LulzSec, the hacking and prankster collective that has attacked the US Senate, Sony, and the Fox and PBS television networks, has struck again, claiming it was behind an assault that took down the website for the Central Intelligence Agency. Attempts to access cia.gov on Wednesday afternoon were met with only limited success. …
...If these guys aren't getting waay too much attention as of late.
And quite frankly I also think something stinks here. Just like this latest one: "Lulzsec claims" which is basically all they've been doing as of late and the "proof" they managed to produce up until now hasn't been very convincing.
The Sony hack? A torrent filled with uncompressed txt files while even stating that it was sooo much data. Any idea how much you can compress that shit with rar or such ? And when looking at the data it looked like something straight from a pwd dictionary.
Truth be told I haven't looked in the other data from other hacks being published; but I did read several stories about other "more professional" IT'ers who also mentioned having some serious doubts if the material was actually acquired as claimed, due to the rather "simple form" of said data. Just like the Sony hack...
And now when they started taking "requests" they're (allegedly) down to doing that which any scriptkiddie can do: DDoS. And its very easy to claim that you took down a few websites, but for all us outsiders it could be caused by just about anything.
Still, true or not; all skepticism aside there is one thing which I truly hope some people take some learning from; the overall security as well as the interest for it on the Internet stinks.
There are very VERY few ISP's which will actually /respond/ by taking specific action against a compromised server (after having received a very detailed report with both the hacking attempts, the traces being done and all evidence pointing to a specific server). In most cases they do absolutely nothing, perhaps apart from sending said client a new check so that he's bound to renew his subscription.
And as long as this phenomenon remains so will groups like these.
I bet it is a lot safer targeting the CIA, than Scientology.
I have a feeling there are going to be some "suicides" among this group of geniuses. The CIA isn't known for due process or playing by the rules.
The CIA isn't going to be fucking with a bunch of idiots that want to play with a computer between goat porn masturbation sessions. And Bubba at Leavenworth is going to LOVE the rest of them. Quite literally.
have watched to much Bourne...
He does have a point, though
These guys are becoming too impressed with themselves, and a truly pissed off government agency does have a shocking amount of resources to waste on pet projects.
The two do not make for a good combination. Nobody is invincible - and that includes LulzSec.
the CIA, and there record for getting things done!
If the CIA has a record of anything getting done, someone screwed up!
I reckon they're f**ked.
Nobody hits a string of the world's most powerful corporations and intelligence agencies and gets away without some reprisal.
They probably could have gotten away with it if they just kept a low profile after the Sony hack, but now they've drawn too much attention to themselves.
Re: Idiots and They're Screwed
+1 from me.
These people need a stiff talking to. Taking on the CIA is not a wise move.
Perhaps Gary McKinnon could do them a favour and explain what happens when the US authorities get their teeth stuck into someone.
Just to be 100% clear, I am not expressing an opinion one way or the other re Gary and his activities. But he does have rather a unique insight into the personal consequences of such actions and Lulz could do well to learn from his experiences.
...weird target list
and then chased it up with CCP, minecraft, and... the escapist?
the DDoS stuff is kids play, and its kids play to guard against for any company big enough to take its own hosting/web presence in-house. I dont understand the intent, though. you push over a couple of soft targets and the site pops back up after a reset. maybe a long rest, as admins everywhere go "hey, while we're offline, can we just pop a few pieces of code in and swap out some drives, maybe do a little rack maintenance...."
I dont get it. DDoSs arent the wrecking balls they used to be, and going for the CIA using something like LOIC is just going to result in loners, misfits, and 13 year old kids getting the no-knock warrant treatment whilst the crafty 'lets just fuck with people' goons with the STORM clusters just sit there and giggle.
seriously. whats the point?
"and then chased it up with CCP, minecraft, and... the escapist?"
..more like 4chan than CCC.
Consider this - a group springs from nowhere in a short time and starts attacking prominent government and corporate sites and is given wide publicity.
Then the backlash and the crackdown begins - "hacker" becomes as dirty word as "paedophile" and extra-legal action is taken against anyone on the pretext of painting that label on them.
I'll predict that you'll find that, when the dust settles, Lulz are actually covert agents of the Statsi State rather than the enemies of it they appear to be.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Hacker is already...
...a dirty word. Even the BBC don't know what a hacker actually is. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13605629
Hacker != Cracker.
@"Who gains" & "covert agents"
I very much agree about who gains and some kind of covert agents. A targeted protest against Sony is one thing, but something about what is going on here really is starting to stink.
For a start we have all heard a lot of political FUD rhetoric recently about how they hate hackers and how important the governments consider cyber security, with some of them even going as far as saying they considering hacking an act of war?!
On top of this we all know Police forces use covert officers which was very much brought to the publics attention in the case of Pc Mark Kennedy. (So people would have to be very closed minded to refuse to believe covert officers exist). Also these covert officers can often act like ring leaders, even going as far as recruiting new members and then going even further by egging them on to commit crimes (and in Pc Mark Kennedy's case, he done all of this and even hired minibuses to take them to protests!). It shows how far covert officers will go. e.g.
Therefore its not difficult to see (as Governments have shown throughout history) they have very little morality in their covert operations which are very often designed to manipulate public perception to justify their public actions with secret behind the scenes manipulations. All this sudden increase in high profile hacking is ideal for them to hit the public soon with demands for greater Orwellian control over the Internet, which is something they have repeated shown they really want.
Oh well only time will tell. At least one good thing about all this is that it'll force more bosses to pay to improve their security now rather than waiting to be hit then closing the door later, but even that would be seen as an additional benefit in the twisted minds of government behind the scenes manipulations.
Something really stinks with what is going on now. I'm just waiting for the other shoe to drop, so to speak, waiting to see what kinds of government Orwellian plans they have "to save us all" ... Yeah right, more like more state control for them. After all, they can't have an Internet that is uncontrolled, otherwise more protesters my keep exposing government lies on the Internet and so the Internet could easily end up helping to overthrow more corrupt two faced governments.
WHO CARES ABOUT THE CIA!!!!!
THEY TOOK DOWN EVE AND MINECRAFT!!!!
my life is over :(
oh waite they are back faulse alarm
I suppose giving a government an excuse to crack down and put in a set of laws with little opposition is a realistic enough scenario, particularly after this group have had such a string of high profile "hacks".
No chance to back out now that the CIA have them in their crosshairs, I suppose.
Ring, ring, ring, ring
Hey Buddy, open your curtains and look out the window.
No need for black helecopters.
Once a few of their members post "The police are letting me post this to tell you they've arrested me." the rest will shut up and do their homework.
Yawn.. bored now.
Does anyone else think this is reminiscent of a teenager burning things to get attention from their parents?
is life so empty?
Don't they have anything better that they can be doing with their lives?
it's like those people who go around posting their inane opinions on news sites...
I mean, what a waste of time, like anyone cares about their thoughts!
and I thought I was wearing a tin-foil cap. They are not going to do anything dodgy to any of these they'll turn them straight over to the local police and it'll go through the courts as usual. They might get a bit of a heavy hand to make an example out of, but that'll be all!
Re: Oh please...
"and I thought I was wearing a tin-foil cap. They are not going to do anything dodgy to any of these they'll turn them straight over to the local police and it'll go through the courts as usual. They might get a bit of a heavy hand to make an example out of, but that'll be all!"
...and Bradley Manning is just a Kafkaesque figment of some geeks' imagination. 'I see what you did there'.
Bradley Manning is a scapegoat for an insecure military. The big issue with Manning is that he is in the military, he signed his rights away (pretty much). If he was a civvy I reckon they would have a much harder time trying to do what they are doing.
Also, what he is supposed to have done is completely different, he didn't deface some website. He leaked classified documents when he had a sworn duty to protect them, now, what Manning did wasn't morally wrong (my opinion considering content) he did break the law and he should get his day in court like anyone else.
But this is beside the point and not on subject...
"But this is beside the point and not on subject.."
YMLT think so, but it ain't so. This is purely a matter of security and how organisations, including state organisations, respond to breaches of security. There will be trouble and, as has already been pointed out, Gary McKinnon has been facing the same Kafkaesque nightmare that Manning is in (not that I sympathise or detract from either case).
My choice of language, 'Kafkaesque', was deliberate and reflected the range of responses and incidents that have thus far been seen; add arrests throughout Europe and we can see very clearly that these people will be taken seriously, whether or you or they like it or not. No excuses will wear. Guaranteed.
I thought this was about Lulzsec and the CIA hack. I do think there may be a thread somewhere about Manning!
"I thought this was about Lulzsec and the CIA hack. I do think there may be a thread somewhere about Manning!"
You cannot take these things in isolation, unless of course you have been living in a shack in the middle of nowhere. These are breaches of security on US government facilities, and the US government alone have made it plain that they are going to act harshly where these things are concerned.
Also there is an international trend for governments to deal with these things with expedition and, it would seem, fairly harshly. There have been arrests in Turkey, Spain, the UK and of course the US for the DDoS attacks. This trend matches the trend amongst private individuals to attack targets like the CIA, the US forces, Sony and Sega et al.. Perhaps you have forgotten. Perhaps you don't know why the trend matches the attacks. I won't be at all surprised.
You may want to compartmentalise these things, and avoid acknowledging that these things fit into a general category of security breaches (of government facilities and large corporations), and that such behaviours invite harsh responses, but you are not doing a very good job of arguing it in public. In fact your attempts are piss poor. Weak. Risible. You can bet your life that Sony, Sega and any other economic unit that's been attacked are in contact with int and security agencies across the world. If you think otherwise then I'm afraid you may have a problem with perception and addition. Of course your arguments could merely be disingenuous. I'll leave that bit for you to work out.
I'm well aware that anyone caught will be dealt with harshly. My point is, I doubt we are going to see a spate of "suisides" or hit attributed to this!
"I'm well aware that anyone caught will be dealt with harshly."
"They might get a bit of a heavy hand to make an example out of, but that'll be all!"
"My point is, I doubt we are going to see a spate of "suisides"[sic] or hit attributed to this!"
That's not the point that you made though, is it? What's this now:
Hmm. I love the smell of primer cord in the morning.
That was the whole point I was making...
we are not going to see a spate of sponsored assasinations over this. The most that will happen is some harsh jail time!
Not like any of this equals the apocolypse or anything.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13848510 (now that is funny)!
Re: That was the whole point I was making...
Uhuh. I think that you are losing track of your warblings. I hadn't said anything about assassinations, this is a giant non sequitur emitted from which of your body parts I know not. Oh, and when I see spelling errata such as 'apocolypse' I suspect that I am interacting with juveniles, especially if they post up a link that I already had in the post to which they are responding... ...and in so doing find it funny that a government site has been attacked.
That's not funny, but a start in sorting out the mess. (Notice who was cooperating with whom.) Hopefully the investigators were investigated with LARTs ( http://catb.org/jargon/html/L/LART.html )
Well, the post that you originally responded to by me might have something to do with that. Which by the way was a comment on other posts throughout the thread alluding to such.
Suspect away my friend. So I tend to write things quickly and not proofread. Usually because I'm to busy and can't be asked. Even with the spelling errors, did you still understand what word I was going for?
Now that you seem to have digressed into light ad hominem attacks by picking out minutiae. I would like to ask. If you are so superior, why do you keep responding?
Different people find different things funny, you obviously don't and I respect that. I would also like to point out that I would find it just as funny when whoever was responsible is caught.
Paragraph 1; nonsense. That would more likely show that you read more in someone's words than is meant.
If you aren't prepared to pay attention to something in a forum like this, then you can expect to be picked up on it, and given your feeble protestations the question arises why bother at all? As to being too busy and "can't be asked", how very droll. Your command of English even fails in your attempts to resort to online encopresis.
As to the argumentum ad hominem; well done, you have picked up on a continual refrain of mine, but not so well done because you missed the other half; that is to say, there are times when the argumentum ad hominem is all that is left. In this context I refer to your seemingly childish amusement at an example of law breaking, which reminded me of a boy sniggering at illicit activities in the playground, only the offences were not committed in a playground. Rather they took place in the world of adults.
Then you insert some claim to the effect that "If you are so superior, why do you keep responding?". To begin with I have not made such a claim. Furthermore, you have not explained why a superior being would not follow up. Methinks this is more a question of discomfort on your part, and a devious attempt to pluck the argumentum ad hominem from some obscure, dark, odiferous place, a device for wriggling off the hook.
"there are times when the argumentum ad hominem is all that is left."
You certainly prove that!
" "there are times when the argumentum ad hominem is all that is left."
You certainly prove that!"
...And as if to amplify my point, in referring to you behaving like a school junior sniggering over the offences of one of its contemporaries, you had to offer as a riposte a 'nyah, nyah' blurt. Thank you for failing to offer anything remotely resembling an unbroken chain of argument, starting from initial empirical evidence and ending with something relating to/consistent with same. Pat-pat.
most accurate interpretation to date