Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter, NYT Whois and DNS altered, Syrian Electronic Army takes responsibility

thenextweb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–105 of 105 posts

Re: Twitter, NYT Whois and DNS altered, Syrian Electronic Army takes responsibility

#101

Post by mjolk »

jnbiche wrote: post #50
krelian wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think they are so sophisticated to create this false flag operation why are the targets and magnitude of this so lame?

NYTimes and Twitter are lame targets? In the US, at least, you don't get a much higher profile non-government target than the NY Times. I mean, if this were a false flag operation -- and I'm not convinced it is -- then the three-letter guys wouldn't very likely chose to target themselves, or other government, would they? They would portray them as being inept at defending themselves.

>NYTimes and Twitter are lame targets?

Yes. A declining media/entertainment company and an advertising firm?

>In the US, at least, you don't get a much higher profile non-government target than the NY Times.

Google, Academi/Blackwater, any number of our oil companies?

Re: Twitter, NYT Whois and DNS altered, Syrian Electronic Army takes responsibility

#102

Post by mpyne »

jlgreco wrote: post #70
mpyne wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like a religion to me, then.

Except unlike gods, we are quite sure that false flag incidents can happen. Nobody doubts that. The very concept isn't what is questioned, only particular incidents.

I wasn't questioning the concept though, especially as the Nazis used it to kick off WWII in Europe.

But on the other hand, we at least had proof of the false flag attack by Germany. In this case we have, to this point, faith and educated guesses, but it's faith nonetheless.

Re: Twitter, NYT Whois and DNS altered, Syrian Electronic Army takes responsibility

#103

Post by jlgreco »

mpyne wrote: post #102
jlgreco wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except unlike gods, we are quite sure that false flag incidents can happen. Nobody doubts that. The very concept isn't what is questioned, only particular incidents.

I wasn't questioning the concept though, especially as the Nazis used it to kick off WWII in Europe. But on the other hand, we at least had proof of the false flag attack by Germany. In this case we have, to this point, faith and educated guesses, but it's faith nonetheless.

Putting it on the same level as religion is questioning/ridiculing the entire premise, though I understand that you did not intend it that way.

Re: Twitter, NYT Whois and DNS altered, Syrian Electronic Army takes responsibility

#104

Post by WettowelReactor »

joshfraser wrote: post #33
jval wrote: post #26

Ok, firstly whois Microsoft.com just returns all URLs with Microsoft.com in them, even as a subdomain, so they haven't been hacked and that result has been there for ages. Same goes for Verisign etc. TechCrunch is reporting that registrar MelbourneIT has been hacked.. This wouldn't surprise me but I'm puzzled as to why either site would register with such a bad registrar.

What do you mean? MelbourneIT are huge and generally have a pretty decent reputation.

When we used to have MelbourneIT they sent us an email with our login password in it in a promotional email. When I inquired how they could possibly be properly securing my account when if they where storing my password in some recoverable fashion I got a form letter back stating they followed all the industry security practices. Needless to say I started the transfer of all our domains that same day.

Their exact response: "Our systems follow strict security measures and only enables us to send the password out to the main email contact in case of password recovery being requested. So rest assured your account password is safely stored with us. "

Re: Twitter, NYT Whois and DNS altered, Syrian Electronic Army takes responsibility

#105

Post by ryalfalpha »

mackal wrote: post #92
ryalfalpha wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get your comment?... prominent members from various versions of the IRA are and have been members of Irish governments, see Gerry Adams/Martin McGuinness (Or even Michael Collins if you're talking way back).

Just because an organization has members/affiliates in a government does not make that organization part of the government. Its like saying what ever the presidents frat was, is part of the government.

Whenever said members/affiliates are former leaders we're really just splitting hairs. I get your point though, I mistook what he had said as there is no link at all between them. Instead he is saying 'The Irish government never commanded the IRA' which I'd largely agree with.
Post reply on HN