OSNews

Yea, me too. Unfortunatly that's a bit of a false dicotomy, isn't it? DDOS attacks would seem to fall into both categories.

Then again, I suppose it it's still better than physical violence.

Edited 2011-02-10 14:30 UTC

It's akin to real-world protests, like blockades of factories or government buildings and such. Perfectly allowed, and a key power of the people in ensuring their well-being. I see no reason why real-world protests should be accepted and protected by law, while digital protests are not.

In this day and age, "Virtual" attacks are just as severe as causing physical damage.

Let me quote from this very article:


That's a pretty harsh form of "protest" if you ask me.

Edited 2011-02-10 15:28 UTC

In this day and age, "Virtual" attacks are just as severe as causing physical damage. "

Did anyone die? Did anyone loose a drop of blood? Did anyone even scrape a knee? Were any buildings burnt down?

Let us keep "virtual" in perspective. Physical damage is several magnitudes worse than any kind of virtual damage as anyone in any of the world's hotspots can attest.

Edited 2011-02-10 16:35 UTC

In this day and age, "Virtual" attacks are just as severe as causing physical damage.

Let me quote from this very article:

But within a day, Anonymous had managed to infiltrate HBGary Federal's website and take it down, replacing it with a pro-Anonymous message ("now the Anonymous hand is bitch-slapping you in the face.") Anonymous got into HBGary Federal's e-mail server, for which Barr was the admin, and compromised it, extracting over 40,000 e-mails and putting them up on The Pirate Bay, all after watching his communications for 30 hours, undetected. In an after-action IRC chat, Anonymous members bragged about how they had gone even further, deleting 1TB of HBGary backup data.

They even claimed to have wiped Barr's iPad remotely.

The situation got so bad for the security company that HBGary, the company which partially owns HBGary Federal, sent its president Penny Leavy into the Anonymous IRC chat rooms to swim with the sharks—and to beg them to leave her company alone.

That's a pretty harsh form of "protest" if you ask me. "

The question is not whether it's harsh, but whether it's justified. HBGary may be 'private industry', but the fact that it is taking public funds makes it complicit in the war against personal privacy and government transparency--and this war is directly linked to the fact that Americans are being sent into harm's way in the Middle East--for what, exactly? Wikileaks and Anonymous represent an attempt to restore the balance in a time when both governments and the financial elite* are showing complete disregard for the private citizen. Comparable times in history show that sooner or later there is a popular revolt, and there is always violence of some sort. Those who do not learn from history...

*Banking has always been a part of war--in fact often an instigator of it. Also see: bailouts, currency manipulation, debt abuse... sooner or later the hard-working private citizen needs to realize he is being used.

Bah, standard silly-kids script-kiddie bragging.
Come back when you can do something constructive with your talents Anonymous, presuming you have any (which is very much in doubt).

I'd prefer effective mature actions. DDoS is really not an acceptable and effective response. It'll only end in tears and won't further the activist goals claimed under the name of the attack.

Those two are not mutually exclusive.