Hacker Group LulzSec Challenges FBI 308
Tiek00n writes "Hacker Group 'LulzSec' has gained some attention recently for their hacks of PBS and Sony. Their most recent target: FBI affiliate Infragard. The group claims, 'It has come to our unfortunate attention that NATO and our good friend Barrack Osama-Llama 24th-century Obama have recently upped the stakes with regard to hacking. They now treat hacking as an act of war. So, we just hacked an FBI affiliated website (Infragard, specifically the Atlanta chapter) and leaked its user base. We also took complete control over the site and defaced it...'"
Act of war. (Score:4, Insightful)
So it's clear from the emails leaked that the US of A just started a war with Libya.
Clear acts of War (Score:3, Insightful)
I wonder if the people of the USA have any legal recourse to arrest our own government for illegal acts of war since the evidence is out in the open, not to mention violating human rights by attempting to maintain slave labor conditions (The recent Levi Strauss/Haiti revelation) for profit.
Oh, and shall we drop on charges of illegal renditions of other countries leaders (how do you think Haiti happened?)
Re:Act of war. (Score:2, Insightful)
What do you mean, "started"? USA has been bombing Libya for weeks already.
You don't honestly expect slashbots to be aware of what's happening in the world around them, do you? And besides, as everyone knows, they're NEVER wrong...
Re:Haha (Score:3, Insightful)
How is that hypocrisy? If you define hacking as an attack on military or civilian infrastructure, then you're playing with the big boys. And those big boys get to define it as anything from a teenaged prank to a full out declaration of war -- based upon who attacked and what the consequences of those actions are. In a lot of respects it's no different than launching an assault by good old fashioned physical means.
So if you're treating this as a joke, grow up. These are real actions with real consequences.
Amusing signature (Score:3, Insightful)
"Now we are all sons of bitches , Lulz Security". I approve of the Manhattan project reference.
Re:Clear acts of War (Score:3, Insightful)
There are measures which can lead to a recall of government leaders. Problem is, you need to organize and the moment you do, somehow you end up on no-fly and other lists and if you wish to "legally" assemble into a group, you have to ask permission.
Re:Just a bully (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:These guys are beyond stupid. (Score:4, Insightful)
Those guys are faceless and nameless. We won't know who disappeared when they disappear. We will just know they disappeared.
Re:Just a bully (Score:3, Insightful)
You're right, they are bullying Sony. However, as some might attest, once someone stands up to the bully, the bully generally chills out, or shows its true colors. Sony was a bully initially-- and hackers have reduced them. Sony, however, has not and will not learn the error of its ways. Call it my opinion, but if, after the first attack, Sony got all its network and use back, do you really think they'd change? Based on what we've seen in the past, they'd become only more draconian. Sony is more like a gang member.
You mess with Sony, they lean on government (the gang.) The US then starts subduing the neighborhood by force, and threat, and (pick your rules, restrictions, and/or persecution). So the US wins and the company is finally restored-- do you really expect them to be kinder? Gentler? More understanding?
I don't like LulzSec, personally. I don't like what they're dong to everyone else-- all we end users. It tells me just what they think of 'ordinary people', but, is that unique for a hacker? Break the law and get around security enough, and you feel you have more power than most-- not condoning their activities, just explaining it. The government doesn't think they have to abide by their own laws either. How is that much different? Rather than posting user info on a website, they store it all in searchable databases for future use. Not much better, IMHO.
Personally, as one of those 'end user' people, I could care less about this action. The USA screws me. Sony screws me. Now LulzSec is screwing me. However, when they all start trying to screw each other, I don't get screwed so often, or so hard. Most of us know how easy it is to get info about people over the internet. So long as I'm online, I have two considerations-- do I want the government snooping in my stuff, or a group of hackers? One gives a shit about me and all my actions and will bring it up against me at the next available opportunity. The other doesn't, but might. I'd rather the government leave the internet entirely. They won't. Therefore, I'd rather have two, or three "gangs" in control, or fighting for control. While they're so busy fighting each other, I can take a moment to go fishing, or post on facebook (don't actually have one, but), or buy some bleach without the tag that I might use it for meth or a bomb or something other than making my socks white. So in this case, I'll root for LulzSec while I go about my normal life. In fact, I think I will go fishing.
Re:Bring it down! Bring it all down! (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't put that all on the shoulders of the government. The corporations want all of our information and metrics as well, so that they can better tailor their advertising, marketing, and sales. Not to mention that information is very, very valuable and people need to realize that in many cases we're the products being sold. Our information is the product.
It's only an act of war if done by a foreign power (Score:4, Insightful)
I mean, right?
Let's say a citizen, or many citizens, are shot. If it's done by another US citizen, it's murder, a crime, and not an 'act of war.' If it's done by some organization, it's homebrew terrorism. If it's done by another country, it's an act of war. That doesn't seem like a wholly unreasonable stance to hold, although it certainly can be debated, I guess.
I don't know, are these people going for the "That's a ridiculous stance on hacking, what are you gonna do, declare war on US?? How ludicrous! See, hacking is not an act of war" angle to this whole thing?
If so.....lulz.
Re:Haha (Score:5, Insightful)
Anonymous Coward Comment Ratio (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Just a bully (Score:2, Insightful)
I hate to use the T word, but this clearly is dictionary-definition terrorism: attacking a soft target in order to bully them into falling in line with your demands.
What is the reported damage to Sony customers? So what if their account details are posted? Every credit union, every other large company that they do business with, every government agency that they've ever interacted with on a federal, state, and local level, every intelligence agency that vacuums up mind-boggling amounts of internet data a day, every Facebook friend, etc. can find that info rather easily. There's literally hundreds, if not thousands, of people that can find out that info about Sony customers, yet no one seems to worry about that. Yet when the hoi-poloi can see it (if they're at all interested), suddenly it's OMG!!1 TERRRORISTS!!!!
Secondly, what demands has Lulzsec made?
Re:These guys are beyond stupid. (Score:4, Insightful)
As long as these guys don't brag about it openly in pubs, I bet many will never get caught.
You pull at the loose threads until the whole fabric begins to unravel.
I mean, c'mon - they couldn't find Osama Bin Laden when he was living in the same house for many years - what makes you think they'll magically be able to find hackers?
The hacker is an adolescent braggart who thinks he is bullet-proof.
Osama's father made billions on construction projects for the Saudi royal family. Osama's share was worth $100-300 million. That bought a lot of protection these hackers do not have.
But Osama is still dead.
Re:Just a bully (Score:5, Insightful)
Yaknow, a lot of people can--and did--defend the Sony hacks. Some could probably defend the "FBI" hack, though when I hear words like "FBI-affiliated" I just cringe at what they're hiding behind that term.
But how do you defend hacking PBS? These people are obviously just scumbags with too much time on their hands, and articles like this are exactly what they want. Ignore them. They're not worth the attention.
Re:Bring it down! Bring it all down! (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't put that all on the shoulders of the government. The corporations want all of our information and metrics as well, so that they can better tailor their advertising, marketing, and sales.
The government, under sealed subpoenas, requests that information from the corporations.
Then argues in court that if those dockets were unsealed, the corporations might feel pressure to resist government requests for information.
So, while the corporations aren't entirely blameless for giving up the goods without a fight, the government is actively aggressing against its people and refusing us the ability to fight back.
Re:Just a bully (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Haha (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Haha (Score:4, Insightful)
Ah, but see - the difference between "Communists", "Terrorists" and "Hackers" is that the first two didn't really speak English, and they didn't ridicule their targets. If, instead of flying planes into the WTC on 9/11, the terrorists had just made the airplanes do loop-de-loops to show how useless airline security was, you can bet that our response would have been significantly different.
The outcome of ridicule, which seems to be the future, is much different than the outcome of direct confrontation.
govt secrecy has killed more people than terrorism (Score:4, Insightful)
the 20th century should have been the end of legitimate arguments for overreaching state power, govrment secrecy, and police states, with (at least) 50 million people directly killed in concentration & labor camps for the benefit of a bureaucracy.
compare that to a few thousand people killed by terrorism, it doesnt even begin to compare. we should be locking up anyone who even approaches moving in a dictator-ship like direction, because the threat of terrorism is just about as dangerous as the threat of perscription medication or tornados, while the threat of overreaching government is as real as the bricks at auschwitz.
information about bio, chem, and nuke weapons is not rocket science. building a nuclear bomb is not rocket science. its nuclear science and its not that hard. the only hard part is gathering enough fissile material.
but governments are paying more attention to frisking babies than to keeping tight controls on uranium mines.
there was a whole warehouse full of yellowcake sitting in Iraq before the war - the us barely even tried to secure it.