Anonymous Denies New Sony Allegations of PSN Involvement
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
If I got this right, Anon is a group of nerds on the internet that collectively join together from all over the place and do attacks on random companies they choose not to like. Just like with all other groups, there's always going to be that one out-there asshole, or group of assholes, that will do things for themselves as well as 'for the group'. So while it's entirely likely that the guy making the statement didn't do it, I'm sure someone who's part of the group could still be guilty of the crime.
So therefore, the general problem for Anon is that they choose to be 'anonymous'. Part of their 'collective group' of random people - even if it isn't part of one sector - could still be going around taking credit cards in their name.
So therefore, the general problem for Anon is that they choose to be 'anonymous'. Part of their 'collective group' of random people - even if it isn't part of one sector - could still be going around taking credit cards in their name.
This is stupid. Either anyone can claim they are Anonymous, or they can't. If they can, then this claim that the "leadership" doesn't condone this action is like the moon saying it doesn't condone wet beaches.
You make waves, this is what happens. Whether or not you condone it, people are going to do things in your name.
You make waves, this is what happens. Whether or not you condone it, people are going to do things in your name.
Yeah, good job missing the point here.Echo136 said:
This isn't a matter of semantics. The fact is, everyone has been jumping around reaching for conclusions with the slightest mention of Anon, claiming allegiance to either Sony or Anon, when Sony themselves have raised no charges against them. All they did was report to the Congress that they found files named 'Anonymous' and 'We are legion' - and that's it. They've gone so far as to say that it's entirely possible the crackers were trying to frame Anon to cover their tracks. It's all uncertain.
Claim allegiance to Sony when they conclusively say, "Yeah, Anon did it." Otherwise, please stop jumping the bandwagon of internet idiots with half-baked conspiracy theories.
Haha, this article says nothing. I hate when this dribble is so clearly dribble. And now they have Leadership, that's good. Easier to deal with rather than, you're a member because you say you're a member. I stated outright previously that this wasn't their MO.
A guy can claim he is a cop, even have a real badge and have worked at the police station, but if he goes around raping women, he isn't really a cop. Police have a very specific set of rules they go by, and if you are not acting as a police officer while pretending you are, doesn't make you an actual cop. You are still a criminal.
A guy can claim he is a cop, even have a real badge and have worked at the police station, but if he goes around raping women, he isn't really a cop. Police have a very specific set of rules they go by, and if you are not acting as a police officer while pretending you are, doesn't make you an actual cop. You are still a criminal.
I think you are presuming a little too much, sir. All I meant was that this article coupled with previous articles turns this whole thing into a game of pointing fingers. At face value, the article says theres a file with probable ties to Anon in it that the security firm found. Unlike some conspiracy nuts who would probably say Sony planted that there themselves, I just think to myself, ok they found a file. Anonymous calls back saying they didnt do it. From reading up on the many illegal things that they do, Im inclined to not believe it, especially since they have no leadership and thus anyone can claim to do something in their name.Raiyan 1.0 said:
More and more as I wrote this it felt like a completely unnecessary post.
I'm not sure about the paradox here. Sure, Anonymous is no one in particular, but there is a sort of guiding MO, a manifesto of sorts. If you adhere to the idea of bringing down eeeeeeeeevil corporations and people to stomp on their superiority complexes and deceitful ways they you may be part of the Anonymous culture (even if it's illegal). If you use the mantle of that culture to comit crimes that actually damage or hurt bystanders who are not part of the eeeeeeeevil corporations and people or use the event for personal profit and vendettas then you are definately not acting according to the principles behind the Anonymous culture and cannot say otherwise, even if you sometimes act according to rest of the community. Anonymous may not have a definite leadership or roster but it has a definite idea behind its actions. Credit card fraud does not really jive with it.
A lot more people on this forum than I previously had thought have never spent significant amounts of time on 4chan. I would like to know who's making these statements on behalf of anonymous. As far as I can tell, I have as much authority as this person to say anonymous didn't do it.
Anonymous didn't do it because it is impossible to organize them. Now someone in anonymous might have done it, that's reasonable to assume since I would guess many hackers are familiar with the anus of the internet. Chasing a group that exists only as an idea but without a body or system is impossible, so Sony would be wasting their time to pursue any legal action against a collective that right at this very moment can exist as much as it can not.
It's borderline hilarious when things akin to "they aren't helping" or "their inconsistency means they're lying" are said. There is no standard "MO" for anon. The closest thing you'll get to a code or structure are the "rules of the internet" which at this point are fairly old and some arguably don't apply. Like the ones about Boxxy.
Anonymous didn't do it because it is impossible to organize them. Now someone in anonymous might have done it, that's reasonable to assume since I would guess many hackers are familiar with the anus of the internet. Chasing a group that exists only as an idea but without a body or system is impossible, so Sony would be wasting their time to pursue any legal action against a collective that right at this very moment can exist as much as it can not.
It's borderline hilarious when things akin to "they aren't helping" or "their inconsistency means they're lying" are said. There is no standard "MO" for anon. The closest thing you'll get to a code or structure are the "rules of the internet" which at this point are fairly old and some arguably don't apply. Like the ones about Boxxy.
You can't blame an entire group of people for what a few people do. You don't blame all of Islam for 911 do you? That would be ridiculous and outright stupid. This is not exactly the same, but it's very similar in that there is a community of people who are part of Anon, and then there may be a few rogue thieves among them that do not fit the ideals of the community.meganmeave said:
Also, you understand why they can't have actual membership drives, right? They stage non violent digital protests, that is what they do. And it's not always in alignment with the laws.
ok let me get this straight, anon is a group without a leader and a structure and even though they decide on actions not all member are obliged to follow as there is no leader to enforce said rules. So one group of anons can say that they will not attack a company but other members can go ahead and do so because they have that free will meaning that within this organisation, there is no unity and ideals are different. so if ideals are different, different members stand for different things. so even if they say they didn't do it, there is a chance that some members in the group actually did it. plus if members share different ideals, it's less of an organisation then. Furthermore they say we are a leaderless group meaning any member can do whatever they want, yet they release press releases, speaking for the collective members as one, even though with every single choice made, there is a chance a member will be against it, effectively contradicting themselves in the process.
did i get it all right?
did i get it all right?
Anonymous is hardly even an organization at all. More like an all-enveloping title for web-vigilantes and internet trolls to make themselves feel like they're a part of something bigger.Xhu said:
If Anonymous wants to get on Sony's and everyone else's good side, why don't they hunt down the responsibles...Or at least make him pay or get the message.
Whether they did it or not, Anon shot itself in the foot by declaring to make attacks on Sony right before this happened. Like I've been saying, they're careless. They do whatever they think is a good idea without stopping to consider where it will go, or what could happen. Agree with them or not, they're extremely stupid in their operations.
Your post is kind of redundant.Echo136 said:
Lets see what you originally wrote:
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.
Your original post basically reads like you would take Sony's word over Anon's. Problem is, they didn't have conflicting statements to begin with, since Sony made no charges that Anon needs to defend themselves against.
Here's the original <url=http://kotaku.com/#!5798492/sony-explains-playstation-hack-to-congress-blames-cyberterrorists>Kotaku article:
The cyber attack that knocked the Playstation Network and Sony Online Entertainment offline for more than a week was a "very carefully planned, very professional, highly sophisticated criminal cyber attack designed to steal personal and credit card information," according to a letter from Sony to members of Congress obtained by Kotaku today from government sources.
While Sony declined to testify at today's congressional hearings on the threat of data theft to American consumers they did provide Congress with some answers to their pointed questions.
In an 8-page letter dated May 3, Kazuo Hirai, chairman of the board of directors for Sony Computer Entertainment of America, explains the lead up to the attack, how it was first detected and the deep impact it is having on the multi-national company. Sony also separately informed the subcommittee that they discovered that the intruders had planted a file on one of their Sony Online Entertainment servers named "Anonymous" with the words "We are Legion."
Not one single charge against Anon. Do you know why? Because Sony isn't run by a bunch of idiot internet conspiracy nuts and they understand that if they make baseless accusations now and are proven wrong later, it would backfire.
Sony's expert security team, with all the forensic evidence at their hands, have not come to a definite conclusion. Why should you?