How many so called "statist" Republitards know their state constitutions?

[Harry Dresden]

Bass fuck up again.....after what he said in his second post you think the dipshit would at least show up again.....its been 2 days....evolutionary perfection is how he describes himself........

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Reids site wasn't collecting data or stealing anyones information that visited it. How does your source prove anything was being phished. People shouldn't use terminology that they don't understand.

It wasn't?

From my link.

The Reid campaign activated the prior sections of Angle's original website where supporters of Angle could enter their e-mail and other contact information for future campaign communications, as well as a form to sign up as a volunteer. I know that the "contact" section was operable because I filled it out the form and hit the "submit" button.

Turning these contact and volunteer functions live must have been a deliberate Reid campaign decision, because the "contribute" function on the spoofed website was inoperable. The Reid campaign clearly wanted to gather names and contact information on Angle supporters, but did not want to go so far as to take fraudulent donations.

Since the website was titled "The Real Sharron Angle" and looked like Angle's original website, it is likely that some people would have thought it was the real Sharron Angle website, and would provided private information under false pretenses if the fake website had continued.

I would like to point out that the author of that blog is a lawyer. and probably more familiar than you with what the terms he uses means,

 

[RDD_1210]

Reids site wasn't collecting data or stealing anyones information that visited it. How does your source prove anything was being phished. People shouldn't use terminology that they don't understand.

It wasn't?

From my link.

The Reid campaign activated the prior sections of Angle's original website where supporters of Angle could enter their e-mail and other contact information for future campaign communications, as well as a form to sign up as a volunteer. I know that the "contact" section was operable because I filled it out the form and hit the "submit" button.

Turning these contact and volunteer functions live must have been a deliberate Reid campaign decision, because the "contribute" function on the spoofed website was inoperable. The Reid campaign clearly wanted to gather names and contact information on Angle supporters, but did not want to go so far as to take fraudulent donations.

Since the website was titled "The Real Sharron Angle" and looked like Angle's original website, it is likely that some people would have thought it was the real Sharron Angle website, and would provided private information under false pretenses if the fake website had continued.

I would like to point out that the author of that blog is a lawyer. and probably more familiar than you with what the terms he uses means,

I would like to point out that a lawyer doesn't know more about phishing then I do, this I promise you.

 

[RDD_1210]

Wow, I missed that one. In answer to your question though.

Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion: Reid Campaign Targets Angle Supporters With Phishing Website

When are you going to answer mine?

Reids site wasn't collecting data or stealing anyones information that visited it. How does your source prove anything was being phished. People shouldn't use terminology that they don't understand.

What did you ask me?

* * * *

While creating a spoofed website may have reflected the childish ways of the Reid campaign, the way the Reid campaign set up the spoofed website was more nefarious.

The Reid campaign activated the prior sections of Angle's original website where supporters of Angle could enter their e-mail and other contact information for future campaign communications, as well as a form to sign up as a volunteer. I know that the "contact" section was operable because I filled it out the form and hit the "submit" button.

Turning these contact and volunteer functions live must have been a deliberate Reid campaign decision, because the "contribute" function on the spoofed website was inoperable. The Reid campaign clearly wanted to gather names and contact information on Angle supporters, but did not want to go so far as to take fraudulent donations.

* * * *

-- excerpted from Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion: Reid Campaign Targets Angle Supporters With Phishing Website [with my own highlighting]

As is often the case, RDD saying something and it being valid are two different things.

How the fuck would YOU, RDD, know what purpose was behind the obviously conscious decision of the Reid campaign efforts to engage in the "spoofing" of the angle web site?

Learn the difference between "spoofing" and "phishing", then get back to me. I never said a word about spoofing, just the claim that he was phishing.

 

[Liability]

Reids site wasn't collecting data or stealing anyones information that visited it. How does your source prove anything was being phished. People shouldn't use terminology that they don't understand.

What did you ask me?

* * * *

While creating a spoofed website may have reflected the childish ways of the Reid campaign, the way the Reid campaign set up the spoofed website was more nefarious.

The Reid campaign activated the prior sections of Angle's original website where supporters of Angle could enter their e-mail and other contact information for future campaign communications, as well as a form to sign up as a volunteer. I know that the "contact" section was operable because I filled it out the form and hit the "submit" button.

Turning these contact and volunteer functions live must have been a deliberate Reid campaign decision, because the "contribute" function on the spoofed website was inoperable. The Reid campaign clearly wanted to gather names and contact information on Angle supporters, but did not want to go so far as to take fraudulent donations.

* * * *

-- excerpted from Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion: Reid Campaign Targets Angle Supporters With Phishing Website [with my own highlighting]

As is often the case, RDD saying something and it being valid are two different things.

How the fuck would YOU, RDD, know what purpose was behind the obviously conscious decision of the Reid campaign efforts to engage in the "spoofing" of the angle web site?

Learn the difference between "spoofing" and "phishing", then get back to me. I never said a word about spoofing, just the claim that he was phishing.

Learn to read, stupid.

Since you seem rather dimwitted, I'll deign to assist you by repetition. Pay attention this time, you dolt:

"The Reid campaign clearly wanted to gather names and contact information on Angle supporters, but did not want to go so far as to take fraudulent donations."

 

[Missourian]

Amazing, no statists Republitards know their state constitution, shame on you statists!!

Inconceivable!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Reids site wasn't collecting data or stealing anyones information that visited it. How does your source prove anything was being phished. People shouldn't use terminology that they don't understand.

It wasn't?

From my link.

The Reid campaign activated the prior sections of Angle's original website where supporters of Angle could enter their e-mail and other contact information for future campaign communications, as well as a form to sign up as a volunteer. I know that the "contact" section was operable because I filled it out the form and hit the "submit" button.

Turning these contact and volunteer functions live must have been a deliberate Reid campaign decision, because the "contribute" function on the spoofed website was inoperable. The Reid campaign clearly wanted to gather names and contact information on Angle supporters, but did not want to go so far as to take fraudulent donations.

Since the website was titled "The Real Sharron Angle" and looked like Angle's original website, it is likely that some people would have thought it was the real Sharron Angle website, and would provided private information under false pretenses if the fake website had continued.

I would like to point out that the author of that blog is a lawyer. and probably more familiar than you with what the terms he uses means,

I would like to point out that a lawyer doesn't know more about phishing then I do, this I promise you.

Like it all you want, it will not change the facts.

How can you possibly justify any attempt to point that out?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Learn the difference between "spoofing" and "phishing", then get back to me. I never said a word about spoofing, just the claim that he was phishing.

What a wonderful idea, learn the definitions before you start tossing around words.

Phishing is the act of attempting to fraudulently acquire through deception sensitive personal information such as passwords and credit card details by assuming another's identity in an official-looking email, IM, etc. The user is provided with a convenient link in the same email that takes the email recipient to a fake webpage appearing to be that of a trustworthy company. When the user enters his personal information on the fake page, it is then captured by the fraudster. A message used for phishing purposes often asks the recipient to "verify your account" or to "confirm billing information". The Anti-Phishing Act of 2005, put forth by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), calls for the criminalization of two essential parts of phishing attacks: establishing and creating web sites with the intent to gather information from victims to be used for fraud or identity theft; and the creation or soliciting of e-mail that represents itself as a legitimate business with similar intent.

Phishing Law & Legal Definition

If the Anti-Phishing Act had passed the Senate what Reid did would have been defined as phishing under federal law.

Just saying.