Print 80 comment(s) - last by The Raven.. on Jun 23 at 1:58 PM

LulzSec and Anonymous have joined forces to declare war on international governments and banks.  (Source: LulzSec)

U.S. law enforcement still seems no closer to catching LulzSec members.  (Source: AP Photo)

Note to the LA Times and media at large -- LulzSec and Anonymous aren't at war, despite LulzSec's attacks on certain 4Chan members.  (Source: Tony Pierce)
Group appears to be refocused on "socially minded" hacking

LulzSec ("Lulz Security") has made a name for itself with its many hacks [1][2][3] of Sony Corp. (TYO:6758)  But its most daring hacks have been a distributed denial of service takedown of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, a hack of U.S. Senate servers, and an attack on an affiliate of the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation

Despite these audacious attacks, the U.S. government appears to be no closer to finding the merry cyber bandits.  There have been no accurate reports of homes being raided; no arrests yet made.

I. Declaration of War

Looking to up the ante, LulzSec has announced its intention to team up with the hacker collective Anonymous to attack international government and financial institutions, who the group accuses are the hoarders of "corrupt booty".  The U.S. government and banking system are among the most prominent targets.  Labeling these parties "terrorists" (a term some are applying to the LulzSec members themselves), it writes [PasteBin]:

Salutations Lulz Lizards,

As we're aware, the government and whitehat security terrorists across the world continue to dominate and control our Internet ocean. Sitting pretty on cargo bays full of corrupt booty, they think it's acceptable to condition and enslave all vessels in sight. Our Lulz Lizard battle fleet is now declaring immediate and unremitting war on the freedom-snatching moderators of 2011.

Welcome to Operation Anti-Security (#AntiSec) - we encourage any vessel, large or small, to open fire on any government or agency that crosses their path. We fully endorse the flaunting of the word "AntiSec" on any government website defacement or physical graffiti art. We encourage you to spread the word of AntiSec far and wide, for it will be remembered. To increase efforts, we are now teaming up with the Anonymous collective and all affiliated battleships.

Whether you're sailing with us or against us, whether you hold past grudges or a burning desire to sink our lone ship, we invite you to join the rebellion. Together we can defend ourselves so that our privacy is not overrun by profiteering gluttons. Your hat can be white, gray or black, your skin and race are not important. If you're aware of the corruption, expose it now, in the name of Anti-Security.

Top priority is to steal and leak any classified government information, including email spools and documentation. Prime targets are banks and other high-ranking establishments. If they try to censor our progress, we will obliterate the censor with cannonfire anointed with lizard blood.

It's now or never. Come aboard, we're expecting you...

History begins today.

The campaign appears to be a departure of LulzSec's tradition of DDoS griefing and brings to mind Anonymous's hacks of Bank of America and HBGary.  Particularly interesting is the notion of hacking government sites to ferret out corruption.  

The online community tends to have mixed feelings on such efforts.  Many are mildly supportive, but a prevailing sentiment is "Who is watching the watchmen?"  

As Wikileaks has arguably demonstrated, it's easy for such efforts to devolve into financially-motivated publicity campaigns and for lives and reputations to be endangered by careless publication.

II. First Strike

In its first effort in the new campaign, LulzSec took down the website of Britain's Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) agency, an agency which performs similar duties to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and the U.S Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

The group posted to Twitter:

Tango down - - in the name of #AntiSec

The SOCA page now appears to have come back to life and is fully reachable.

We'll update here as more attacks come.

III. Anonymous and LulzSec -- Friends Till the End

While we correctly reported that LulzSec's botnet was composed partially of 4Chan users of the '/b/' message board, some publications [1][2] became a bit overeager and erroneously jumped to the conclusion that Anonymous (who frequents 4Chan) were at war with LulzSec.

Both groups firmly dispelled such notions.

Anonymous's AnonOps Twitter account posted:

Attention #Media: about #Lulzsec and #Anonymous, we are not at war. We are bros of teh internetz. Also, /b/ != Anonymous.

"YourAnonNews", another Twitter affiliated with the group, added:

We are NOT at war with @LulzSec #MediaFags

And LulzSec wrote:

To confirm, we aren't going after Anonymous. 4chan isn't Anonymous to begin with, and /b/ is certainly not the whole of 4chan. True story.

/b/ is the peon of all the 4chan boards and 4chan is the mass amplification of crowdsourcing used by AnonOps to gain support. #MediaFacts

Saying we're attacking Anonymous because we taunted /b/ is like saying we're going to war with America because we stomped on a cheeseburger.

So that's settled -- LulzSec and Anonymous are friends -- even if some 4Chan users are upset at the fact that their computers were taken over.

IV. Anonymous Members' Handles Exposed?

One site LulzSecExposed is generating a lot of attention for claiming to carry chat logs taken from inside LulzSec by "Web Ninjas" for the purpose of "Bringing Lulz to hack victims."  

The chat logs include the groups handles ("Sabu", "Neuron", "storm","Recursion_", "trollpoll","io", "Topiary", "JoePie91", and "tflow"), the name of at least one of the group member's virtual proxy network server ("HideMyAss"), and more.

Among the amusing revelations is that some members appear to have quit as the government attacks started.  Reads one log:

Jun 03 23:31:23 Sabu recursion and devurandom quit respectfully
Jun 03 23:31:27 
Sabu saying they are not up for the heat
Jun 03 23:31:32 
Sabu you realize we smacked the fbi today

Later in the log they advise a new member how to cover his tracks, commenting:

Jun 03 23:40:32 ‹Neuron› Yo anyone have any extra tips for staying safe?
Jun 03 23:43:08 ‹Sabu›  clean your box out, make sure any sensitive info you have encrypted on a usb stick
Jun 03 23:43:12 ‹Sabu›  stay behind your vpn
Jun 03 23:43:16 ‹Sabu›  from now on your vpn is your weapon
Jun 03 23:43:23 ‹Sabu›  without your weapon you are nothing
Jun 03 23:43:30 ‹Sabu›  without you it is notihng blah blah blah
Jun 03 23:43:34 ‹Neuron› haha
Jun 03 23:43:39 ‹Sabu›  and dont do nothing we dont approve of :D
Jun 03 23:44:04 ‹Neuron› Alright right now.. My "hackbox" has 512 aes encryption on the entire harddrive
Jun 03 23:44:18 ‹Neuron› two passwords and truecrypt on info concerning anything hacking related
Jun 03 23:44:24 ‹Neuron› and my vpn is HideMyAss
Jun 03 23:44:43 ‹storm› sabu
Jun 03 23:44:55 ‹storm›  my netbook will be here win only a matter of days
Jun 03 23:45:01 ‹storm›  and ill be wiping my entire system
Jun 03 23:45:05 ‹storm›  desktop
Jun 03 23:45:14 ‹storm›  and just encrypting the entire drive
Jun 03 23:45:16 ‹Neuron› im already wiping my enitre desktop
Jun 03 23:45:16 ‹storm›  after i scrub it
Jun 03 23:45:58 ‹Sabu›  yeah
Jun 03 23:46:01 ‹Sabu›  wipe it all
Jun 03 23:46:04 ‹Sabu›  im wiping all my shit now

Yet another log indicates that "Topiary" and "JoePie91" are working as public relations team members for the group and helping to channel donations to it via Bitcoin.

If these logs prove real, this could prove very bad news for some members of LulzSec as they might give the government the clues they need to discover their real word identities and/or locations.

That said, there's no real smoking guns in the logs -- yet.

Comments     Threshold

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

RE: These little kids need a lesson.
By NullSubroutine on 6/20/2011 8:40:54 PM , Rating: 2
I would agree they aren't constitutional lawyers, but in their mind they are trying to make the world a better place. Their fighting a fight that first and foremost affects them and what they believe negatively affects everyone else. One could argue their are misguided in their effort of execution (certainly a debatable topic).

What I think is a larger question is if they succeed in gaining any sort of power themselves, are they going to abuse it as the overlords they hate do. Slay the monster by becoming the monster.

And again, I'm not trying to legitimize the group, only countering your original argument that they didn't have a legitimate grievance because of past bad action. Beyond that, the question becomes can someone who did past bad action, do current good action?

If a hypothetical group who had previously stolen peoples identities and money, then hacked a pharmaceutical company to find a cure for cancer that the company had been with holding and releases it to the public, does that make the group good?

What if it happens in the reverse order? Is good/bad a matter of mathematically attributes added or subtracted? Is it once saint forever good or once tarnished forever dirty? Or does ones actions exist in a vacuum of the present with the past completely irrelevant?

RE: These little kids need a lesson.
By Reclaimer77 on 6/20/2011 8:50:58 PM , Rating: 2
but in their mind they are trying to make the world a better place.

Well so was Timothy McVeigh. He saw our own government murder citizens in Waco, Texas and figured he would even the score and set things right. I don't have to tell you how wrong and insane he was for it.

Beyond that, the question becomes can someone who did past bad action, do current good action?

What is this, chicken or the egg? Well I guess yes you can, but you're still going to have to answer for the previous "bad action". And, again, I don't honestly believe for one minute these people are now trying to do "good" things. Even if they are, my point is their methods are completely unacceptable.

You're hitting me with a lot of philosophical arguments. And while they are quite fun to entertain, I must admit, unfortunately they only go so far in our "real world" society with it's laws and other trappings.

RE: These little kids need a lesson.
By NullSubroutine on 6/20/2011 9:03:12 PM , Rating: 2
Well so was Timothy McVeigh. He saw our own government murder citizens in Waco, Texas and figured he would even the score and set things right. I don't have to tell you how wrong and insane he was for it.

True, intent cannot be the sole judgement for right and wrong. The act should be the main consideration and in this case so far their action has been in the terms of vandalism not mass murder. I think most would concede that only in the rarest of occasions does loss of life not outweigh the "right" of action.

On the other hand liberty is and most likely always will be paid for in blood. So another philosophical question for you, what is more important liberty or life? Without life you can't enjoy liberty, but is life worthy without liberty?

The storming of the Bastille in France is still celebrated as their independence day if I am not mistaken, not only did many people die that day, but the revolution itself was horribly bloody, many innocent people died. This smorning when I woke up I thought of Hitler's quote about success/right/wrong and had this to say about it:
Success/Victory is not the sole judge of right, but it surely convinces alot of people.

By Reclaimer77 on 6/21/2011 1:06:50 PM , Rating: 2
So another philosophical question for you, what is more important liberty or life? Without life you can't enjoy liberty, but is life worthy without liberty?

Well that's a no-briner. Life. As long as you are alive you have a chance to fight for what you want. Being dead never solved anything.

I just think it's silly for anyone to convince themselves these hackers are suddenly fighting for our "Liberty". Or that hacking, in general, is an effective means of securing it.

"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki