This is hilarious
Google.ps domain was hacked
21–30 of 92 posts
Re: Google.ps domain was hacked
#22Good job, butthurt nationalist losers ;-).
Re: Google.ps domain was hacked
#23google.ps has not been hacked. The .ps registry was. Google DNS servers have been changed to omar.genious.net and hamza.genious.net
Hacking a registry is even more alarming.
Re: Google.ps domain was hacked
#24Re: Google.ps domain was hacked
#25Fair warning, that link goes to the compromised site.
Re: Google.ps domain was hacked
#26google.ps has not been hacked. The .ps registry was. Google DNS servers have been changed to omar.genious.net and hamza.genious.net
I think saying "google.ps was hacked" is a perfectly reasonable way to describe what happened.
I don't agree at all, the system which was hacked is not in Google's control at all, even though it does depend on it for DNS SOA.
Every site depends on root DNS servers to do their job right...the root for .ps was hacked...that's what happened here...google was affected, but not hacked.
Re: Google.ps domain was hacked
#27I love how it says "From Palestine: We are the Best of the Rest"
Best of the Rest? Well, that's not saying much, is it?
Re: Google.ps domain was hacked
#28google.ps has not been hacked. The .ps registry was. Google DNS servers have been changed to omar.genious.net and hamza.genious.net
Hacking a registry is even more alarming.
i would surely be more alarmed if google got hacked, not some 2.5-world registry. there's been worse, like CAs getting hacked.
Re: Google.ps domain was hacked
#29Looks like their domain was compromised. It points to an IP associated with this hosting provider: http://www.genious.net/
Looks like a Moroccan hosting provider.
Re: Google.ps domain was hacked
#30... and thousands of HN readers get infected by a zero-day exploit. Maybe. If you're thinking of submitting a known compromised site to HN, consider instead submitting a third-party site which explains/documents the compromise. Ideally from a respected security research company. This has several benefits:
1. You're not subjecting HN readers to a site under the control of a malicious party who may have done more than just deface it. Even if you verify that you only receive plain boring text with no scripts, iframes, plugins, etc. it's impossible to verify that someone else won't get served different content. For example, malware that only gets served to people in Israel.
2. Once the compromised site is restored, people visiting the link won't see what happened. When you link to a third-party article, that article will persist even after the hack is long since gone.
3. Linking to a security research company will probably give better insight into the technical details how the attack happened, gratifying our intellectual curiosity, instead of just being a dumbed-down piece from some mass-market tech blog.