Anonymous Strikes Back, Hacks "Internet Security" Firm

[AnonOperations]

Snip Well, that's the only legal form of protest they've committed in this whole affair.

While your post is better then most of these ignorant anti anonymous people. You are still trying to say DDoS is a terrorist act. And you still have little clue to the extent of what AnonOps does.

1 of the primary actions of Anons with wikileaks. After raising public awareness with the DDoS protests. Is to summarize and spread the cables everywhere. And of course there are also anons hosting wikileaks sites.

Heard of Leakspin sauce? Operation Leakspin? Operation Cablewiki?

Here is an article regarding paypal releasing the funds: http://thenextweb.com/media/2010/12/09/caving-to-pressure-from-supporters-paypal-releases-wikileaks-funds/

I also closed my paypal account along with a lot of others.

Master card released a statement saying that no public information was compromised.

Here it is here: http://www.benzinga.com/movers/10/12/681247/mastercard-says-accounts-not-compromised

I did hear of some /b/tards trolling with misinformation deliberately saying peoples information was compromised.

http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=42947

REYKJAVIK - Icelandic firm DataCell said Wednesday it would sue Visa for blocking payments to the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks, accusing the credit card giant of bowing to political pressure.

"DataCell who facilitates those payments towards WikiLeaks has decided to take up immediate legal action to make donations possible again," the company's chief executive Andreas Fink said in a statement.

"Visa users have explicitly expressed their will to send their donations to Wikileaks and Visa is not fulfilling this wish," he added.

"Visa is hurting WikiLeaks and DataCell in high figures," he said.

 

[antipunt]

WOW. His SOCIAL SN? They mean business..

 

[hooksashands]

Who wants to bet after they're found and all the buzz dies down, they're offered jobs?

But then they'll just help the FBI hunt us.

 

[AnonOperations]

Like I said I appreciate their attempts at activism, but they are woefully ignorant.

Do you have anything else to inform me of - other then "Anons do not comprehend or accept responsibility for their actions and their actions are stupid?"

That isn't that helpful or completely accurate but thank you for your concern. I will take it under consideration and bring it up with other anons.

Do you know of any other practical ways to help, other then helping them get around censorship, provide access to relevant wikileaks cables and information on how to be anonymous using the tor network?

Or do you just suggest we sit back and do nothing so not to anger their corrupt governments regime?

 

[nightwolf667]

Snip Well, that's the only legal form of protest they've committed in this whole affair.

While your post is better then most of these ignorant anti anonymous people. You are still trying to say DDoS is a terrorist act. And you still have little clue to the extent of what AnonOps does.[/quote}

I said it was illegal. Which it is. Do I think they caused terror to the people who couldn't use their cards? Yes. Do I think that might be something brought up when those arrested (and who will be arrested) go to trial? Yes.

1 of the primary actions of Anons with wikileaks. After raising public awareness with the DDoS protests. Is to summarize and spread the cables everywhere. And of course there are also anons hosting wikileaks sites.

Here's the part you're not understanding. In a court of law (which is what I care about) i doesn't matter why these Anons committed these attacks. It just matters that they did and whether or not it can be proved that they did. (The FBI are very good at computer forensics, plus any admission of guilt online can be used against them in a court of law, including forum posts and things said in IRC chats.)

The law doesn't care why they did it. And I honestly don't care why they did it. I care when they intentionally harass governments who will initiate more crackdowns. (There are other, smarter, better ways to go about it. Seriously.) I care when they threaten the security of credit card companies. I care when they openly state the the five anons arrested are part of their organization (which again, will be used against them in a court of law). I care that the way they are behaving is woefully naive about the real world and that everything I have heard from both their press releases and elsewhere (biased and nonbiased sources such as "Coldblooded's" interview with the BBC) only further to make the situation (legally) worse for those who are caught and brought to trial. I care about the fact that some of these kids are going to get sued straight back into the stone age by those companies (Visa and Master Card included) that have been wronged in these "protests". I feel sorry for those of them who have been committing copyright infringement (felony) and piracy, whose computers were taken by the FBI during their search and seizures. They can (and probably will) be charged with that and then the MPAA and the RIAA will come and sue them, not only for damages, but for reparations of the crimes they have just been convicted of. I care that many of those caught will be denied their chances at higher education, I care that some of them will lose large portions of their lives to the penalty box aka prison, and I care that once they get out many will be barred from having decent paying jobs. I don't care if it's five who are caught, or ten, or twenty.

I think Anonymous is stupid when they try to bully governements. I think they're going to lose, hard. I hope it will be a wake up call.

Heard of Leakspin sauce? Operation Leakspin? Operation Cablewiki?

Nope and if they were legal I don't care. If they were small time, then that's nice and again I applaud their activism. I just care that many Anons seem misinformed about the legality of their actions and the fact that they believe "WE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WRONG!" is going to keep coming back and biting them in the ass. Because they did do something wrong. They broke the law. We can get all high minded and philosophical about it, but, at the end of the day that's all that matters.

Here it is here: http://www.benzinga.com/movers/10/12/681247/mastercard-says-accounts-not-compromised

I did hear of some /b/tards trolling with misinformation deliberately saying peoples information was compromised.

Yes, but saying shit like that, getting it repeated on this website and by other news organizations does give people a legitimate reason to fear Anonymous. I'm not afraid of Anonymous, but the average individual who doesn't really care about wikileaks? Who all they see in the headlines are "Cyber-Terrorists/Hacktivists Attack Visa, Master Card, and Pay Pal" how do you think they're going to feel about Anon?

They're going to be scared shitless.

 

[Swifteye]

Wow this is becoming a real situation. These guys sound like the terrorist one would hear about in sci fi movies. Personally I think it's going to end with all our private information available to the government for "security reasons"

 

[nightwolf667]

Like I said I appreciate their attempts at activism, but they are woefully ignorant.

Do you have anything else to inform me of - other then "Anons do not comprehend or accept responsibility for their actions and their actions are stupid?"

That isn't that helpful or completely accurate but thank you for your concern. I will take it under consideration and bring it up with other anons.

Do you know of any other practical ways to help, other then helping them get around censorship, provide access to relevant wikileaks cables and information on how to be anonymous using the tor network?

Or do you just suggest we sit back and do nothing so not to anger their corrupt governments regime?

I'm saying break the crackdown, don't hack the websites. Don't for the love of god, don't put lofty philosophical rhetoric in the faces of a governmental regime that leads them back to easy scapegoats and names the people you're "fighting" for. Right in their goddamn face. These governments are not going to tolerate that and it's only going to make things worse. Anonymous basically went to them and said "We are here, this is what we're going to do and now we're going to piss all over your face, nya, nya, nyaaa. Oh and we're doing this for the activists you've so cruelly maligned and mistreated." Most of Anonymous is out of reach, but they're still going to go looking for whoever did it. Situations are tense and even though reporters say "this is not the action they should be taking" they will probably take it anyway because they're the ones in control and the ones who have the guns. And when governments get pissed off (there not in the US or the UK, but certainly there) these regimes will inevitably grab for the easiest people in reach.

You want to help? Get on a plane, go to Tunisia.

 

[AnonOperations]

Understand that it is a very small amount of people that is capable of, or interested in defacing. I might have a chat with them but certainly can't promise anything.

Regarding DDoS: I understand your concern and I understand there are better ways to go about it. People were frustrated and afraid that wikileaks was going to be taken out so massive actions were taken. It was soon realized that DDoSing was ineffective and operation leakspin was spawned. It isn't as noticeable as the DDoS protests for a number of reasons, the main 1 being, there is no need to mention anonymous when spreading the cables.

Posted on IRC:

The point of this Operation, was to hinder the public face of the companies to draw media attention to what they did to wikileaks. Not to harm infrastructure that people use day to day.

I would hope everyone in here is prepared to go to trial with their heads held high, if it comes to that. Remember that DDoS IS illegal, and don't get cocky, protect yourselves. If you do get v&, don't worry, we are working on securing strong legal council for Anons.

 

[BVBFanatic]

Now they are under the entire alphabet soup of agencies as well as Homeland Security. They face the same scrutiny as a domestic terrorist, and the ability to obtain open-ended tracking subpoenas is now unlimited. Expect the see the surprised faces of these people on the news in short order.

(Citation needed.)

Second, protesting is not a right.

Protesting is indeed a right. Freedom of Assembly, First Amendment, Bill of Rights. The legal implications of an "e-protest" are a matter for the courts to decide. Not the legislative branch, the executive branch, and certainly not you or me.

 

[nightwolf667]

Understand it is a very small group that is capable of or interested defacing. I might have a chat with them but certainly can't promise anything.

I understand your concern and I understand there are better ways to go about it. People were frustrated and afraid that wikileaks was going to be taken out so massive actions was taken. It was soon realized that DDoSing was ineffective and operation leakspin was spawned.

Posted on IRC:

The point of this Operation, was to hinder the public face of the companies to draw media attention to what they did to wikileaks. Not to harm infrastructure that people use day to day.

I would hope everyone is here is prepared to go to trial with their heads held high, if it comes to that. Remember that DDoS IS illegal, and don't get cocky, protect yourselves. If you do get v&, don't worry, we are working on securing strong legal council for Anons.

It doesn't matter if it's only a small group that's interested in defacing, those actions are reflected on all of you (specifically because they were done under the banner of Anonymous) and mar everything this particular Anonymous group stands for. Posting a man's social security number on the internet is a felony, hacking his Twitter account and posting erroneous messages is libel. It's not just bad for him because it's humiliating, damaging to the company's reputation, etc. It's bad because some anons have claimed to have their hands on the company's financial data (very bad for them, worse for the anons if it's true). I understand why these Anons (or single Anon) felt it was necessary, but this will have repercussions extending beyond just simply beyond a man's humiliation. It looks like childish, petulant destruction to an outside observer against a man who was simply doing his job. (The truth of things not withstanding.)

Anonymous may not be an organization, but they act like one (leaderless as it is) with their press releases and interviews with the media. he likelyhood is that those arrested will be charged with the actions of the group, which means (like I said) that any actions undertaken by a sect of Anonymous will reflect back on the whole, and any member of Anonymous may be charged with the actions undertaken, even those by destructive splinter groups.

I'm presenting the worst possible scenario here. And it's possible because of the continuation of actions (against the MPAA, RIAA, PostFinance, Bank of America, Visa, Master Card, the US Copyright Office, etc) that even some minors (probably fifteen on up) will be charged as adults.

 

[AnonOperations]

Thanks for the reminder and info in the post above nightwolf.

Yes, but saying shit like that, getting it repeated on this website and by other news organizations does give people a legitimate reason to fear Anonymous. I'm not afraid of Anonymous, but the average individual who doesn't really care about wikileaks? Who all they see in the headlines are "Cyber-Terrorists/Hacktivists Attack Visa, Master Card, and Pay Pal" how do you think they're going to feel about Anon?

They're going to be scared shitless.

Not all news outlets are biased propaganda (fox news) using inaccurate labels to support the arrests of anonymous and wikileaks members.

2 of the Anonymous interviews shown on RT were pretty good and the guardian+BBC and others has some nice articles.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12299137

Some of these news outlets are starting to catch on that anonymous is not a well defined group. To quote BBC: People using the name come together, commonly to stage a protest.

 

[mechanixis]

It's ironic how a group titling itself "Anonymous" seems to spend a lot of time and effort trying to get public recognition for what they do.

They're accomplished hackers, no doubt about that, but their whole motivation for doing it seems like childish posturing. They act like Robin Hood for preying on organizations that can't hit back, but now they've finally gone and kicked the hornet's nest by pissing off a group that can retaliate. But they just keep digging themselves a deeper and deeper hole by trying to maintain the illusion that they're this unstoppable underground network that no system is safe from.

Digital shock and awe isn't going to work on the FBI, guys.

 

[qeinar]

Hmm, I'm interested to see how this ends.
Prediction right now: the internet gets turned off. Yes it's an incredibly drastic move, but I calls 'em like I sees 'em.

yes 'cus that would happen. : p might happen just for usa, but alot of comapnies would lose alot of money if the internet was down just one day. ^^

 

[qeinar]

It's ironic how a group titling itself "Anonymous" seems to spend a lot of time and effort trying to get public recognition for what they do.

They're accomplished hackers, no doubt about that, but their whole motivation for doing it seems like childish posturing. They act like Robin Hood for preying on organizations that can't hit back, but now they've finally gone and kicked the hornet's nest by pissing off a group that can retaliate. But they just keep digging themselves a deeper and deeper hole by trying to maintain the illusion that they're this unstoppable underground network that no system is safe from.

Digital shock and awe isn't going to work on the FBI, guys.

now your talking like anonymous acts as 1 force, which it rarely ever does unless it is something that is pissing everyone of. "now" as you say the pissed of a group which your saying can retaliate. which is not really true, since the group made fake claims on having information that could hurt some members of anonymous, so they hacked the site and found out all the effort they had put into digging up info on anonymous, was infact info anyone could get my beeing on their irc servers. to me it just seems they have pissed of a group that think they are a lot more powerfull than they are.

 

[qeinar]

wow anonymous really needs to be taken out there too dangerous and too good at what they do

Exactly. I don't like the idea of people taking the law into their own hands and deciding what's right and what's wrong.

taken down? how exactly?

 

[Starke]

Ancient history lesson here kids, really the only force that can deal with a group of hackers is another group of hackers.

Except, what we're already seeing in this case is a bit different from the crackdowns of old. These aren't hackers, they're script kiddies, and their lack of technical proficiency is already starting to catch up with them.

I think this is a popular conception, but ultimatly wrong. I think the whole point of Anonymous is it's sheer size, and the variation of people involved. Obviously nothing the size of Anonymous is going to be made up of skilled hackers, there just aren't that many of them. I think the "script kiddies" involved are largely a human shield for the more more skilled members. Ths is why Anonymous goes from a total joke, with failed raids and the like, to operating on a world class level against goverments and corperations, it all depends on who is involved. Yes, skilless script kiddies are going to be tracked down and busted, but that has little affect on Anonymous as a whole. The "hordes of /B/" are part of Anonymous but not all that it is.

I'd be more inclined to agree with you if it wasn't for how phenomenally stupid Anonymous members have been about getting caught. We've got the IRC admin who went on to post on twitter after his arrest basically confirming the allegations against him. We've got one of the UK 5 that went to the press before he was arrested. We've got the press statement from Anonymous demanding the release of their members in the UK, confirming that those five were members. We've got the instructions to lie to the police if arrested, and at that lie incompetently in a way that a quick forensic investigation can disprove. We've got people who genuinely do not believe what they are doing is criminal. Now, a person who understands that what they're doing is criminal, and does it anyway while taking precautions is an absolute terror to convict, but that's not what we have here. We don't have a new generation of hacker wars, we've got people who believe they're in the right so strongly they will, fuck, they want to tell their side of the story without any reservations. Where there side of the story is also admitting to criminal activity.

 

[nightwolf667]

Yes, but saying shit like that, getting it repeated on this website and by other news organizations does give people a legitimate reason to fear Anonymous. I'm not afraid of Anonymous, but the average individual who doesn't really care about wikileaks? Who all they see in the headlines are "Cyber-Terrorists/Hacktivists Attack Visa, Master Card, and Pay Pal" how do you think they're going to feel about Anon?

They're going to be scared shitless.

Not all news outlets are biased propaganda (fox news) using inaccurate labels to support the arrests of anonymous and wikileaks members.

2 of the Anonymous interviews shown on RT were pretty good and the guardian+BBC and others has some nice articles.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12299137

Some of these news outlets are starting to catch on that anonymous is not a well defined group. To quote BBC: People using the name come together, commonly to stage a protest.

Yes that's all nice and wonderful that they're finally understanding. But there it is, right there. "It's important that the general public understands that Anonymous is not the enemy", you are mistaking media outlets as the general public.

The average person has almost no idea that this is going on (from the lack of reporting on the situation). A good impression does not leave as big of one as a bad impression. What will people remember more? That some guy named "coldblood" gave a decent interview to BBC about the motives of Anonymous? Or that their identity was potentially compromised in a DDoS attack (which they probably do not understand, all they might here is "identity" "compromised" "attack"). The efforts to educate the general public are noble I suppose, but the constant explaining and taking credit for things is a great way for the feds, police, whomever to pin something on an individual.

According to BBC "Coldblood" was among those arrested in the U.K. His interview will almost certainly play a role in his trial, and because he was easily identifiable the interview may have been a reason he was caught. It was the press release after demanding their release by the Anonymous presswebsite that probably made any lawyer defending him want to shoot himself in the head.

 

[Starke]

Hilarity

is...is that an actual thing? They were stupid enough to attack the Government site of a government that doesn't feel like tolerating them?

Without context, and off the top of my head, Anon has attacked the websites affiliated with Zimbabwean, Egyptian, Tunisian, Swiss, British, and American governments. (I might be wrong about the Swiss, I'm not sure.) Well, that's a group of countries you want pissed with you.