Hackers hijack Egypt highway billboard and Malaysian screens to show porn

Posted by entryleveljobsc 1 day ago

Counter65Comment89OpenOriginal

Comments

Comment by regretsresin 1 day ago

Kind of a shitty choice. Like, I'm very much sex positive, but not everyone wants to see porn.

And you might say, "Not everyone wants to see ads!" And totally agree! But like, the people who have to look at this eyesore now have to deal with a different eyesore.

Why not, "This garbage ad remived from your view by hacking group X, you're welcome" and show some pet photos or something? Or like, get clever with it? Run onion or infowars style satire.

Comment by psdndown 1 day ago

Some societies need a good turning upside down.

Egypt is one of them. There is value in most of the value being in the shock value. Egypt has already done the sorts of things you suggest. It doesn't work. Putting up porn actually makes a lot of sense from a decision matrix perspective here. First of all despite the pretense otherwise Egyptians watch a lot of porn (like most countries). It's sort of a great "in your face" mirror to a country rife with hypocrisy.

It's not like the authorities give much breathing room for more nuanced protest anyway. They're already in for a very unwelcome visit to the slammer if they are caught. Might as well go as transgressive as possible while you still can.

Comment by Freak_NL 1 day ago

If the goal is to get companies to get their security in order, than showing porn is certainly one of the most effective ways. It'll put political pressure on the company that owns the billboards, for one.

Show a cute picture of Big Bird telling people to eat more pizza, and the company will just reset some passwords. Show a couple of choice scenes from Brazzers and the CEO just got a call from a government minister and suddenly the leaky hardware is getting replaced at breakneck speeds.

Works well too if the goal is just to get people to object to digital billboards.

Comment by ryandrake 1 day ago

Yea, it's harmless, and a criticism of digital billboards, and it can't be swept under the rug by the billboard companies as if it didn't happen. Really great stunt!

Comment by whoanoway 1 day ago

[dead]

Comment by nbajka 1 day ago

[flagged]

Comment by ryandrake 1 day ago

Contrary to what the religious warriors claim, I can assure you nobody's head is going to explode, nobody is going to get cancer, and nobody is going to suffer psychological damage by briefly riding past these billboards. Truly, let's get serious here.

Comment by nbajka 1 day ago

[flagged]

Comment by NietzscheanNull 1 day ago

Genuinely curious, as someone who was exposed to porn on several occasions as a kid (with seemingly no negative long-term consequences): what makes you think it's "really bad"?

Comment by camcil 1 day ago

You're kidding, right? Am I seeing correctly that there are multiple people on HN actively arguing against children seeing porn being a bad thing?

Comment by Freak_NL 1 day ago

Do you have kids? I can assure you that children are quite good at automatically blocking out everything related to intercourse and other sexual acts until they reach puberty. Like an advertisement for mortgages, they will just treat it as something that is probably relevant to adults, but not at all interesting to them.

Seeing some girl getting ploughed by a slab of a guy might raise questions (which is excellent, questions are always good, because then you as a parent can guide their understanding), but it won't harm them in the slightest.

Repeated exposure to porn is a problem, but that comes from teenagers having an intrinsic interest in sex and private exploration of unsavoury websites on the internet, not accidental viewing of a naughty billboard.

Comment by camcil 20 hours ago

It fascinates me what people will defend publicly in the name of “hacker good, advert bad.” One of these comments also just builds a straw man: “it’s like someone yelling ‘fuck’ at a ballgame… it doesn’t mean the kid’s ruined,” but at least they don’t go as far as claiming it might actually be a good thing because “seeing some girl get ploughed by a slab of a guy” might just raise a constructive question in a child.

Yikes.

Comment by 1 day ago

Comment by yubblegum 1 day ago

He did self diagnose as "with seemingly no negative long-term consequences".

Comment by rconti 1 day ago

It's like the kid hearing someone yell "fuck" at a ballgame. Just because most people in the culture might agree it's not particularly age-appropriate doesn't mean the kid's ruined.

There's a huge difference between regular exposure via neglectful or abusive parents and "oops I saw a thing". More than a few kids have "walked in" on their parents too, I assure you.

Comment by fatata123 22 hours ago

[dead]

Comment by kotaKat 1 day ago

Iunno, but it was a blast going back through Rockos Modern Life as an adult and catching all the shit I missed as a kid.

Comment by ponector 1 day ago

Funny how in US it's okay to show to kids drinking alcohol, smoking and using the gun while naked body is a taboo and will harm someone (parents).

Just curious, do you think it will harm kids to go to nude beach or naked sauna?

Comment by yubblegum 1 day ago

Watching porn at home and not wanting to see it in public space does not make one a 'hypcrite'.

> Might as well go as transgressive as possible while you still can.

This only computes in the mind of an national adversary that wants to see a society in chaos. No one in their right mind would want to "trangress" against their own society because of some political goal. Those that do are iirc are technically in the terrorist quadrant of 'protest'.

Comment by za3faran 1 day ago

Who gave you the right to decide that Egypt needs turning upside down? It seems that some people in the west cannot leave the rest of the world alone without trying to impose their values (which the rest of the world looks down upon) on others.

Comment by excannuk 1 day ago

Not your place to turn anyone's society upside down but your own.

Imagine if Time Square was hacked with images of the consequences of monkey pox on HIV+ gay men because an Egyptian thought our society needed a shocking turning upside down.

Comment by 1 day ago

Comment by thinkingtoilet 1 day ago

Under no circumstances is it ok to show porn in a public setting. I say this as someone who very much enjoys porn.

Comment by ponector 1 day ago

Porn cinemas are very much a public settling, no?

Comment by thinkingtoilet 21 hours ago

No. They are a private enterprise that does ages checks. It is totally fine for consenting adults to go in a room and watch porn together.

Comment by ponector 17 hours ago

Age checks does not change the fact they are public setting. Contrary to your point, sometimes it's okay:

>>Under no circumstances is it ok to show porn in a public setting.

Comment by gazpachotron 1 day ago

The people who want to outlaw pornography and put scriptures in every classroom agree with you on two points: society does need to be turned upside down, and a tiny group of unelected people should be the ones to do it.

Comment by IncreasePosts 1 day ago

Porn in the Arab world is probably going to turn already misogynistic men even more down that path. First, perhaps they can try to view women besides their mothers as humans, then we can work forward from there

Comment by Freak_NL 1 day ago

Are a few clips or screenshots shown on billboards going to influence people to that extent?

Comment by IncreasePosts 1 day ago

I'm responding to OP who is saying exposing randos in Egypt to porn is a good thing and will turn their society upside down

Comment by bongoman42 1 day ago

You have a very heteronormative view of porn. Plenty of Arab women also enjoy porn and the origin of misogyny in Arab society is way older than any kind of modern porn.

Comment by IncreasePosts 1 day ago

Where in my post did I say that Arab women don't enjoy porn?

My point is that many Arab men wont have a single meaningful interaction with a woman outside their family this year. Presenting women as sex objects to those men isn't going to have great effects. Similar to incels and porn.

Comment by za3faran 1 day ago

> My point is that many Arab men wont have a single meaningful interaction with a woman outside their family this year

And you got this information from where, western media? Even if, how is it a negative thing?

> Presenting women as sex objects to those men isn't going to have great effects

Incidentally, western liberal capitalistic systems are the ones presenting women as sex objects in ads and the like. Where as they are preserved in the conservative culture in Islamic countries.

Comment by TFNA 1 day ago

Men in the Arab world are already porn consumers and have been for decades. I hitchhiked around Egypt for a few weeks in 2009, and men would occasionally show off short porn vids on their Nokias or iPods. Internet cafes in the whole region would, upon request, give customers the details for connecting to a proxy to access forbidden content.

Fast forward to now, and the big porn video sites have content expressly tailored to the Arab world. Everyone has smartphones, and everybody finds some alone time to wank.

Comment by giantg2 1 day ago

Generally agree. However, I wonder if their intent was to draw attention to women's rights, or antagonize people regarding women's rights, in those nations. Porn was the wrong choice. Instead of pet photos, they could have shown women in positions of power and not wearing tradional clothes.

Comment by pitched 1 day ago

This has to be either activists or trolls and my bet is on trolls. Aiming to cause the most damage for lols.

Comment by rconti 1 day ago

This is hilarious and harmless. Who cares?

I find it far more offensive that you wouldn't even be able to post this headline without self-censoring in the major social media apps for fear of The Algorithm. How far the internet has fallen.

Comment by skissane 1 day ago

> This is hilarious and harmless. Who cares?

Our daughter is 8. As her father, I’d rather she not be exposed to pornography, and I know my wife would agree with me on that. Of course, she’s sure to somehow be introduced to it eventually, but I hope not until she’s significantly older.

Comment by 1 day ago

Comment by aussiethebob 1 day ago

If I lived in a middle eastern nation, worrying about my daughter seeing a few seconds of porn would be so far down the list of worries I have for her that it wouldn't even register.

Comment by skissane 1 day ago

I’m not in the Middle East, but I don’t think the question of the appropriateness of displaying pornography in public places is country-dependent.

Comment by rconti 1 day ago

There's a huge difference between "appropriate" vs "harmful".

Comment by skissane 1 day ago

How do you define "harm"? I think there are reasonable definitions by which it would be considered "harm".

Many jurisdictions worldwide criminalise exposing people to pornography without their consent – see for example, Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009 section 6 [0] – and especially doing it to minors. Criminalising doing something to someone without their consent constitutes an official judgement that such an act is harmful.

[0] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2009/9/section/6

Comment by fuzzythinker 1 day ago

it could be minutes if traffic

Comment by rafram 1 day ago

It’s objectively not harmless, and clearly lots of people care.

Comment by 1 day ago

Comment by pretzellogician 1 day ago

Subjectively, yes. Not sure about objectively.

Comment by za3faran 1 day ago

Subjectively, porn has been shown to cause lots of dangerous effects.

Comment by 1 day ago

Comment by 1 day ago

Comment by excannuk 1 day ago

[dead]

Comment by zahrevsky 1 day ago

I guess this is done simply to grab as much of people's attention as possible. And I mean all groups of people:

– for observers on the road, make them more likely to film this and share on social media;

– for news agencies, make them allocate as much coverage as possible for this incident;

– for regular readers, simply to more likely grab theirs attention.

Comment by ericmay 1 day ago

> And you might say, "Not everyone wants to see ads!" And totally agree! But like, the people who have to look at this eyesore now have to deal with a different eyesore.

That’s why across the world we should ban blanket advertisements like these. They’re a dumb eyesore.

Porn just exposes what is obviously annoying. But advertisements themselves are a sort of mind-virus you can’t opt out of. I can choose to not buy cable TV. I can’t (reasonably) choose to not walk outside in the public space.

Comment by sellmesoap 1 day ago

Walk softly and carry a big EMI interference device! I'm waiting for the sci-fi utopia where the AI AR glasses replace all the physical ads with something nicer, ublock: eyes

Comment by ericmay 22 hours ago

Yea - it would just be nice to use the simple solution which is to just ban billboards of broad advertising in the public sphere besides like a sign in front of your store. But it’s another victim of car-only infrastructure. You need bigger and crazier ads to capture the attention of people who should be focused on driving their car.

Comment by kelseyfrog 1 day ago

For it to work it has to be unpleasant. In fact, the more unpleasant it is, the more it works. It has to be more unpleasant than making the decision to remove the billboards altogether.

Showing a nice animal or a 'you're welcome' message achieves the goal of removing the ad, but falls short of fixing the root of the problem: the billboard existing. As long as it exists, the temptation and incentive to put ads on it also exists.

Comment by exe34 1 day ago

It's all about consent, isn't it, we don't consent to advertising in every public space and yet we can't get away from it.

Comment by happosai 1 day ago

An outside advertisement display in Finland was defaced recently with a certain well known image from early internet: (warning article includes blurred version of the image)

https://yle.fi/a/74-20134714

Comment by cyberpunk 1 day ago

My mind went straight to goatse and yes, it was goatse.

Comment by tclancy 1 day ago

Really? My mind went straight to Tom of Finland and was disappointed. Least it’s not Tubgirl.

Comment by zahrevsky 1 day ago

> According to Olkkonen, the light board has been broken into. It is not a hacking incident.

> – It was clear what had been done. The media player's cord had been ripped out and its own content had been played.

To me, it's more an act of vandalism than hacking.

Comment by pitched 1 day ago

Hacking in the way presented in the article is vandalism. A door being unlocked isn’t permission to enter. A lock with a flaw doesn’t mean it can be removed.

Comment by reaperducer 1 day ago

For the earliest hackers, it was all about puzzles.

In addition to computers, other common obsessions were lockpicking (mechanical computing), model railroads (electricity + switches + relays), and Chinese food menus (language skills).

Comment by pixl97 1 day ago

The plains have been settled, the pioneers are all dead.

Comment by pitched 11 hours ago

I still use the old form and don’t mind too much if anyone gets the wrong idea. It’s a good way to find other like-minded people.

Comment by quickthrowman 1 day ago

I don’t think I would ever stop laughing if I was driving down the highway at night and saw hello.jpg shining brightly from an LED billboard.

Comment by cowlevel 1 day ago

I've always wondered what these electronic billboards run on. Obviously I'm not going to cut one down and bring it home to study nor will I impersonate a customer to get one, so I'll never find out, but it's cool someone did manage to hack one.

Comment by vdfs 1 day ago

It's just a computer running windows + big screen + app in full-screen mode that show the images/videos on a loop and can be controlled from a central server

Comment by hard_times 1 day ago

Some version of Windows + custom software

Comment by MisterTea 1 day ago

There are a surprising number of Linux thing running webstuff likely hacked together and shipped. I find a lot of vending machine computers on eBay that boot Ubuntu or whatever and start some sort of webservice thing.

Comment by cowlevel 1 day ago

What custom software though? How does it get the data? What is it vulnerable to? What about the backend software, that's also part of the system? It's easy to say "it is hardware running software" but it obviously goes deeper than that.

Comment by pixl97 1 day ago

I mean the easiest step would be finding someone that works with the software installing them and see if they like to talk.

If you're the kind of person that's good at making relationships you might even talk them out of old or dead hardware.

Comment by cowlevel 1 day ago

How would you find someone?

Comment by tclancy 1 day ago

Hopes, dreams and FM.

Comment by Havoc 1 day ago

How uncreative.

Nothing against porn, but given a platform that's what you pick to blast into the world?

Comment by TFNA 1 day ago

Even the Max Headroom hacker thought it was neat to broadcast some dominatrix (very) soft porn.

Comment by reaperducer 1 day ago

Hackers gotta hack.

We did the same thing back in the 80's.

The scenario was usually "Oh, wow! We got access! What do we do before someone notices in the next ten minutes?!"

Political people want to make statements. Hackers just want their hacks to be noticed.

Comment by Havoc 1 day ago

Yeah I sorta get it, but like idk put something like "End child hunger" on it or something...

Comment by pixl97 1 day ago

Ain't no one gonna notice. There are already ads just like that.

The thing is with ads is after seeing so many you just kind ad block them automatically.

Now when there is porn, you 100% know it's not supposed to be there.

Comment by Markoff 1 day ago

these hackers are most likely childless incels, no sane adult person would show such content in public setting where some 5yo can set it from car, and I have zero problem with porn

disclaimer - I enjoy porn almost on daily occasion and I have no problem with nudity, but porn certainly doesn't show natural human behavior which should be shown to little kids who don't know any better

Comment by dinkblam 1 day ago

finally!

Comment by worik 1 day ago

Good job! I despise advertising billboards.

Comment by ziiinq 1 day ago

[dead]

Comment by excannuk 1 day ago

Israel did this to the Palestinians back in 2002. Im sure it was for educational and liberating purposes /s

Comment by moniosi 1 day ago

[flagged]

Comment by maximilianburke 1 day ago

What do you mean by the use of the triple parentheses?

Comment by moniosi 1 day ago

electromagnetic wavefront of course

Comment by throwup238 1 day ago

One man’s hacker is another man’s sexual freedom fighter.

I wonder how this goes over in conservative countries like Egypt. Is it a scandal of some sort with ample pearl clutching or is it mostly a non-event?

Comment by zkmon 1 day ago

You wanted speed and connectedness every where. Speed by automating the intelligence, speed of payment transactions, high-speed trains ... Result? The speed of hacking everywhere, speed of $6B vanishing in 20 minutes and speed at which things going wrong.

None of these would happen in places that are not invaded by speed of technology and connectedness. Slow is good, not sometimes, but always. Human life is not compatible with things moving at speed of electricity.

But you gave the controlling power to children. The children with science toys want more and more speed, just for fun and profit. They, unfortunately, control the future of human race.

Comment by odo1242 1 day ago

To be fair, both high speed trains and planes are very safe forms of transportation, with deaths numbering in less than 1000 per year.

Currently the yearly global death toll for cars is at 1.16 million and climbing

Comment by reaperducer 1 day ago

with deaths numbering in less than 1000 per year.

Well, that's OK, then.

What is the exact number when it's no longer acceptable? Is is 1,001? 10,001?

Exactly how many deaths are perfectly fine in the name of progress? How many people are we allowed to kill for the sake of convenience?

Currently the yearly global death toll for cars is at 1.16 million and climbing

No need to compare. Both can be bad at the same time.

Comment by odo1242 1 day ago

I’m just pointing out that you chose to omit the one that’s over a thousand times worse and accounts for >99% of the “bad” overall.

Traveling the same distance without rail or air (i.e. on foot, horse, car) is also relatively deadly and the alternative (of living in small communities and not traveling long distances) is also not great for multiple reasons

Comment by derektank 1 day ago

> What is the exact number when it's no longer acceptable?

You’d have to calculate how many lives speed saves. How many people had an organ delivered just within the safe transplant time? How many people were able to eat because a grain shipment could be diverted after a bad harvest? How many people didn’t contract cholera, because it takes minutes to manufacture pipes?

Comment by reaperducer 1 day ago

Slow is good, not sometimes, but always.

Ask any cowboy. The fastest way to move a cow is slow.

Comment by UltraSane 1 day ago

That speed and connectedness increases GDP by vastly more though.

Comment by reaperducer 1 day ago

That speed and connectedness increases GDP by vastly more though.

Translation: Money is more important than human lives.

Got it.

Comment by derektank 1 day ago

Money makes it possible for people to afford food and healthcare

Comment by cowlevel 1 day ago

Technically incorrect. Food and healthcare are food and healthcare. In an apocalypse you have food if you have food and you don't have food if you only have money. To make your statement work we need to introduce additional assumptions.

Comment by UltraSane 1 day ago

Wealth allows for MORE food to be produced and healthcare to be provided.

Comment by cowlevel 1 day ago

Now that's a nonsensical statement if I ever saw one. A stockpile of velvet curtains does not allow more food to be produced.

Comment by UltraSane 21 hours ago

How is food produced today? Using very expensive machines and fertilizer and carefully bred seeds. That is all wealth.

Comment by ericmay 1 day ago

Easy to say when you’re not, oh idk, waiting on a helicopter to deliver a life-saving organ transplant, or freezing your bones off because you don’t have electric heat.

The trade-offs are worth it and humankind continues to accept those trade-offs. Yea 60+ people died in a train crash. So what? Tens of millions ride high-speed trains on a weekly/monthly basis without any issues. So why would we overreact to anomalies when by and large the technologies we’ve invented are pretty awesome?

I’m no opponent to the “slow life” and I have a lot of critical comments regarding modernity (cars, social media, modernist art) and overpopulation but we don’t need to throw the baby out with the bath water here.