61–70 of 113 posts
Not that LulzSec has made sense up until now but why bother taking out online video games? I feel like that's alienating the population that would normally support or at least be indifferent about a group like LulzSec.
I think they want to project power. I don't think they want anyone to be indifferent about them. Beyond that, it's almost impossible to know their motivations.
They have an twitter account, thus a quick phonecall to twitter from US gov for an IP and mac address should put an end to all of this. Also they have a site up, so simply check their dns and domain provider for a whois (most likely private - so might require pushing). They are also on The Pirate Bay, so they might have some IP data too. meh
No. Not that easy. They use VPNs offshore chained together not to mention the off shore vps' they have. Of course they would use protection when even just getting on Twitter, so a phone call from the government would do very little as the give would receive an IP from somewhere offshores that doesnt give a damn about US law, providing time and security to lulzsec.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These attacks are annoying and damaging but in the long run they make our internet stronger. If these didn't happen so often people would care a lot less about security and robustness.
Sure, and I can go around punching people in the face and tell 'em that I'm doing 'em a favour by reminding them to always wear a full-face helmet when out in public. But if nobody except me is a big enough asshole to go round punching people in the face at random...
The disincentives that exist for your example and those that exist for actions similar to those taken by lulzsec are radically different.
The conclusion that people should walk around with full-face helmets is ridiculous because of the existing disincentives for assaulting someone. The conclusion that companies should secure their networks, not such an unreasonable expectation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's phrase this in another hyperbole, shall we? Should you rob every bank that doesn't have an alarm or leaves the vault open? No. But if a lot of banks had no policies in place to prevent those things from occurring, would you feel more secure that someone was walking into the bank, taking photos of their break-in, and not stealing the money? I don't agree with their means (it's wrong, IMO, to mess with any machin…
But if these are just DDOSes, then (a) there's no way to steal sensitive information that way, and (b) there's no real defence against 'em anyway. So this particular argument is pointless, right? There's an argument for whiteish-hat intrusions, but DDOSes must be intrinsically black-hat, right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
public broadcaster one day government the next game servers the next trying to hit every demographic :/
Anyone willing to suggest something we could do? Because the title on the top of this site will get very unpopular in the next couple weeks.
Discuss secure coding techniques, perform security analysis on software (and closed-source services with bug bounty programs!), make sure your own projects/products are secure, and generally just keep security -- not just attacks -- in the limelight.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These attacks are annoying and damaging but in the long run they make our internet stronger. If these didn't happen so often people would care a lot less about security and robustness.
Sure, and I can go around punching people in the face and tell 'em that I'm doing 'em a favour by reminding them to always wear a full-face helmet when out in public. But if nobody except me is a big enough asshole to go round punching people in the face at random...
This is just getting tired and dumb now. It's no longer funny. It's like the joke you told at a party that everybody laughed at. Then you told it 5 more times before you left the party. Unfortunately, I don't see them stopping any time soon. Soo....
Ah, but to them , the more you complain that it's not funny any more, the funnier it gets. It's kinda like a destructive version of people who say "That's what she said".
When they're attacking Sony it's "righteous" and "good", when they're attacking companies we like they're "bad" and "immature". They've always stated their intention is to create "lulz" and just do whatever damage they can, apparently people overlooked this when they were attacking people everyone "hated". Luckily Minecraft wasn't down for too long, some of us are directly affected by this stuff, sigh. The internet i…
These attacks are annoying and damaging but in the long run they make our internet stronger. If these didn't happen so often people would care a lot less about security and robustness.
I just hope that the league of american white old men doesn't meet and decide that the answer to Lulzsec is naturally the removal of more freedoms for the sake of security and much easier wiretapping by the FBI.