Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Anti-US Hacker Takes Credit For Worm

timothy posted about 4 years ago | from the sociopath-with-a-heart-of-gold dept.

Worms 221

angry tapir writes "Credit for the "Here You Have" worm (recently discussed on Slashdot), has been taken by a hacker known as 'Iraq Resistance' who says the worm was designed, in part, as a propaganda tool. He said he had not expected the worm to spread as broadly as it had, and noted that he could have done much more damage to victims. 'I could smash all those infected but I wouldn't,' said the hacker. 'I hope all people understand that I am not negative person!' In other parts of the message, he was critical of the US war in Iraq. For a brief period early the worm accounted for about 10 percent of the spam on the Internet."

cancel ×

221 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Luddite victims. (4, Insightful)

jonescb (1888008) | about 4 years ago | (#33559848)

I can understand his message, but unfortunately this sort of things always backfires. I'm not sure how he thinks a virus is going to convince the super patriotic Luddites who support the war that their beliefs are totally wrong.

Re:Luddite victims. (4, Interesting)

FriendlyLurker (50431) | about 4 years ago | (#33559906)

Backfire, true: It will just be held up as an excuse to Kill Switch the internet [youtube.com] , remove anonymous access - China's state media is already calling for teaming up with the US [xinhuanet.com] to remove anonymous internet access. Sure any registration system will be far from a perfect net - full of holes and work around's for the technically adept - but they only have to get the majority to use it and it will be enough to destroy the Internets potential to bring true accountability and openness to our respective governments. Something that our traditional media channels have utterly failed to do [wordpress.com] .

Re:Luddite victims. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33559946)

Backfire suggests unintended consequences.

On the contrary, it's been proven that a tiny poke in the Achilles world trade centre, causes the land of the free to implode in a counterproductive, authoritarian cluster fuck.

It has a certain beauty to it. Much like a slow motion train crash.

Re:Luddite victims. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560636)

On the contrary, it's been proven that a tiny poke in the Achilles world trade centre, causes the land of the free to implode in a counterproductive, authoritarian cluster fuck

That may be true, but that wasn't what they wanted to have happen. They wanted the US to remove its armies from muslim lands . It resulted in even more American troops in Muslim lands.

Re:Luddite victims. (4, Funny)

Shompol (1690084) | about 4 years ago | (#33560924)

You are wrong. Obviously they just wanted to clear some downtown space for a mosque. [humanevents.com] "Remove your armies and bring world peace" act it was not.

Re:Luddite victims. (2, Funny)

ScrewMaster (602015) | about 4 years ago | (#33561110)

Backfire suggests unintended consequences.

On the contrary, it's been proven that a tiny poke in the Achilles world trade centre, causes the land of the free to implode in a counterproductive, authoritarian cluster fuck.

That may be true, but that wasn't what they wanted to have happen. They wanted the US to remove its armies from muslim lands . It resulted in even more American troops in Muslim lands.

Yes. In other words, Al Quaeda's plan backfired, in an (ahem!) Biblical sort of way.

Re:Luddite victims. (3, Insightful)

Moryath (553296) | about 4 years ago | (#33560160)

If China wants to try to kill anonymous access, that's all the more reason our laws should say no logging, no tracking, EVER.

And fuck the MafiAA and the fascists, who are the only ones who think differently.

As for traditional media channels - let's face it, they failed us a long time ago. The simpering, fawning "yay Obama" types in 2008 were just the most blatant, but most of the world has seen that kind of behavior for years - chinese media, iranian media, russian pravda, BBC, and pretty much everything else.

Re:Luddite victims. (2, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 4 years ago | (#33560340)

If China wants to try to kill anonymous access, that's all the more reason our laws should say no logging, no tracking, EVER.

That's terrible logic. China has laws against murder, does that mean the USA should have laws requiring you to shoot everyone you see? There are rational arguments against logging and tracking online, we don't need irrational ones.

Re:Luddite victims. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33561088)

How the hell did you manange to squeeze in Obama?!

You're so full of shit.

Re:Luddite victims. (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | about 4 years ago | (#33560968)

Right. I see *more* rabid ideology on the Internet than I ever saw in the Old Media. We seem more polarized than ever, and I blame the ability of people to go to various ideological sites and sit around in echo chambers while they fine tune their reality distortion fields. And by "we" I mean you lot out there. I discarded ideology decades ago when I realized what a mug's game it was.

Re:Luddite victims. (2, Interesting)

Ailure (853833) | about 4 years ago | (#33559974)

If it's even meant to backfire, if there was a group I wanted to discredit I would spread a virus in the name of said group instead of the group I take part.

I don't believe it's the case in the situation though. Experience tells me that most people don't realize that protesting through destructive means rarely works well...

Re:Luddite victims. (1)

lgw (121541) | about 4 years ago | (#33561116)

It's particularly silly in this case, since US involvement in Iraq is already winding down. Somehow I doubt this is someone shouting "and stay out!" after we've already left - it seems much more likely an excuse invented after the fact (by the actual author, or as you mention, a Joe-job).

Re:Luddite victims. (1)

lxs (131946) | about 4 years ago | (#33559982)

Wasn't the 'plan Colombia' worm designed to do the same? Didn't work a decade ago and it doesn't work now. Unless it's a false flag operation.

Re:Luddite victims. (1)

umghhh (965931) | about 4 years ago | (#33560658)

why cannot we bomb the guy out of existence? Ohh wait - have we not tried to do just this for few last years? Ohhhhh.....

Re:Luddite victims. (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | about 4 years ago | (#33561142)

why cannot we bomb the guy out of existence? Ohh wait - have we not tried to do just this for few last years? Ohhhhh.....

Sure, but then people get all riled up about "collateral damage". Just send in a hit squad to "disappear" the bastard. Do that enough times, and you might have an effective deterrent. Matter of fact, I understand the Mossad has some experience with that, so long as we don't insist they use Blackberries.

Re:Luddite victims. (1)

gnapster (1401889) | about 4 years ago | (#33561160)

Unless the worm's author is American. The US hasn't done much domestic bombing, yet.

"Anti-US" Hacker? (2, Interesting)

geminidomino (614729) | about 4 years ago | (#33559862)

Where do they get that? Plenty of Americans with functioning synapses say the same damn thing about the Iraq Clusterfuck, and Terry Jones *IS* a fucking troglodyte.

I mean, okay... There's not really any excuse for releasing malicious code on anyone, so he gets no pass there. But if the only communication from him and info about him is from that video... shit, he addresses "Americans" more rationally then the two sides of the idiot aisle do each other.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (1, Insightful)

Chrisq (894406) | about 4 years ago | (#33559998)

Where do they get that? Plenty of Americans with functioning synapses say the same damn thing about the Iraq Clusterfuck, and Terry Jones *IS* a fucking troglodyte.

You are absolutely correct. This is the same mentality as those who say that opposing the building of the Ground Zero Mosque is "anti-Islamic". You can dislike something supported by some members of a group without being "anti" that group.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560058)

What is it if not anti-Islamic? Should churches and synagogues in the vicinity be torn down? New churches and synagogues banned in the vicinity?
This is essentially a non-issue among most New Yorkers, the people who have an issue with this come from elsewhere, part of extremist Christian groups.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560124)

Don't feed the Republican trolls (yeah, I'm sure he self-identifies as a Libertarian [snicker, as if a Libertarian would give a shit where an Islamic Youth Center - not a mosque - were built]), but believe me, he has intense erotic dreams about the Gipper every Monday night, most intensely the night before the first Tuesday in November...

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560354)

What if he opposes the mosque because he has a phobia of buildings? Would that make him anti-Islamic?
What if he is homeless, and has made "Ground Zero" (or more truthfully, the abandoned bookshop a couple blocks from "Ground Zero") his home? Is that anti-Islamic?
What if he's a fundamentalist atheist, and opposes all aspects of all religions? Is that "anti-Islamic"?
What if he knows about an oil lake or buried treasure at the build site?
What if he's an engineer who has seen the plans for the mosque, and believes such a structure is prone to collapse?
Are these anti-Islamic?
Are you seriously so retarded that you can't think of a single scenario where someone might oppose the construction of a specific building in a specific location, and not have some deep-seeded bigotry against the entire group of people who use such building?

If I make plans to bulldoze your house and build a pet store, would that make you anti-puppy-and-kitten? You sick, extremist kittnen-hater.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (0)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | about 4 years ago | (#33560384)

Are you seriously so retarded that you can't think of a single scenario where someone might oppose the construction of a specific building in a specific location, and not have some deep-seeded bigotry against the entire group of people who use such building?

When pretty much 99.9999% of the people against it are because "those durn muslims attacked us!!!" your bullshit excuses ring very, very hollow.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (0, Troll)

c6gunner (950153) | about 4 years ago | (#33560614)

True. And when pretty much 99.9999% of the people who oppose the Iraq war criticize it because "those durn Amerikkkan Neokkkon Fascist hicks are at it again", your bullshit excuse rings very hollow.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (4, Insightful)

Abcd1234 (188840) | about 4 years ago | (#33560694)

And when pretty much 99.9999% of the people who oppose the Iraq war criticize it because "those durn Amerikkkan Neokkkon Fascist hicks are at it again"

They do? Weird. Because I'm pretty sure most people opposed the Iraq war because, you know, it was justified with lies.

But hey, what do I know, I'm not a total fucking idiot...

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (1)

daem0n1x (748565) | about 4 years ago | (#33560982)

I'm European. Most people I know used to like the Americans before the stupid, illegal and outrageous invasion. Specially when the lies used to justify it were so lame that, outside of the US, only a mouth-foaming ultra-right-wing retard would buy any of them (not that our media hadn't tried).

Before the invasions the demonstrations throughout the world made it into the Guiness in number of participants. Many people I know went to a demonstrations for the first time ever. Most of them don't even know what a "neocon" is.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560598)

What if he's a fundamentalist atheist, and opposes all aspects of all religions? Is that "anti-Islamic"?

Umm....YES?

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (1, Flamebait)

hairyfeet (841228) | about 4 years ago | (#33560810)

I probably shouldn't feed the PC troll, but WTF. They named it "Cordoba House" which apparently you know jack and shit about history, because Cordoba was the place in Spain where a great triumph of Islam over Christianity happened and they destroyed a church to build a mosque and the sad part is many PC Americans are too ignorant to history to see they might as well have named the damned thing "Mission Accomplished". You might want to look up about the 100 year old Catholic church that was also destroyed during 9/11 because guess what? They are NOT being given the right to rebuild.

So you see Mr PC AC Troll, it isn't about building a place of worship, it is about building a place of worship whose name practically means Fuck the West on the site where they...well fucked the west. How sad that the PC are so quick to make kissie with the religion that wants to destroy us, while hating anything Christian. Hell I'm a fricking Atheist and the way the PC are so quick to roll over just makes me want to puke! But before you buy that religion of peace crap, why don't you see the violence numbers for Europe in countries that have a high Muslim population? They just don't play nice unless you play by their rules which means Sharia for everybody.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560898)

But its in America - they swear every morning that they will "defend to the death" the right for them to say "fuck you to the west" - regardless of location.

Care to provide some links for the Catholic Church btw? I've read up on the Orthodox one that are arguing over money - not heard of others.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (5, Informative)

daem0n1x (748565) | about 4 years ago | (#33561014)

Your post couldn't make it more clear that you're a bigot fed on Fox News propaganda.

The catholic church the evil infidels "destroyed" is still there. I visited it a few years ago. It's the main landmark in the beautiful city of Cordoba. Oh, by the way, they take great pride in their Arab heritage.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (1)

Abcd1234 (188840) | about 4 years ago | (#33561190)

Man, this needs to be modded up +1 Informative and Hilarious...

As an aside, let's say, for the moment, that the amusingly misinformed twat GP was right... it still wouldn't fucking matter. The US is a country built on ideals. Either those ideals exist and are to be lived by, or they don't. Either these people have the right to do with their private property what they choose, or they don't.

'course, as always, the rabid right has once again demonstrated that they believe strongly in the constitution and the bill of rights... unless, of course, your exercising those rights offends them in some way. And this is especially true when its election season and the base needs riling up...

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33561132)

This is essentially a non-issue among most New Yorkers, the people who have an issue with this come from elsewhere, part of extremist Christian groups.

I wonder if they will have the stamina to stick with this through the entire duration of permitting, construction, etc. I don't think these people really appreciate just how real estate development works here.

If you're coming to NYC to protest the mosque, don't forget to take a ride on the 2nd avenue subway and catch a game at the West Side stadium!

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (3, Insightful)

internettoughguy (1478741) | about 4 years ago | (#33560320)

Where do they get that? Plenty of Americans with functioning synapses say the same damn thing about the Iraq Clusterfuck, and Terry Jones *IS* a fucking troglodyte.

You are absolutely correct. This is the same mentality as those who say that opposing the building of the Ground Zero Mosque is "anti-Islamic". You can dislike something supported by some members of a group without being "anti" that group.

No, It's more like saying that those who are opposed to Al-Qaeda are anti-Islamic. Those who are opposed to what amounts to little more than a Muslim YMCA, are most likely anti-Islamic.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (2, Insightful)

dave420 (699308) | about 4 years ago | (#33560334)

It's not a mosque, and it's not at ground zero. Anyone who says they can't build their community center on their own property is doing so because they don't like Islam. That's the only possible reason. Oh, or they really like the old coat factory and want it to stay the same - that would work, too.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560414)

The youth centre is not limited to, but includes a mosque.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560362)

What other reason is there to oppose the mosque if not due to an anti-Islamic mindset? Would you be up for the banning of any church's being built around the Alfred P. Murrah building in OKC due to the fact that the bombers were Christian?

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560494)

There isn't really any room to build a church around it. It is a pretty nice memorial now, though.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about 4 years ago | (#33560402)

This is the same mentality as those who say that opposing the building of the Ground Zero Mosque is "anti-Islamic".

You mean "the Islamic community center two blocks away from ground zero." Just because the media have accepted the term designed to stir up the most controversy and ratings about the issue is no reason to accept the distortion of the facts.

And the fact is that this is not a mosque and it is not at ground zero.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (1)

Chrisq (894406) | about 4 years ago | (#33560486)

Except that it has been gradually re-branded from a Mosque - through a mosque including a community centre [thisislondon.co.uk] to a community centre including a mosque. And that the site was damaged in the attacks, making it part of ground zero

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (4, Insightful)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | about 4 years ago | (#33560538)

And that the site was damaged in the attacks, making it part of ground zero

Only by redefining the term "ground zero". Ground zero does not include any and all areas that has been damaged it only refers to the "point directly below an explosion". So no, it is not at "ground zero" at all.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (1)

Chrisq (894406) | about 4 years ago | (#33560572)

Fair enough, refer to it as area damaged in the 911 attacks then.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (1)

Mister Whirly (964219) | about 4 years ago | (#33560826)

How about Ground Two? Zero would imply the epicenter of the attacks.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (0, Troll)

TimSSG (1068536) | about 4 years ago | (#33560868)

So the fact the landing gear of the aircraft hit the building does NOT make it ground zero. Tim S.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560460)

This is the same mentality as those who say that opposing the building of the Ground Zero Mosque is "anti-Islamic".

Nope, [islamophobia-watch.com] nothing [mediamatters.org] anti-islamic [mediamatters.org] here! [hurriyetdailynews.com]

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (2, Interesting)

Abcd1234 (188840) | about 4 years ago | (#33560492)

How can you oppose a mosque a couple blocks away from ground zero and not be, at least a little bit, anti-Islamic? Upon what other basis would you oppose such a thing, save that you believe the 9/11 terrorists == Islam, and therefore Islam is bad and a mosque is somehow, by it's very association with that religion, "disrespectful" of the victims of 9/11?

Would you similarly oppose a church being built a couple blocks away from the site of an abortion clinic bombing?

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (1)

Chrisq (894406) | about 4 years ago | (#33560548)

Its interesting to compare the reaction of the Muslims supporting the mosque and community centre being build in the area damaged by the planes with the carmalite convent as auschwits [jewishvirtuallibrary.org] , which was relocated.

And yes I would oppose converting a building damaged by a christian anti-abortion bomber to a church, or the opening of an irish Catholic centre at the site of the Baltic exchange.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (3, Insightful)

Abcd1234 (188840) | about 4 years ago | (#33560670)

Its interesting to compare the reaction of the Muslims supporting the mosque and community centre being build in the area damaged by the planes with the carmalite convent as auschwits, which was relocated.

Except, of course, that's completely different. The convent wasn't relocated because some hate-filled "Catholics" ran the camp, but because the Jewish community felt it would distract from the suffering jews were subjected to. Oh, plus the convent was going to be built right on the periphery of the camp. Not a couple blocks away, but literally right there.

'course, I also think that case was fucking ridiculous. But that's neither here nor there. The point is, it's a totally different situation.

And yes I would oppose converting a building damaged by a christian anti-abortion bomber to a church, or the opening of an irish Catholic centre at the site of the Baltic exchange.

Why? Religion didn't cause those acts. People did.

No offense, but your position strikes me as both irrational and bigoted. Doubly so given the area is known for having a large muslim population (it was once nicknamed Little Syria, ffs), and that this facility is actually a couple blocks away from ground zero.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (1)

suomynonAyletamitlU (1618513) | about 4 years ago | (#33561184)

And yes I would oppose converting a building damaged by a christian anti-abortion bomber to a church, or the opening of an irish Catholic centre at the site of the Baltic exchange.

Why? Religion didn't cause those acts. People did.

That's a stupid question. The bad act those people committed has already been done, and the person trying to build a church knows that. It takes some serious balls and a bad attitude to make a decision like that when you know damn well THAT people are going to be upset and WHY, especially when what you're building is something that, in theory, is protected and reverential and an "it would be an insult to our religion if you asked us to leave or tore it down" sort of thing--which basically says "I know you're going to be upset, and perhaps I'm even doing it BECAUSE it will upset you, or perhaps not; however, you're powerless unless you want to start a war with us".

Because seriously? This isn't about defending the people who actually did the thing. You learn a lot about the people who are building the church (although not necessarily their whole religion) by how they handle delicate things like that. The above examples? Pretty nasty people. And even if you say that once it's built it's just a house of worship that people use normally--who would move into a place like that knowing its location? How do the patrons handle the controversy--do they even care? If a Christian church was set up in a place a Christian had deliberately attacked, I would expect as a sign of decency that they would have some obvious, public way for attendees to offer prayers to those hurt, which would hopefully be permanent. If it's only up for a couple weeks or months, that says something too.

In the case of the mosque, a couple blocks may or may not be enough--I don't know, I don't live in NYC, that's up to them. If they show a halfway decent attitude, I say let them, but I don't know anything about the decision except some third-hand information from comments.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33561228)

why is it that when people disagree with liberals, they're bigots, but when liberals disagree with others, they're enlightened?

can you get over the "everyone but me is racist" garbage so we can have a real conversation, please?

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (2, Insightful)

Custard Horse (1527495) | about 4 years ago | (#33560556)

I think part of the problem is that the protesting is based around allowing a building 'for the terrorists' rather than recognising that islamic terrorists make up a tiny fraction of the Islamic community.

Consider this with the fact that muslims were killed in the Twin Towers attack *and* that muslims were also part of the rescue services (plenty of whom lost their lives in the rescue effort) and the protest against the muslim support centre or mosque or whatever seems, well, bigoted.

There was a women from the UK on BBC news on Saturday who lost her son in the attack and she said that you can't blame the Islamic community for the actions of fundamentalists and it is not acceptable to burn sacred texts (referring to the proposed book burning by the disillusioned, former (probably) worst hotel manager, Kentucky pastor nut-job). She then went on to say that she disagreed with the building of the Mosque near ground zero but gave no adequate reasoning. I put this down to her emotional involvement as it contradicts everything else she had said previously.

With such 'logic' you may as well blame men for all war or pigs for tasting so good. How about blaming all Catholics for paedophilia? Some Catholic priests are kiddy-fiddlers therefore all Catholics are kiddy-fiddlers. Fair? I think not.

If you are going to blame a whole religious community you may as well allow a tit-for-tat reaction - I propose allowing muslims to destroy a Christian Church - a good one, Catholic or at least one where they take their shit seriously - but not allow them to rebuild. Karma restored and everyone is equally happy or unhappy.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (1)

Chrisq (894406) | about 4 years ago | (#33560592)

If you are going to blame a whole religious community you may as well allow a tit-for-tat reaction - I propose allowing muslims to destroy a Christian Church - a good one, Catholic or at least one where they take their shit seriously - but not allow them to rebuild. Karma restored and everyone is equally happy or unhappy.

I think you will find they have already destroyed hundreds.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (1)

couchslug (175151) | about 4 years ago | (#33560682)

"You can dislike something supported by some members of a group without being "anti" that group."

There is, it should be noted, no reason NOT to oppose a religion or all religions on their own lack of merit.

The idea that superstition should be respected is silly, and it would be easier to break the hold of superstitions if we were much more comfortable treating them with the contempt such ridiculous beliefs deserve. Religions attacking each other is healthy, because it highlights their defects and their tribalism.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (1)

Abcd1234 (188840) | about 4 years ago | (#33560918)

The idea that superstition should be respected is silly

People's rights should be respected. In this case, the rights of an owner of a private piece of property to build a facility on it, and within that facility to exercise their right to freedom of belief and expression. Religion, itself, has fuck all to do with it.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (1)

daem0n1x (748565) | about 4 years ago | (#33560822)

Then give me any good reason why someone can not build a perfectly legal building in their own property.

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (2, Insightful)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about 4 years ago | (#33560368)

From TFA:

SecureWorks Researcher Joe Stewart believes that Iraq Defense is a Libyan hacker who is trying to gain followers for a cyber jihad hacking group called Brigades of Tariq ibn Ziyad.

It definitely sounds tenuous, my first thought was this was some bored kid in suburbia who accidentally caused some damage and was trying to throw off the trail. It sounds though like Robert McMillian of PC world is convinced. Stewart's article is a little more skeptical about that group being the actual perpetrator, but if it is...

The goal of Tariq ibn Ziyad is "to penetrate U.S. agencies belonging to the U.S. Army," Iraq Resistance said, according to a Google translation of his post announcing the group.

Even then, "anti-american" is arguably an overstatement. Anyway, there might be a little more than just "I don't think the US should be in Iraq."

Re:"Anti-US" Hacker? (1)

gad_zuki! (70830) | about 4 years ago | (#33561188)

>Plenty of Americans with functioning synapses say the same damn thing about the Iraq Clusterfuck, and Terry Jones *IS* a fucking troglodyte.

Pardon me, but my memory of 2003 is pretty good. Plenty of Americans were chomping at the bit to start a war they couldn't afford for reasons based on intel that was obviously massaged. I remember almost zero skepticism about this. Tthe US's view on Islam is pretty low, to the point where we are having a national discourse on why you can't build mosques in certain places.

Please don't make the US out to be this enlightened culture. I'm a liberal atheist. I see this shit all the time. At worst, our culture is this awful strawman, at best we're a religious dominated conservative culture with an itchy trigger finger. Let's not pat ourselves too hard on the back. We're on the long road to sanity and secular enlightenment, and usually we go as much backwards as we do forwards.

Profiteering (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33559898)

This guy is just another Spam king Profiteering. He is trying to spin a political message on top of the spam but that's about it.

PREPARE FOR FUNDING! (3, Funny)

phantomcircuit (938963) | about 4 years ago | (#33559910)

Seriously a bunch of consultants are about to become filthy rich.

If his plan was to slowly bleed the US to death with enormous security consulting fees, I suspect his plan will be a success.

Re:PREPARE FOR FUNDING! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33559954)

Seriously a bunch of consultants are about to become filthy rich.

If his plan was to slowly bleed the US to death with enormous security consulting fees, I suspect his plan will be a success.

Cool. Where do I $ign up?

Re:PREPARE FOR FUNDING! (1)

AnonymousClown (1788472) | about 4 years ago | (#33560148)

Seriously a bunch of consultants are about to become filthy rich.

If his plan was to slowly bleed the US to death with enormous security consulting fees, I suspect his plan will be a success.

Cool. Where do I $ign up?

No need to sign up - hit the pavement.

You do the marketing and then farm out the tech work to India - that's how it's done these days. Although, people are starting to figure out that they can just cut out the American salesman and go directly to India and save all the American overhead and commissions that just pay for the fancy suits, Exlax watches, and huge CEO salaries.

Re:PREPARE FOR FUNDING! (1)

box4831 (1126771) | about 4 years ago | (#33560920)

ExLax watches? Is that so you know exactly when you shit yourself?

Not negative? (5, Insightful)

Alwin Henseler (640539) | about 4 years ago | (#33559942)

Two points:

  1. Writing malware has 0 effect at large, until it's put out into the wild. Once out, damage is done & cannot ever be undone. Yes it might help to increase OS security over time, yes it'll keep anti-virus companies in business, but it's always a net negative for society. Prevention & cleanup takes time. Time that will not be spent on more useful things.
  2. What that malware will do over time & for what other purposes it might be used, will have little (if anything) to do with your original intentions. It's a vehicle, and if it works, others (with a different agenda) will ride that vehicle too.

Re:Not negative? (3, Insightful)

nedlohs (1335013) | about 4 years ago | (#33560106)

Not necessarily. Active malware tends to get the software producer to fix the bug faster. Hence less damaging malware now, might see the issue fixed before more damaging malware is released - that would be a net positive for society.

Of course you can never know, all you know is the damage done by the malware that was released.

Re:Not negative? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560190)

That is still the broken window fallacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window [wikipedia.org]

However, in this case you are adding in a 'crack' in the corner of the window and it may have caused some water damage in the future.

So instead of buying a blob of caulk and putting it in the corner and replacing the window when he can. He needs to replace the whole window right now because some punk smashed it.

Take example of the Sony PS3. Recently hacked to let people run linux again. Sony rushed out a patch to cover that hack. They could have used that manpower to be making a new feature. Instead it looks like from the outside (and someone who doesnt bother hacking his ps3) it was an 'all hands on deck' sort of feature push. Then all of the wasted time of millions of PS3s needing to be updated. Does that sound like 'harmless' hacking? No it caused a company to spend millions then millions more of peoples time and electricity. But by GOD my ps3 is more secure now!

Re:Not negative? (3, Insightful)

nedlohs (1335013) | about 4 years ago | (#33560242)

No it's not the broken window fallacy. Do you just post random crap in random places.

If it is you'll be able to point to part which is about the economy being improved by the busy work of repairing the damage. But you can't because it wasn't there and because you are fucking retarded.

Re:Not negative? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560716)

Awww did I say something you didnt like?

Not necessarily. Active malware tends to get the software producer to fix the bug faster. Hence less damaging malware now, might see the issue fixed before more damaging malware is released - that would be a net positive for society.

Of course you can never know, all you know is the damage done by the malware that was released.

Sorry I didnt quote you.

You suppose that by diverting attention from new thing being worked on right. So we can fix things that are now broken and being exploited is not wasting money?

Some douche bag shows up and finds a hole in the system (and you can try and try and make the system better but you will never find them all). So now thousands of people and millions of dollars are spent fixing something *right now*. Instead of getting rolled up into proper testing and when the right people can look at it.

Using my PS3 example show me how I am better off now? I spent 20-30 mins updating it at a cost to my time as I could not use the online functionality until I did so. SONY spent millions of dollars patching the hole. The fallacy part is that my time is better spent sitting around for an update. Also the millions that SONY spent is better spent on patching this.

Putting it in 'broken window' terms and virus/Trojan terms it is like saying 'see now the guy is better off now he has double paned windows with glazing so he will now save money'. Maybe he was going to do that in the future maybe not. But see we got it done faster and the world is a better place. Which is almost exactly what you said. And like I said BROKEN WINDOW FALLACY

But I 'just post random crap in random places'. What do I know I only majored in economics and fucking retarded...

You sir are a troll.

Re:Not negative? (4, Informative)

nedlohs (1335013) | about 4 years ago | (#33560848)

The broken window fallacy is that a broken window causes the owner to buy a new window which employs the window maker, who then buys something else, and so and so on. Resulting in a boost to the economy. It's an obvious fallacy.

My claim was nothing to do with that at all, here's the example for the morons:

1. Dr Evil has found a bug in Windows and has his team of hackers writing an exploit which he will use to blow up the power grid in North America.
2. Joe the Crappy Hacker also finds said bug and tells Microsoft
3. Microsoft does nothing.
4. Dr Evil pulls the switch and Americans can't watch TV for an evening.

Compared with:
1. Dr Evil has found ;a bug in Windows and has his team of hackers writing an exploit which he will use to blow up the power grid in North America.
2. Joe the Crappy Hacker also find said bug and writes some malware that displays a political message and distributes itself via email.
3. Microsoft rushes to fix the problem and releases an emergency patch.
4. Dr Evil pulls the switch and nothing happens because the exploit was fixed.

The second situation has less negative consequences for society, and hence the malware was positive for society.

Yes I don't think it's a particularly likely, in fact I don't think it will ever occur. It is however, a possible situation (well the bug getting fixed before a more damaging exploit part, not the Dr Evil part).

But even if you disagree with that it still isn't a broken window fallacy, because it isn't making claims about economic benefit of any activity at all.

If you majored in economics then I suggest asking for refund. Then again I guess if you only have a hammer then the whole world looks like a nail.

Re:Not negative? (1)

null8 (1395293) | about 4 years ago | (#33560126)

I think it will increase OS security and create a lot of jobs in this sector. If you think this jobs are redundant, think about lawyers. The ignorant will suffer, and if they learn their lesson, they will be much better prepared for the new threat and take security more seriously. I think that computer malware is more useful than many think it is. Just remember the blaster worm. It made actually normal people think about security and the big losers were the ones who used windows in places it shouldn't have ever been.

Re:Not negative? (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | about 4 years ago | (#33560174)

>>>1. Once out, damage is done & cannot ever be undone.
>>>2. It's a vehicle, and if it works, others (with a different agenda) will ride that vehicle too.

3. Even if a virus is completely harmless, it can still cause unintended consequences. For example the early Commodore Amiga viruses were just simple things that said, "Hello I am Hacker XYZ." Unfortunately this friendly hacker forgot that his virus would overwrite boot sectors on copy-protected video games and commercial software, thereby making them unusable.

no wonder folks are frustrated (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33559962)

Blair, again controversial, to get Liberty Medal (as opposed to a trial for war crimes?, why do we need this guy to look good so badly?)
By KATHY MATHESON (AP) – 45 minutes ago
PHILADELPHIA — Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair will receive the Liberty Medal on Monday for his global human rights work, even as his new autobiography has reignited debate over his political leadership.
The medal is given annually by the Philadelphia-based National Constitution Center to individuals or organizations whose actions strive to bring liberty to people worldwide.
Blair is being honored for his work with the Tony Blair Faith Foundation, which promotes religious tolerance; for his initiative to improve governance in Africa; and for advancing peace in Northern Ireland, among other efforts.
The award will be presented by former President Bill Clinton at an outdoor ceremony on Independence Mall.
The event comes amid a publicity tour for Blair's best-selling memoir, "A Journey," which was released Sept. 1. The autobiography re-energized British and Irish anti-war protesters, who continue to blast Blair for supporting the U.S. invasion of the Iraq; a hostile crowd threw shoes and eggs at him at a book-signing in Dublin this month, and he canceled a similar event in London for fear of disruption.
Constitution Center spokeswoman Ashley Berke said organizers were not aware of any planned protests in Philadelphia.
Clinton, the center's chairman, said in a statement that Blair "continues to demonstrate the same leadership, dedication and creativity in promoting economic opportunity in the Middle East and the resolution of conflicts rooted in religion around the world."
Blair, who led Britain from 1997 to 2007, said he shares the values embodied by the award.
"Freedom, liberty and justice are the values by which this medal is struck," Blair said in a statement. "Freedom, liberty and justice are the values which I try to apply to my work on governance in Africa and on preparing the Palestinians for statehood."
The medal, first given in 1989, comes with a $100,000 cash prize. Blair will donate the money to his faith foundation and African Governance Initiative.
Previous winners have included rock singer and human rights activist Bono, former South African President Nelson Mandela and former U.S. President Jimmy Carter. Six winners have subsequently received the Nobel Peace Prize.
The ceremony kicks off nearly a week of events leading to Constitution Day on Friday. The U.S. Constitution was adopted in Philadelphia on Sept. 17, 1787.

worm takes credit for promoting illuminati agenda (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560026)

no doubt he should be given something? eggs & shoes are an understatement of the true sentiment of many regarding this foulcurr.

Worm smash! (2, Interesting)

Issarlk (1429361) | about 4 years ago | (#33559986)

"I could smash all those infected but I wouldn't..."

I personnaly find it _amazing_ that none of the worm writer so far used them to destroy the computers. Really, that must be tempting, isn't it? Hundred of thousands of computer that you wipe with the push of a button.

Re:Worm smash! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560020)

wiped computer dont make you money

Re:Worm smash! (1)

Twisted Willie (1035374) | about 4 years ago | (#33560022)

If you have control over that many computers, there are far more interesting/lucrative things you can do than just wiping them all.

Re:Worm smash! (1)

Zironic (1112127) | about 4 years ago | (#33560028)

For one the worm wouldn't spread very far if you did that, for another you'd get the international police after you for gargantuan damage penalties that you wouldn't be able to pay of in your entire life.

Re:Worm smash! (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 4 years ago | (#33560364)

For one the worm wouldn't spread very far if you did that,

It only takes a few days to propagate around the Internet. The kill can be time-delayed to occur a month after release and it will cause significant damage. for another you'd get the international police after you for gargantuan damage penalties that you wouldn't be able to pay of in your entire life.

If they can find you, you'll be in prison anyway, so not much of a disincentive.

Re:Worm smash! (2, Insightful)

bsDaemon (87307) | about 4 years ago | (#33560038)

Yeah, but then you lose your spam net. He may not be a "negative person," but his positive attitude creating 10% of all spam on the net over a period of time isn't exactly a charitable gesture. But then, I think spammers are worse than terrorists.

Re:Worm smash! (1)

wvmarle (1070040) | about 4 years ago | (#33560428)

I wonder about this 10%-of-all-spam claim. I haven't seen this worm. I haven't seen any increase in spams that I receive over the last few days.

And I should have seen a serious increase as this worm spreads through Outlook, using proper smtp servers, which will pass through my greylisting (>90% of spam is stopped that way already). And as I'm doing business with dozens of companies all over the world, and possibly hundreds have my e-mail address in some address book or so, it's surprising to simply not receive it.

Just looking through my spam folder again and no surprises there... about half Nigerian scams and related, about half other stuff.

Re:Worm smash! (1)

imakemusic (1164993) | about 4 years ago | (#33560042)

But then you wouldn't have hundreds of thousands of computers to play and that would be no fun/not profitable.

Re:Worm smash! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560688)

You say that like the targets wouldn't just get their system re-installed and continue doing whatever behavior got them the worm in the first place. It'd take a little time, but they'll be reinfected soon enough.

Re:Worm smash! (1)

jeffmeden (135043) | about 4 years ago | (#33560074)

Those looking at this from a long term perspective wish he would smash them already! Seriously, nothing sends a message of "you better learn how to use your f****** computer" like waking up one day, turning it on, and finding it completely wiped of everything. I had that experience when I was about 13, and have been extremely vigilant against malware (and malware-free) ever since. As it is, all those computers are spewing spam and infections out and the operator will probably never know.

Re:Worm smash! (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | about 4 years ago | (#33560222)

>>>nothing sends a message [than] finding it completely wiped of everything.

Yep. Likewise we should sabotage people's tires so they go "pop" after they pass 55mph, and leave them stranded along the highway. Nothing teaches a person how to change his own tire (and remember to inflate the spare) faster than a broken down car.

/end sarcasm

Stop being a dick. WANTING people to have their computer wiped and precious data lost makes you no better than a grumpy old man ("get off my lawn you stupid brats!"). Besides most of them are running Microsoft antivirus software by default. If that fails, it's not the person's fault.

Re:Worm smash! (1)

phillymjs (234426) | about 4 years ago | (#33560758)

Besides most of them are running Microsoft antivirus software by default.

[citation needed]

I'd be more inclined to think that most of them are running [the possibly expired trial version of] whatever came preloaded on their machine when they bought it, which most certainly would NOT be Microsoft Security Essentials, lest the antivirus vendors go crying monopoly.

In any case, antivirus software did not help. I know of at least one large company with very well locked down machines and a very well locked down network, and they still got their ass kicked by this thing.

~Philly

Re:Worm smash! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560446)

They do it for profit, not destruction. And considering whom he represents, I'd say we already know what the money is for.

Re:Worm smash! (1)

couchslug (175151) | about 4 years ago | (#33560562)

I find it unfortunate. That's the ONLY thing which will force lusers and PHBs to take security seriously because, unlike merely parasitic malware, a nuked system isn't fun to play with any more. A fish can still swim with a lamprey attached.

FFS start breaking shit so we build more immunity.

Re:Worm smash! (1)

wvmarle (1070040) | about 4 years ago | (#33560584)

Botnet creators sell to the highest bidders. They normally sell their services, but I bet if the price is right they will sell the master keys (passwords, update codes, whatever) too.

What is an enemy organisation or country stopping from trying to buy such keys? How about the US and China would manage to start a war (or slightly less unlikely China and Japan), then one of them would track down the creators of say Storm or Conficker or whatever is today's major botnet, and buy the master keys for maybe half a billion dollars. Then they have access to maybe millions of pre-compromised computers. With botnet software that can take all kinds of commands, including complete updates of itself - when you have those keys getting those computers to wipe themselves becomes trivial.

At this moment there may be no-one really interested in wiping computers; no-one wanting to put that much effort in it as it doesn't bring any advantage for the attacher.

But if you are in a state of war - this can really cripple your enemy. You don't need to kill their military computers, if you kill enough computers in general businesses the whole economy comes to a halt. Shipping companies can not plan their shipments. Supermarkets run out of stock because shipments stop coming in on time. People can't eat because there is no food for sale. Telemarketing companies lose their databases, and have no way to store info gained from their cold calls, and as a result have to stop this. Car manufactures can not produce or sell cars because they do not get the stocks (factory office down), and they can not book sales (dealers down), let alone get finished cars to the dealer (they can't access their order database, nor book trucks to get those cars out).

There are are currently no big wars going on - big as in big countries against each other. Not those guerrilla wars the US is trying to fight, guerrillas are typically not rich and don't care to take out the country, just to kick the enemy soldiers off their turf. This is over the heads of Al-Quaeda et. al., they don't have this kind of money (otherwise they would have done so already I'm sure). But in case of a more traditional war... I'm really wondering what this kind of botnets would be used for.

Re:Worm smash! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560700)

...Telemarketing companies lose their databases, and have no way to store info gained from their cold calls, and as a result have to stop this...

One of the few bright sides of a Sino-American conflict, I tell ya.

Re:Worm smash! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560910)

Risk vs. Reward. At most its an ego boost, possibly some money, and nothing more. I'm sure the lounge chair psychologists around here could interject their theories as to why one my need such an outlet.

Paging Dr. Freud!!!

After the fact rationalization (5, Insightful)

antifoidulus (807088) | about 4 years ago | (#33560016)

If his payload was something *OTHER* than spam I might be more inclined to believe him, but delivering spam to people usually also involves delivering money to his bank account. He is just looking for a nobler purpose to game some "cred" I guess, and opposing the Iraq war in the cracker community is 99% of the time a pretty safe bet.

Re:After the fact rationalization (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560958)

If his payload was something *OTHER* than spam I might be more inclined to believe him, but delivering spam to people usually also involves delivering money to his bank account.

I believe "spam" in this case doesn't refer to a payload of spam but rather to the worm's regular propagation. As an email worm, it travels by spamming itself out to the people in each victim's address book.

This guy sounds like he failed at his aim (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560030)

This guy sounds like a drunk I saw getting arrested at a club recently. He tried to throw a punch at a bartender, got tackled by club security, then started screaming that he deliberately didn't hit hard or wasn't trying to aim accurately as he was being held down for the local police to haul him off.

This worm writer was too incompetent to actually have done more damage. I'm sure he was trying to, but because IT people and AV makers reacted to it in a fairly short amount of time, he is just excusing it as he didn't hit hard enough.

And what did this get mr "Iraq Resistance"? Nothing. This guy is nothing more than a glorified script kiddie that would have gotten kickbanned from any meaningful IRC channel the second he typed in his first line of text.

Maybe he should go back to spamming random message boards with anti-US slogans and calling himself an uber haxx0r because he can manually type in a CAPTCHA.

bad title tag (1)

kj_kabaje (1241696) | about 4 years ago | (#33560046)

Holy bad title--or bad reading on my part. Really is the hacker against the US? Or hacking the US (as in government and business interests)?

Re:bad title tag (4, Informative)

Akoman (559057) | about 4 years ago | (#33560282)

It's just a rip from the article, which is terribly written and fails to provide a lot of context. My initial opinion was this was a stitch up and the hacker was just against the war and people were stretching connections and definitions to make them sound like a security threat. This ComputerWorld article [computerworld.com] is way better at providing the details that link this worm to previous efforts by a Libyan hacker to create a politically motivated hacker group. To describe these guys as anti-US would be, I think, a simplification of the motivation of these groups. Jihadists (and here I also probably simplify) may be prepared to attack the States, but the motivation is not simply anti-US. I found this article on Eurozine [eurozine.com] to be really interesting on breaking down their attitudes.

Famous Last Words... (3, Insightful)

geekmux (1040042) | about 4 years ago | (#33560054)

"He said he had not expected the worm to spread as broadly as it had..."

Gee, we've never heard that one before...

At one point it accounted for 10% of the world's spam, but "I'm not negative person!"

Yeah, I guess he's right. There's a difference between a "negative" person and an idiot.

Best Sig Ever (1)

dgower2 (1487929) | about 4 years ago | (#33560142)

You have the best sig I've seen on here!

Just another victim (0, Troll)

kaoshin (110328) | about 4 years ago | (#33560122)

"Here you have" spread when victims clicked on a Web link and then allowed a malicious script to run on their computer.

The hacker isn't the one causing problems. The "victims" are.

Re:Just another victim (5, Insightful)

KiltedKnight (171132) | about 4 years ago | (#33560332)

I'm always amazed at how so many people can so easily fall for something that was at best a third grade attempt. Several of my coworkers and I were unhappy, to say the least, because we all took one look at the email and said that a blind man should've been able to pick up on this. And then someone chimed in with probably what was the best comment about why this happened. He suggested that it's been many years since we've seen this kind of attack go this rampant so everyone's guard was let down such that they didn't believe these attacks happened any more.

okay, yet another deathfest scheduled (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33560310)

Herman+Naeckarts. totally man-made. totally fatal. called 'deterrence'. totally opposed to the creators' intentions for us.

Why is the title not worded "Windows worm"? (4, Informative)

couchslug (175151) | about 4 years ago | (#33560508)

Certainly any such story on /. should point out the affected operating systems...

"I'm not a negative person" (2, Insightful)

Tomsk70 (984457) | about 4 years ago | (#33560718)

I'm not a burglar either - I was just breaking into your house and messing it up to show you how unsecure the locks are.

Anti-war is not "Anti-US" (4, Insightful)

wealthychef (584778) | about 4 years ago | (#33561052)

Just because the worm author makes statements agains the US war in Iraq and calls himself "Iraqi resistance" does not mean he is anti-US. I too am agains the war in Iraq. Is it possible to disagree with US foreign policy and not be accused of being a traitor? Yes, I know he crossed a line making a (fairly harmless) worm, but this guy sounds as much aligned with US interests as most beer-swilling, harley-riding, pit bull owning flag wavers.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>