![]() Models have been able to charge for content in a variety of ways since the early days of the internet. For example, Dolly promotes what she calls "Dolly's Disney Fund," where customers can pay between $5 and $100 for photos and videos that she'll share from an upcoming trip to a Disney theme park. Then there's the true do-it-yourself option of giving individual customers content via direct message on Twitter or providing access to a Google Drive or Dropbox folder and collecting a one-time fee through Venmo or Square's Cash App. She also charges $12 a month for her private Snapchat (or a $35 payment for indefinite access), where users pay to see a person's posts. Part of her revenue comes through $10 monthly subscriptions on OnlyFans, which caters to YouTubers, trainers, models, content creators, influencers and makers of amateur porn. Dolly said she makes $500 to $1,000 a month at the moment. The subscription market is in its relative infancy and the sums are still generally modest. "You make your own rules, you make your limits." "There's no in-person stuff to deal with," said Dolly, who doesn't disclose her real name, in an interview. Just as independent musicians are trying to make money by going directly to their fans on SoundCloud and Bandcamp, and comedians are turning to Comedy Central's Stand-Up Direct to sell uncut performances, women in porn are adopting the direct-to-consumer business model on the web and mobile devices. In the opaque online porn industry, where billions of dollars a year flow to websites powered by ads and premium subscriptions, Dolly and others are aiming to wrest some control from the content distributors and take a bigger slice of the economic pie. Personal Loans for 670 Credit Score or Lower Personal Loans for 580 Credit Score or Lower While the information made public is often several years out of date (many of the emails posted along with the Dropbox passwords were deactivated in 2012), it's still valuable to hackers compiling large lists of email addresses and passwords to be used in attacks against other sites.Best Debt Consolidation Loans for Bad Credit Amateur developers aren't stepping up password security, and existing leaks continue to resurface. We're seeing more and more passwords leak online. Sure, I got $120 with my Bitcoin address, but when you consider how much time was spent acquiring this stuff (I'm not the hacker, just a collector), and the money (I paid a lot via Bitcoin as well to get certain sets when this stuff was being privately traded on Friday/Saturday) I really didn't get close to what I was hoping for. Similarly, OriginalGuy, the anonymous forum poster behind the first wave of hacked iCloud celebrity photos, expressed dismay at the small trickle of donations that came his way, remarking: ![]() The hacker who shared the collection of Dropbox passwords received just 8 cents. It's often less than they expect to receive. We can use the public nature of Bitcoin addresses to see just how much hackers gain for posting passwords online. As we mentioned before, hackers leak partial collection of passwords as "teasers." This is often accompanied by a request for Bitcoin donations. Or at least, they post some of the information online. Instead, it seems like they just post the information online. So why are hackers re-using old information? There's rarely evidence that they actually use the passwords to log into sites. Sure, many of the email accounts had closed, but the information could still be downloaded and used by hackers to break into other accounts. It wasn't a new leak, but a collection of older password leaks compiled together to seem new. In September, Russian hackers published a list of 5 million passwords to a variety of different email providers, including Gmail. ![]() Chances are that the information works for several sites, so compiling these caches of data together can quickly create a list of millions of passwords. Instead of spending months finding vulnerabilities in large sites, they re-use login information stolen from amateur third-party apps. We're now seeing hackers use a new approach. ![]() Why bother trying to hack into Google, Apple or Facebook's servers when you can simply take advantage of a poorly built website to get the same information? Hackers don't need to try and target the tech giants anymore. In a post on the Snapsaved Facebook page, the site's anonymous founder explains that a mis-configured Apache server left the files vulnerable to hackers. The recent Snapchat hack, which saw nearly 100,000 private photos and videos posted online, happened because an amateur developer hadn't securely set up his website. Account icon An icon in the shape of a person's head and shoulders.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |