Anonymous Denies New Sony Allegations of PSN Involvement

[ZiggyE]

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.

Even though this is true, it would have been impossible for a fringe group to have pulled off such an organised assault.

Also, Anonymous has never nor would they ever steal credit card information. It isn't just that they are posting ideals to the public, it's the public that 'joins' because of their ideals. They just wouldn't be able to pull off something like this without it getting out, even if they claimed they didn't.

It also should be mentioned that the IRC channel is open to pretty much anyone, so if they were going to attack Sony, it would have been announced there.

Also, Anonymous has never shied away from admitting responsibility before.

 

[SelectivelyEvil13]

But... technically the PSN breach was by anonymous because, going by the definition, we have no bloody clue who did it anyways...

Things get so confusing when people start calling themselves "Anonymous," especially when it's many people, some of whom may not care about the overall goals of the overall group.

 

[diddykonger]

a buddy of mine just sent me this....

http://www.ictnewz.com/index.php/Gadget-Newz/PlayStation-Network-More-Attacks-Coming-This-Week-End-IRC-rumors.html

this is really getting out of hand, someone really needs to find these fuckers and lock them up

 

[Krong]

Anon is better than Sony, fact. I hope Sony goes bankrupt.

 

[Frostbite3789]

I notice throughout the entire article it said they weren't involved in the "credit card theft" when as of now, it seems as if credit card info wasn't in fact stolen.

Kind of interesting to think about.

 

[Frostbite3789]

Anon is better than Sony, fact. I hope Sony goes bankrupt.

I guess you hate the games industry as a whole then? That's cool. Just strange for you to be on a gaming centric website then.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

I always have to laugh every time I hear stuff like this. How exactly can Anonymous deny involvement when, by their very nature, they can't keep track of their membership anyway. And I'd still like to know who speaks for Anonymous.

 

[SinisterGehe]

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.

Anon really isn't a sub-culture either, sub-culture to exist needs people who represent it and make it to exist. At least that is the definition of "culture" that I been taught in school - in Finnish.

Anon' is more like a name, I say I am anon' - therefor I am anon' and no one can deny me, because there is no clear definition, who and what is anon'. Like my second name is "Tapani" there are other "Tapani"s around Finland, ex. My brother, Father and few other random people I know, we are all "Tapani" - But there is no definition of what being "Tapani" is. You can be Tapani if you say that that is your name, you can even change your name to "Tapani" if you want to, if you do: that makes you as much as Tapani than any other "tapani"

If I go to a channel and post there as a Anon' then I am Anon' and no one can deny that.

This is a group of terrorist-cultist we are dealing with. The "members" of Anon' still do have free will, they could have done this attack if they are wanted. Any of us could have done it, it could have been the Tech expert who said that there are issues with the security.

 

[nothingspringstomind]

Anon suffer the same problem as all governments and religions throughout history:
Start off with a great ideal and (subjectively) good morals and then let thousands of people join and mutate the whole concept into a bizzare parody of itself.

I mean, Marxism works. y'know if it was't for all those pesky humans it involves.

 

[kingcat1]

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.

wtf how are anon cyber-terrortistic , or cult like ?

 

[LandoCristo]

The only thing Anon has done any good was when the attacked WikiLeaks, but I still think that any organization that can be described as a web vigilante isn't the type to steal credit cards. On the other hand, because Anon has no rosters or leaders, it's difficult for them to say "But we didn't order that to happen," when they don't have any leadership or system of power.

But I still am rooting for Sony to figure out who hacked em.

 

[LandoCristo]

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.

wtf how are anon cyber-terrortistic , or cult like ?

They are "cyber-terroristic" because they attack websites of institutions that they don't like in order to take them down. WikiLeaks (although I'm glad they attacked it) was hit by Denial-of-Service attacks that shut down their servers, simply because Anon didn't like them. Some people think of them as "web-vigilantes", but even vigilantes are a type of terrorist when you think about it (even Batman.)

 

[ArmorArmadillo]

Forget their MO or their mission, this attack was way beyond Anon's league. This wasn't some garage-scripter's DoS attack, this was the big leagues of hacking, data intrusion, and theft.

 

[samsonguy920]

If members of Anonymous are responsible, then to me Anonymous is responsible for screwing over many legitimate users and gamers by shutting down a service that has a lot of good going for it.
Anonymous may not be based on a tight-knit structure, but it is lead-by-example. It wouldn't surprise me if there are members who heard the call to shut down Sony because of that twit geohot, and it took them some extra time to pull off something this big.
So, no. Denying responsibility just because you don't condone certain stuff is being irresponsible. You opened this pandora's box. Time to own up and start taking better charge.

Or it may be time you people started spending time in Gitmo.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

They are "cyber-terroristic" because they attack websites of institutions that they don't like in order to take them down. WikiLeaks (although I'm glad they attacked it)

So why are you glad they attacked wikileaks?

 

[Fasckira]

Its good to know that if I ever commit any cybercrime all I have to do is leave a file on the network called "Anonymous" and the blame will instantly shift.

Blaming Anonymous doesnt help - Anonymous are anonymous so all the reports are really saying is "We dont know who did it" still.

 

[Low Key]

I love how the members on this site flip flop so easily on subjects. Anon DDoS's websites to support Wikileaks and golly, they are the greatest group ever to have existed. Anon denies attacking Sony and people are too fucking blind to see that perhaps Sony could be lying to save face.

I personally don't like Anon. They are a nuisance, even when the public perceives what they do as the right thing. However, I don't believe they had anything to do with the security breach as a group. Sony either needed someone to blame because they ran out of leads, or the person/people responsible put that file on their system because they knew they could just throw blame elsewhere and get away easily.

Regardless, I may be wrong, just like everyone else in this thread. No one knows the truth, unless someone here works for Sony. And if that's the case, quit posting on a fucking message board and fix the problem.