backtop


Print 72 comment(s) - last by vol7ron.. on Feb 5 at 8:46 PM

Anonymous takes the fight to the U.S. Government

Anonymous is steaming mad, and the U.S. government is directly in its crosshairs. The suicide of Aaron Swartz, an internet activist and co-creator of Reddit and the RSS standard, was the final straw which caused Anonymous to come out of hiding and attack the U.S. Department of Justice with all its might.
 
I. Aaron Swartz Find Himself in Legal Trouble, Eventually Commits Suicide

Swartz came under fire after he accessed JSTOR database with a personal laptop in 2011. Using the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's (MIT's) data network, Swartz downloaded over 4 million academic journals in an effort to make them freely available to the public.
 
While Swartz had indeed compromised MIT's network and the JSTOR database, the Middlesex County district court decided that he wouldn't face jail time for his actions. The matter would have been closed and Swartz would have been "off the hook" so to speak, but United States Attorney Carmen M. Ortiz took up the case and things decidedly took a turn for the worse.


Aaron Swartz
 
Ortiz decided to hit Swartz with 13 felony charges that could have sent him to jail for up to 35 years. Swartz would also be on the hook for a $1 million fine for his actions. In a 2011 press release, Ortiz declared that, "Stealing is stealing whether you use a computer command or a crowbar, and whether you take documents, data or dollars. It is equally harmful to the victim whether you sell what you have stolen or give it away.”
 
With the U.S. Government breathing down his neck and with no outlet and no amicable resolution in sight to "humanely" resolve his legal woes, Swartz took his own life on January 11, 2013.
 
After Swartz committed suicide, Ortiz acknowledged that, “There was no evidence against Mr. Swartz indicating that he committed his acts for personal gain” and that his conduct “did not warrant the severe punishments authorized by Congress.”
 
Aaron Swartz's family released a statement shortly after his death that placed the blame for his suicide on MIT and the Massachusetts U.S. Attorney's office:
 
Aaron’s death is not simply a personal tragedy. It is the product of a criminal justice system rife with intimidation and prosecutorial overreach. Decisions made by officials in the Massachusetts U.S. Attorney’s office and at MIT contributed to his death. The US Attorney’s office pursued an exceptionally harsh array of charges, carrying potentially over 30 years in prison, to punish an alleged crime that had no victims. Meanwhile, unlike JSTOR, MIT refused to stand up for Aaron and its own community’s most cherished principles.
 
II. Anonymous Breaks Its Silence, Fights for Justice by Attacking the U.S. Department of Justice

This morning, Anonymous revealed its massive attack on the U.S. Government, culminating with the hacking and defacement of the website for the United States Sentencing Commission (for obvious reasons). Anonymous made it clear that Swartz's death was the reason for its latest actions:
 
Two weeks ago today, a line was crossed. Two weeks ago today, Aaron Swartz was killed. Killed because he faced an impossible choice. Killed because he was forced into playing a game he could not win -- a twisted and distorted perversion of justice -- a game where the only winning move was not to play.
 
And with that, Anonymous laid out its plans to turn the tables on the government and in essence, give it a taste of its own medicine. In the letter, Anonymous declared, "The time has come to show the United States Department of Justice and its affiliates the true meaning of infiltration. The time has come for them to feel the helplessness and fear that comes with being forced into a game where the odds are stacked against them."

 
Anonymous has spent the last few weeks infiltrating government sites using injection code to gather a wealth of information that it intends to leak to news organizations. Although the hacktivists didn't detail what's included with the information they've gleaned so far, they note, "Everyone has secrets, and some things are not meant to be public."
 
We have enough fissile material for multiple warheads. Today we are launching the first of these. Operation Last Resort has begun...
 
We have not taken this action lightly, nor without consideration of the possible consequences. Should we be forced to reveal the trigger-key to this warhead, we understand that there will be collateral damage. We appreciate that many who work within the justice system believe in those principles that it has lost, corrupted, or abandoned, that they do not bear the full responsibility for the damages caused by their occupation.
 
It is our hope that this warhead need never be detonated.
 
The first weapon is a file called US-DOJ-LEA-2013.aes256, which contains multiple "warheads" named after current U.S. Supreme Court Justices:
 
Scalia.Warhead1
Kennedy.Warhead1
Thomas.Warhead1
Ginsburg.Warhead1
Breyer.Warhead1
Roberts.Warhead1
Alito.Warhead1
Sotomayor.Warhead1
Kagan.Warhead1
 

Anonymous plans to detonate its warhead if its demands aren't met.

The contents of these files has not yet been decimated, but we're sure that over the course of the next few days that we'll be privy to what Anonymous wants the world to learn about the U.S. Government.
 
III. What Does Anonymous Hope to Gain from These Actions?

Anonymous knows that its actions will bring forth a hellstorm from the U.S. Government; Richard McFeely, executive assistant director of the FBI's Criminal, Cyber, Response, and Services Branch, has already stated today that it is "handling it as a criminal investigation." But Anonymous feels that changes have to be made to the way sentences are handed down for crimes that essentially are a "violation of terms of service". It calls for "reform of mandatory minimum sentencing" and "a return to proportionality of punishment with respect to actual harm caused, and consideration of motive."
 
The inalienable right to a presumption of innocence and the recourse to trial and possibility of exoneration must be returned to its sacred status, and not gambled away by pre-trial bargaining in the face of overwhelming sentences, unaffordable justice and disfavourable odds. Laws must be upheld unselectively, and not used as a weapon of government to make examples of those it deems threatening to its power.
 
Anonymous ended its diatribe by simply stating, "This time there will be change, or there will be chaos…"
 
We doubt that the U.S. Government will simply roll over and bow down to the demands of Anonymous, so it will be interesting to see how many warhead detonations we'll see as we move on to another round of "WarGames".

Sources: Wired, CNET, CNN, Media Nation



Comments     Threshold


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

Oh Dailytech...
By SayWhut on 1/26/2013 9:45:36 PM , Rating: 0
I love how bad journalism can just be labeled as a "blog" and then blatant bias is all good.

So this guy breaks into a computer system (against the law) and tries to make a bunch of academic journals free. A crime with no victims? What about the academics who spent the time to do the research papers for those journals? Or the people who gave grant money to them? I see some victims here.

I also see a defendant who was too much of a wuss to have his day in court. A prosecutor is not a judge or a jury, so no matter how far they overreach or how many crazy potential sentences are thrown at a defendant, it doesn't mean anything until the trial is over.

If you're afraid to do the time, don't do the crime. He knew what he was doing was illegal and assumed he'd never get caught. Its too bad he decided to off himself, and I feel for his family, but ultimately that was his choice, just as the original crime was. Blaming it on the prosecutorial boogeyman is just an excuse and our esteemed "journalist" is doing readers a disservice by offering such a thinly veiled defense of a criminal and a coward.




RE: Oh Dailytech...
By chµck on 1/26/13, Rating: -1
RE: Oh Dailytech...
By SayWhut on 1/26/2013 10:10:52 PM , Rating: 2
Would you ask a relevant question to further a meaningful conversation?

The moral comparison is so ridiculous it doesn't even warrant a response.


RE: Oh Dailytech...
By dsx724 on 1/27/2013 2:21:10 PM , Rating: 4
He didn't break into any computer system. He had full access to all of the articles that he downloaded.

He was charged with
1) "breaking and entering a building with intent to commit a felony",
2) "wire fraud",
3) "computer fraud",
4) "unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer",
5) "recklessly damaging a protected computer"

1) he didn't break in anywhere nor did he commit a felony
2 & 3) there was no intent to deceive so thus no fraud
4) it was lawful for him to obtain the information, do not confuse terms of service with law
5) he didn't damage any computer system, jstor was looking into high utilization and took the service down

You have no idea what you're talking about so refrain from making yourself look ignorant.


RE: Oh Dailytech...
By kmmatney on 1/27/2013 2:40:22 PM , Rating: 2
He was asking for trouble...

When I was an engineering student, I had free access to journal articles. Now that I have a real job, and I don't have that anymore - but if I really need something I'll have a university friend get it, or I take my ass to the University library. While it sucks that they came down on him so hard, he was asking for trouble.


RE: Oh Dailytech...
By dsx724 on 1/27/2013 4:58:56 PM , Rating: 1
Which rights activist didn't "ask for trouble"? Its part of challenging the status quo. Let us bankrupt all of them through legal fees and then threaten them with 30 years of prison on government dime.


RE: Oh Dailytech...
By xti on 1/28/2013 11:18:41 AM , Rating: 3
you are completely naive to think he didnt know exactly what he was doing and aware of the consequences. He was expressing his opinion or something equally dumb sounding, and he got caught.

US Gov didnt pull a trigger, didnt make him OD, didnt make him jump on a bike with no seat, whatever he did...he did it on his own will because he was a coward.

surprised anon is supporting a coward, so to me sounds like they were looking for a reason to 'unleash the fury'.


"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings














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