Anonymous Seeks to Legalize DDoS Attacks

[jklinders]

........... So the group all about anonymity.......... wants you to put your name to a form............ they are going to send to the government..........................................................*head implodes*

This wins the thread. Seriously the irony is really quite exquisite.


There are a few folks who have been saying that the German courts have deemed DDoS attacks a legal form of protest. Courts make stupid rulings all the time. Just because the courts in one country make this act of vandalism legal does not make it valid. Let them DDoS German sites all they want. That's the problem of the people who host sites in Germany and that is their fight to win or lose. Maybe in the eventual appeal they will get some judges who are actually intelligent enough to see what is wrong here but what Germany did is not relevant to what the US or other countries are doing.

Last I checked union thugs were not allowed to block access to their work sites. Only delay it. An argument could be made that DDoS is the same thing except Anonymous is not working at these places and others have mentioned that the underlying server damage is more troubling than is commonly recognized. So yeah, not legit. Especially since botnets are still involved.

 

[the spaciest]

I think the Anons raise an important point. While there may be crucial differences between a sit-in and a DDos attack, the idea of a virtual form of protest is a compelling one. Some dissenters mentioned that "if it's worth protesting, then it's worth protesting in person" [sic] but if turning up in person means being brutalized, tear gassed and/or shot at; perhaps it's not quite as worth it to some people.

Add to that fact that Anon have turned their attentions to global situations and... Well, when Anonymous helped Egypt back onto the internet, giving Government dissenters a renewed voice and facilitating the free flow of information; would they have been better off buying plane tickets to a slaughterhouse?

To get back on track, I believe that the denizens of this world grow increasingly connected and globally aware. It would be absurd to think that the most efficacious form of protest for a global community would be a physically manifest one. I willingly concede that a DDos attack cannot, in all probability, constitute a legitimate form of protest, but what if an analogue of it could?
If I were to organize a large number of people to all sit in front of their computers and manually request data from a website, then those people would be effectively "manually DDos-ing" that site. Nothing illegal would be taking place and no damage (other than the temporary loss of service) would be taking place. I'd argue that such action would be a legitimate "electronic sit-in" and the fact that it would only work by virtue of sheer numbers might add credence to the point in question.

That however raises another important notion. What if I feel strongly about something I perceive as a strong political injustice - and what if only say a hundred people actually give a fuck about it. Legality and morality aside, would it be more efficacious to spend years attempting to raise awareness - or would it be more prudent to wheel out something akin to LOIC and make headline news the following day?

As an aside, I'd like to point out the hypocrisy in breaking up peaceful protests with batons and tear gas; and also the American Government's usage of DDos to cripple websites that it has a problem with.

I guess that last thought was born of the idea that groups like Anon would be fighting a very lopsided battle if they always stayed within the bounds of legality. The Governments and corporations do not play fair - why should the resistance?