• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

'Anonymous' hacktivists become web vigilantes

#61
I have to say, I'm with Kwesi in that I do not respect, approve of, or condone unlimited free speech, as is exemplified by the WBC.

I'm all for free speech - but within limits. If your intent is to communicate: well and good. If your intent is to harm or to incite harm: sit down and shut up.

I don't know about the rules down there in Yankeeland, but I seem to recall something in our legal codes about freedom of speech being limited in certain ways. Unfortunately, our criminal code happens to make an exemption on hate speech and incitement of hatred & genocide for religious persons...

...so, clearly, we need to reform that part of our criminal code, and toss these - individuals - into the sea.
 
#63
proxies-1.jpg
 
#68
jady said:
True but anonymous is a community and whereas not all of them are in agreement (as stated in the interview posted earlier) they accept the decisions. If not they disassociate themselves from the group.

For example, I personally do not agree with abortion but being an open minded, mature individual (at least I hope :D) I do not believe it should be illegal but a personal choice with ramifications (emotional, spiritual, or otherwise).

The WBC church is IMHO a heinous group of hate fueled psychos but I WILL defend their right to speak out in words and protests. I will also defend anyones right to disagree with them and take what ever steps they deem appropriate.

Both groups (the WBC and Anonymous) need to be accountable for their actions and so far Anonymous is the only one of the two to voluntarily do that. In the eyes of Anon they are just in their actions and I happen to agree but again that is a personal choice and I will accept any ramification of that opinion.

We live in a world with fabricated rights, people think they are owed a safe nice life just because of their country of birth. You do not have the right to not be attacked or murdered, there are merely ramifications for the attacker or murderer. Free speech is a right but there are no universal rights to prevent you from being attacked from what you have to say. Free speech only protects you from governmental silencing.

In a world of legal BS and loopholes I find Anon refreshing. A strong dose of reality for those who are not too grounded in it.

EDIT: I just re-read my post and it does seem a bit pessimistic. Maybe that comes with age *sigh* I am old.
Click to expand...

It's easy for anonymous to hold others accountable for their actions because it's by definition impossible for anon to be held accountable for their own. They're a group that works in the shadows and feces covered corner of the internet known as /b/ and don't have any kind of cohesive leadership structure which can be held accountable. Yea you can shut down 4chan, but they'll just go to 2chan or back to SA, and probably ruin that place again in the process.
 
#69
dj150888 said:
Not really, its mostly a bunch of guys from kids up to around my age with fairly average computer skills. Theres nothing difficult about DoS attacks.
Click to expand...

Mostly, yes. However...

Anonymous pwns security firm that probed its membership
Anonymous pwns security firm that probed its membership • The Register

Anonymous security firm hack used every trick in book
Anonymous security firm hack used every trick in book • The Register

How Anonymous hacked the security firm hacker
Little did we know what would be revealed when the HBGary Federal chief's boast that he'd cracked Anonymous rebounded
How Anonymous hacked the security firm hacker | Barrett Brown | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

How one man tracked down Anonymous—and paid a heavy price
How one man tracked down Anonymous—and paid a heavy price

Anonymous vs. HBGary: the aftermath
Anonymous vs. HBGary: the aftermath

HBGary Email Viewer: Portal
HBGary Email Viewer: Portal - AnonLeaks
A full .tar.gz archive of the website can be found here. The entire website is roughly over 9 gigs uncompressed.

MD5 checksum: 482bc5482a387041b9e1df9cf4e39e03
SHA1 checksum: cff35c791963997eccd4f5f3b750ed58ba98c498
Click to expand...

SPOOK COUNTRY 2011: HBGary, Palantir, and the CIRC
Invalid Link Removed

The HBGary Scandal: Using Counterterrorism Tactics on Citizen Activism
Link Removed

Invalid Link Removed

(Please scroll down for this video fom Feb. 24, 2011):
Now allow Stephen Colbert explain what happens when you cross this group of hacktivists. Like Bank of America's security firm HBGary stupidly tried.
Click to expand...
In Canada: Link Removed

Anonymous claims to have Stuxnet access
Online activists say they have details of worm that delayed Iran's nuclear programme
Anonymous claims to have Stuxnet access | Technology | guardian.co.uk

It may be prudent not to underestimate Anon's more skilled members.

Anonymous hack showed password re-use becoming endemic
Anonymous hack showed password re-use becoming endemic • The Register

--------

Anon hackers join Egyptian protests
Anon hackers join Egyptian protests • The Register
...Any restriction on free speech on the internet is anathema to Anonymous, prompting it to launch "Operation Egypt" (screeenshot of manifesto in blog post by Sophos here) - though DDoS attacks might themselves be seen as a denial of free speech, if you're inclined to complicate matters.

Volunteers are invited to download the Low Orbit Ion Cannon (LOIC) tool in order to take part in the attacks. If past experience is anything to go by, a number of participants are likely to be using networks of compromised machines to increase the potency of the junk traffic bombardment assaults.

All participants in the attacks risk the possibility of arrest, as a number of participants of previous attacks under the Anonymous banner in the Netherlands, Greece and the US know to their cost. ®
Click to expand...

It might be an idea to keep one's system and anti-malware defences up-to-date to avoid being unwittingly dragged into a DDoS attack....

Link Removed
How do I use a proxy with LOIC?

* You don't. If you do you will simply be DDoSing the proxy instead. Think of it as trying to shoot a RPG at your neighbor's house behind your own fence. You will just end up destroying your own fence.

What if I get caught and V&d?

* DDoS'ing used to be safe. You used to be able to excuse yourself by saying "My computer was incorporated into a botnet, and then my computer was a zombie," but now the veil afforded by anonymity and working in groups is no more, and you can blame the overreaction to Operation Payback for it. As The Register puts it: "The LOIC does a poor job of preserving users' anonymity, hence the risk for anyone using it that they may come to the attention of local law enforcement agencies." Please take this time to pray for your imprisoned brothers-in-arms.
Click to expand...

--------

Operation Payback
Operation Payback - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some earlier background on Anonymous
Project Chanology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
#70
while i agree with the whole 'defending someone's freedom of speech even if i disagree with it', i also have a point i'd like to bring up (more like an exploration on the "pro-Anon" views but i digress). i'd compare the world as a whole to a typical bar. you can say pretty much anything you want in a bar and no one will give you a second glance. now, let's say that this bar has equal representation of every demographic/nationality/ethnicity/etc. and next we'll introduce the "drunk bigot" (WBC). it's around midnight, and up to this point everyone's been having a good time (i was mackin' on Australia, of course. she's mine.). in comes WBC smelling of cheap beer and pee and the first words out of its* mouth is "YOU ALL SUCK!". this gets everyone's attention briefly. WBC orders a shot, then starts mouthing off again, "all you blacks, jews, asians, middle-easterners and homosexuals are going to hell! and you families of soldiers KIA- your soldier died because god hates **** and he was fighting for them!".

now, you can't just call the police and have them haul WBC away simply for that. as long as WBC isn't disturbing the peace/what-have-you, the most you can do is kick WBC out of the bar, in which case it'll go to another bar, or start preaching just outside the bar. however, we've missed one possibility. imagine now, that WBC is still in the bar and had just gone off on the previous rant. but then, instead of just letting it go, all the patrons (citizens) of the bar (world) decided they weren't having it, and decided to drag WBC to the alley out back and beat WBC senseless in a mob so WBC couldn't blame any one person.

granted, this is just what i would personally like to see happen.
TL;DR: feel free to go back to any bar anytime and say whatever you want. just know that if you mess with the wrong people you're gonna get your *** whooped. maybe then they'd stop preaching that stuff in all the bars and at least keep their 'word-spreading' escapades in reasonably good taste.

oh yea, i'm also kinda hoping that someone goes ape**** and takes 'em out, and i've never wished bad fortune on anyone.
 
#72
for once i'm actually proud of anon. still think it's funny how people play up the ****hole of /b/ as an "elite hacker" group, but some /b/tards actually have skills.

rules 1 and 2, yadda yadda, i'm not anon now so oh well.

i agree with kwesi. the pain and suffering that the wbc has caused is utterly wrong. if i went out and caused the turmoil to grieving parents that they have, i would be sued and locked up and my life would be destroyed. they hide behind a veil of religion, and thrive on it. In my opinion, they all deserve to be bound and gagged and thrown into the sewer system head first.

and eventually, somebody will take one for the team (read: the rest of the world) and do it to them. just a matter of time.

gotta say, i'm proud of anon taking a serious stand on something for once. saw some threads on /b/ yesterday and chuckled. today, i'm impressed.
 
#73
I normally am not a fan of annon... especially after the whole gawker media thing. The have, at many times in the past, gone after people who really havent deserved it.

This however, I am fine with. I greatly dislike the Westboro Baptist "Church." They are a bunch of classless nutjobs flaunting their unlimited free speech. Now, I am fine with freedom of speech, but protesting funerals? I would say that goes towards imposing upon the freedoms of that family.

God Speed, Anon
 
#75
Where's that Hank Hill picture when I need it. It is asinine that they would target a websites servers because they disagree with the message. I hate WBC and I'm sure they hate me but as long as they're in this country I will defend their right to say whatever they want, otherwise soon enough I won't be able to say what I want.

People nowadays think they have a right to not be offended.
 
#77
This the Anonymous Press Release (linked to in post #10 of this thread) dated Feb. 20, 2011:

Link Removed

Dear Phred Phelps and WBC Phriends,

So we've been hearing a lot about some letter that we supposedly sent you this morning. Problem is, we're a bit groggy and don't remember sending it. Our best guess is that you heard about us on that newfangled TV of yours and thought we might be some good money for your little church.

You thought you could play with Anonymous. You observed our rising notoriety and thought you would exploit our paradigm for your own gain. And then, you thought you could lure some idiots into a honeypot for more IPs to sue.

This is not so foreign to us; as you may have heard, we trade in Lulz. You just do not have enough to offer right now.

While Anonymous thanks you for your interest, and would certainly like to take a break and have some fun with you guys, we have more pressing matters to deal with at the moment.

But, we will keep this application on file, and will certainly contact you if any openings become available in future.

Next time, don't call us. We'll call you.

Additionally, as your "Press Release" failed to understand: *When Anonymous says we support free speech, we mean it. We count Beatrice Hall among our Anonymous forebears: "I disapprove of what
you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Do some among our number hate you and your cynical exploitation of your human rights for monetary gain? Of course. But the MoralFags are also the first to admit that they are, in fact, your rights to exploit.

In closing, let us assure you: We are not BAWWWING sissies, nor are we afraid of your false god; we're just really busy. Stay tuned, and we'll come back to play another day.
We promise.

To the Media: Just because it was posted on AnonNews doesn't mean every single Anon is in agreement, in fact in this case it doesn't even mean a single Anon is in agreement. Next time, if you could give us a few minutes to put all our paperwork in order, we'll be sure to let you know what we're up to. (LOL)

To Anonymous: It's a trap. They've got their ports wide open to harvest IPs to sue. Don't DDoS, and boycott Operation Westboro. If you really want to continue messing with them, just send them a few male prostitutes and faxes of goatse. Nothing more.

(Note: This letter was written by more than 20 Anons, at the same time, and none of them were inbred family members. Unlike that other, BLEEP "Press Release".)

We are Anonymous.
We are legion.
We do not forgive.
We do not forget.
Expect us.
Click to expand...

*EDIT: Bold type for emphasis.
 
#78
basstotheface said:
Where's that Hank Hill picture when I need it. It is asinine that they would target a websites servers because they disagree with the message. I hate WBC and I'm sure they hate me but as long as they're in this country I will defend their right to say whatever they want, otherwise soon enough I won't be able to say what I want.

People nowadays think they have a right to not be offended.
Click to expand...

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
 
#79
WickedPissah said:
First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
Click to expand...

Post 41
 
#80
dj150888 said:
I find it funny how quick some people in the states are to defend their constitutional rights when it affects them, but how they'll happily agree that other people should be denied those same rights...
Click to expand...

Yep. I admit to doing this and I'll probably do it more in the future. I'm perfectly ok with being a hypocrite in this scenario.

WickedPissah said:
First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
Click to expand...

In response to this, I'll repeat what I said earlier, I do not defend the WBCs right to free speech but there's not much I can do otherwise that would not cost me jail time and I have a life to live. I will and do readily defend groups that I am not apart of (LGBTQ community, legal immigrants, certain workers unions, etc.) because I believe that their campaigns, at the very worst, harm no one in any way. The WBC, on the other hand, while not doing any physical damage, has probably emotionally hurt quite a few people and done so deliberately and unapologetically. I just can't get along with the idea that they are allowed, by law, to abuse people that way. in my mind it goes far beyond simply being offensive. I absolutely refuse to defend the rights of a group that I detest and should some higher power decide to suspend their rights and sentence them all to few good punches in the face by family members of fallen soldiers that they've harassed, I'd give that power a nod, a smile, and an approving fistbump. They can charge them with being "relentless douchebags and heartless bastards of the highest order" or some similar title - anything indicative of the kind of scum these people are. Would I want the same done to me? Of course not, no one would. But that doesn't mean I can't wish it on someone else. I also don't go around spewing nothing but hate speech and generally being a giant dick to fellow human beings that don't happen to subscribe to my particular ideas so I'd like to think that less people would hate me. Again, call me selfish, call me a hypocrite, I know full well that I am both in this case ;).

The anti-protests against the WBC are just awesome. Within the law, that seems to be the most that we can do and I love every single person that has participated in them for what they have done. That said, I happily wait for the day when someone - anyone, decides to lay the smack down on any prominent figure in the WBC. I don't make it a habit of supporting violence but this would put a big, stupid grin on my face and make me feel all warm inside. And I'd have a bigger, stupider grin if he managed to get away from the cops afterwards. I'm sure he'd have to dodge a hailstorm of high-fives though ;).
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back