SCO.com Defaced 547
A whole slew of readers wrote:"According to an Image on the SCO website they own all our code and we shall pay them all our money. (found at Heise online (german IT news). " Yes, I'm sure this will help the whole legal case; defacement has always been such a valued piece of input in court *cough*.
Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:5, Insightful)
But when it comes down to it, this is not, even remotely close to what SCO are doing! SCO are thieves. Scum. They are wishing to use the legal syste, to gain and ownership and control and misuse the code of thousands of programmers, to scum off them and make profit on what is not theirs, they wish to lie and cheat and deprive the real workers and people playing by the rules of the benefits of their work, and they send letters to senators saying to make open source and linux and GPL unconstitutional??? This is not just a case of a minor disagreement between people about code this is SCO a thieving company wishing to exploit the works already done by so many people. Lying, theft, unconsciounable deceipt and exploitation
I think some graphics replaced on their website is really minor considering the filthy actions they are trying to do!!!. Really!!!
The best chat house on the web [tribbles.org]
Only business (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't take SCO's actions so personally.
Re:Only business (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Only business (Score:5, Funny)
And I hope the burglar doesn't take it personally when I shoot his dumb ass...
Re:Only business (Score:5, Insightful)
No matter whether you own the car or not, you end up involved in a legal squabble that costs you time and money.
Re:Only business (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Only business (Score:4, Funny)
Well at the very least it's quite revealing about the security (or lack thereof) of their OS !
I think they should pay themselves $690 and put Linux on their servers
Thomas-
Well ... (Score:4, Interesting)
Though I do expect that how much Darl paid for his license, is covered by a draconian non disclosure agreement, preventing you from ever revealing this information or any other arbitrary information that Sco may wish you to withold for the entire rest of your life. :D
Re:Only business (Score:4, Informative)
"It's only business, nothing personal"
-- Michael Corleone
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:5, Insightful)
You're right, but all that's besides the point:
1. This doesn't hurt SCO, or those behind SCO, in any way at all.
2. It doesn't help Linux, or those involved in Linux, in any way at all.
3. It does harm the image of Linux users.
4. It's illegal. Yeah, they're doing worse illegal stuff, so what? Vigilante justice is not the answer.
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:3, Insightful)
then vigilante justice will.
This Tuesday Night.... (Score:3, Funny)
Sounds like the tagline for some syndicated action flick.
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, it can't look good when the manufacturer of a commercial server operating system gets 0wned.
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:3, Insightful)
What does the defacement of SCO's website have to do with Linux users? Who says the vandal is a Linux user - and even if he is, why should that affect the 'image' of Linux users?
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:4, Insightful)
I use Windows and still hate SCO...
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:3, Interesting)
I disagree. It shows to me that either Sco no longer care about thier website or that the site is owned that they can't fix it.
Which brings into question the security in SCO.
Don't think it makes Linux users look like vandals. Just because a few might be acting the maggot doesn't mean every single user is the same. If that was the case every windows user would be a script kiddie spam master.
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:3, Insightful)
It's all about having people ask "Now why would they do that?" and the answer is written right there in the image.
Like the Osama video's describe why he did THAT but of course no one is allowed to see those.
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:5, Funny)
Yea it was totaly freanking usless and was actually hurtful to Linux to do anything to SCOs website.
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:4, Insightful)
You making the assumption that it was defaced by someone outside of SCO. They have been keeping their mouth shut lately, so what better way to stir up some noise but to deface the website themselves?
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:5, Funny)
Can you imagine the SCO office right now?
[lawyer 1] How do we change graphics on our that there webpage thing?
[lawyer 2] graphics?
[lawyer 1] the picture thingy
[lawyer 2] uh....
[lawyer 1] ok maybe we should have kept the IT dept... someone send an e-mail to India asking how please?
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:4, Funny)
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity!
=Smidge=
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:3, Insightful)
Defacing SCO's site doesn't do any damage to SCO, in fact the opposite because they can now cast "The Linux" community in a negative light. Amusing as the new logo is, someone has still most likely broken the law in placing it there and so SCO can say with some justification that some of their opponents are willing to even break the law to get at them.
So yes, it is
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:5, Funny)
It obviously was not a member of the Linux community, a fact which can be easily proven. The defaced image contains absolutely zero typos. Clearly, it was an inside job.
Re:Nothing for you to see here. Please move along (Score:3, Interesting)
"Just kidding!"
My personal hope is that they turn around and follow that up with:
"IBM didn't buy us, we used all our money on legal fees, we are now bankrupt, don't try to counter sue"
It may be defacement... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It may be defacement... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It may be defacement... (Score:3, Funny)
Or maybe they just don't use their website or read
hehe (Score:5, Funny)
See it before it goes away! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:See it before it goes away! (Score:5, Funny)
C:\>telnet www.sco.com 80
GET
JFIF d d Ducky Adobe d ä
Screenshot Mirror (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Screenshot Mirror (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Screenshot Mirror (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Screenshot Mirror (Score:5, Funny)
I just had to go back and look at the photo. You're right, there *is* a woman in the picture, all I'd noticed before was the tag...
I feel so pathetic, and I hate you for pointing it out.
Re:Screenshot Mirror (Score:3, Funny)
*ring ring*
HAL: Mr. Belford?
PLAGUE: My name is the Plague
HAL: Uh, Mr. The Plague, uh, something weird's happening on the net.
PLAGUE: As in what, you hapless techno-weenie?
HAL: Uh, the web server image subdirectory in the Gibson is working really hard. We got one person online, the workload is enough for like ten users. I think we've got a hacker.
PLAGUE: Never fear. I is here.
HAL: I've narrowed the activity to terminal 23.
PLAGUE: Let's echo 23, see
Decent (Score:5, Funny)
Bad hacker! Bad! (Score:5, Funny)
calling card (Score:4, Insightful)
And as with most hackers, (s)he left a calling card in the image. Can you spot it? The writing is on the wall, so to speak.
Re:Notice the whiteboard (Score:3, Funny)
I think it says: "hacked by realloc(". I wonder what the original looked like. Was the girl also in the original? I can't find it anywhere (maybe sco can't either).
Re:Notice the whiteboard (Score:4, Informative)
Now if it said... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Now if it said... (Score:4, Funny)
Look on there faces! (Score:4, Funny)
Course since I looked at the image, I am sure now they will try and charge me $699.00.
strings on the graphic (Score:4, Interesting)
$ strings webinar_land2-1.jpg | head -n 3
JFIF
Ducky
Adobe
Re:strings on the graphic (Score:3, Funny)
The image is already "tagged" 'Hacked by realloc(' in plain view.
Re:strings on the graphic (Score:5, Interesting)
"hacked by realloc(" and she's drawing the ")"
Re:strings on the graphic (Score:4, Funny)
i knew realloc(3) was a bad apple! sure, it seems so simple to use, but how many people handle the error case correctly? however, i never would have expected an ansi c function to deface a website like that. it's just so high level (and childish). that kind of behaviour you'd imagine seeing from a language like perl, perhaps. from stdlib, i expected better.
Re:strings on the graphic (Score:5, Informative)
JFIF means it's in JPEG File Interchange Format.
Adobe means it was created with an Adobe product.
Ducky is there because certain Adobe employees are obsessed with rubber ducks [realworldgolive.com].
Re:strings on the graphic (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:strings on the graphic (Score:3, Funny)
"This copy of photoshop cracked by reallock()"
Twice in one day. (Score:5, Informative)
Then that disappeared, but the graphic remained.
Re:Twice in one day. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Twice in one day. (Score:3)
tut tut.
I... (Score:5, Funny)
it's not surprising they didn't fix it yet... (Score:5, Funny)
As for me... (Score:3, Funny)
Another article (Score:5, Interesting)
Conspiracy theory of the day (Score:5, Funny)
This punchline... (Score:3, Funny)
Fixed (Score:5, Funny)
look at the blackboard in the background (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:look at the blackboard in the background (Score:5, Interesting)
-!- realloc [nobody@nightwish.wideopenbsd.org]
-!- ircname : h4h4@sco
-!- channels : @#sco
-!- server : irc.nac.net [I have a poisonous friend]
-!- End of WHOIS
Re:look at the blackboard in the background (Score:3, Funny)
Re:look at the blackboard in the background (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:look at the blackboard in the background (Score:5, Informative)
"realloc()" is the guy that did the hack. His tag was on the RedHat page on the SCO site last night before he obviously thought up something more amusing
that is elegant and leet... (Score:5, Insightful)
all I can say is that all you other ankle-biters out there need to learn from this....
posting defacings that look like viagra adds and filled with shouts and greetZ only makes you look like a very silly child with only script-kiddie skillz.
(oh and spelling that way makes you simply look like a wanna-be)
congrats to whoever did it. they needed to make it a little more discreet to see if it would have stayed there for a week or more...
Re:that is elegant and leet... (Score:3, Insightful)
8:35 and it's still there... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:8:35 and it's still there... (Score:3, Insightful)
I wouldn't expect to see anything change until at least 8am mountain time.
hacked by realloc? (Score:4, Insightful)
not that I encourage defacement (Score:3, Insightful)
e.
To quote the immortal words of Nelson.... (Score:3, Funny)
Openserver? (Score:5, Funny)
A little too open it would seem.
Re:Openserver? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Openserver? (Score:5, Funny)
Still defaced.. (Score:5, Funny)
Microsoft.com looks OK (Score:5, Funny)
Rumors for Nerds, stuff that doesn't matter (Score:3, Insightful)
I dislike SCO's business practices as much as the next
Yes I know there probably is no corrolation between some script kiddie and the Open Source movement. It's all impressions anyway.
Free clue for the would-be SCO hackers out there: SCO makes themselves look like idiots - very well I might add. They certainly don't need your help.
-FlynnMP3
I just tried... (Score:5, Funny)
Made me laugh, anyway.
Announced here yesterday (Score:5, Informative)
Did anyone other than me not notice when this was "announced" here on Slashdot in the e17 story?
Here. [slashdot.org]
Seems not to have gotten much attention, but it show's that kiddies can't help but crow, even anonymously.
Re:Announced here yesterday (Score:3, Insightful)
Next /. story: TSG issues subpeana to /. for server logs. (assuming TSG read /. ....yess.....)
(hmmmm....actually...no wait...they are very bored and haven't got anything better to do these days have they?...no money...no products (never had them)...no "IP" (or that)...nearly no lawsuit now....hmm could be....get /. to remove your comment ASAP...)
Why they haven't changed it (Score:5, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)
Pictures (Score:5, Funny)
http://www.sco.com/images/landing_pages/people.gi
I for one, am glad that they got h4x0r3d after publishing this smut.
Re:Pictures (Score:5, Funny)
(The "before" photo.)
Groklaw down....Counter-attack? (Score:3, Informative)
Maybe SCO have attacked Groklaw in order to get their own back (or maybe they attacked themselves and Groklaw because they were bored).
He was trying to tell them the weakness. (Score:4, Interesting)
Suspicious timing (Score:5, Interesting)
SCO has a November 30 filing deadline in the IBM case, on the IBM counterclaims. That's tomorrow. SCO has to reply to IBM's "You violated the GPL and you can't use IBM's code in Linux any more" counterclaim. This is the day SCO has to provide legal arguments to back up their "the GPL is unconstitutional/illegal/irrelevant" claim. Which they're not going to be able to do successfully. That's not the news SCO wants heavily publicized.
So the timing here is suspiciously convenient for SCO.
Inside job?
Re:Slow aswell... (Score:5, Funny)
When they start? I'm already getting the full service.
As a completely unbiased and disinterested observer, I bought a SCO license to see what the fuss was about. Since then NOBODY has sued me for anything, least of all for violating any code SCO might possibly have in the Linux kernel (including any Linux kernels in alternate universes). You can't argue with service like that. I'd recommend it to anyone.
Business proposal... (Score:3, Funny)
Not a defacement (Score:4, Funny)
Why do you think this is a defacemant?
It's their new business model (you insensitive clods)
Re:What changed? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Damn - it won't go "Slashdotted" (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Ah (Score:4, Funny)