![\"user-pic\"](\"/css/images/default.gif\")
Wait clearly without merit?
Everything even remotely involved in the investigation disappears or is hacked and ONLY the items involved in the investigation and its clearly without merit?
Granted it is circumstantial, but I am pretty sure some russian punk would not be specifically targeting delta emails when it would be a lot easier to load in a keylogger and get her credit cards. Not to mention a lot more profitable.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-905801-100x100.png\")
So it's his and her word against their's? I'm no fan of Delta, but even I know that aint gonna go far in court.
I wouldn't put it beyond Delta but unless I see further proof that it was actually Delta, I won't believe this on words alone.
@BacteriaEP: I think the testimony of the airline employee who was confronted with the hacked emails is pretty good evidence in support of her story.
@BacteriaEP: That is precisely why it IS merited some time in court because we shouldn't just conclude that Delta is guilty. However, after considering all of the facts it does make Delta look incredibly suspicious. Computers and e-mail accounts get hacked all of the time, but it is ridiculously rare that a hack like this occurs and then it just so happens that the data finds itself within the hands of people with very special interests.
Delta needs to come clean. They need to show exactly how they got this data and some forensics investigators need to try and gather proof for the prosecutors so that there is no dispute over whether or not Delta is guilty or innocent.
@Naame: Ms Hanni is in a win-win situation here. Either Delta somehow got into the e-mail accounts (sounds like social engineering, not actual hacking,) and they get hit for that. OR! Delta is somehow able to get around this, and Hanni gets Metron for wrongful termination.
@ivanthemute: Don't we all wish we could be harmed in a not very painful, but legally actionable, way
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-887707-100x100.png\")
@BacteriaEP: There is something called discovery. Her lawyer will demand information about where the email was obtained and how. Metron said Delta provided it. What does Delta say about who provided it to them? Someone, someone did, or hired someone to do, the hacking. The blame lies at Delta until they can show where they got it and show that they didn't actually hire this criminal action.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-318831-100x100.png\")
@Skaperen: Even if someone \"anonymously\" provided the emails to Delta, copies of multiple people's private email accounts would raise red flags in any reasonable person's mind.
I know that if you accept physical goods you would reasonably expect to be stolen can get you into serious legal trouble. Does the same apply to hacked private records?
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-68654-100x100.png\")
@Difdi: computer intrusion violates a multitude of laws. i'm thinking part of the reason for this lawsuit is to get the feds attention so that they can initiate a more thorough criminal investigation.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-929652-100x100.png\")
@BacteriaEP: Welcome to 2009...I'm sure Delta didn't cover their tracks very well, if they did indeed hack her email account. AOL has already allegedly confirmed that hacking went on, it shouldn't be that difficult to determine who did it.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-417012-100x100.png\")
The involved parties should have their lawyers issue a request to their respective ISPs to preserve any backups they may have made during the time in question. The messages may have been deleted by that doesn't mean all records of it have been lost.
If the allegations are true someone is going to jail for electronic tampering/wire fraud. Why just settle for the (admittedly easier to substantiate) civil claim?
And how does Delta know the claims are \"without merit\"? The new Delta is so colossally huge that one half probably doesn't know what the other is doing. I guess incidents of landing at the wrong airport are also without merit...
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1258615-100x100.png\")
@Paladin_11: I couldn't agree more. The executives should be ejected from their offices with search warrants, the Delta email server should be confiscated (they can put another one in place) and CIO and CEO should be arrested in front of the whole staff and questioned by the local sheriff's office or the FBI.
@Areyouagoodlittleconsumer: Interesting. I meant for the plaintiffs to have their own ISPs preserve their backups, as the hacked and deleted messages probably still exist. I don't think there's any way to compel Delta to provide their backups in a case like this. But I like the way you think. ;-)
mmi-gov.com = yahoo?
@Stephen Schenck: What? The whois doesn't imply any Yahoo involvement. They're just the nameserver. The domain ownership is hidden.
Domain Name: MMI-GOV.COM
Registrar: MELBOURNE IT, LTD. D/B/A INTERNET NAMES WORLDWIDE
Name Server: YNS1.YAHOO.COM
Name Server: YNS2.YAHOO.COM
@Stephen Schenck: Whoops -- I RTFA, but I overlooked the Yahoo comment. Anyway, all he's saying is that mmi-gov, including its mail, is hosted by Yahoo, not that Yahoo has jack to do with this.
@Stephen Schenck: could be setup using yahoo servers to handle mail, on a private domain... i know google offers this
you prolly shouldn't publish those emails. id be pissed. at least use [at], or retact it
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-68888-100x100.png\")
I don't think this lady is going to use those e-mail any longer. So publishing them probably doesn't matter at this point.
I believe they hacked her computer(s). Sad when all customers want with a bill of rights is the right to be treated fairly.
Yea, nothing is deleted forever. A quick subpoena and AOL will be spitting deleted email out to the attorney.
This lawsuit ain't gonna fly.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1223645-100x100.png\")
Good Luck proving it in court. Even a Best Buy Geek Squad employee could dismantle her claims and evidence.
@FTWGeek (With Friends Now): I wouldn't count on that between subpoenas and court ordered forensic investigations on Delta. It is likely that some sort of trail exists. It is simply a matter of whether or not that trail is found.
@FTWGeek (With Friends Now): except for that whole employee being presented with his own personal emails by the company, as well as her own personal emails.
It would be one thing if it was through the company email system. They fired him based on email found on a system they had no way of accessing without having his credentials. Thats illegal under a whole slew of laws dealing with wiretapping and even interstate transmissions.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-406173-100x100.png\")
Hmm. I would be talking to the FAA Inspector General's office.
They would probably find this case quite tasty.
Peoples accounts get hacked all the time from Yahoo and AOL. It was probably some script kiddy being a bastard and thought it would be funny to get somebody canned.
How can he do this you may ask? Simple, how many people here use the same password for multiple email, login accounts? How many people send emails back and forth between email accounts? OK, that's what I thought! So the kid has probably figured out that she has multiple accounts and is probably using the same password that he cracked(bruteforced) one account with for the other.
Just a thought...not that I would know anything about stuff like that.
@FTWGeek (With Friends Now): Yeah...no. FTA, the there were 3 individuals who had personal accounts \"hacked\" and 4 accounts, all on different domains. Hanni also said the first thing she noticed was that some passwords were changed. If someone brute force cracks a password, to they then change it? Nope. However, if AOL or Yahoo F*ed up and allowed some social engineer to 'reset' the password, they'd still have the same access, and would have to change the pw.
Now, I'm not defending Delta, but the term \"hacking\" is almost pure BS nowadays. Social engineering is more prevalent and is fairly easy. Remember the Sarah Palin e-mail \"hack\"?
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-545212-100x100.png\")
@ivanthemute: Indeed, but it doesn't make it any less legal. And, I do believe that if they did use any sort of social engineering to get the passwords changed so they could access those accounts, that would run afoul of the same tampering laws had they hacked the accounts themselves. Not to mention wrongful termination of employment (unless this guy's employment contract gives his employer the right to his personal emails, of course) to also be investigated.
I would say if this case was brought before a jury, and this evidence was admitted, Delta and Metron would both likely be found at the end of a guilty verdict by a jury.
@cluberti: I agree completely (I said earlier that it's a win-win for Hanni as either Delta will have to pay up, or Metron will for wrongful termination.) What I object to is the term \"hacking.\" A \"hacker\" is someone who actually cracks into a computer, network, etc, to do whatever dastardly deed they want. It's kind of like a burglar vs a con man. Either way, you're screwed, but two very different things.
@FTWGeek (With Friends Now): If this wasn't real hacking and they didn't have something to cover up, they wouldn't have instantly fired the guy to cover it up.
@FTWGeek (With Friends Now): I agree that is possible. However it is far less likely considering the special interests here. Remember, the proof needs to be \"beyond a reasonable doubt\". It doesn't need to be \"beyond a shadow of a doubt\". That's the language they like to use when explaining the task to the jury.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-348172-100x100.png\")
@Naame: Actually, Naame, the standard of proof on a civil claim is on \"the balance of probabilities\" which means that you only have to prove that it is more likely than not that your claims are true.
\"Beyond a reasonable doubt\" is the criminal standard.
\"Beyond a shadow of a doubt\" is neither, although sometimes lawyers will state in argument that they've proven their case to this level in asserting that they've gone beyond meeting either of the above two standards.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-86807-100x100.png\")
@FTWGeek (With Friends Now): No, that doesn't explain any of the events in the article. Did your ead it?
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1223549-100x100.png\")
Grammar snark won't help you now, my young apprentice--your comments made no sense.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-782863-100x100.png\")
Why are the terms \"baseless\" and \"without merit\" always used jointly when responding to an accusation? Seems redundant to me. Can't something be called simply \"baseless\" without adding in \"without merit\"? Doesn't \"baseless\" mean \"without merit\" already? Same with the reverse ... if an accusation is \"without merit,\" doesn't it logically follow that it must also be \"baseless\"?
Yes, I know it's a customary phrase. Along those lines of asking that people \"cease and desist\" doing something. Aren't you really asking them just to \"cease\" what they're doing? Why is it necessary that they also \"desist\"? Is it even possible to \"cease\" without also \"desisting\" at the same time? If ceasing and desisting are the same, why demand that people do both?
... Just asking out loud. I don't expect a rational, sensible answer.
@PsiCop: Kinda like the phrase \"taking it seriously\"? Consumerist needs to start a new series \"without merit\".
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1021770-100x100.png\")
@PsiCop: Well, no, not really. Baseless and without merit actually have quite different meanings. Baseless; meaning it has no foundation in fact, or unfounded or unwarranted, and without merit; meaning it has no quality or worth, or undeserving of consideration.
Essentially saying that the case has no reason to exist and therefore deserves no consideration by the courts.
Of course, it's all open to interpretation...just like all legal jargon. Gotta keep those loopholes open, you know.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-391013-100x100.png\")
@AngryK9: Cease and desist works the same way:
cease - stop doing X [in progress]
desist - refrain from doing X [again]
c'mon. How hard was it for Delta when her password is DeltaSucks?
Actually...she can probably get a log of her email address access based on ip from her email provider (or the requisite subpoena). I doubt delta's \"hacker\" (these I.E. guys are truly pathetic) was smart enough to spoof his ip when accessing the account.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-515791-100x100.png\")
@Areyouagoodlittleconsumer: Manager or higher level without any real knowledge of how computers work + nephew/other family member who is a \"hacker\" = attack on personal computer to obtain IP (blacking out her comp), using the IP address of the hacked comp to obtain the emails with another hack, then a delete everything and leave a nasty virus to hose the system to cover tracks.
That's the most logical sequence of events I could think of happening. The idiot manager/higher up couldn't ask/order an employee to do it, and without any contacts in actual cracker's circles finding one to do this would be hard, thus is it likely that s/he turned to a family member whose 'expertise' was not all that high. The hack, slash, and burn is nasty, but not very inspired as far as hacks go. It has all of the finesse of a nuke.
It will come out in court. I could be wrong, but still the firing of the employee over private emails is pretty condemning by itself.
@nstonep:
Even if he/she did use a proxy, a lot of the organizations/businesses that run the proxies will roll over when law enforcement asks for the logs, if they used a botnet or something of those sorts it may be a bit harder but still is able to be tracked by the ISP's
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-985949-100x100.png\")
@nstonep: There would be no IP Spoofing, since http (webmail) protocol is connection based and requires a return path to a valid IP to view the mail. The issue would more likely be if, and I do mean if her account was hacked (btw guessing a password is not hacking, and brute forcing does not work on webmail as they lock accounts fairly quickly), that the hacker would have used a proxy or open wireless access point at some coffee shop.
I have no idea what their log and email retention policies are, but odds are they no longer have copies of the email, they may have copies of access logs though.
Based on the OP though, it was probably an easy to guess password, regardless of what it is. Delta using those emails is about the same as receiving stolen property and using it (in this case passing it onto Metron).
The other issue I have, she spoke with MS Tech support.. they could not hack their way out of a wet paper bag, never mind figure out someone hacked her system. The other issue being that most hackers, specifically ones who attempt data exfiltration, prefer to leave no trace behind and try to prevent the user from ever knowing they were there.
@nstonep: Thanks for pointing out the obvious. I am pretty certain that her lawyer would have done some cursory forensics even before the discovery process gets underway.
Folks here need to realize that the news story is no real indication of the merits of a case, especially before discovery has even started.
So let me get this right... He provided her information to help the proposed Passenger Bill of Rights and Delta found out and reported the guy. The guy also being an employee who worked for a company that is currently investigating Delta.
I guess Delta and they're very probable very high budget lobbyists got upset that there is actual competition? That their isn't just their side of the story?
I haven't bought a Delta ticket all my life... and this is definitely cementing it in. Over $1,200 dollars for a flight from San Antonio to Long Island vs $150 on Southwest.
Delta seems like a GRRREAT! Company..... Not.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-21984-100x100.png\")
Stuff like this happens when $10s of millions of dollars are at stake. Hopefully she will end up owning Delta and the guy will end up owning Metron.
As someone who flew Delta yesterday, I hope she wins. That airline SUCKS. I'll never fly them again, that's for damn sure.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1382962-100x100.png\")
I havent been on Delta since I was a child. Their fares aren't competitive or their flights just aren't convenient in the areas I fly.
But, I get the feeling that there has been a lot of info left out. Who owned the laptop and the desktop computers? Hopefully not a company she worked for.
Did Mr Forman access any personal e-mail accounts via web interfaces on his work computer? Did he or Hanni interact with any Delta employee who in turn read personal e-mail via the web from a company computer?
Most companies monitor computer traffic on their network. There is no expectation of privacy for employees while using one. I beleive that the courts have made this clear on several occasions.
All that needs to have happened is for one person on an e-mail thread to have read it on a company computer to blow this whole thing wide open.
It's not hacking when a company monitors traffic and communications over their own network.
@RedCatLinux: ..and no... the company e-mail system does not need to be involved for this to happen.
@RedCatLinux: Quite true, however, if that was the case, how did Ms. Hanni's computer get knocked out along with her email on a yahoo server just before the emails were used to fire Mr. Foreman from his position at Metron, one of Delta's partners?
It is a bit of a stretch to conclude that it was sniffed through the company computers, which would have provided clean, discrete, and non-disruptive copies of the emails without anyone ever being the wiser.
@LeoSolaris: I'm probably resistant to conspiracy theories, since everybody has them.
It think it's more of a stretch to assume that her personal data was target by a hacker working for or passing data to Delta.
Systems crash inexplicably all the time. People get malware all the time. For the record, most of them have no idea how it happened and are greatly confused.
And God, give me a dollar for everytime someone assumed the PC fairies were responsible for something mysterious happening on their systems.
I guess what I'm looking for is more in the way of evidence that there was a deliberate act to steal data and foul up her system.
It would further be interesting to look at their website and see if they are installing anything to spy on customers computers and steal data off there too.
Just sayin...
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-738213-100x100.png\")
Wow. Even if they \"bought\" the info from an opportunist hacker, they should be held severely liable- that CEO should be in the slammer.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1314487-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1148718-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-804913-100x100.png\")
shoudldn't have made her password \"deltasucks\" >.>
@sparky1_2007: +1 internets to you!
@sparky1_2007: Where was that mentioned?