Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
1–10 of 47 posts
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#2whilst 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.
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#3I 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 information system; or
(ii) a telecommunications system; or
(iii) a financial system; or
(iv) a system used for the delivery of essential government services; or
(v) a system used for, or by, an essential public utility; or
(vi) a system used for, or by, a transport system.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/slaa200245...
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#4http://www.aph.gov.au/
The Parliament of Australia site is down.
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#5whilst 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.
The notion that peaceful protest is always better than violent protest is simply historically bankrupt. There's a time and a place for both. To be honest, what they're doing, at least by revolutionary terms, might as well be considered "peaceful protest."
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#6whilst 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.
If they DDOS'd the server by massive amounts of complaints I'd consider it different. However, a straight out attack isn't going to do anything.
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#7I 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…
No doubt, but the government has thus far proven itself inept with respect to technology let alone counter measures and risk mitigation.
A political assault is far more likely: "Anonymous are terrorists, therefore all who protest against government censorship are terrorists or supporters of terrorism."
Given we've already been declared pedophiles or supporters of pedophilia this is a bow barely drawn.
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#8I 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.
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#9whilst 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?
Re: Anonymous hacks Australian Government in response to Internet censorship
#10I 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 decentralized, with no real command structure, and no allegiance to any single website (if one goes down or is monitored, they can always move elsewhere). It's not even an organization, in the old sense; you might as well say that slashdot or HN are organizations[1]. On the upside? Most of them, most of the time, don't care - except when someone makes them angry, they seem fairly passive, more interested in their own amusement than anything else (yes, I occasionally lurk on 4chan) - and even then, there are probably only a few thousand who actually participate in things like this [not that I have actual numbers to support this, but still - someone who's more interested could start lurking on IRC channels mentioned in image macros (such as the one in the article) and keep track of how many unique individuals show up].
Or you could always kill them off by destroying anonymity in the internet - force everyone to use their real names everywhere, to provide concrete linkages to real personalities. That's the only way to stop people from taking advantage of anonymity.
I'm sorry that this turned into a rant; it was originally going to be a lot shorter. I just kept on thinking of things to add, you see ... and I haven't ranted for a while.
[1] Lots of like-minded people, who read content on sites, post content, and occasionally take action/respond to that content, when it means something to them, or is so easy that there's no reason not to.