This is so awesome. It's like I'm living in near future cyberpunk novel. With vigilante hacker groups fighting the evil and oppressive corpora^H^H^H^H^H^Hgovernment.
Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
21–30 of 47 posts
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#22I thinks its only a matter of time before Anonymous gets labelled a terrorist organisation to increase the counter measures / invasive laws that can be used against them. Disrupting Goverment sites and services would be considered as an attack as per the Australian Terrorism definition: (e) seriously interferes with, seriously disrupts, or destroys, an electronic system including, but not limited to (i) an informatio…
It wouldn't make any difference. Anonymous isn't a set group of hackers, it's quite literally anyone and everyone that wants to get involved at any moment for any cause whether for fun, such as sabotaging Time's most influential people list, to objecting en-mass to outlandish proposals such as these censorship laws. Labelling Anonymous as terrorists is essentially labelling the general public as terrorists.
So I guess Anonymous is more like a "brand name" for unconnected groups that perform terrorist actions and have a loosely shared ideology, rather than the title of any distinct, traditional faction having a centralised control and command. Yet it does seem that governments and certain sections of the media like to perpetuate the idea that there is a single shadowy entity called "Anonymous" responsible for all these actions. Anyone know the arabic word for anonymous?
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#23I thinks its only a matter of time before Anonymous gets labelled a terrorist organisation to increase the counter measures / invasive laws that can be used against them. Disrupting Goverment sites and services would be considered as an attack as per the Australian Terrorism definition: (e) seriously interferes with, seriously disrupts, or destroys, an electronic system including, but not limited to (i) an informatio…
It would be like punching mist. Hell, if someone gets in jail for being part of anonymous (or, more accurately, for participating in a DDoS advocated by people under the banner of anonymous, or even more likely for having their wifi used by someone to participate in such a DDoS), it will just make all the others more angry. Fighting them would be like fighting tor, or bittorrent; highly distributed, highly decentrali…
"It would be like punching mist."
Or, as Anonymous likes to put it -
"Trolling /b/ is like pissing into an ocean of piss"
/b/tards only have two real motivations, lulz and rage. The only intelligent response is to ignore them and hope they'll go away. It's like a bully who is stronger than you, anything you do in response will only enrage them or gratify them. The basic skillset anon has is the ability to hide behind proxies and withstand disruptions to their preferred comms channels. They're not particularly good at either, but their sheer numbers more than make up for it. Anon is just good enough at hiding to make it very laborious to hunt them down. When LEA resources are already completely inadequate to deal with terrorism and paedophilia, anon just isn't on the hit list. As regards deterrent, there are a number of /b/tards currently being prosecuted for their involvement in raids, but nobody really gives a shit. Most /b/tards just view them as dumbfucks who shouldn't have been so stupid as to get caught.
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
> He is easily traced by IP I have a feeling that a group of people calling themselves 'anonymous' have probably heard of torproject.org
Wouldn't using an encrypted onion routed network put a bit of a pinch on the amount of DDOS traffic one could push? Not to mention that there is probably an upper bound to the amount of traffic any given exit-node is willing to allow for. How many exit nodes restrict outbound connections to common ports?
Anon's preferred tool are the array of open HTTP proxies available. They provide relatively weak anonymity, but in scale it works well enough. LEAs have to subpoena the proxy owner and their ISP for logs, usually the owner has very poor logging anyway, often they're based in a foreign jurisdiction... There just aren't the resources available to go after them in any real numbers. They can (and do) go after a couple of people to make an example of them, but they always seem to pick on the low-hanging fruit who didn't go through a proxy.
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would be like punching mist. Hell, if someone gets in jail for being part of anonymous (or, more accurately, for participating in a DDoS advocated by people under the banner of anonymous, or even more likely for having their wifi used by someone to participate in such a DDoS), it will just make all the others more angry. Fighting them would be like fighting tor, or bittorrent; highly distributed, highly decentrali…
"It would be like punching mist." Or, as Anonymous likes to put it - "Trolling /b/ is like pissing into an ocean of piss" /b/tards only have two real motivations, lulz and rage. The only intelligent response is to ignore them and hope they'll go away. It's like a bully who is stronger than you, anything you do in response will only enrage them or gratify them. The basic skillset anon has is the ability to hide behind…
The most amusing element of this story is how seriously it's being taken. That's because no one in the media discussing it knows or understands who these "/b/tards" are.
To see someone call them the "internet superheroes" is hilarious. If that is at all an accurate description, this is probably what their costume looks like:
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#26This is so awesome. It's like I'm living in near future cyberpunk novel. With vigilante hacker groups fighting the evil and oppressive corpora^H^H^H^H^H^Hgovernment.
I was just thinking about Google v. China and PayPal v. India.
This kind of stuff is not necessarily new: think of the banana republics, the royal charter companies, Hearst and the Spanish-American War, and so on. Heck, the Boston Tea Party is comparable: a trollish, grandstanding intervention in government business.
What seems new is just how open it is: that Google, for example, appeals directly to the public when it argues with China. A hundred years ago, similar things might have happened, but I think only a few thousand people would have had such a clear view as everyone who reads a general-interest news site does now. It’s a lot harder to idealize power plays with our post-Watergate (if that’s the line) popular love of reliable muckraking.
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
It wouldn't make any difference. Anonymous isn't a set group of hackers, it's quite literally anyone and everyone that wants to get involved at any moment for any cause whether for fun, such as sabotaging Time's most influential people list, to objecting en-mass to outlandish proposals such as these censorship laws. Labelling Anonymous as terrorists is essentially labelling the general public as terrorists.
I feel it would. Imagine a script kiddie in Australia decides to join the DDOS attack on the government site. He is easily traced by IP, and the Australian Federal Police come to visit. His new 'rights', now that he is part of a terror group include: Being held for up to nine days in detention without being formally charged. Warrantless searches The seizure of any objects associated with the terrorist act (this is qu…
Useless. They wouldn't find anything on the kid's computer, in all likelihood he clicked a link on an anonymously created website that ran a script from his browser. Once he's released all he need do is post his story on a blog and he'll be international news within a month.
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#28whilst i agree with their protesting of our governments unnecessary proposals on censoring australia, their methods are not helping. a ddos attack on the government only gives the government more ammunition to paint the average protester as a criminal or someone who is trying to harm the government. a peaceful protest is far more effective.
Is there anyone on the net who thinks this filter is a good idea? Pretty much the only people who do are the ones who don't even use the Web, and just keep shouting that it's inherently evil. Oh, and the ones with the government contract to implement the filter. When no one will listen to the people who will actually be affected by this, what other options are left?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/01/2433845.htm?si...
This is probably the only article I've read that is pro-filter.
"Oh, and the ones with the government contract to implement the filter."
The government body ACMA will maintain a list of blacklisted websites (which already occurs, although pointless at this stage). I understand it will be the responsibility of the individual ISPs to choose how to block those websites.
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#29"The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." -- John Gilmore
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#30This is so awesome. It's like I'm living in near future cyberpunk novel. With vigilante hacker groups fighting the evil and oppressive corpora^H^H^H^H^H^Hgovernment.
William Gibson's prescience continues to frighten me. Unless the causality goes the other way, then it frightens me even more.
"Chaos, Mr. Who," Lupus Yonderboy said. "That is our mode and modus. That is our central kick."
Or, in the parlance of our times, they do it for the lulz.