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 …
The Air Force waterboards every pilot as a part of SERE training. Not comfortable but it's a lot less damaging than rubber hoses and bamboo shoots.
Weird or weird?
Just goes to show that most of these Hollywood "celebrities" or "stars" are d-list egomaniac dumbnuts. Take pictures of yourself nude, then leave them in your email folders - WTF.
Can I just say...
...that on my personal stunning-burd-o-meter, SJ only rates a "meh". ie one point behind that clothes hanger Kiera Knightley, by virtue that KK does at least have less "bad lighting" moments.
Then again, naked pics may improve that rating a little...
Look up, Look down
Pictures look fake to me. In the second pictures (ass shot) she is looking down in the foreground but the position of her phone in the background reflection suggests she should be looking up.
The wallpaper in the background is exactly the same as that in the bedroom shown in a real estate listing for her house.
Now right there
we have the obsessed stalker.
They had pics from a realtor agency of the bedroom in the same article - furniture rearranged but same place as SJ took her pics in.
Had a look at both pictures.
Seems that SJ made a right tit, and a complete arse of herself
Cleaning up after yourself, or not
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.
True, but a friend's mother at least had enough clue
to ask someone who does, how to go about before handing off her laptop. So it's not just the 'no clue about how this stuff works's that is the problem. It's the 'I have something I ought to protect' issue that is a problem.
So, what did the friend's mother have on their then?
I'm not worried
Back when naked pictures of me were of any interest to anyone, they were still using the daguerreotype process.
...although I found out that it's really hard to scrape that damn charcoal off the cave walls
"celebrities deserved privacy on their personal phones and emails as much as anyone else"
but they don't deserve more and they don't deserve special treatment
You managed a totally content-free post. Well done.
/at work right now connected to home proxy
/winsshd and tunnelier made it extremely easy to setup encrypted secure proxy
Already saw pictures last night.. oh yeah they are real. ahem.
I'm not stupid. Not going to check out nsfw sites at work even on a proxy.
Don't any of the commentators here feel in the slightest bit sorry for this woman, rather than disgusting pursuit of personal gratification.
Well... yes... a bit. But I still looked up the images on my mobile. *mildly ashamed*
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.
Not really dreadful
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.
Best of luck blocking the peeps running sshd on port 80 of their home machine. <whistles tunelessly whilst examining ceiling>
"...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.
@Clare, RE: same as short skirt argument
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 police manual says
They're going to take a VERY long time reviewing any images and will probably need the lovely Ms Johansson to disrobe just to ensure they're genuine and not a crude Photoshop job.
Don't record ANYTHING....
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.
@ David D. Hagood
"Because no matter what, as soon as that information leaves your brain, it CAN be accessed by others"
So, if its ok to fantasize about ScarJo, as long as I don't commit anything to media?
OK!! I'm on it!!!
She has two...
..spots on her forehead. Tut tut. I expect my celebs to be flawless always..
I noticed that myself.. but would I.. yes!
Socially awkward penguin situation
- Click on Scarlett Johannson nude pix newsflash to be first in comment section.
- Two pages of comments!
That is all.
... there's a public interest defence.
... a pubic interest defence?
Okay, it on the peg by the door ...
Does my arse look big in this?
Maybe she has been offered nude work a film or a nude photo shoot in some magazine or other and wanted to know if she looked good enough to do it. Maybe they are just self pics and she didn't send them to anyone.
Who's Scarlett Johansson?
She can use my phone
It's far less likely to be hacked. I wouldn't mind.
it's 'medulla oblongata', I'm afraid. You were doing well up to that point...
Of course, one of the advantages of "The Cloud" is that everything you store will be completely private. Oh, wait...
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.
Don't see what the fuss is about - nice ass but there are much better packages on Page 3 - Keeley for one...
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.