Lulzsec Declares 'Operation Anti-Security'

> Does anyone else smell a less free Internet approaching closer?

Hmmm ... any chance Lulzsec is really a false flag operation?

Dear Lulzsek, eye for an eye, and everybody goes blind. If you have something to ask from the government, please write a Petition or a Freedom of Information request, or any other formal request. Hey, with all your power you could event start a site to inform people of their democratic choices and suggest actions that make the world a better place.

Don't act like rude kids, that just denigrates our image as a whole and eventually further spoils our beloved common space known as the Internet.

Every time I hear about LulzSec, I say "Conspiracy Theory Time" before I read the HN comments page. Finally I have some worthy conspiracy which I think no one has posted before. It goes something like this.

Axioms:

1. Most of the geeks and internet privacy aware people in America hate the American government. If not hate, they at least despise them for most of their new internet policies.

2. Out of these people there are a lot of smart teenagers and young men/women. This is the age where most of the sociologists (I don't know if that is the correct term, just read it as parents or people who have PhDs and study this kind of things) believe that this is the age where they are most impressionable. And more so if the idea is rebellious, that too at the highest level.

3. Terrorists are not a bunch of fools who don't know how to use a dvd player. Most of the times they are capable of carrying out sophisticated internet attacks. Also they have strategists competent enough to take on US intelligence. (Not very sure of the last sentence but who am I to suck the fun out of this).

4. After 9/11 it has become increasingly hard for the terrorists to do bomb blasts or other such activities. Also suicide bombers make recruiting a pain.

5. Terrorists hate America.

Hypothesis:

The chief aim of terrorists is to make you people's (read American's) life miserable. They used to do it with short term impact plans like bombs. One bomb and america is terrorised for around a year or max for two. Make them hate their own government and they would be terrorised for life. Well terrorised is not a very good word for it, but pedestrian word for massive pain in the rear end of human body is not allowed on HN. So they devise a new scheme. They start riding on the current AnonSec wave. While AnonSec did it for a cause (the wikileaks thing) they would say they did it for the lulz. Now the group is supposed to be an all american group but anyone can be anyone on the internet. Also doing it for the lulz sounds more rebellious. So more and more rebellious and smart to some level kids join lulzSec. In some time they may have an army of them. Then they would really start acting up and randomly deface the government site. The cyber crime department (whatever it is called in US of A) is spread thin looking for these young brats who are doing all this DDoS attacks. They may do a real attack on american security then or just sit back and enjoy while americans fight each other in a kind of civil war. As an added bonus here, the government, under the fear of such acts, will make new laws restricting internet use. This will further annoy people and make new LulzSec recruits. So the terrorists groups have their very own "Vicious Cycle". At this point all the terrorists will go "Whoopie".

Refutations:

1. I don't know but I think the government sites are not hosted on the same server as the other high security services. So DDoSing them will be just an annoyance. But still people shiver at the headline "Hackers successfully take down CIA website".

2. Government cyber crime unit is not that small that they are spread thin with just few DDoS attacks. Someone will have to help me out here as I have no idea if this is right or wrong.

Please feel free to come up with more refutations.

I'm confused about the relationship between Anti-Sec (in the sense of the wikipedia article) and Anonymous. Anti-Sec is "dedicated to eradicating full-disclosure of vulnerabilities and exploits and free discussion on hacking related topics" [1]. In contrast, Anonymous is a strong backer of Wikileaks which would seem to be squarely behind the concept of full disclosure (except insofar as it could undermine the process of full disclosure).

I wonder if LulzSec even intended to make this connection. This "call to action" is quite different from the Anti-Sec mission statement, but I would have a hard time believing they weren't aware of previous use of "Anti-Sec".

[1] http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2009/Jul/164

it all depends on how you get there...