Loosely connected hacking collective Anonymous claimed responsibility for making the CIA's website inaccessible on Friday - but later said it was just reporting the event. The apparent distributed denial of service attack against the spy agency's web presence follows a week after the release of a recording of a conference call …
Anonymous is correct. Their original tweet referenced an article from rt.com that claimed Anonymous took down the CIA site. Their subsequent tweets had terms like "apparently" in them, indicating that they were not the source of the information.
Maybe they were using words like "apparently" because there is no way of knowing if anyone has done anything as part of "Anonymous", which has the rather convenient side effect of allowing them to do whatever they want and then say it wasn't them, should public opinion be outraged.
Whomever hacked it is likely to be prosecuted and sent to prison.
I wonder when we'll reach the point that individual Anonymous "members" will start hacking and poublishing intimate details about one another in the name of the Cause?
"We'd remind media that if we report a hack or ddos attack, it doesn't necessarily mean we did it... "
Does not mean you didn't either sunshine.
That's the spirit
After a few trips down the stairs and a generous application of a length of rubber hose you'll soon fess up to whatever it was you didn't do.
If only every Anon member could get this appropriate "training"...
...the world would be a better place and there would be fewer hackers.
»» "hackers". "Script-kiddies who think they're super 1337 by using LOIC" would be more appropriate.
- Game Theory The agony and ecstasy of SteamOS: WHERE ARE MY GAMES?
- Intel's Raspberry Pi rival Galileo can now run Windows
- Hello, police, El Reg here. Are we a bunch of terrorists now?
- Microsoft and HTC are M8s again: New One mobe sports WinPhone
- Worstall on Wednesday Wall Street woes: Oh noes, tech titans aren't using bankers