Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 8th Dec 2010 12:16 UTC
Internet & Networking It looks like several companies are learning what happens when you mess with the internet - and they're learning it the hard way. Several major companies have been hit by the collective powers of Anonymous after 4chan launched several distributed denial-of-service attacks. What many have been predicting for a long time now has finally happened: an actual war between the powers that be on one side, and the internet on the other. Update: PayPal has admitted their WikiLeaks snub came after pressure from the US government, and Datacell, which takes care of payments to Wikileaks, is threatening to sue MasterCard over Wikileaks' account suspension. Update II: Visa.com is down due to the attack. Update III: PayPal has caved under the pressure, and will release the funds in the WikiLeaks account.
Thread beginning with comment 452891
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
inappropriate
by weorthe on Thu 9th Dec 2010 03:44 UTC
weorthe
Member since:
2005-07-06

I find it greatly concerning and very objectionable that Thom Holwerda has advocated actions that are illegal in most countries, including the US and the EU. I am referring to this line: "I fully support these DDoS attacks."

Is it the policy of OSNews to encourage illegal activities like these?

In regards to DDos attacks: the Internet relies on cooperation among a great number of very diverse people. It cannot survive if too many people abuse it for political or other ends. What if the victims of these current attacks respond by attacking their attackers, and those who support them such as OSNews?

While Mr. Holwerda is obviously entitled to his opinions and is certainly not required to agree with mine, I believe that advocating acts that are both illegal and seemingly diametrically opposed to the spirit of OSNews is inappropriate.

Edited 2010-12-09 03:46 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: inappropriate
by TheGZeus on Thu 9th Dec 2010 03:45 in reply to "inappropriate"
TheGZeus Member since:
2010-05-19

Again, civil disobedience.
No justice, no peace.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: inappropriate
by weorthe on Thu 9th Dec 2010 03:48 in reply to "RE: inappropriate"
weorthe Member since:
2005-07-06

But a DDos attack is not civil disobedience. It is more like rioters tearing up their own neighborhood.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: inappropriate
by lemur2 on Thu 9th Dec 2010 04:09 in reply to "inappropriate"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

I find it greatly concerning and very objectionable that Thom Holwerda has advocated actions that are illegal in most countries, including the US and the EU. I am referring to this line: "I fully support these DDoS attacks." Is it the policy of OSNews to encourage illegal activities like these? In regards to DDos attacks: the Internet relies on cooperation among a great number of very diverse people. It cannot survive if too many people abuse it for political or other ends. What if the victims of these current attacks respond by attacking their attackers, and those who support them such as OSNews? While Mr. Holwerda is obviously entitled to his opinions and is certainly not required to agree with mine, I believe that advocating acts that are both illegal and seemingly diametrically opposed to the spirit of OSNews is inappropriate.


The Wikileaks website, which launched no DDoS attack of its own, has come under heavy DDoS attack.

Whom do you imagine launched that DDoS attack against Wikileaks? Who would be interested in doing this? Who would sponsor such an act?

Was this initial DDoS attack on Wikileaks legal in your view? If it was, why?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: inappropriate
by weorthe on Thu 9th Dec 2010 04:17 in reply to "RE: inappropriate"
weorthe Member since:
2005-07-06


The Wikileaks website, which launched no DDoS attack of its own, has come under heavy DDoS attack.

Whom do you imagine launched that DDoS attack against Wikileaks? Who would be interested in doing this? Who would sponsor such an act?

Was this initial DDoS attack on Wikileaks legal in your view? If it was, why?


It could have been the US government trying to delay the release of information from the leaked cables. Or anyone else wanting to do that. It was certainly wrong. I can't say if it was illegal or not, since it may have been done by the very entities that define "illegal."

Let us hope that these strategies do not escalate into a world wide web war that destroys the usefulness of the medium.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: inappropriate
by atriq on Thu 9th Dec 2010 05:11 in reply to "inappropriate"
atriq Member since:
2007-10-18

Yeah, except those companies effectively control whether or not wikileaks gets ahold of the funds that are donated to them. And by choosing to refuse transfering those donations, that is a blatent attack on the organization.

The DDoSing is hardly going to ruin any of these companies. But it is a reminder to them that caving to political pressure is still choosing a side.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: inappropriate
by MollyC on Thu 9th Dec 2010 05:44 in reply to "inappropriate"
MollyC Member since:
2006-07-04

Sadly, this site has become less and less about computer hardware/software technology, and more and more about politics. I think this site has lost its way.

Reply Parent Score: 2