Anonymous Denies New Sony Allegations of PSN Involvement

[Andy Chalk]

Anonymous Denies New Sony Allegations of PSN Involvement

Anonymous has once again denied allegations of involvement in the attack against the PlayStation Network and Sony Online Entertainment, saying that credit card theft runs directly against its principles and goals.

All eyes raised the question [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/109448-PSN-Down-Worldwide-Is-Anonymous-to-Blame] of its involvement again on May 4 when it claimed that its investigation had discovered a file created in the attack titled "Anonymous" which read, "We are Legion," a line from the group's infamous slogan.

That allegation has led to a fresh denial of involvement from Anonymous, which said in a press release that while it has never been known to engage in credit card theft, "many of our corporate and government adversaries... have been known to have lied to the public about Anonymous and about their own activities." It also pointed out that stealing credit cards runs contrary to the group's "modus operandi" and desire for public support, which is what led it to end its attack on Sony in the first place. "We are trying to fight criminal activities by corporations and governments, not steal credit cards," the group said.

"If a legitimate and honest investigation into the credit card [theft] is conducted, Anonymous will not be found liable," it added. "While we are a distributed and decentralized group, our 'leadership' does not condone credit card theft."

But the ethereal nature of the group's "membership" is precisely what makes it so difficult to determine - or deny - its involvement. Simply put, Anonymous is open to any who claim it, which makes it difficult, if not outright impossible, for any kind of centralized leadership to claim that it wasn't involved. Denial requires definition, which is an effectively impossible task; so while Anonymous may not have been involved, it's still quite possible that Anonymous was, well, involved.

Source: Guardian.co.uk [http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/may/05/anonymous-sony-playstation-hacking-statement]


Permalink

 

[Xhu]

If a police officer under their own discretion breaks into a house and steals a television, this does not make the police force responsible for theft. Replace that with any organisation of your choosing. Even if it were somebody who also participated in Anonymous' attack who stole the data, it would not necessarily mean "Anonymous did it".

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

There is definitely no "leadership".

Because there isn't a ship to lead.

 

[Echo136]

Id much rather believe Sony, who I buy products from and support, than a group of hackers who do illegal things in the name of "the greater good", most of which I dont support.

 

[hudsonzero]

look i said it before just leaving a hidden note is not anaon's MO they always claim there credit, the file is ether a red herring from the hacker or a remnant from when the DOS attack happed

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Because there isn't a ship to lead.

And at this point, the ship has hit the fan

OT: I don't trust EITHER of you. Sony may have been acting Eeeevvvviiiilll, but Anon is a cyber-terroristic cult.

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

Huh, maybe I'm missing something, but I thought the whole point about Anonymous is that they're Anonymous and don't have a centralised leadership, all of their raids decided as they go along and the membership is basically whoever wants to join.

So as far as I can see, if someone claiming to represent Anonymous gathered up a whole bunch of people under the banner of Anonymous, and carried out a raid where they identified themselves as being part of Anonymous, then surely Anonymous are involved.

Anonymous can't have it both ways, they can't claim that they have no centralised ideas and morals, but then in the very next sentence claim that they didn't take part in a attack. If they have even one single moral or idea, then it's an organisation and anyone who takes part in a raid that goes against that moral is not part of the Anonymous group, but that takes away from their leaderlessness.

 

[DaHero]

If they claim there's a leadership or even a membership then...Anon has been a group all along, a total paradox of what they claim.

Which, since they have been lying about EVERYTHING up to this point, they obviously did it.

Ironically, they just dug their own graves. Anonymous will have to either admit they have a group with a leader, which makes them complete liars, or never speak again as if they had a leadership, which makes them a big joke.

 

[Dogstile]

Ironically, they just dug their own graves. Anonymous will have to either admit they have a group with a leader, which makes them complete liars, or never speak again as if they had a leadership, which makes them a big joke.

Hilariously enough, most people think the 'anon' leaders aren't true anons at all, because they don't understand that they're ripping apart what anon is.

Simply put, even true anons don't like these "leaders". They're not actually leaders.

 

[DaHero]

Ironically, they just dug their own graves. Anonymous will have to either admit they have a group with a leader, which makes them complete liars, or never speak again as if they had a leadership, which makes them a big joke.

Hilariously enough, most people think the 'anon' leaders aren't true anons at all, because they don't understand that they're ripping apart what anon is.

Simply put, even true anons don't like these "leaders". They're not actually leaders.

It's a total paradox of irony where they're saying "this statement is false" every time they open their mouth. How do you answer such a statement? Laugh...laugh like you've never laughed before.

 

[Dogstile]

Ironically, they just dug their own graves. Anonymous will have to either admit they have a group with a leader, which makes them complete liars, or never speak again as if they had a leadership, which makes them a big joke.

Hilariously enough, most people think the 'anon' leaders aren't true anons at all, because they don't understand that they're ripping apart what anon is.

Simply put, even true anons don't like these "leaders". They're not actually leaders.

It's a total paradox of irony where they're saying "this statement is false" every time they open their mouth. How do you answer such a statement? Laugh...laugh like you've never laughed before.

I can't laugh. I'm too busy crying at how the news is giving attention to these freaks.

Anon sucks now

 

[Jumplion]

"many of our corporate and government adversaries... have been known to have lied to the public about Anonymous and about their own activities."

Yes, because if there's anything that Sony really needs to do right now, it's to lie to the fucking United States Congress.

Anonymous isn't a group, it's made up of a bunch of random people in it. For all we know, the hackers that caused all this trouble could think that they're working under the Anonymous banner or try to keep attention off them or they're delusional enough to think that Anonymous would support them.

 

[ace_of_something]

Whenever they claim something they did do it's all 'we're shadowy and nebulous' when they don't want the blame it's 'i speak for all of us'

WHICH IS IT!?
HEY!!!
LISTEN!!
If you quoted me to tell me I'm wrong, don't bother. I'm being facetious

 

[Matt Oliver]

Anon I support, they are the robin hood's of the 21st century. The people who Started Anon said that statement and if anyone is open to join it, then it's not the people who started Anon faults. Anon has an MO and unless it was some rouge hackers that claim to be from Anon aren't from Anon if they truely believe what Anon believes!

 

[RA92]

Id much rather believe Sony, who I buy products from and support, than a group of hackers who do illegal things in the name of "the greater good", most of which I dont support.

Believe Sony...? Why is that even an issue here?

I think a previous conversation of mine deserves a repetition here...

Hmm, should I believe the corporation that has made a few mistakes in the past, but overall provided me with a solid gameplay experience? Or should I believe the random people online who STEAL games for a living, lie about it, and have a superiority complex big enough to make them DDOS game servers?

I'll be taking Sony's word on this one.

Care to point out exactly where Sony blamed Anon for anything, beyond stating that the hackers left behind files named 'Anonymous' and 'We are Legion'?

For fuck's sake people, read the article before jumping to conclusions...

 

[moretimethansense]

Annonymous isn't really an orginization, it's more of a sub-culture, claiming that annonymous did this is somewhat like saying that goths did it, a number of them may have or may not have, but that doesn't mean you can go around acusing everybody wearing black lipstick.

 

[ohHaiGuiz]

The situation is FUBAR.

 

[Mrsoupcup]

Anonymous isn't an organization, it's just a collective of web culture.