> ... you mean "reports", which is what reporters do ...
So this doxx site just reports on people, no?
The distinction between him and the doxx site he writes about is subtle.
Also, "semi-routinely break actual laws" is a huge bin. Reporters also get sued for libel. And sometimes lose.
Edit: And hey, once you're "break[ing] actual laws", you're a criminal. And by Krebs' standard, you're fair game.
But for what it's worth, I'll briefly clarify my position. I'm rather anarchistic, but not very collectivist or communitarian. I believe that we're all free to do what we like, consistent with our principals and values. Notwithstanding whatever laws exist. And that includes self defense, and weeding out troublemakers.
So in that sense, I agree that Krebs has the right to doxx supposed criminals. But I also believe that others arguably have the right to act against those who attack them. And of course, everyone else has the right to act against those who attack them, recursively.
So it's fair to root for Krebs, and to attack neofascist doxxers. But, in my opinion, it's deceptive to argue that one is moral, and the other is evil.
And he doesn't just rely on public sources:
> KrebsOnSecurity uncovered strong evidence to support a similar conclusion. In 2010, this author received a massive data dump from a source that had hacked into or otherwise absconded with more than four years of email records from ChronoPay — at the time a major Russian online payment provider whose CEO and co-founders were the chief subjects of my 2014 book, Spam Nation: The Inside Story of Organized Cybercrime.
> Querying those records on Yalishanda’s primary email address — [email protected] — reveal that this individual in 2010 sought payment processing services from ChronoPay for a business he was running which sold counterfeit designer watches.
And he posted a copy of the guy's passport!
0) https://krebsonsecurity.com/2019/07/meet-the-worlds-biggest-...