LulzSec Phone-Bombs FBI and Blizzard 404
Revotron writes "Anonymous hacker group LulzSec has begun to harness the power of the crowd in their latest griefing attempts. After a day of numerous DDoS attacks on a handful of famous MMOs, LulzSec's phone lines lit up with an estimated 20 calls per second. Using a fairly simple phone redirect, they sent all of their incoming calls to various offices, among them the FBI office in Detroit, Blizzard Customer Support, online retailer Magnets.com, and most recently, the corporate offices of HBGary." Update: It looks like they also brought down the CIA website tonight, but it is up now.
False flag (Score:5, Insightful)
Wankers (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Balls of steel (Score:5, Insightful)
Doesn't take much courage to throw a rock into a window when you're wearing a ski mask and there's no one around.
Re:Wankers (Score:5, Insightful)
Justice? I don't think they were ever about justice. Their name says it all: they're in it for the lulz.
Re:Balls of steel (Score:5, Insightful)
Being behind a ski mask (7 proxies) doesn't really mean much unless you're outside the country, what with all the taps the NSA have, I'm sure if they wanted them gone it wouldn't take much.
Re:Wankers (Score:5, Insightful)
Slashdot circa 1999: "Free Kevin Mitnick!"
Slashdot circa 2011: "These damn hackers are interfering with my WoW time."
Re:Wankers (Score:3, Insightful)
So screwing over WOW players trying to get customer support is now "justice"? What a bunch of wankers.
Can we stop giving these jokers the attention they crave for every little idiotic stunt they pull? Every 10th story seems to be about LulzSec. I'm not really sure it's even news anymore. These guys are like internet trolls and will continue until they either don't get the attention they want or they get their asses arrested.
Re:And in other news (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:first post (Score:5, Insightful)
It was... "interresting" in the start.
But that has worn off long ago.
They're not doing anything intelligent or justifiable; they're just bullies out to hurt easy targets.
Re:Balls of steel (Score:1, Insightful)
But no, they would rather punk on the defenseless.
If the FB fucking I is defenseless then a lot of people need firing.
Possible? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:False flag (Score:5, Insightful)
It makes perfect sense. They're children, looking for attention. And they're getting tons of it. I wouldn't go so far as to say news outlets should stop reporting on it, as that gets into censorship territory, and it IS newsworthy to a point, and yet if they knew that the only ones paying any attention to them were law enforcement, and the only reason they hadn't gotten caught yet is because they're waiting to collect enough evidence to ensure the sentences last multiple decades... maybe it would stop all on its own.
As for being out of reach, NOBODY is out of reach. Even if a country is unlikely to allow extradition, consider the fact that if some small country was causing an abnormal amount of grief for the rest of the world, surrounding allies might consider cutting off all internet access to prevent it. Just something to consider.
-Restil
Re:Wankers (Score:4, Insightful)
Frankly, with the latest series of indiscriminate attacks it's starting to look less like griefers run amok and more like false-flag psyops run to reduce support for hacktivism through guilt-by-association and create fertile grounds for some new draconian legislation.
Great, I can see where this is going... (Score:5, Insightful)
"Lawmakers today announced new legislation that will take away more of our civil liberties, in response to recent attacks by the groups LulzSec and Anonymous."
Re:LulzSec disables CIA web server, too! (Score:5, Insightful)
One thing is certain. The crackers in LulzSec are damned good, OR they have considerable "inside" help at the CIA and FBI. Or BOTH!!
Or the CIA doesn't use the public facing web server for anything important, so they didn't bother securing it very well.
Re:Possible? (Score:5, Insightful)
What principle is that? The LALALALAICANTHEARYOU principle?
Re:Great, I can see where this is going... (Score:3, Insightful)
What "civil liberties" are you worried about losing? I'm not aware of any that explicitly grant you the ability to phone-bomb some organization. Are you still pissed that you cannot send spam faxes to people?
Re:Possible? (Score:4, Insightful)
The Do Not Feed the Trolls principle.
Re:Wankers (Score:3, Insightful)
Looks more like a riot, to me. Except on the internet.
Re:Seems like... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:first post (Score:3, Insightful)
Fucked (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Great, I can see where this is going... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not generally the offense that's the problem, it's the investigative techniques involved. Nobody had an issue with the NSA investigating terrorism, but most of us have a problem when they claim to need warrantless wiretaps and the CIA need for black sites to do interrogations.
Re:Balls of steel (Score:5, Insightful)
Better for the Lulz than the Stash (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why you mad tho? (Score:4, Insightful)
Interfering with someone else's electronics is in fact a serious crime in most places. The Internet is primarily privately run these days, so you might find it strange but private companies' resources being misused is not the same as dancing like an idiot in a public park. Its a direct assault on private property, like your examples.
Re:first post (Score:5, Insightful)
Thus anyone who breaks into your house and vandalizes it is serving a purpose, since they're demonstrating that your security could be better.
What is the state of the art security to prevent being phone bombed other than by disconnecting your phone service? What security weakness are they revealing here?
Old criminal line "They are asking for it". (Score:3, Insightful)
A rapist: "She was wearing a provocative outfit! Anyone could see that she was asking for it".
Now these script kiddies: "Hey, we broke in and found plaintext! Sony was asking for it."
Same logic. "It's not my fault, you did not prevent me from committing a crime so it is your fault. I am not responsible for my criminal actions, you are. You are also responsible for the third-parties I hurt because you did not adequately prevent me from doing it".
Re:Great, I can see where this is going... (Score:2, Insightful)
And all LulzSec is doing is violating other people's rights, such as the right to enjoy your property without it being broken into, copied, and posted in public for all to see.
Your right to swing your fist does not permit you to punch me without consequences. Your right to free speech does not permit you to slander me without consequences. Your right to free activity on the internet does not permit you to interfere with my activity on the internet.
Any government action taken against LulzSec will be taken in defense of the rights inherent to all human beings. I for one cannot wait to see these smug cowards forced to stand up in court and take responsibility for their sociopathic behavior.