NATO Considers "Persecuting" Anonymous

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
NATO Considers "Persecuting" Anonymous



The powers of the West report on the growing concern of "hactivism" of groups like Anonymous.

NATO is an alliance of nations formed in 1949 to solidify the relationship of mutual defense for North America and western Europe after World War II. Today, the members of NATO account for almost 70 percent of the world's spending on defense. Preventing attacks of any type on its members is of utmost importance to the organization, so it only makes sense that NATO analyze possible cyber-attacks on its military and defense computer systems. A report called "Information and National Security" from General Rapporteur Lord Jopling of the UK discusses the potential good of social networks for fostering democracy, the WikiLeaks scandal, and how hacktivists need to be burned at the stake.

"Virtual communities operating online provide new opportunities for civil society, but they have also increased the potential for asymmetrical attacks," the report says. "Apart from causing harm, destruction or conducting espionage, most recent cyber attacks have also been used as a means to reach a rather different goal. 'Hactivism' is a relatively recent form of social protest or expression of ideology by using hacking techniques."

The report then singles out Anonymous as an example of this new trend by relating government's plans to take down WikiLeaks. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/105954-Anonymous-Declares-Infowar-on-Wikileaks-Opponents]

The report continues:

Today, the ad hoc international group of hackers and activists is said to have thousands of operatives and has no set rules or membership. It remains to be seen how much time Anonymous has for pursuing such paths. The longer these attacks persist the more likely countermeasures will be developed, implemented, the groups will be infiltrated and perpetrators persecuted.
Perhaps Lord Jopling should have used the word "prosecute" instead of "persecute" which means "to harass persistently" or "to pursue with oppressive treatment, especially because of religion, race, or beliefs."

I mean, I definitely think that it's important for governments to be aware of the dangers that hacking can pose, but I'm not sure that oppressing them in return is the right move. As Stephen Colbert said of the Anonymous attacks [http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/375428/february-24-2011/corporate-hacker-tries-to-take-down-wikileaks], you don't want to stick your penis into the hornet's nest.

Source: NATO [http://www.nato-pa.int/default.asp?SHORTCUT=2443]

Permalink
 

theriddlen

New member
Apr 6, 2010
897
0
0
"The groups will be infiltrated"

How exactly are you gonna infiltrate something that doesn't have any structure?
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
"you don't want to stick your penis into the hornet's nest."

Well how else am I supposed to get my kicks?
 

microhive

New member
Mar 27, 2009
489
0
0
theriddlen said:
"The groups will be infiltrated"

How exactly are you gonna infiltrate something that doesn't have any structure?
I'd assume by participating in the IRC and listen to conversations, pretending to be members or guests.

Just hoping that these listeners won't have their information distributed, otherwise they'll have their lives ruined.
 

Wintermoot

New member
Aug 20, 2009
6,563
0
0
theriddlen said:
"The groups will be infiltrated"

How exactly are you gonna infiltrate something that doesn't have any structure?
maybe they will "join" anonymous which is useless since there is no member list.
The only thing they CAN do is keeping a list of all of /b/,s activity.
 

Alcari

New member
Jan 28, 2008
61
0
0
I find it hard to believe various governments don't already have a few people to check in on certain unnamed imageboards across the wide internets.

Also, shouldn't this concern lead to making those "sensitive government, military, and corporate files" a bit more secure? Like say, on a server WITHOUT web access?
 

Wicky_42

New member
Sep 15, 2008
2,468
0
0
theriddlen said:
"The groups will be infiltrated"

How exactly are you gonna infiltrate something that doesn't have any structure?
"Oh hai guys, I herd u liek hacking?" There, done :D As to "persecuting" them... well, honestly that sounds more like trolling them TBH, but if he meant "prosecuting" then I imagine shit could get real. also, making statements like this, BEFORE you've infiltrated them and got defences up? Possibly not the best plan - at least game publishers had their DRM in place before boasting about it ;)
 

Thyunda

New member
May 4, 2009
2,955
0
0
Pft. You can beat Anonymous easy. Just write all your personal details with a pen and paper and post it to people you want to know it. If it ain't on the Internet, Anonymous can't do shit with it.
 

Realitycrash

New member
Dec 12, 2010
2,779
0
0
The report then explainis how Anonymous hacked government contractor HBGary's servers and the CEO's Twitter account after the group revealed the government's plans to take down WikiLeaks
Okey, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Anon "Hack" HBGary's by pretending to be an admin and emailing someone within the network to get a new Admin-pass?
Because if so, they "hacked" it by exploiting human stupidity, and proves once more what big-shots in government (or NATO this time) know about "hacking".
 

Particulate

New member
May 27, 2011
235
0
0
Greg Tito said:
Permalink
Interesting idea but

theriddlen said:
How exactly are you gonna infiltrate something that doesn't have any structure?
This

How to you assign anyone to infiltrate into a group that hangs out on 4chan? It would be like assigning someone to huff paint for a year and then write a report on it. Combating the anons in any conventional sense in impossible because most of them are just posers and ALL of them are scatter brained computerized malcontents. It would be like trying to defend Rorke's drift from the Zulu hordes if the Zulu's were all ghosts. Because so what if you find one of their higher ups, trace their ISP, and then arrest them? Another will pop up within the hour.

The answer, to me at least, isnt to fight them but hire their ring leaders. I know that might come as a shock to some but think about it. If these ramen sucking basement dwellers can offline Sony for a month then imagine the miracles they could do with a budget. Because if someone like google or microsoft or apple or sony sat them down, gave them a blank cheque, and said "Design us an online interface that allows us to do our jobs and doesn't compromise our customers" THEY WOULD DO IT.
 

Alcari

New member
Jan 28, 2008
61
0
0
Realitycrash said:
Okey, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Anon "Hack" HBGary's by pretending to be an admin and emailing someone within the network to get a new Admin-pass?
Because if so, they "hacked" it by exploiting human stupidity, and proves once more what big-shots in government (or NATO this time) know about "hacking".
You're correct. All the electronic security and the best password in the world is no match for some retard just handing out login info.
 

Blind0bserver

Blatant Narcissist
Mar 31, 2008
1,454
0
0
theriddlen said:
"The groups will be infiltrated"

How exactly are you gonna infiltrate something that doesn't have any structure?
Well, I imagine that would be pretty simple because no one in Anonymous actually knows who anyone else in the group is. Add onto that the complete lack of a leadership structure and no "procedures" for new members joining and all NATO agents would have to do is join one of their IRC channels and they're done. It'll be the easiest infiltration of a group in the history of government wetworks and espionage ever.
 

Sixties Spidey

Elite Member
Jan 24, 2008
3,299
0
41
Hey, NATO! Remember these two assholes? You know, the ones who have been killing innocent men, women and children every single day in their 30 year regimes and are spilling even more blood to keep themselves from relinquishing power? It's okay! I have pictures of them:



Yeah, stop wasting your incompetently trying to pursue a group that has the ability to severely fuck you over by leaking all your information, and start spending that time to ensure that these two leave their countries and are placed in a fucking prison cell for the rest of their miserable existence!
 
Apr 28, 2008
14,634
0
0
Yes, lets put out a statement saying we're going to infiltrate a group. Thats won't tip them off at all. And besides, it has no command structure, so yeah.

Wicky_42 said:
theriddlen said:
"The groups will be infiltrated"

How exactly are you gonna infiltrate something that doesn't have any structure?
"Oh hai guys, I herd u liek hacking?" There, done :D As to "persecuting" them... well, honestly that sounds more like trolling them TBH, but if he meant "prosecuting" then I imagine shit could get real. also, making statements like this, BEFORE you've infiltrated them and got defences up? Possibly not the best plan - at least game publishers had their DRM in place before boasting about it ;)
Well, not all. Remember EA/Ubisoft boasting about their "unbreakable" DRM schemes in Spore/Assassin's Creed 2 and onward?
 

theriddlen

New member
Apr 6, 2010
897
0
0
redmarine said:
theriddlen said:
"The groups will be infiltrated"

How exactly are you gonna infiltrate something that doesn't have any structure?
I'd assume by participating in the IRC and listen to conversations, pretending to be members or guests.

Just hoping that these listeners won't have their information distributed, otherwise they'll have their lives ruined.
They can only listen like that to regular "members" of Anon, talking about something, or spreading the news about upcoming attack (DDoS is the only thing regular people can do), but nothing that would help track down someone. Nothing you can't get from their websites. And there's no way they'll get to the core greyhats of Anon that are causing the real damage.

henritje said:
theriddlen said:
"The groups will be infiltrated"

How exactly are you gonna infiltrate something that doesn't have any structure?
maybe they will "join" anonymous which is useless since there is no member list.
The only thing they CAN do is keeping a list of all of /b/,s activity.
Keeping list of /b/'s activity? That would be the worst job ever.
 

Gunner_Guardian

New member
Jul 15, 2009
274
0
0
To use a Starcraft 2 analogy.

I think NATO thinks Anonymous has evolved into Lair tech and are worried about what might happen once they evolve into Hive tech. Anonymous has been getting stronger since the days it was just closing pools.
 

Sniper Team 4

New member
Apr 28, 2010
5,433
0
0
Oops. Someone forgot to check themselves before they started talking. I positive he meant 'prosecuted'. This is why you have people read your speeches before you give them. So...is Anonymous going to hack NATO now?
 

Wicky_42

New member
Sep 15, 2008
2,468
0
0
Irridium said:
Yes, lets put out a statement saying we're going to infiltrate a group. Thats won't tip them off at all. And besides, it has no command structure, so yeah.

Wicky_42 said:
theriddlen said:
"The groups will be infiltrated"

How exactly are you gonna infiltrate something that doesn't have any structure?
"Oh hai guys, I herd u liek hacking?" There, done :D As to "persecuting" them... well, honestly that sounds more like trolling them TBH, but if he meant "prosecuting" then I imagine shit could get real. also, making statements like this, BEFORE you've infiltrated them and got defences up? Possibly not the best plan - at least game publishers had their DRM in place before boasting about it ;)
Well, not all. Remember EA/Ubisoft boasting about their "unbreakable" DRM schemes in Spore/Assassin's Creed 2 and onward?
But they did actually have DRM schemes then, right? Not sitting there with the game, talking about how they are GOING to implement a completely hack-proof system just as soon as they get around to it. Didn't stop pre-day one hacks in some cases, but still, they at least had the systems going, not just as ideas on paper.