidence" and unsubstantiated allegations from publicity-seeking hackers -- Adrian Lamo's preening snitch one among many Wired adores pumping. The alleged Cryptome hackers have been touted by Wired before using the same artfully doctored technique. 

Cryptome asked Wired's Kim Zetter for copies of evidence allegedly shown to her by those she claimed did the Cryptome hack so it could be examined for legitimacy. She refused, as journalists often do expecting them to be believed as they spin their stories for maximum ad sales.

Cryptome believes Zetter is lying about what she has been shown using the hoary defense of protecting sources when actually protecting the right to write a story most appealing to the gullible. And will surely hide the lies behind "constitutionally protected" press shields conveniently arranged by government to keep the press obediently head up ass "simply seeking the truth" in the darkhole.

Hmm, that technique has been lately adopted by Wikileaks and its gaggle of media co-conspirators supposedly hard at work doctoring Iraq war files for maximum ad sales following the lucrative Afgan war diary fabrications. Hacker heroes of the Ellsberg-new-media brand -- "most dangerous people in the world" hired by the thousands to suck Tor-grade data for DoD.

6 October 2010

Cryptome: On Kim Zetter's report on the hack: Cryptome has never promised security to correspondents at its end, that has to be done at the sender's end with the caveat often repeated here, there is no online security, none. Digital security is the weakest of all forms of communication, leaky by design to "facilitate administration and provide security."

Security along with sacred cow encryption are fraudulent by design, check with a cryptographer mediating all sides. Cryptome frequently posts warnings of its untrustworthiness due to it being an online outlet in the vast spying apparatus, the Internet.

Wikileaks among many others -- ISPs, email providers, governments, security peddlers, commercial firms, non-profits, banks -- promises impossible protection as a deceptive lure. Network Solutions and Earthlink have called to say they are not at fault for the hack while promising to provide maximum help to lawful investigators but not directly to John Young and Cryptome. Instead they suggest we sign-up for advanced security products, else we are at fault for their incompetency -- security hustlers favorite exculpation.

Both expressed "very servious concern" about the hack, but repeated they were not at fault. Both made security suggestions to be kept "secret from the enemy," the infamous "security by obscurity," a certain sign of poor security. This legalese script is the typical CYA response of those promising security and confidentiality, including officials, Wikileaks, journalists and hackers, all in a pea pod together flogging their brand of " 'information wants to be free' for us but not for others who must pay or be put at risk," a modern version of the ancient threat to burn in hell.

Apt back-scratching triangulation of governmental protection of religion and press.

Cliches of "secret spilling" and "whistleblowing" are not what Cryptome does, those are bombastic patois of touts.

October 3, 2010

A3 writes:

I read your website was hacked. Can you publish some more information about this? For example how did you find out who it did, Was there something stolen (confidential emails / information). How was that hack even possible, was it brute force or using a know exploit? What do you do to block further attempts?

Cryptome: We have just posted an account of the hack on Cryptome home page. A person wrote claiming to know who did the hack. No way to know if this claim is true. Hackers, like spies, often blame one another to cover their tracks. Blocking attacks is nearly impossible due to the purposefully weak security of the Internet. Nearly all security methods are bogus. A competent hacker or spy, or the two working together, can penetrate easily. We monitor and keep back-ups ready. And do not trust our ISP, email provider and officials to tell the truth or protect us.

October 3, 2010

Cryptome: Steps of the Cryptome hack on the morning of 2 October 2010.

1. The Cryptome email account at Earthlink was accessed by unknown means and its access password changed.

2. According to emailed notifications from Network Solutions (NSI) retreived after email access was restored, the hacker requested information about Cryptome's multiple accounts by using the email address.

3. With a password guessed or stolen by unknown means the Cryptome.org management account at NSI was accessed.

4. All 54,000 files (some 7GB) were deleted and the account password changed.

5. NSI was sending emails of the account management modifications.

6. The hack was discovered by lack of access to email or to the Cryptome.org NSI account.

7. A call to NSI support restored all files from a back-up except for the previous two days.

8. An Earthlink online support chat restored email access and showed the NSI emails about management changes.

9. New passwords for Earthlink and NSI were set.

10. Email is not stored at Earthlink. What undelivered email might have been deleted by the hacker is unknown, the NSI and a couple of spam emails were awaiting delivery.

11. The other Cryptome accounts hosted by NSI do not seem to have been affected.

12. This is the second shutdown hack in 14 years. Except the one by Microsoft abusing DMCA.

__________

A2 writes this was the Cryptome home page left by hacker at 1:45AM, 2 October 2010:

__________

A writes the Cryptome hack was done by a person described here:

http://encyclopediadramatica.com/XyriX

Cryptome was hacked this morning about 3:45 AM, down for about six hours, now restored. Email hacked also, now restored. Cryptome home page left by hacker, 5:15 AM, 2 October 2010: