Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 10th Feb 2011 10:45 UTC
Internet & Networking Absolutely fantastic article over at Ars about a guy trying to hunt down Anonymous - which cost him and his company dearly. "Aaron Barr believed he had penetrated Anonymous. The loose hacker collective had been responsible for everything from anti-Scientology protests to pro-Wikileaks attacks on MasterCard and Visa, and the FBI was now after them. But matching their online identities to real-world names and locations proved daunting. Barr found a way to crack the code. [...] But had he?" A comment to the article says it best: "Personally, I'm rooting for Anonymous. I may not care for their attitude or their methods sometimes, but I think a little fear and caution on the worst excesses of those who would impair our rights is good thing." Governments and companies should fear the people - not the other way around.
Thread beginning with comment 461819
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Governments
by AaronD on Thu 10th Feb 2011 16:33 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Governments "
AaronD
Member since:
2009-08-19

" I rather their actions be childish than physically harmful.

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

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Governments
by Laurence on Thu 10th Feb 2011 17:54 in reply to "RE[4]: Governments "
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Did anyone die?

That's a somewhat extreme position to take. There are several magnitudes of "bad" before you reach murder.

Did anyone loose a drop of blood? Did anyone even scrape a knee?

I'd sooner have a "scraped knee" or cut arm than lose my job because the company I worked for had to lay off staff due to the cost of virtual attacks.

Wounds heal themselves however bills don't.

Were any buildings burnt down?

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

Buildings can be rebuilt. Smashed windows can be replaced and so forth.
Yes it might place a financial burden, but so does a loss of virtual data.

Your comments are as if we, as a global population, have somehow forgotten how to build and repair tactile property that we once constructed.

Let us keep "virtual" in perspective.

I am. given the high value and global dependance on "data" - which essentially is just a virtual commodity, I'd say "virtual" attacks can be pretty serious.

We live our whole lives dictated by the strength of the local and global economies - all of which is essentially just a virtual number.

Our salaries are calculated virtually on computers then sent "virtually" to other computers (often, for example, via BACS). It's all a virtual process. Nothing physical has traded.
Our modern day communication (e-mail, text, social networks and even phone calls) are all handed "virtually" by computers. We don't use carrier pidgens nor smoke signals - we depend upon virtual bits on a computer to be traded, or in the case of phone calls, the telephone exchange software to correctly relay the number I dialled to the requested destination. Again, it's all a virtual process. We no longer have telephonists working behind huge banks of physical sockets using jumper leads to make a phone connection. A have computers to do this virtually instead.

Nearly every single aspect of our modern day lives is dictated by computers. So don't give me this bullshit that "virtual" data is trivial and irrelevant.

In fact, if anyone would spout that crap, the person I'd least expect to hear it from would be a geek on an IT news forum.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[6]: Governments
by umccullough on Thu 10th Feb 2011 18:14 in reply to "RE[5]: Governments "
umccullough Member since:
2006-01-26

In fact, if anyone would spout that crap, the person I'd least expect to hear it from would be a geek on an IT news forum.


As a geek in an IT news forum, I'm here to warn you that our lives are being run for us these days - we have little control over what happens, and we better prepare for the worst - as this virtual world that runs us is more dynamic than we can imagine. Can you sustain your own life daily without the internet and all the convenience that it provides?

I'm not being alarmist, just realistic, too many people have become dependent and complacent.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[5]: Governments - virtual
by jabbotts on Thu 10th Feb 2011 20:37 in reply to "RE[4]: Governments "
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

Sure, let's keep "virtual" in perspective; are all staff at the affected companies decision makers deserving of criminal attack?

I mean, this is excessive.. even as a network attack it's excessive. It'd probably put a smaller company close to bankruptcy or at least shatter it's ability to do business with others. Yeah, I know.. the plan was to cause the company harm but how many of the employed staff deserved the harm? Deleting backups is far beyond just affecting Barr (the target of the attacks).

This was children running rampant on keyboard courage. This was group-think maliciousness not responsible political outcry. Remember it's about the LOLs.. the kids join into the actions that get them the best LOLs not that produce the most effective protests.

If you really think this kind of virtual attack is no biggy.. please post your personal contact information, internet connection details and details for any connected systems in your home. If you'll just sign this waver, we'll get under way and you can show how it's no biggy to be digitally brutalized.

Reply Parent Score: 1