They haven't been taken out for the same reason Al Qaeda hasn't, only moreso.tony2077 said:
They aren't "too good", the idiot they sent the email to was just bad.
Anonymous Strikes Back, Hacks "Internet Security" Firm
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
They aren't "too good", the idiot they sent the email to was just bad.
Consequences. There will be some. I'm not sure which side will win out. The FBI is the freakin' FBI, but you can't kill an idea (you can kill the dude who came up with it, though). Honestly, this isn't worth the debate. We don't know what will happen next, just that SOMETHING will happen next. The FBI does nothing, and Anonymous moves on to other targets, or the FBI punches back, at which point they scare off enough Anon to make a difference or they crack down too hard and in doing so raise support for Anon across all the internet. And it sucks when the internet is your enemy.
But seriously, anything could happen.
But seriously, anything could happen.
....They stole a man's social security account, hacked his twitter account and then claimed it to be a victory. If they're fighting for us, I'm jumping ship and lighting my modem on fire. I refuse to be part of a group who steals from a person who is doing their job.Clarity112 said:
They are the worst representatives of the internet one could ask for.
Ancient history lesson here kids, really the only force that can deal with a group of hackers is another group of hackers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legion_of_Doom_(hacking)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masters_Of_Deception
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Hacker_War
Also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sun_Devil
Okay this is ancient history I am going to use to illustrate a point. Truthfully I know there are those who claim that Lex Luthor claims the Great Hacker War never happened, but there seems to be supporting evidence, and truthfully I tend to take any claims from anyone claiming to be, or have been dealing with THE Lex Luthor with a grain of salt.
To put it bluntly the goverment has largely been ineffective in dealing with hackers on any signifigant level. Operation Sun Devil was one of the biggest operations in history, and for the most part it had no real effect, being largely a PR stunt, and most of the arrests and attempted prosecutions wound up failing utterly.
The biggest successes the goverment has had in dealing with hackers has come about as a result of hacker groups going at it with each other, and using the police more or less as a weapon to take each other out. MoD and LoD were two of the baddest groups out there, but to put it bluntly they came to some substantial disagreements and there was a battle between substantial numbers of members of both groups, which ended with a victory for MoD and a lot of hackers either "selling out" and going legit as a dodge (internet security companies) or being arrested largely to what amounted to the efforts of better hackers arranging for them to be caught. This (and the wiki articles) are an extreme simplification of things.
Truthfully, groups like the FBI chasing groups like the "Legion Of Doom" around was the stuff of jokes for a long time, especially during the era of BBS systems before the internet as it exists now as in such heavy use. The whole Steve Jackson Games raid (which was mentioned in their GURPS Cyberpunk book, as the FBI wound up seizing shipments of it) being one of the most lulzworthy events, and got a lot of RPG players who formerly had no interest looking at the whole hacker thing with amusement.
The point here is that whether I agree with everything Anonymous does nor not, I don't think the FBI or the goverment can really do much of anything, their track record is pretty abysmal and always has been. Their massive search streak here, and the arrests in the UK, seems very "Operation Sun Devil" like in of the fact that it's done to show them doing something, but I have seen no evidence of anything of substance coming from it. Anonymous is still operating, it's still effective, and there doesn't seem to have been any real convictions, and with the increasingly public/flashy nature of what's going on, if the FBI had something that solid where they even thought they were going to be getting probable convictions they would be shouting it from the rooftops I'd think.
Now truthfully if I was coordinating this for the goverment, and following hacker activity, I'd probably look at other groups with a strong, illegal internet prescence, and see if I could find a way to engineer a war, and use the fallout to get the people involved. Not the best plan in the world, but the bottom line their own tactics pretty much don't work. What you'd really need is another big group of anonymous hackers who use similar tricks to weed out the "hordes of B" and find out who the real threats are. A war between two groups would ultimatly come down to the best people on each side gradually hunting down and trying to
deal with each other.
I'll also be honest in saying that Anonymous does seem like an evolution of the "ancient" groups, that is a huge horde of people for the dangerous ones to hide in. What's more the "we are anonymous" mask tends to be a lot smarter than people using specific handles in their work, so you could say try and track down or trump "the hacker using this name". Way back when that was kind of cool, and gave an illusion of invincibility, but as any comic book fan can tell you guys like "The Riddler" who absolutly HAVE to leave behind personal trademarks (riddles) aren't as effective as those who don't leave any trace, or blend in with everything else perfectly (which is sort of what Anonymous does). Not a perfect analogy, but I hopefully convey my thoughts effectively.
As I've said, I think a lot of what Anonymous has done is cool, but I don't support them in everything they've done, and have never harboured any illlusions of them being a group of philanthropic freedom fighters, due to looking at more of their "body of work" than just the recent events that have been getting them more public attention. I think defending Wikileaks was a BAD move and highly irresponsible for example. The point of this rant however is that I don't agree with those who think that the FBI or the goverment's ire should be something that worries them, because really, it doesn't appear that the goverment has gotten any better at dealing with this kind of thing than it's ever been. I will be very surprised if the US goverment or those of it's allied nations does anything signifigantly effective, because honestly the goverment's techniques have never been all that effective, going back decades now. If the goverment wants to even slow Anonymous down it has to start thinking way outside of the box it's set for itself, I'm hardly a genius and my plan about trying to set up a hacker war to nail people is doubtlessly stupid, but it's ideas along those lines as opposed to conventional security and investigative methods that are going to yield any results.
To some extent I mention ancient history (especially in computer terms) because I think this is one of those cases where we're seeing history kind of repete itself, with the FBI running around chasing hackers ineffectively and setting itself up for a Lollercaust. While definatly differant in both form and function, I can't help but wonder if Anonymous will ever become quite the "Road Runner" to the goverment's "Wile E Coyote" that LoD was.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legion_of_Doom_(hacking)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masters_Of_Deception
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Hacker_War
Also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sun_Devil
Okay this is ancient history I am going to use to illustrate a point. Truthfully I know there are those who claim that Lex Luthor claims the Great Hacker War never happened, but there seems to be supporting evidence, and truthfully I tend to take any claims from anyone claiming to be, or have been dealing with THE Lex Luthor with a grain of salt.
To put it bluntly the goverment has largely been ineffective in dealing with hackers on any signifigant level. Operation Sun Devil was one of the biggest operations in history, and for the most part it had no real effect, being largely a PR stunt, and most of the arrests and attempted prosecutions wound up failing utterly.
The biggest successes the goverment has had in dealing with hackers has come about as a result of hacker groups going at it with each other, and using the police more or less as a weapon to take each other out. MoD and LoD were two of the baddest groups out there, but to put it bluntly they came to some substantial disagreements and there was a battle between substantial numbers of members of both groups, which ended with a victory for MoD and a lot of hackers either "selling out" and going legit as a dodge (internet security companies) or being arrested largely to what amounted to the efforts of better hackers arranging for them to be caught. This (and the wiki articles) are an extreme simplification of things.
Truthfully, groups like the FBI chasing groups like the "Legion Of Doom" around was the stuff of jokes for a long time, especially during the era of BBS systems before the internet as it exists now as in such heavy use. The whole Steve Jackson Games raid (which was mentioned in their GURPS Cyberpunk book, as the FBI wound up seizing shipments of it) being one of the most lulzworthy events, and got a lot of RPG players who formerly had no interest looking at the whole hacker thing with amusement.
The point here is that whether I agree with everything Anonymous does nor not, I don't think the FBI or the goverment can really do much of anything, their track record is pretty abysmal and always has been. Their massive search streak here, and the arrests in the UK, seems very "Operation Sun Devil" like in of the fact that it's done to show them doing something, but I have seen no evidence of anything of substance coming from it. Anonymous is still operating, it's still effective, and there doesn't seem to have been any real convictions, and with the increasingly public/flashy nature of what's going on, if the FBI had something that solid where they even thought they were going to be getting probable convictions they would be shouting it from the rooftops I'd think.
Now truthfully if I was coordinating this for the goverment, and following hacker activity, I'd probably look at other groups with a strong, illegal internet prescence, and see if I could find a way to engineer a war, and use the fallout to get the people involved. Not the best plan in the world, but the bottom line their own tactics pretty much don't work. What you'd really need is another big group of anonymous hackers who use similar tricks to weed out the "hordes of B" and find out who the real threats are. A war between two groups would ultimatly come down to the best people on each side gradually hunting down and trying to
deal with each other.
I'll also be honest in saying that Anonymous does seem like an evolution of the "ancient" groups, that is a huge horde of people for the dangerous ones to hide in. What's more the "we are anonymous" mask tends to be a lot smarter than people using specific handles in their work, so you could say try and track down or trump "the hacker using this name". Way back when that was kind of cool, and gave an illusion of invincibility, but as any comic book fan can tell you guys like "The Riddler" who absolutly HAVE to leave behind personal trademarks (riddles) aren't as effective as those who don't leave any trace, or blend in with everything else perfectly (which is sort of what Anonymous does). Not a perfect analogy, but I hopefully convey my thoughts effectively.
As I've said, I think a lot of what Anonymous has done is cool, but I don't support them in everything they've done, and have never harboured any illlusions of them being a group of philanthropic freedom fighters, due to looking at more of their "body of work" than just the recent events that have been getting them more public attention. I think defending Wikileaks was a BAD move and highly irresponsible for example. The point of this rant however is that I don't agree with those who think that the FBI or the goverment's ire should be something that worries them, because really, it doesn't appear that the goverment has gotten any better at dealing with this kind of thing than it's ever been. I will be very surprised if the US goverment or those of it's allied nations does anything signifigantly effective, because honestly the goverment's techniques have never been all that effective, going back decades now. If the goverment wants to even slow Anonymous down it has to start thinking way outside of the box it's set for itself, I'm hardly a genius and my plan about trying to set up a hacker war to nail people is doubtlessly stupid, but it's ideas along those lines as opposed to conventional security and investigative methods that are going to yield any results.
To some extent I mention ancient history (especially in computer terms) because I think this is one of those cases where we're seeing history kind of repete itself, with the FBI running around chasing hackers ineffectively and setting itself up for a Lollercaust. While definatly differant in both form and function, I can't help but wonder if Anonymous will ever become quite the "Road Runner" to the goverment's "Wile E Coyote" that LoD was.
I agree here. They think they're some kind of rebel group rallying against oppresive and secretive governments and corporations, but really, they're just being dicks. I'm sure they'll be put on the terrorist list soon. Anyone who thinks this isn't an organization is wrong. You don't hack the system of a computer security firm and not have a moderate sized group and some organization. This isn't the movie "Hackers", get fucking real.Daemascus said:
MiniPax.joebear15 said:
I'm sorry, that's a little like saying that an attack dog won't rip your genitals off so long as you're spraying in it's face, it would rather sit back and nibble on you a piece at a time while savoring a fine wine and reading the Wall Street Journal. As opposed to ripping your genitals off and swallowing them whole.kouriichi said:
You see, the government is not subtle. It is not clever. It has all the refinement of three FBI agents kicking in your door at 7am, shoving loaded 9mm semiautomatic weapons in your face, and screaming at you to comply.
No, laws don't, but the courts do. That's kinda the way constitutional law in this country is written. Someone does something, or passes a law they think is legal. Someone else hits them in the face with a shovel. They go to court, and fifteen years later we get a ruling from the court saying either that, "yeah, the law's fine, stop hitting people in the face with shovels," or, "no the law wasn't fine, here, give me that shovel."agnosticOCD said:
Umm you do know that Anonymous does that as a joke right? A really rascist joke but onme nontheless. They are one of the more multi-cultural communitys not in name but in numbers.spartan773 said:and we'd all be forced to possibly chastize african-americans and gays and lesbians.Tenky said:I want Anonymous to be the global internet authority... they are fair, reasonable, and take no sides, just equality.
Best of all... they're not governed or goverment... they are everyday joes!
doesn't sound great does it?
Whaaaaaat???? How are they sticking up for fair use of the internet without control? They are doing all the things that have forced restrictions on the internet. Plus, the US already has net neutrality laws that say there are no restrictions!Clarity112 said:
Humanity is helping people after a natural disaster. Humanity is adopting a child. Humanity is not damaging a company, stealing people's personal information, taunting the FBI, and then claiming a victory for internet use and freedom of information and speech. These people are not on my side. If I knew someone who was in this group, I would out them in an instant.
you forget that the FBI has the ability to take a flame-thrower to almost every snake out there, by the end of this, the few snakes that are left will go into hiding, or simply phase out. though I do agree, for now this will be quite entertaining.obisean said:
[sub] I hope that this line on it's own can't be taken too far out of context if it is, I'm sorry[/sub]
seriously doubt they have enough flame throwers for this.nicholaxxx said:
all the FBI can do is point their wussy guns at people ... some intelligence agency are they..
buncha rookies with guns and a permit to trash your house.
Still your house is trashed, and you have a gun in your face, while the FBI is munchin' on everything in your fridge, and takin' your computer, your phone, your laptop, your 360, your DS... and leaving you with... well, nothing.phoenix352 said:
So what if they didn't get everyone. They got you, and now your life is effectively over. Enjoy.
regardless of whether or not you are correct, I find the thought of the government winning this battle more comforting than a bunch of over-privileged hackers winning.phoenix352 said:
Strawman? Only if you take my point out of context.sleekie said:
Here, let me spell it out for you:
Anonymous's little hacking action isn't going to do anything other than provide an excuse for the government to implement more restrictive laws on the internet. Anonymous won't write the laws, they won't enact the laws, and they won't enforce the laws, but they will act as a catalyst for said laws.
This sort of reactionary bullshit has happened before.
The government used 9/11 as an excuse to enable the Patriot Act (which in itself was a horrific violation of rights).
While Anonymous's actions are nowhere near the magnitude of 9/11, the same premise and reasoning fits. Someone committed a crime that pissed off the US government, and the government used it as leverage.
In short: Anonymous is not helping anyone acquire more "internet freedom" through these actions, no matter how "trivial" they are (and let us hope the US government considers them trivial).
