Moving On | Choose your lifeMoving On | Choose your life
Safe Passage Foundation - Support to youth raised in high demand organizations


Saturday, January 31, 2009    

Home | New Content | Statistics | Games | FAQs

Getting Out : Seeking Justice

The Morals of a Hacker

from Skanska - Wednesday, February 02, 2005
accessed 2174 times

A new low for this group?

Just these past two weeks MovingOn has had attempts at redirecting; the FGA site, exfamily.org has had its chat board scripts fail; the new encyclopedia site, xfamily.org has had a malicious script uploaded, which dumped the databases (i.e. deleted everything); the articles on Wikipedia have been either completely deleted, rewritten, or larger tracks of text have been re-worded (the IP address for this user was traced to FCF); and at least one person has had their phone records tampered with.

This may all be one big coincidence. However, the probability of that is rather low. How many hackers would wish to target these avenues all within the space of a two weeks? Either of two things are happening here: (1) The group has people (either hired externally or some good geeks internally) who can and will do this. (2) The group is being framed to look like they are behind this (the FCF user was rather sloppy with hiding his or her tracks). Of course, they may be all unrelated or human error, etc. I will let you decide.

If they are, indeed, attempting to sabotage these sites, how are they morally justifying all of this? Not that I need to understand their twisted morals (think "Deceivers Yet True"). However, isn't this going too far? I mean, forget about it being extremely illegal (I believe the offense can fetch you up to 20 years in prison?), wouldn't this be digging their own grave?

It is interesting that the media hasn't picked up on the significance of all their legal name changes. Wouldn't anyone find it odd that ALL the top leadership of a group has legally changed their names (and multiple times for some)? What about them using fake passports (i.e. Zerby with her Australian passport)?

The above may be just gossip and founded on nothing. However, I would be interested in hearing what others think about this. Have there been any other such illegal attempts? Let's get a list together, shall we?

Reader's comments on this article

Add a new comment on this article

from Craven de Kere
Tuesday, March 08, 2005 - 20:00

(Agree/Disagree?)

www.Able2Know.com was also targeted with a series of DoS attacks right after the www.xfamily.org exploit.

I'm not sure if they are related (a2k is attacked very frequently) but there has been an increase in malicous traffic to the web properties I maintain and vapid legal threats have already been attempted.

Thing is, before you give people too much credit, note that all the attacks I had seen were crude and elementary (and innocuous except for my own error on the xfam exploit). The xfamily exploit was not much of a hack, I'd opened up dangerous uploads and not screened editors. That has changed and that's that.

I'd not read too much into this activity, to put it in perspective Able2Know is attacked several times a day. There's just a lot of malicious traffic out there and websites with a high profile will inevitably be attacked.
(reply to this comment)

From Craven de Kere
Thursday, March 17, 2005, 18:49

(Agree/Disagree?)

Update:

There is hacker interest on both sides though, I have run across a website where an ex-member is begging hackers to hack The Family's site and a member is asking hackers to hack Moving On and xFamily.org.

I'll post the urls for the editors on the xfamily forum.

I've also run across some reports that requests were made in IRC as well, so it looks like there's a lot more interest than capability.(reply to this comment

from Skanska
Thursday, February 03, 2005 - 08:44

(Agree/Disagree?)
In case any of you are interested, a simple 'whois' search on that IP address from Wikipedia (216.70.243.114; the one who was doing all the deletions or re-wordings to remove anything about the FCF) yields the following:

================================================
216.70.224.0 - 216.70.255.255
Family Care Foundation FAMILY-CARE-FOUNDATION (NET-216-70-243-112-1)
216.70.243.112 - 216.70.243.127
CustName: Family Care Foundation
Address: 1373 Marron Valley Rd
City: Dulzura
StateProv: CA
PostalCode: 91917
Country: US
RegDate: 2003-08-19
Updated: 2003-08-19
================================================

They even tried changing "Family Care" to "Family Car" etc. LOL! Every tactic in a very old book.
(reply to this comment)
from Joseph_S
Thursday, February 03, 2005 - 06:20

(Agree/Disagree?)

With NDN being one of the older sites, we've been dealing with this kind of thing for years. So many things that it's hard for me to remember them all.

One that sticks out in my mind was a complaint from our web host that NDN is a pro-terrorist organization. This complaint, of course, was made in late 2001. We were hosting with a company in Australia at the time, and it really freaked them out, especially when they saw all the discussion of things like child molesting and Berg's anti-semitism all over the place.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Family engages in active warfare against the various ex-member sites, and has for a long time.


(reply to this comment)

From Nancy
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 09:10

Average visitor agreement is 5 out of 5Average visitor agreement is 5 out of 5Average visitor agreement is 5 out of 5Average visitor agreement is 5 out of 5Average visitor agreement is 5 out of 5(Agree/Disagree?)

Folks, it's time to not put up with this! Time to go on the offensive with these attacks. Time to call a spade a spade. This is a cult we're talking about. One which is anti-Semetic, pro-Palestinian, abused its children, raped its children, exploited its children, conspired to do so, lives in hiding, changes its name regularly, has its members change their names, has its leadership legally change their names, and on and on. If anyone is a terrorist organization between this cult and its victims, then it's the cult.

There are legal ramifications to much of the cult's activity, including recent. Time to stop letting it go! (reply to this comment

From Joseph_S
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 10:52

(Agree/Disagree?)

You should have seen the email I had to write to the hosting company to keep them from pulling the plug on us. We are all used to hearing this stuff, but outsiders aren't, and you come off like a babbling lunatic trying to explain it.

Most of the time, it's hard to prove who is doing it. I was surprised and amused when I ran a "whois" on that wikipedia IP and it came up registered to FCF. What they did on wiki was annoying, but it wasn't a crime, since wikipedia allows anyone to edit pages.

I firmly believe that The Family has people with reasonable talent who attempt to disrupt the websites. But, talented people know how to move around. The guys who are really good leave you wondering if there really was an intruder, or if it was just a screw up in the software.(reply to this comment

from electric
Thursday, February 03, 2005 - 04:55

(Agree/Disagree?)

Phone records tampered with?what phone records? Tampered? How is that possible? Can you explain?
(reply to this comment)
From Nancy
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 06:06

(Agree/Disagree?)

My understanding is that someone could not access their phone record and bill online through the service provider's website. Access to the record was blocked because of too many failed attempts to access it with the wrong password. This person had made no unsuccessful attempts himself. You draw the conclusion.

Please, remember if you have parents still in the cult and you are speaking out right now, you make yourself a target. The cult's MO is to go to your parents and siblings to get information about you in order to defame you. What they can't get, they often make up.

When I said protect yourself, I meant your personal information. Your parents know it all and if they are still in the cult, what's to stop them from handing it over? Your parents know your social security number, your date of birth, your mother's maiden name, etc. Be smart! Protect your records with new passwords. Tell people close to you about your parents. Have a simple Will drawn up, so your parents (aka the cult) are not your heirs if something happens to you. Without a Will, if you are not married, your parents are your heirs in most all states, and they have the authority to dispose of your possessions and property and arrange your services. I have already been to an ex-SGA funeral in which the woman's parents planned it, a nice cult ceremony. It was a slap in the face to this ex-SGA who hated the cult.

If you're speaking to the media, go ahead and tell your employer a little bit so they will be caught up to speed if someone contacts them. If you're in school, tell your Dean of Students. Make them aware, so they will look out for you. Protect your vital records. If you suspect any kind of fraud, contact the necessary authorities.

I'm not saying to be paranoid. I'm talking about not being naive. This cult is capable of criminal acts, as we have all seen or experienced. Keep that in mind. Protect yourself and the life you worked so hard to build. Don't be intimidated. Just don't make yourself an easy target.

(reply to this comment

from neez
Wednesday, February 02, 2005 - 22:47

(Agree/Disagree?)

Now this was a laugh:

The editor of MyConclusion is apparently getting phone calls from an anonymous caller asking him to take down his site in exchange for the callers name. The caller then finishes by saying I'm outside your house Sidney.. hang on.. no that was the movie Scream.

Anyways, he finishes this paranoid fantasy with this statement:

"Im all for dialogue and intelligent conversation, I love debates and Im more than ready to defend my lifestyle. However I call upon those ex-members who seek to use these tactics to stop. I call on all of us to respect each others privacy." -Dan Johnson

Yes we can all see how much he loves honest debating from his joke of a website.

http://www.myconclusion.com/archives/2005/01/24/threatening-phone-calls-now/
(reply to this comment)

From Joe H
Wednesday, February 02, 2005, 23:14

(Agree/Disagree?)
Here's my favorite part: "Im all for dialogue and intelligent conversation, I love debates" followed by "Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time." It's the kind of hypocrisy only the cult is capable of.(reply to this comment
From Nancy
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 10:58

(Agree/Disagree?)
Did you check out that website farce myconclusion.com recently? There's some guy with long hair on there who hails from Mexico (Mexico state). What the hell? Where the hell is that? Is that the country of Mexico or the state of New Mexico? Those lunes are never-ending in their foolish attempts to appear normal.(reply to this comment
From Marc
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 14:36

(Agree/Disagree?)
Nancy: Not to dampen the spirit of your post . . . however, there _is_ such a place called "Mexico State" (also known as "Edomex" short for 'Estado de Mexico'). This is just one of the 31 states in Mexico (much like the 50 states in the USA). This state contains the Mexican Federal District (similar to the District of Colombia) and Mexico City (see "Washington D.C.").

How is that for a Google lookup, Jersey? Actually, I already knew the above, as I am sort of a geography geek (after all, I have been to 43 countries; shouldn't I know a little about geography?). ;-)(reply to this comment
From Jerseygirl
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 11:20

Average visitor agreement is 5 out of 5Average visitor agreement is 5 out of 5Average visitor agreement is 5 out of 5Average visitor agreement is 5 out of 5Average visitor agreement is 5 out of 5(Agree/Disagree?)
I actually found him a bit silly as well. Besides using the term "rock on", his 3 am fatigue whinning was ridiculous. The only reasons in my book for being awake at 3am are if you are partying, working, or having passionate sex (and of course if you are composing drunken rants on the existence of man--wink wink to Marc). Staying up to write silly messages and then complaining that you are up writing them is just,well, silly!(reply to this comment
From Marc
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 14:37

(Agree/Disagree?)
Hey! Why pick on me? I am sure I am not the only one who has posted on this site while under the influence of a spirit or two (?).(reply to this comment
From neez
Wednesday, February 02, 2005, 23:02

Average visitor agreement is 5 out of 5Average visitor agreement is 5 out of 5Average visitor agreement is 5 out of 5Average visitor agreement is 5 out of 5Average visitor agreement is 5 out of 5(
Agree/Disagree?)

Down the bottom of MyConclusion there is this tiny disclaimer:

"The authors of some letters chose to use initials or aliases, as they live in locations where publicizing their legal names could put their Christian missionary work at risk."

Umm.. Explain that one. How could publicising their legal names possibly put their "missionary" work at risk!?

Well I guess being charged with sex crimes & locked up for eternity would affect your ability to be a "missionary".(reply to this comment

from surfer
Wednesday, February 02, 2005 - 20:54

(Agree/Disagree?)
Go to google and type in movingon and an ad for myconclusion.com will show up.
(reply to this comment)
From Nancy
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 16:40

(Agree/Disagree?)
Below is the link to the FCF's Form 990 for 2002. It lists Angela Smith as on the Board of Directors. It also lists Grant Montgomery's salary as $37,000 and Lawrence Corley's is also $37,000, probably because if they paid any one director more than $50K, the had to report that separately. Ken Kelly is also a director. Interstingly, they spent $3.5K that year on legal fees, $18K on phone bills, $42K on contract labor, $3.2K on bank charges, $21K on director serv- retreat support (Maybe that is the cruise Daniel's parents went on with Sara Davidito.), $10K on insurance, $11K in repairs (of what?), $22K in towing and auction car costs (Apparently some folks, a lot of folks, donated their cars.), $134K in car intermediary fees (What is that? Car rentals?), $10K on vehicle fuel & maintenance (how many cars do they have?), $1.3K on workers' comp (Insurance? How many employees do they have?) and $68K on compensation to directors. They lost $9K on stocks they invested in. Now here's the big one! They spent $150K, (read: $150,000), on "marketing-internet search engine" that year. And we wonder why they are a sponsored result when you google "moving on" or "Ricky Rodriguez" or even "Daniel Roselle."

This is the year they bought that $389K property from Christine Mlot, one of their director's right? Wasn't that house purchased in 2002?

So, tell the public, again, Claire Borowik, that Angela Smith was not a member of the cult.

I wonder, too, if it is appropriate for a director to sell her personally owned house to a non-profit for $389,000 three years after she purchased it for $370,000. That is a $23,000 profit. Is that a violation of her fiduciary duties? I don't know.

"Capital Lease Payable - Brookside Farms----$326,009"
"Capital Lease Payable - Furniture & Fixtures-$63,105" (That's a lot of furniture.)

"These leases are with a member of the Board of Directors of Family Care Foundation. The relationship is explained in more detail in Statement 10." (Do show us "Statement 10." Who lives at this property? Why is it being leased with a Board Member?)

Why has one of the board members, and treasurer according this 990, been sued a number of times for medical malpractice and wrongful death in California?

Have a look for at their 990 for 2002. 990's for other years can be found at guidestar.com

http://www.guidestar.org/Documents/2002/330/734/2002-330734917-1-9.pdf(reply to this comment
From Nancy
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 19:44

(Agree/Disagree?)
Here are the links to the FCF's 990's for 1997-2001. They all show Angela Smith as a director. Another director they report is Marc Desruisseaux of BC Canada. They also report another "Smith" director (which we know is one of the generic last names the cult's top leadership took when they changed their names). This one is Kim Smith of Huntington Beach, CA. There is also, yet another director reported in these. He is Philip Sherman of Canada. In one of the 990's Angela Smith is listed as a director and secretary, who is paid $5,000. In the 990 for 1997, Tom Hack of CA is listed as a director, as well. You also see the same types of expenses and costs for legal fees, advertising, professional fundraising, employees (Who?), phone bills, leases, director salaries and securities (stocks), as well as interest on investments and cash.

http://www.guidestar.org/Documents/1997/330/734/1997-330734917-1-9.pdf

http://www.guidestar.org/Documents/1998/330/734/1998-330734917-1-9.pdf

http://www.guidestar.org/Documents/1999/330/734/1999-330734917-1-9.pdf

http://www.guidestar.org/Documents/2000/330/734/2000-330734917-1-9.pdfhttp://www.guidestar.org/Documents/2000/330/734/2000-330734917-1-9.pdf

http://www.guidestar.org/Documents/2001/330/734/2001-330734917-1-9.pdf(reply to this comment
From jack420
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 16:08

(Agree/Disagree?)

I've added movingon to the list of keywords we are running our competetive ads on.

(reply to this comment

From Nancy
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 13:23

(Agree/Disagree?)

You get the same ad for myconclusion.com when you google Daniel Roselle's name or Ricky Rodriguez. I'm not sure it's a paid thing because movingon.org comes up as a sponsor when you google David Berg. Unless Jules or someone else paid, then it might not be a paid ad.

The cult is skirting a very fine line here when they start doing this stuff to individuals, in my opinion.(reply to this comment

From Jules
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 13:10

(Agree/Disagree?)

I saw this when their site first launched. I wasn't too bothered about it, since I do not have the budget to even try to buy ad space and it's not illegal, but it does seem to be in rather poor taste to do something like that. I did put a link to their site on the home page of this one. The favour has not been returned.

Something I found that was interesting is that myconclusion.com is listed on a site of domain names bought by a URL merchant, which are being resold. The asking price of this domain was $10,500. Is this a scam or did they really pay that amount for this domain name? http://www.ebizname.com/SubmitABid.cfm?DomainID=7883

One other thing is that harassment, stalking and uttering threats towards individual people are all crimes. Dan J. has every right to host the myconclusion web site and to harass him because of this is illegal. I have been receiving threats myself, both email and PHONE, for years and I know how unpleasant it is. I haven't done anything about it because I assumed it was the work of a few fanatical and misguided teenagers and I have better things to do with my time than get all worked up over something so silly.

I wrote Dan privately and suggested he block the whois information to prevent this sort of thing, but have not heard back from him. It goes without saying but harassment, apart from possibly landing the individual doing this trouble, also just feeds into the "them" vs. "us" mentality that some of the SGs in the Family are unfortunately getting so hysterical about. Dan has not done anything wrong in hosting this site, and most of the people writing on there are simply reacting to what they have been told. While the level of hostility towards us is quite nasty, IMO, the people to blame are those giving them the misinformation.

The most common complaint is that people speaking out are "attacking their lifestyle". Unless child abuse and protecting pedophiles is part of their lifestyle, this is completely untrue. (reply to this comment

From ErikMagnusLehnsher
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 20:06

(Agree/Disagree?)

"I wrote Dan privately and suggested he block the whois information to prevent this sort of thing, but have not heard back from him. It goes without saying but harassment, apart from possibly landing the individual doing this trouble, also just feeds into the "them" vs. "us" mentality that some of the SGs in the Family are unfortunately getting so hysterical about. Dan has not done anything wrong in hosting this site, and most of the people writing on there are simply reacting to what they have been told. While the level of hostility towards us is quite nasty, IMO, the people to blame are those giving them the misinformation."

Well put. My sentiments exactly.
(reply to this comment

From I notice
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 14:09

(
Agree/Disagree?)
The rating feature seems to work again. The last few days it seemed to have been down.(reply to this comment
From Big Sister
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 10:00

(Agree/Disagree?)
Do it now! Go to Google, type in movingon and see the ad. THEN CLICK ON IT! Every click costs them money. Those ads are based on click thru rate - the more clicks thru to the target site, the more they pay. Go Back. Click it again, and again, and again. Every click is $$$!(reply to this comment
From xolox
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 12:33

(Agree/Disagree?)
Missionary work can't pay too well, the link has been removed.(reply to this comment
From Haunted
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 12:46

(Agree/Disagree?)
well, it's back up again. Both on the google search of "movingon" and "moving on".(reply to this comment
From xolox
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 12:46

(Agree/Disagree?)

Oops never mind I found it

(reply to this comment

From Big Sister
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 13:23

(Agree/Disagree?)
Oh, that's the other thing about google ads (and the reason the ad is sometimes there and sometimes not), the advertiser can limit the amount they spend on their ad. So once the daily amount runs out, no ads run
until the next day. If they increase the daily allotment, the ad will run more often. Just thought you might want to know all that.....(reply to this comment
From xolox
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 13:45

(Agree/Disagree?)

I guess we found a great way to knock it out of circulation.

C'mon everybody, just a few clicks each. Do your part ;)(reply to this comment

From JohnnieWalker
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 13:57

(Agree/Disagree?)
Just keep in mind that they can do the same to the sponsered links for ex-member sites.(reply to this comment
From Big Sister
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 14:38

(Agree/Disagree?)
Good point! All this clicking brings added traffic to either site, then the google page ranking increases, raising both closer to the top of google search page. This helps keep the subject alive, to some extent. Beyond that though, it's Google that benefits most!(reply to this comment
From
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 10:31

(
Agree/Disagree?)
Great , It's now my oficial "workout" for my right hand, 3mins a day will do it. LOL(reply to this comment
From Vicky
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 10:36

(Agree/Disagree?)
Surely there's a better, more rewarding way of getting your hand in shape - unless you're lefthanded, that is...(reply to this comment
From
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 10:49

(
Agree/Disagree?)
Jokeing ;)(reply to this comment
From
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 10:22

(
Agree/Disagree?)

I just put together a quick HTML page that refreshes itself every second using the link for the sponsored ad. It's running in the background as I type. :)

Not sure if they'll get billed, but they should be happy with the 86400 hits they get today. :)

Hmmm....then again, that might boost their Alexa ratings.(reply to this comment

From jack420
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 16:11

(Agree/Disagree?)
That's a stupid idea. Google is not dumb enough to ignore lame fraud attempts. Don't do illegal stuff. Don't stoop to their level. If you have to, at least try using a proxy (or several) so it doesn't look like one person came 86,400 times in one day.(reply to this comment
From on the other hand...
Thursday, March 17, 2005, 19:30

(
Agree/Disagree?)
"so it doesn't look like one person came 86,400 times in one day"

Dude, I don't know about you, but I don't even *want* to know what the guy that comes 86,400 times in one day looks like. :D(reply to this comment
From neez
Wednesday, February 02, 2005, 22:37

(
Agree/Disagree?)

I guess Jules could do the same thing. Although I don't think ppl pay much attention to google ads.(reply to this comment

From xolox
Wednesday, February 02, 2005, 22:43

(Agree/Disagree?)
You would be wrong there, millions use google. Surely there is some merit to that idea.(reply to this comment
From electric
Thursday, February 03, 2005, 04:53

(Agree/Disagree?)
i never look at google sponsored ads on the right, only the search results themselves on the left.(reply to this comment
From neez
Wednesday, February 02, 2005, 22:54

(
Agree/Disagree?)

Millions recieve spam mail too. Haven't read one of them in years.

But it definately wouldn't hurt to have there.(reply to this comment

from roughneck
Wednesday, February 02, 2005 - 20:39

(Agree/Disagree?)
I'd hate to give TF too much credit for smarts.. however script kiddie they may be :) Personally I'd credit the huge exposure this site (as well as the other prominent exer sites) has received as of late in the news media for the events of which you speak. Perhaps this is wishful thinking on my part.

As for the Wikipedia edits, alas, such is the case with a wiki: anyone can change, modify and delete content. I guess we'll have to Wiki-war them to death on top of everything else, eh?
(reply to this comment)

My Stuff


log in here
to post or update your articles

Community

57 user/s currently online

Web Site User Directory
5047 registered users

log out of chatroom

Happy Birthday to demerit   Benz   tammysoprano  

Weekly Poll

What should the weekly poll be changed to?

 The every so often poll.

 The semi-anual poll.

 Whenever the editor gets to it poll.

 The poll you never heard about because you have never looked at previous polls which really means the polls that never got posted.

 The out dated poll.

 The who really gives a crap poll.

View Poll Results

Poll Submitted by cheeks,
September 16, 2008

See Previous Polls

Online Stores


I think, therefore I left


Check out the Official
Moving On Merchandise
. Send in your product ideas


Free Poster: 100 Reasons Why It's Great to be a Systemite

copyright © 2001 - 2009 MovingOn.org

[terms of use] [privacy policy] [disclaimer] [The Family / Children of God] [contact: admin@movingon.org] [free speech on the Internet blue ribbon] [About the Trailer Park] [Who Links Here]