backtop


Print 43 comment(s) - last by Dtprodromos.. on Jul 26 at 7:01 PM


Anonymous/AntiSec have carried out a major hack on NATO, spilling confidential documents, including -- ironically -- one about security.  (Source: Reuters)

A group calling themselves Ottoman Turkish "raiders" has defaced a holding page for the new Anon+ social network. Presumably the cyber-vandals were irritated by Anonymous's recent attacks on the Turkish government.  (Source: Dennis Malone Carter)

Anonymous decided to found the social network after one of their press accounts was kicked off of Google's new Google+ social network. The new network will be a secure, encrypted, P2P-based social network.  (Source: Your Anon News)
No one is safe in today's era of open hacking warfare

Anonymous-offshoot LulzSec may have received the lion's share of recent attention [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15], but Anonymous itself has been quite active over the last year as well, inciting opposition to Middle Eastern dictatorships, disgracing government contractor HBGary, and battling Sony Corp. (TYO:6758).

Most recently Anonymous has joined with LulzSec's key players in an ambitious campaign of populist cyberwarfare dubbed "AntiSec", that targets governments, government contractors, and businesses internationally that the hackers feel are corrupt.  In recent weeks U.S. government contractor Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp. (BAH) and agriculture giant Monsanto Comp. (MON) have been targets of AntiSec [1].

I.  NATO Hacked by AntiSec

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was already hacked by LulzSec in a minor breach of an e-reader system.  However, an Anonymous-affiliate Twitter feed, AnonymousIRC, claims to have gained access to a much larger treasure trove of NATO secrets.

The feed comments:
We are sitting on about one Gigabyte of data from NATO now, most of which we cannot publish as it would be irresponsible. But Oh NATO....

Hi NATO. Yes we haz more of your delicious data. You wonder where from? No hints, your turn. You call it war; we laugh at your battleships.
Initially, a pair of documents were published.  The first was named "CIS Support for New HQ ISAF Joint CIS Control Centre", while the second was named "Outsourcing of Balkans CIS Support".   Both were posted to and quickly yanked from PDFCast.org, with the site citing usage violations.  The former was published on Scribd, while the latter was republished on another PDF hosting site here [PDF].  Later another document was published [PDF] -- ironically entitled "Security Within the NATO".

NATO in a statement commented, "NATO is aware that a hackers group has released what it claims to be NATO classified documents on the internet. NATO security experts are investigating these claims. We strongly condemn any leak of classified documents, which can potentially endanger the security of NATO Allies, armed forces and citizens."

Anonymous fired back on Twitter:
"NATO strongly condemns any leak of classified documents, which can potentially endanger the security of.." RLY. Guess what we did NOT leak?
The attacks come shortly after the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigations arrested 14 alleged members of Anonymous.  The arrests likely will not affect Anonymous's operations significantly, as the entity is a group without a leader, with numerous organizers and thousands of members.  It's also possible that the FBI was duped into arresting enemies of Anonymous, as appeared to be the case in the recent arrest of ex-Anonymous hacker Robert Cavenaugh, who had a bitter falling out with the group.  In Mr. Cavenaugh's case the FBI was led to believe he was part of LulzSec, a suggestion LulzSec greeted with derision.

II. Anonymous "Hacked"?

Anonymous was recently given the boot unceremoniously off of Google Inc.'s (
GOOG) social network Google+.

Anonymous responded by creating a new social network dubbed "AnonPlus", which it describes stating, "[AnonPlus is a] social network where there is no fear...of censorship...of blackout...nor of holding back."

The site -- which in is current, undeveloped form is essentially just a message board -- launched a couple days ago, but has gone offline following it being defaced, with the message:
We Are TURKIYE. We Are AKINCILAR.

This logo suits you more..How dare you rise against to the World..Do you really think that you are Ottoman Empire?
We thought you before that you cannot challenge with the world and we teach you cannot be social
Now all of you go to your doghouse..
The attacks appear, ostensibly, to be the work of Turkish nationalists or government officials, who were upset about Anonymous's recent efforts to attack the government of their country.  While AnonPlus isn't really an official Anonymous site and is intended for non-hackers as well, it appears to have been a low-lying fruit that "TURKIYE"/"AKINCILAR" (the latter being a Turkish term for "raider") could vent their rage upon.

Anonymous was remarkably quiet about the "hack"/defacement, uncharacteristically failing to type nary a "u mad bro?"

A full description of the intentions for Anon+ is available here.  To give a taste, the author states:
Anon+ will be a social network system based on peer to peer (p2p) connectivity using encrypted torrents as the means to hold profile data. There will be a central web site from which you can download the software, and it will also host the system's secure databases (which keeps track of who is friends with whom and other back office stuff).
So in other words, whatever the attackers managed to deface, was only a holding place for the eventual planned rebellious social network.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Coming soon, to the internets near you!
By gevorg on 7/21/2011 7:44:17 PM , Rating: 5
Massive internet censorship, monitoring, no quasi-anonymity, logs required, ISP=police.

Thank you Anonymous, you made the world a better place. Americans are more free then they ever were!




By JasonMick (blog) on 7/21/2011 7:58:59 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Massive internet censorship, monitoring, no quasi-anonymity, logs required, ISP=police.

Thank you Anonymous, you made the world a better place. Americans are more free then they ever were!

I can see where you can fault certain members of Anonymous for their thoughtless attack methodology, which rather than actually exposing wrong-doing, instead merely constitutes attacking somebody out of some vague, unproven allegation.

But can you honestly claim that Anonymous is to blame for all those things you mentioned? That's kind of like blaming a store clerk for rape because he said something mean earlier in the day to the person who actually raped somebody.

Sure the gov't doesn't like what Anonymous is doing, but that's just one of countless things it can use to justify the abusive actions you've mentioned above.

I don't agree with what some members of Anonymous have done, but I think your comment is unfair, too.


RE: Coming soon, to the internets near you!
By gevorg on 7/21/2011 8:19:03 PM , Rating: 5
The store clerk taped the raping for the lulz!

A better analogy:
Terrorists take down a couple of buildings and the whole nation gets their freedom handicapped by Patriot Act. A decade passes, and the act is renewed + groping at airports is added. The only difference between Anonymous and terrorists is that Anonymous do not kill, but both cause governments to handicap your freedom and liberties.


RE: Coming soon, to the internets near you!
By someguy123 on 7/21/2011 8:49:24 PM , Rating: 5
The people are the ones that allow this abuse to occur. Too many people use the excuse that one man can't achieve anything over his government, even though the government was made for the public to begin with. You've got to start somewhere, and if it's alone outside of a government building with a sign, so be it.


RE: Coming soon, to the internets near you!
By jamesjwb on 7/22/2011 5:01:00 AM , Rating: 5
Very surprised this got rated down. Was it too optimistic for Dailytech readers to suggest WE can actually achieve things?

It's completely true. An informed population could stop things like this from happening, and not just from the government. The problem is, you've got ignorant drones who watch TV and think Fox news is true (or any mainstream news for that matter). Then you've got people on the right that think they've got it all figured out - it's the government, democrats and taxes, and we need more guns, loads more guns! Then you've got people on the left who think everything that's wrong with the world is because of the right.

All of these folks need to start again from a non-biased, open-minded position and check out some facts, then we might get somewhere.


By bigdawg1988 on 7/22/2011 10:50:56 AM , Rating: 2
How high and mighty we are this morning. People are entitled to do or think whatever they want, no matter how "ignorant" it may seem to others. Some people really don't care and they also don't want to be bothered getting educated about the intricate details of government.
Also, the anti-sec/lulzsec people are going about it all wrong. What is their agenda? What kind of anti-corruption are they working at stopping? Do they have a manifesto or something? Just sounds like a bunch of anarchists with too much time on their hands. If they want to change other people's opinions and get more people on board they need to do a better job of communicating whatever it is they are trying to achieve. You really think defacing some sites is going to stop corruption? That's dumber than communism.


RE: Coming soon, to the internets near you!
By JackNSally on 7/22/2011 2:09:40 PM , Rating: 5
Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.- Benjamin Franklin


By Phoque on 7/22/2011 9:59:35 PM , Rating: 5
As is, it looks to me as an incredibly stupid statement. You can't have absolute freedom along best safety.

I think the following variant is a much wiser one, and hopefully truer to what he meant:

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Taken from: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin


By TSS on 7/22/2011 7:01:56 AM , Rating: 4
I'm sorry but no. What anonymous is doing might be wrong but it's not what causes the government to handicap freedom and liberties. Governments do that by default. It's the very definition of the word: Govern-ment. To govern is to control, and control (or to be controlled) is the opposite of freedom.

What causes the government to actually take liberties and freedoms rather then just wanting to is a docile population. From day one nobody has liked the patriot act, yet you voted the same idiot into office AGAIN, and it's very much looking like you'll vote that idiots party, which has gotten much more idiotic, into office AGAIN in 2012. And because hyperinflation is unavoidable by the elections after that you'll vote the party of the idiot that started trillion dollar deficits and sped hyperinflation up by 4-5 years back into power. Yknow the guy that opposed the huge deficits of his idiotic predecessor, then went on to double them for a decade to come?

Or that the national debt is really Taxation without Representation. Because it's spending future money, and future people do not have a say in today's spending. A person turning 18 today will have to share in paying back atleast $14,5 trillion worth of federal debt while he's had no oppertunity to have a say in the matter.

Where is the bloody revolt? This actually IS for the children. Don't tell me anything can be pushed through "for the children" but this can't.

On anonymous though, i don't think it's such a bad idea raising awareness on cyber security. They belong in jail, sure, but i'd rather have them go on a hacking spree then the chinese. Don't forget the real cyber wars are starting to gear up, and the US government is really slow to move, unless there's a threat.....


By tastyratz on 7/22/2011 11:48:27 AM , Rating: 2
Where is my +6 button on this, seriously.
That is absolutely the best analogy, and all this international government takedown crap is going to just result in the net having HEAVY oversight and a HEAVY government hand.
They are going to have a new "war on terror" instead it will be our rights on the internet.
Yes the governments of the world could collude to do this at any time, but something so public with such media coverage will result in pressure to do so or be more vigilant in their actions.

Sony was lulz, but this is getting out of hand.


RE: Coming soon, to the internets near you!
By Reclaimer77 on 7/21/11, Rating: -1
By JasonMick (blog) on 7/22/2011 12:11:30 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
Once again, Jason Mick, defender of hackers and illegal activities cometh.

And again, you fabricate reality and try to put words in my mouth.

I've said it once and I'll say it again -- there's nothing inherently illegal about hacking -- it's all what you do and who you piss off, as the laws are very ambiguous and in many cases arbitrarily applied.

Don't believe me?

Do yourself a favor and read some portions of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

Do I think that Anonymous broke multiple international laws in obtaining and releasing these documents? Absolutely.

Do I condone what they did? No.

You may call me a "defender of hackers" or some trite contrivance, but here's my actual opinion. What Anonymous did here was attention catching, but did little real harm (this time). But it was childish and likely illegal.

Basically Anonymous wants to play private eye and offer up some proof of grand wrongdoing by governments and corporations. Like private eyes it's likely breaking laws to get that proof, but at least if they actually DID provide some sort of concrete evidence of wrongdoing it could somewhat morally justify its actions, if not legally.

Instead, they've basically resorted to the Nixon "enemy list" strategy -- "get them in any way possible".

I think that childish, illegal, and most importantly, immoral.

quote:
Yes, yes we can. Why can't you? This is the world we live in. If you go around committing international cyber-terrorism, you damn sure have to know what the response to that is going to be.

Oh come now. You're really living in your basement in terror of Anonymous because they leaked some "classified" NATO document on information service efforts in the Balkans? Really?

You're the one who's giving them far too much credit here.

Anonymous has only gained attention within the last year and a half.

Most cybercrimes policies, wiretapping statutes, etc. have been in place for 5 years or more. That was my point. You and the original op can claim they were somehow the result of Anonymous, but that's patently false.

Anonymous didn't exist when the laws passed! C'mon now.

quote:
Equating rape to a law enforcement measure to protect against hackers is especially off-putting.

You misunderstood my analogy. I was referring to widespread censorship or domestic surveillance efforts. I'm not convinced such efforts are in place in the U.S., but they most certainly are in other countries like Turkey, China, or North Korea.

I think there is compelling evidence that the U.S. has increasingly engaged in some light warrantless domestic surveillance of citizens (not foreign nationals), which I believe is fundamentally unconstitutional. But such incidents are still relatively far from mainstream.

Basically I think it's something people should be concerned about, since it is their freedoms, but we're by no means on the level of China, et al. when it comes to cyber-oppression.

Perhaps my original analogy was less than optimal, but my point was that it's silly to think Anonymous somehow create the current state of cyber-censorship etc. -- it was in place long before they hit the scene.

quote:
Some" members? As if there is anything redeeming about any of these people.

Again that just conveys your lack of understanding of the group. It's essentially like a forum. Just like you wouldn't do some things other DT readers might, some members of Anonymous would never do the things these members did.

Okay, I can accept the argument that in the face of recent actions it might be wise to distance yourself from Anonymous. Fair enough. But I suspect that Anonymous is heavily people under 20 that are less than gainfully employed (though there are likely many exceptions to that rule). Young people will always do foolish things.

In the 1950s they became greasers and were in gangs and fought each other. Today they hack each other. Perhaps their actions today are a bit more harmful, but it's essentially the same concept.

Again, we may not see eye to eye on this issue, but I wish you would avoid fabricating wild statements about what you think I think... particularly when I've been generous enough to explain my actual viewpoint to you several times.


RE: Coming soon, to the internets near you!
By Reclaimer77 on 7/22/11, Rating: 0
By JasonMick (blog) on 7/22/2011 1:19:46 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
We're not speaking in the abstract here so I don't know why you continue to try and make this point. Breaking into secured networks and stealing data is most certainly illegal. Call it hacking, call it whatever you want, but stop saying it's not "inherently" illegal.

Again, that really depends. The CFAA only covers government and financial institutions. So hacking, say, GM would definitely SEEM illegal, but is NOT covered by federal laws. Instead, that is covered by state laws, which vary wildly from state to state...
http://www.ncsl.org/IssuesResearch/Telecommunicati...

Depending on what state you live in, mild hacking (in the sense of network probing) of some private businesses, if you do not take copies, or engage in malicious actions is legal. Believe it or not, there are some hackers who only are seeking knowledge, not try some attempt at "hacktivism" or attacking somebody.

Let me ask you. If you Reclaimer, gained access to GM's networks, peeked at files, but caused no mischief and did not take anything or do any other damaging action, have your really committed a great offense? No, actually you've learned some valuable skills that you can apply to protecting your own network.

Face it, whether you like it or not, virtually every quality GOVERNMENT or corporate security professional started off play hacking. Just most had the common sense not be malicious about it.

The most competent individuals among the people you're holding up as more authorities(cyber law enforcement) ironically are likely ex-hackers themselves. :)

quote:
LOL and again, you just can't help yourself from making excuses for them whenever you can. How does the severity of the crime matter? No I'm not living in fear, so what? That doesn't make what they are doing okay.

And what part of "I DON'T condone it" and "I think it's WRONG" don't you understand?

Of course it's relevant to discuss the seriousness of the crime, though. That's how the legal system of America or any other free nation works.

quote:
No, we're not claiming that at all. Now who's putting words in peoples mouths? We're just saying, don't start crying when these policies get extended or they use these rampant hacks by Lulz and Anonymous to take even more freedoms away from us.

"Expanding" domestic surveillance is most certainly "expanding" violations of Constitutionally guaranteed rights.

It's ridiculous to suggest Constitutional freedoms be abridged because certain gov't agency admins can't conduct proper penetrations testing, which any IT man worth his salt could?

The gov't IT folks are being outwitted by a bunch of (for the most part) underage hackers. Doesn't that show a bigger underlying problem?

The government needs to hire more talented people to protect its system, not step up illegal, unconstitutional spying efforts on citizens.

quote:
That just doesn't cut it. They are accessories, plain and simple. Since you used rape, I'll use murder. If my friend blows someone away and I drive him around all day while during and after he's done it, well that makes me an accessory. I don't get a free pass just because I didn't pull the trigger.

Guilt by association, ZERO tolerance. These people are dangerous, and it's time to stop treating them like just some misguided youths who are being "foolish" just having a good time.

Err most members of Anonymous don't even know what some small group of hackers is doing on some given day.

That's like suggesting that if a group of Boy Scouts committed a crime, that all Boy Scouts should be punished.

Most members of Anonymous are likely not even remotely associated with these attacks. It's unlikely they even heard about it. These things are only organized on select IRC channels, etc., which most members of Anonymous never even venture onto.

Again, you're just showcasing your own ignorance on how this organization operates. Know thy enemy, at least...

quote:
If they can do this to secured government websites, how in the hell does an average Joe stand a chance? If they decide to target individuals who have made their list, for whatever reason, who can stop them?

Err I doubt these websites were very well secured. Given past reports about the lack of competence of U.S. government agencies when it comes to cyber security (GOVERNMENT reports, mind you), I would say it likely didn't take some great hacking genius to gain access.

These are childish individuals playing a little game and they should be punished.

But don't overstate this as some sort of Mission Impossible-esque feat.


RE: Coming soon, to the internets near you!
By tecknurd on 7/22/2011 4:07:52 AM , Rating: 2
You do not know what you are saying. These hacker groups think they are in a civil war. They feel they have no freedom on the Internet. That is true in some countries, but not in all countries. Third these hacker groups have god complexes.

These hacker groups are the grey goop of society that are trying to change how the world should think in their own views.

If wikileaks were never been created, things will be different. People think having all the information for everything is good. Technically not true. In the Casey Anthony case, there are a lot of evidence that made her guilty, but it did not help to bring any justice. If people want to know everything about everyone, then that means they have a god complex and eventually they will open a pandora box.

About hacking into someone's computer with out permission is legal. Technically it is NOT. If you list directories and/or files, it is illegal. If you copy the data, it is illegal. Sure you have to be caught hacking.

These hacker groups are terrorist. To your definition they are not but to me they are because it is different in the virtual world like the Internet. If a server is down from an attempt of hacking, it is murder. Also it goes against freedom of speech. Companies and the government can take down the server if the site owner crosses over the line of terms of use of the company or goes too far that the freedom of speech saids you can not say. Though there is those 0.1 percent out of 99.9% that goes against the rules and their site is taken down, but those 0.1 percent are just mad and they prefer to take revenge with out checking what they did wrong.

In conclusion, these hackers are jerks and they are not any better than the companies that did badly. Hacking anything did not fix any wrong doing. The companies that got hacked will basically say "thanks for testing our security, good day." Suing is the only way for a company to change their ways. Past has shown that suing companies changes their thinking.


RE: Coming soon, to the internets near you!
By jamesjwb on 7/22/2011 5:19:44 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
These hacker groups are the grey goop of society that are trying to change how the world should think in their own views.


Maybe, but this insinuates we aren't already in that situation. We don't really live in a free society when an enormous chunk of the worlds mainstream media is owned by a few massive transnationals that own corporations in so many conflicting fields it's almost a crime (in my own personal view, that is).

Stop pretending you live in a free-thinking land, and let's also realize these hackers have zero power to do anything really, except get some headlines and steal some info. The others who behave exactly the same as your quote can do enormous, horrendous harm and do so on a daily basis.

I know which one concerns me more. I'm not saying the hackers deserve no attention, they do. But if we are talking solely about a group who are "trying to change how the world should think in their own views", there are far more serious foes to worry about.


RE: Coming soon, to the internets near you!
By Reclaimer77 on 7/22/11, Rating: -1
By guffwd13 on 7/22/2011 1:36:49 PM , Rating: 2
Fundamentally I might agree with parts of this.

However, I would say still today that many people, while they have access to many viewpoints of any given issue, don't receive their credible news from the "internets" but from online versions of those newspapers you say have gone extinct. They haven't died and they aren't dying. They simply no longer exist in print form.


By tecknurd on 7/22/2011 8:28:43 PM , Rating: 2
I do live in a free thinking land which is named USA. I understand in other parts of the world does not have this. Free thinkers that have morals and understands ethics can do good things. The world will be different with out free thinkers such as inventors, entrepreneurs, scientist, and explorers. I do think you take everything for granted that free thinkers have done. Yes there are free thinkers that have done bad things, but it is something to learn what is bad. I just stating a warning like the same thing that Nostradamus. People thought the warnings from Nostradamus were crying wolf, but the events did happen.

Since everything is now in a computer and it is connected everywhere, it is possible the hackers can change the world to their desire.

My country tries to warn countries to keep the Internet open, but some countries will shut up their people because it goes against the laws in the country. I try to go to America made news casters or go outside to something like BBC.

Hackers does not deserve any attention. They are jerks or another word bullies. They are not doing good for me. They are doing a lot of harm. Sure these are not the only groups that I fear. I fear countries like North Korea. They are worst than Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan combine.


By Darkefire on 7/21/2011 11:26:35 PM , Rating: 2
A better analogy: it's like blaming your brothers for your parents no longer allowing you to eat dinner in front of the living room TV because they decided it'd be funny to have a food fight or demonstrated their dissatisfaction with broccoli by dumping it on the carpet. Or really, any number of situations where "one person spoils the fun for everyone else" that we've all seen countless times in our own lives wherein Idiot Alpha abuses a privilege and the corresponding authority figure removes it. And while the internet is absolutely a necessity these days, it's a necessity like driving is (which coincidentally is also commonly referred to as a privilege rather than a right); having it sanitized, neutered, licensed and regulated won't affect your ability to get from Point A to Point B. Massive restrictions and filters seem to work just fine for libraries, public schools and China, so why not the entire world? If the government perceives a free internet as a threat to public safety they won't hesitate to bring down the hammer, and with these dolts providing easily sensationalized headlines like free candy the unwashed masses will cheer the government on every step of the way.


RE: Coming soon, to the internets near you!
By gorehound on 7/22/2011 10:03:26 AM , Rating: 2
coming soon the rise of all hackers to take down ICE/DHS.
keep on the attacks.hopefully millions of young smart hackers will take down ICE the arseholes in the us gov.
the war will start on the arses who think they can control the world.


By tng on 7/22/2011 10:21:58 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
the war will start on the arses who think they can control the world.
Yes! Take them all down!

When the anarchist mob breaks in your door in the world that you want to create, those corrupt police will not answer your calls to 911 because you took that down to!


RE: Coming soon, to the internets near you!
By sprockkets on 7/21/2011 9:57:54 PM , Rating: 3
Uh, where have you been the last decade??? We've had warrantless wiretapping of the internet due to 9/11.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surve...


By tng on 7/22/2011 11:47:59 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
We've had warrantless wiretapping of the internet due to 9/11.
We have had warrantless wiretapping of phones well before that as well. More erosion of freedom/privacy.


By tng on 7/22/2011 10:18:22 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Anonymous responded by creating a new social network dubbed "AnonPlus", which it describes stating, "[AnonPlus is a] social network where there is no fear...of censorship...of blackout...nor of holding back."
Does anybody really believe this? No fear of censorship? Typically there is no censorship until you put something up there that everyone disagrees with, then it will be censorship for the common good... These guys will be no different.

Just like allot of the people that live near me, they describe themselves as "tolerant", until you say something that doesn't fit into their view of the world and then they are just plain full of hate.


RE: Coming soon, to the internets near you!
By tamalero on 7/22/2011 11:02:50 AM , Rating: 2
So, are we blaming Anonymous and hackers now?
I tought you guys were blaming the terrorists or the inmigrants.


RE: Coming soon, to the internets near you!
By tng on 7/22/2011 1:46:19 PM , Rating: 2
It is easier than blaming the people who are really responsible....us.

We continue to vote people into office time and time again and they continue to screw us. It is well and good to criticize someone elses member of congress, the senate or the government in general, but your own members of the House and Senate are great and you vote them back in. So nothing ever changes except the finger pointing.

Seems that the only way to get them out is if they are married and caught chasing skirts, or expose themselves on the internet.


By Uncle on 7/22/2011 1:55:15 PM , Rating: 2
"We continue to vote people into office time and time again and they continue to screw us."

Right now you don't have much of a choice. Thats because both party's have been hijacked. The best you can do now is go out on a limb and vote an independent in, whether you like him or not, other wise the con keeps evolving.


By Uncle on 7/22/2011 1:47:57 PM , Rating: 1
What are you Americans doing about it. You sit at home crying wa wa wa, while your country has been taken over. This didn't happen over night. This fundamental hijacking of your government really took off from the sixty's. You were warned by people, for over forty years, that knew and you referred to them as the people with tin foil hats, other then whining about people who at least try, even if it is out of the ordinary, what are you going to do about it, WHINER.


Why use Torrents? Remember FreeNet?
By CZroe on 7/21/2011 9:31:00 PM , Rating: 2
"Anon+ will be a social network system based on peer to peer (p2p) connectivity using encrypted torrents as the means to hold profile data. There will be a central web site from which you can download the software, and it will also host the system's secure databases (which keeps track of who is friends with whom and other back office stuff)."

Uhh... so why not use FreeNet?




Just a matter of time
By kfonda on 7/21/2011 11:54:52 PM , Rating: 2
Eventually these clowns are going to piss off the wrong government and you will never hear from them again.

Some of them may be technically smart, but there is always some one who knows more than than they do. Plus, they don't strike me as the type that would stand up for their fellow saviors of the world under any kind of real interrogation.




So many...
By xpax on 7/22/2011 11:33:24 AM , Rating: 2
... commenters fail to understand the true point behind the actions of Anonymous.

Could these actions result in governments instituting more insidious and liberty-raping laws and legislation? Perhaps.

Would things be better otherwise? Probably not. The US government in particular has shown repeated interest in renewing legislation which strips citizens of personal liberty -- for example the unnecessary Patriot Act. They'll continue this course as long as they can get away with it, and regardless of whether there's a justifiable reason to do so (arguably, there never was).

The true point here is to expose as many of governments and corporations inner workings as possible. To see the true absurdity of what goes on in law enforcement today (have any of you looked at some of the releases? Like the border patrol one? It's pure Kafka.)

The only way true change will happen is when the people finally get upset and demand change. And I don't mean that in some abstract, useless "vote for so-and-so" way. I don't mean in the "drinking beers with pals and bitching" way. I'm talking about marching on our capitals en masse and refusing to leave with anything less than full control.

A quote sums it up best: People shouldn't be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.




How Anon plays it
By Autisticgramma on 7/22/2011 2:44:58 PM , Rating: 2
With the media's hunger for actual information to deliver, and with murdoch on the ropes, Anon could be the only hope for the news to actually have something to report about.

If they play it right, timing, connections and desperate reporters, could come together to make this the revolution they're hoping for,(restoration of common sense in politics and business - a non violent revolution) instead of fanning the fires of discord, that threaten all of our lives.

Right now it could go either way. But if history is as iterative as it seems, people will have to die before the rich gentry (see out of touch executives/policymakers) think about how their actions affect the world.




Terrorist
By Autisticgramma on 7/22/2011 3:21:26 PM , Rating: 2
the word terrorist is sooo common
almost like mainstream




Some things just don't fit.
By Dtprodromos on 7/26/2011 7:01:40 PM , Rating: 2
Everyone is quick to judge the actions of a hacking group, but there is no proof, that they are actually, who they say they are.

If I hack a site and declare to you, that I am God, would you so quickly accept my declarations?

They say they are anti-government, but they do not have a coherent ideology. They post pseudo-manifestos, that anyone with higher education could compile on the fly, half asleep and half drunk.

Before not long ago a flood of hacking attacks began, supposedly to "punish" the villains, but the bad guys were always among us. What triggered their actions at this point in time?
They say a lot of sites do not protect well enough their customers; is this news? Is the cyber security so worse today than it was 10 years ago?
I, also, have a hard time to believe that they are able to attack governments,agencies and corporations (some with great sophistication and resources, others just incompetent) during all this time and JUST GET AWAY WITH IT.

I don't know who they are, so I can't say if they are right or wrong. In most cases they do not inflict direct financial damage to the supposed evil ones. If they did, would they be so successful?
They just pose in front of us a "vague bubble"(if i may) which contains our liberties, our security, our welfare, but they do not seem to have either a motive or a general plan.
And don't give me, that they arrested that good guy, that worked for the right of open source software, because if it were like this we would have a permanent revolution from the birth of the web.
If they think, they are right, they should say what exactly did the individual, the company and the government they attack and why they cannot be corrected through the judicial system and most of all give us a background to understand them. A will to fight for the good of the people is not enough, because it is not natural. If it were, you would see revolutions in every part of the world. Every revolution has a triggering event, e.g. you are bad, you kill people, I hate you and I was civilized against you till you hurt me and my family.
A lot of children grow up in the middle of hell today, they live all their childhood in a war, they are hungry because of it, they may lose mummy and daddy because of it, they do not have a house because of it, and they experience live tortures because of it. I could better understand such a kid to become a terrorist than some random guy with only high ideals about the freedom of the internet.




Jason Mick, without a fail
By andylawcc on 7/21/11, Rating: -1
RE: Jason Mick, without a fail
By dayanth on 7/21/11, Rating: -1
RE: Jason Mick, without a fail
By ppardee on 7/21/2011 7:42:21 PM , Rating: 2
He appears, ostensibly, to know the meaning.

I find this entire article to contain multitudinous ostensivity. You are clearly jealous of Jason's afflatus!

Linguists, Refudiate!


RE: Jason Mick, without a fail
By BBeltrami on 7/21/11, Rating: -1
RE: Jason Mick, without a fail
By wordsworm on 7/21/2011 8:46:21 PM , Rating: 2
You know, www.dictionary.com can help you with your problem. Don't give up on becoming literate! But at the same time, don't get angry at folks who are literate for using words that you don't understand.

If DT is really too hard for you, why don't you try out some of the kids' publications? Maybe they use smaller words.


RE: Jason Mick, without a fail
By ppardee on 7/22/2011 3:51:41 PM , Rating: 2
English is a wonderfully beautiful and diverse language. It has become more simplified every year as people become less interested in expanding their vocabulary. There are more than a quarter of a million words in the English language (more if you consider distinct meanings of words) and the average person knows about 5000 words but uses less than 2000 in daily life.

There is nothing needless about writing intelligently, especially in a professional publication ostensibly read by intelligent people. (I hope that didn't come off as pompous and condescending.) There are subtleties that are conveyed by certain words that make them appropriate where other, more common words would not be.

Some people are more comfortable reading books by Norman Bridwell than by Leo Tolstoy, but that doesn't mean that we as a society need to dumb it all down for the average man. I personally feel THAT to be condescending.


yuioyu
By yuioking on 7/21/11, Rating: -1
"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki