September 26th, 2024

X (Twitter) blocks links to hacked JD Vance dossier

X blocked links to a hacked document about JD Vance, leading to journalist Ken Klippenstein's suspension for sharing private information. Other outlets refrained from publishing the hacked content, raising policy concerns.

Read original articleLink Icon
X (Twitter) blocks links to hacked JD Vance dossier

X has blocked links to a newsletter containing a hacked document related to JD Vance, a vice presidential candidate for the Trump campaign. The document, allegedly obtained through an Iranian hack, includes personal information about Vance, such as his full name, addresses, and part of his social security number. The journalist who published the newsletter, Ken Klippenstein, has been suspended from the platform for violating rules against sharing unredacted private information. Despite other news outlets receiving information from the hack, they chose not to publish it. X's safety account confirmed Klippenstein's suspension, but did not provide details on why the links to his article are blocked. Attempts by The Verge staff to share the link resulted in error messages indicating the link was deemed potentially harmful. This incident raises questions about X's current policies on hacked materials, especially in light of its previous stance under former management, which had shifted to allow the sharing of such content.

- X has blocked links to a hacked document related to JD Vance.

- Journalist Ken Klippenstein was suspended for sharing unredacted personal information.

- Other news outlets opted not to publish the hacked information.

- Attempts to share Klippenstein's newsletter link resulted in error messages.

- The incident highlights ongoing uncertainties regarding X's policies on hacked materials.

Link Icon 21 comments
By @rideontime - 7 months
The block is very amateurishly implemented, and can be circumvented by appending any query param to the URL, like so: https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/read-the-jd-vance-dossier?...

Update: I guess someone at Twitter reads Hacker News, because they finally forced me to delete the posts containing those links, a few hours later.

By @klyrs - 7 months
Wow, good job Elon. I've downloaded the dossier and I'm telling my friends. Send Barbara Streisand my regards!
By @abraxas - 7 months
Elmo's "radical free speech" on full display.
By @sys32768 - 7 months
X (Twitter) policy on sharing private information: https://help.x.com/en/rules-and-policies/personal-informatio...

Among others it prohibits sharing:

>home address or physical location information, such as street addresses, GPS coordinates, or other identifying information related to locations that are considered private

By @arctics - 7 months
I scrolled over the dossier and there nothing significant there, most of it is bunch of things he said, his investments, property, donations, tickets, taxes and so on.

Most of the information can be found online, this is just complied into one PDF file.

By @Hizonner - 7 months
What could possibly in there that would be more damaging than what you can get for free by waiting for Vance to open his mouth in public?
By @wtfwhateven - 7 months
So posting publicly available information gets someone banned but people can post horrific videos of children being abused with no punishment? https://www.dailydot.com/debug/elon-musk-reinstates-child-ab...
By @rllearneratwork - 7 months
Majority of Elon's net worth is tied to Tesla. Tesla has a massive presence in and therefore dependence on China. How can we accept Twitter as a free-speech platform? Just because he says so?
By @hiddencost - 7 months
https://youtu.be/1sbZLhuaZIY

Duck Sauce - Barbara Streisand

(It's just a really catchy song. And I suspect this block will backfire.)

By @2OEH8eoCRo0 - 7 months
So much free speech!
By @turingfeel - 7 months
Much of the dossier reads like it was written by ChatGPT. Similar style and structure of paragraphs. I think a Trump campaign staffer got a little lazy.
By @adultSwim - 7 months
There is no evidence how the document, commissioned by the Trump team while vetting Vance, got out. I'm reminded of Facebook suppressing the New York Post's Hunter Biden story in 2020, minus any noteworthy revelations.
By @jonathanyc - 7 months
On the one hand, Musk has already retracted his claim[1] that he's a "free speech absolutist"[2], so I don't think it's fair to come after him for that:

    In last month’s interview with the BBC, Musk said, “the rules in India for what can appear on social media are quite strict, and we can’t go beyond the laws of a country … If we have a choice of either our people go to prison or we comply with the laws, we will comply with the laws.” At another point in the interview, Musk said: “If people of a given country are against a certain type of speech, they should talk to their elected representatives and pass a law to prevent it.”
But blocking links to hacked documents regarding JD Vance seems a little suspect considering that, as the article mentions, he was opposed to blocking links to hacked documents about Hunter Biden:

    Twitter, before it was bought by Elon Musk, had a policy regarding hacked materials — but the page is no longer available. A pre-Musk version of the policy, dated 2019, stated that posting or linking to hacked content is prohibited. Under this policy, links to a story by The New York Post about Hunter Biden, the current president’s son, were banned. But in October 2020, Twitter changed its policy to say that it would no longer block hacked materials, after an outcry about how the company had handled the Post story. “Straight blocking of URLs was wrong, and we updated our policy and enforcement to fix,” wrote then-CEO Jack Dorsey.
    Musk was one of the people who was unhappy with the decision to ban links to the Post’s story. “Suspending the Twitter account of a major news organization for publishing a truthful story was obviously incredibly inappropriate,” Musk wrote of the decision on the story in April 2022. He even invited former Rolling Stone pundit Matt Taibbi to examine internal documents showing how Twitter handled the decision. (In the course of tweeting his conclusions, Taibbi exposed the email addresses of Dorsey and Representative Ro Khanna.)
[1]: https://www.cato.org/commentary/elon-musk-sues-critics-silen...

[2]: https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/29/tech/elon-musk-twitter-govern...

By @smsm42 - 7 months
The vibe I am getting here is that if somebody enables people who criticize government decisions and policies in a way that the government considers "dangerous", he's an evil idiot and doesn't understand what "free speech" is and something "needs to be done" about him. But if somebody publishes his political opponent's home address, phone number, SSN and other details who have absolutely no bearing to any political discussion, but may seriously jeopardize their personal safety in an environment where trying to shoot a presidential candidates is becoming a routine event - then in the name of free speech this must be allowed to be published, no restrictions.

I think people that take such position care very little about free speech and a lot about hurting people who have different politics than they do. And they are part of what is wrong with the politics today.