CIA.gov Possibly Down, LulzSec Claims Responsibility
readwriteweb.com
CIA.gov Possibly Down, LulzSec Claims Responsibility
1–10 of 134 posts
Re: CIA.gov Possibly Down, LulzSec Claims Responsibility
#2Well this will be interesting.
Great article btw in the current Popular Mechanics [1] about the new militarized CIA and whether or not that's a Good Thing.
[1] http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/spi...
Re: CIA.gov Possibly Down, LulzSec Claims Responsibility
#3Hilariously, the massive media frenzy surrounding the site outage will send the site enough traffic to DDOS it, even if LulzSec never meaningfully impacted it in the first place.
Re: CIA.gov Possibly Down, LulzSec Claims Responsibility
#4Confirming that it is indeed down for me.
I wonder what the CIA are going to do, especially because LulzSec is directly targeting them now.
Re: CIA.gov Possibly Down, LulzSec Claims Responsibility
#5Confirming that it is indeed down for me. I wonder what the CIA are going to do, especially because LulzSec is directly targeting them now.
I doubt that the core of the CIA cares too much about it's public-facing website.
Re: CIA.gov Possibly Down, LulzSec Claims Responsibility
#6Is it a (d)dos or an actual hack?
Re: CIA.gov Possibly Down, LulzSec Claims Responsibility
#7Confirming that it is indeed down for me. I wonder what the CIA are going to do, especially because LulzSec is directly targeting them now.
I doubt that the core of the CIA cares too much about it's public-facing website.
Whether they care about it or not, it's a great excuse to tighten internet regulation and track these people.
Re: CIA.gov Possibly Down, LulzSec Claims Responsibility
#8Hilariously, the massive media frenzy surrounding the site outage will send the site enough traffic to DDOS it, even if LulzSec never meaningfully impacted it in the first place.
My first thought too. I immediately tried to load CIA and then thought, "Maybe they didn't hack it at all but just put out their Twitter message to drive traffic at it?"
Or more interestingly, if they were in the process of hacking or something and wanted the cover of a torrent of strangers trying to reach their site.
Re: CIA.gov Possibly Down, LulzSec Claims Responsibility
#9Confirming that it is indeed down for me. I wonder what the CIA are going to do, especially because LulzSec is directly targeting them now.
I doubt that the core of the CIA cares too much about it's public-facing website.
True, it's probably little more then a coat of paint on it's house. That being said, they're probably paying more attention to those that just threw eggs all over it, and if they chose, to act accordingly. Not like there woudl be much that would stop them.
Re: CIA.gov Possibly Down, LulzSec Claims Responsibility
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt that the core of the CIA cares too much about it's public-facing website.
True, it's probably little more then a coat of paint on it's house. That being said, they're probably paying more attention to those that just threw eggs all over it, and if they chose, to act accordingly. Not like there woudl be much that would stop them.
I agree with the coat of paint comment but if we have learned anything about government agencies or large corporations being hacked in the past it is that their Internet security practices can sometimes be painfully bad.
@Below and HBGary was a IT security firm after all...