Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

WikiLeaks Defenders Threaten Amazon

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the world-war-something-or-other dept.

Security 703

healeyb writes "CNN is announcing that, starting at 11 AM EST, the hackers (coined Operation Payback) responsible for the DDoS attacks on MasterCard, Visa, PayPal, and PostFinance have promised to commence an attack against Amazon for their revocation of the WikiLeaks EC2 account. They released a do-it-yourself hacking tool online Thursday so other people can help with the attacks they say took down the websites of MasterCard and Visa..."

cancel ×

703 comments

M.A.D. (4, Insightful)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502150)

Somehow I don't see escalation of online actions being to anyone's benefit in the long run.

Re:M.A.D. (3, Insightful)

SuperRenaissanceMan (1027668) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502174)

No. A site slowdown could hurt Amazon's holiday sales, but not nearly as much as the government could for aiding a "terrorist."

Re:M.A.D. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502232)

Who's the terrorist? The one who did the *acts* reported in the documentation? Or the one who's letting others know they did it?

I know which it is, and it's not the one's letting the cat out of the bag.

That's right, the good ole US Gubernment is the terrorist now.

Re:M.A.D. (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502484)

Anyone who wants to flay is a terrorist. The only way to stop terrorism is molesting people. They haven't found any bombs yet, but that's proves that it's working.

Re:M.A.D. (3, Funny)

spun (1352) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502570)

Anyone who wants to flay is a terrorist. The only way to stop terrorism is molesting people. They haven't found any bombs yet, but that's proves that it's working.

Doesn't that depend on what you want to flay? I mean, flaying a deer is okay. Flaying a TSA agent, not so much.

Re:M.A.D. (5, Insightful)

dougmc (70836) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502240)

We'll just call anybody a terrorist nowadays, won't we?

Re:M.A.D. (4, Insightful)

Marc Desrochers (606563) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502366)

Pretty much. There always an "ist" of some sort to battle against. There were fascists, that went away. Then came communists, that got old. Now it's terrorist. You have to tell people who the bad guys are or else they start looking at what you've been up to.

Re:M.A.D. (4, Insightful)

spidercoz (947220) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502716)

To quote the Prophet Bueller, "Not that I condone fascism, or any -ism for that matter. -Ism's in my opinion are not good. A person should not believe in an -ism, he should believe in himself."

Re:M.A.D. (3, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502724)

Pretty much. There always an "ist" of some sort to battle against. There were fascists, that went away. Then came communists, that got old. Now it's terrorist.

How do I move it along to lobbyist?

You have to tell people who the bad guys are or else they start looking at what you've been up to.

From Bob Dylan's "Talkin' John Birch Paranoid Blues" at the end once the narrator has picked over his friends and family and everyone else with a fine tooth comb:

Well, I fin'ly started thinkin' straight
When I run outa things to investigate.
Couldn't imagine doin' anything else,
So now I'm sittin' home investigatin' myself!
Hope I don't find out anything . . . hmm, great God!

Someone needs to update that song for DHS and TSA.

Re:M.A.D. (1)

SuperRenaissanceMan (1027668) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502384)

Clearly we will, whether or not it is justified. Hence the quotes suggesting that the label might be improperly applied.

Re:M.A.D. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502448)

The term was pretty much diluted beyond any usefulness with the "Bush is the real terrorist" stuff. Which was pretty much the point of that.

Re:M.A.D. (2)

Gohtar (1829140) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502546)

I am not sure why we are calling these script kiddies hackers. There is no hacking going on at all.

Re:M.A.D. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502652)

Yes. In fact, one post above calls the US Government terrorist so I guess that proves your point that we will call anybody terrorist.

Re:M.A.D. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502260)

U Mad Bro?

Re:M.A.D. (2)

Stregano (1285764) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502400)

Nope, just another mother who forgot to put the final D in MADD

Re:M.A.D. (4, Insightful)

Motard (1553251) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502408)

Yes, this will likely have the effect of governments exerting greater control over the internet - exactly what the script kiddies would be most outraged by.

Re:M.A.D. (1, Interesting)

Weezul (52464) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502422)

Yes, voluntary DDoS attacks are a legitimate form of non-violent resistance, assuming people use their own computers, probably not corporations. And these are these first opt-in DDoS attacks being seen sympathetically by the main stream press (outside the U.S.). So big win!

Btw, Low Orbit Ion Cannon (LOIC) is NOT a hacking tool. It's just a opt-in DDoS tool.

Re:M.A.D. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502568)

No it isn't, not shopping at Amazon would be non violent.

Attacking the site is a form of violent protest.

Re:M.A.D. (1)

Duradin (1261418) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502604)

Voluntary DDoS attacks are non-physical-violence at best.

Being a DDoS *ATTACK* should be a clue that it is violence.

Re:M.A.D. (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502718)

A verbal attack isn't violence. That part of your point is invalid. The other, I'm not saying either way. I just wanted to comment on that second bit.

Re:M.A.D. (3, Insightful)

sycodon (149926) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502616)

Essentially they are saying that if you don't agree with them and/or support their cause, they are going to blockade your business.

It's not a boycott and it's not a protest. It is actively interfering with business. No different than parking a cement truck in front of the doors.

If this becomes acceptable, then no one with a web presence is immune to wackos with a grudge or those with legitimate beefs.

I knew terrorism was good for something (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502160)

I am so convinced that a global campaign of sabotage and terrorism will convince the American public and corporations that Wikileaks is harmless to US interests.

DIY hacking tool? (5, Funny)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502202)

Is wget in a while loop insufficient?

Re:DIY hacking tool? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502282)

It would be more interesting if they could run the tool from within EC2.

just sayin'

Re:DIY hacking tool? (3, Funny)

entotre (1929174) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502294)

The 'hacking tool' for everyone: object on F5-key

So (5, Funny)

Kymation (948416) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502362)

My cat is a hacking tool?

Re:So (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502412)

My cat is a hacking tool?

You've seen the hairballs it's hacked up, right?

Re:DIY hacking tool? (2)

Domini (103836) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502618)

Yes it is, but "wget &" in a loop is more what they're going for... except they modify wget so that it does not also kill your machine...

Re:DIY hacking tool? (2)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502660)

So all you really need is wget, while, and nice.

Re:DIY hacking tool? (3, Interesting)

the_one(2) (1117139) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502650)

Take a look at LOIC (Low Orbit Ion Cannon). The sourcecode is on sourceforge and everything=). An encyclopedia dramatica page on the subject can be found here [encycloped...matica.com]

So now we MUST follow Wikileaks agenda? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502204)

So much for freedom.

Re:So now we MUST follow Wikileaks agenda? (2)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502496)

You don't have to. You could fight Wikileaks or you could stay out of it entirely. So, with three basic realms of possibility, I'd say that freedom still exists. Freedom does not ensure that all possibilities are particularly appetizing.

Hackers? (3, Insightful)

Degenerateuk (1609379) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502212)

Yet another case of script kiddies giving hackers a bad name...

DIY hacking tools (5, Insightful)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502214)

really isn't 'hacking' - or is it?

This news did nothing more than re-direct a lot of people to Amazon.com just to see if it was working. Then, they got distracted searching for something cool and subsequently made a few purchases.

This makes it worse (2, Insightful)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502216)

The US government now has another excuse for an internet-wide crackdown. Thanks assholes.

Re:This makes it worse (3, Insightful)

healeyb (1799034) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502286)

The fear of a government crackdown is probably the best possible excuse to continue what you are doing.

Re:This makes it worse (5, Insightful)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502346)

I don't know about that. I think certain people in the government are just waiting for something like this to happen to help convince the 80 percent of the US that are morons its time to "stop the cyber-terrorists". Then its unique ID's on the internet, centralized and monitored network hubs, ect. Maybe Im being a tin-foil hat nut but I don't have alot of faith in the US population that allows themselves to be duped into the Patriot act and TSA gropings.

Re:This makes it worse (5, Insightful)

healeyb (1799034) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502458)

You may be right. But to resolve to sit quietly and just take it all out of fear isn't the solution.

Re:This makes it worse (2)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502640)

Im not suggesting that. It be more effective to get people involved in a boycott of Visa and Mastercard. Some people can survive only on cash in their wallet for a few months (by that I mean they take it out of the bank when they need it rather than use a Visa or Mastercard).

Re:This makes it worse (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502516)

You know, it would be far quicker to just attach unique ID numbers to tinfoil hats.

Re:This makes it worse (3, Interesting)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502394)

The US government now has another excuse for an internet-wide crackdown. Thanks assholes.

What makes you think this isn't a false-flag operation? Duck, signed comms coming this way.

Re:This makes it worse (4, Insightful)

retech (1228598) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502462)

Precisely. In the end we'll look back and see the mountains of spin the US Gov', CNN and FOX put on this to convince the world that hackers will eventually take over the world. They'll cite stats on how they compromise this or that. They'll interview ppl who had their identity stolen and close the interview with things like: "..it's only a matter of time before we all end up like John here."

While I do think their heart is in the right place, this is a woefully misplaced effort. If they could instead boycott all these places. If they could get say an 80% reduction in customers of PayPal and Amazon for a month, that would seriously damage them. If they could get a global effort of people to not use their Visa or MC for 6 months, that would make everyone take notice. But sadly, like much of the current social spectrum, they'll have a kneejerk reaction, applaud themselves and then forget about it. But the gov't's and corporations will NOT. We will all pay for this type of behaviour.

I'm left to ask: Why Wikileaks? Why not fight for the stack of equally as good social causes and try to stop the mountain of injustice we have? Oh, yeah, cuz this is the hot topic du jour.

Re:This makes it worse (5, Insightful)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502606)

I'm left to ask: Why Wikileaks? Why not fight for the stack of equally as good social causes and try to stop the mountain of injustice we have? Oh, yeah, cuz this is the hot topic du jour.

The US government is perpetrating quite a lot of the social injustices these days IMHO.

SHUT UP, BITCH! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502686)

The ONLY reason the shadowy hacker group[1] known as anonymous does anything is :
FOR THE LULZ!



[1] yeah, I know, I'm just yankin' yer chain. I heard NPR make that misteak this time, last night.

Re:This makes it worse (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502470)

What is it we say around here? The more you tighten your grip the more star systems will slip through your fingers? Or something like that.

Bring it. You're a shuddering fucking pansy who fears the government. The government should fear YOU.

Re:This makes it worse (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502532)

I really don't think it's right to blame the movement for the backlash. That's like blaming people who practice free speech for the censoring of free speech. The enemy is the government removal of rights, not the ones who provoke them. Honestly, the government needs no provoking, their objectives have always been the same whether we fight them or not. Frankly, we should all be signing up for this movement. Unfortunately humanity is for the most part too chicken to revolt.

Trojan Horse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502220)

Download at your own risk.

Hackers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502222)

I'm stunned that all media, including Slashdot, just repeat that they are "hackers". What do they do?

They essentially go to the website and visit it. Voluntarily. No force at all applied.

How is that hacking?

Re:Hackers? (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502556)

Indeed, this is at best social engineering, and even that's questionable given that most of the people know perfectly well what's going on and are participating because they believe in it not in spite of their beliefs.

Court order on coverage? (2)

healeyb (1799034) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502228)

gawker has said, although unsubstantiated, that websites are being handed federal orders to stop chronicling the attacks. If true (which it very well may not be), I would be very curious to learn on what grounds the coverage is being ordered to stop.

Re:Court order on coverage? (1)

mibe (1778804) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502292)

It's probably in the PATRIOT Act somewhere...

Re:Court order on coverage? (1)

healeyb (1799034) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502322)

"Thou shalt not cover things which thy government dislikes. Punishment: Guantanamo."

Cataclysm servers... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502230)

must be down for an update

But they're too powerful! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502234)

Can they really take down Amazon? I though Amazon was too big, and had too much bandwidth, and too many servers, and most of the attackers were running out of their home Internet connections.

Re:But they're too powerful! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502380)

EC2 is slow -- really slow, and its compute capacity is heavily oversold. Finding expensive operations on several EC2-hosted sites and hitting those repeatedly would likely be a viable plan, considering the number of individuals involved in these efforts.

Is this really hacking? (5, Insightful)

Dyinobal (1427207) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502276)

I honestly don't see how this can be considered 'hacking' to me it sounds like cyber vandalism. A petty crime for petty reasons. Amazon had valid reasons for dropping wikileaks, they aren't crusaders they are a business. This is pretty much tantamount to being the jackass that sits at the red light until it's yellow and then gunning it through the intersection, to make the rest of the people behind you wait for the next light.

Re:Is this really hacking? (1)

Dyinobal (1427207) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502332)

Make that Green light until it's yellow.

Re:Is this really hacking? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502474)

Unless you are in the UK where a yellow does follow a red, then you run over last-minute, innocent pedestrians. Same analogy, I guess.

Re:Is this really hacking? (1)

ModernGeek (601932) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502706)

Maybe he lives in opposite land, you insensitive clod!

Re:Is this really hacking? (1)

zakeria (1031430) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502636)

Cut of the nose to spite the face!

Re:Is this really hacking? (4, Insightful)

sockonafish (228678) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502728)

If dropping Wikileaks ends up disrupting their sales, then maybe they'll think twice before dropping a customer that the State Department dislikes. The DDoS attacks are giving them a business reason NOT to drop Wikileaks.

This one could actually hurt (3, Insightful)

MetalliQaZ (539913) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502280)

If they were able to actually knock Amazon offline, which I think is mostly unlikely to happen, it would be the first to make a serious economic impact. Mastercard's website may have been unreachable, but their credit processing facilities were just fine, as I demonstrated with my own card several times over the past few days. Amazon, on the other hand, is in the middle of their holiday rush, which is crucially important to them. IIRC, it is the reason they had the cloud infrastructure in the first place: their immense holiday resources went unused during the rest of the year. The last thing they need is a DDoS attack right now. I wonder if they might try to appease the mob with some kind of nod to anon in the form of a daily book deal or similar...

Re:This one could actually hurt (1)

u38cg (607297) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502544)

I seriously doubt it. Mastercard barely *needs* a front page; their job is shuffling money between bank accounts and as long as they do that they are making money. Their regular traffic is unlikely to be tenth of a percent of Amazon's. It's not like people don't try taking down site like Amazon relatively frequently.

They couldn't take Amazon out - can't happen. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502684)

I've been on Amazon getting some gifts and had no problems.

Amazon has been around a long time and they started out as an internet company - in other words, they've considered this a looooong time ago.

All of Assange's fans from all around the World will not be able to take Amazon out.

Thus... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502298)

Thus proving once and for all that the best course of action for any company is to stay as far away from wikileaks as possible. I guess it's the entropic principle that it's so much easier to destroy something than to create something, but I wish more people were thinking about constructive things to help WL and an open internet. But what could that be? Running TOR nodes? Hosting the documents? Giving money?

Re:Thus... (0)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502638)

No, this proves that being worthless scum whores might have some consequences. Mastercard, PayPal, Visa, EveryDNS and Amazon were all perfectly happy taking the money, they knew what they were taking money for and then chose later on to flip flop on the issue. Of those, EveryDNS is probably the only one with a halfway reasonable excuse, the others were happy with the money as long as they didn't need any spine.

Not particularly effective (1)

emgarf (727623) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502302)

Digital terrorism doesn't seem like a particularly effective way to sell a point of view.

Re:Not particularly effective (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502386)

It isn't particularly convincing, but the knee-jerk reaction to the threat of digital terrorism will require you to have to get felt-up by a federal employee before launching your web browser.

Re:Not particularly effective (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502434)

agreed, but this is exactly how the attack on Scientology started. DDoS attacks were never meant as a be all, end all solution. They interested media groups in the issue, paving the way for more legal methods to be used to garner attention.

DDOSing Amazon will be a challenge (4, Insightful)

FlameWise (84536) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502358)

Considering Wikileaks rehosted to Amazon to escape their original sites getting DDOSed exactly BECAUSE Amazon is damn hard to DDOS, I wonder whether Payback can actually do that.

Maybe they just consider it a challenge they can't resist.

Re:DDOSing Amazon will be a challenge (1)

Stregano (1285764) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502424)

Or they are throwing out a subtle hint that they can't do it, and need a bunch of people to hop in to help

Re:DDOSing Amazon will be a challenge (1)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502502)

Remember that no resources on planet earth are infinite. Amazon knows this. If 15,000 people initiate these DDoS attacks, Amazon will be in trouble. Bad press also does no good.

Re:DDOSing Amazon will be a challenge (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502682)

I don't think at this stage that they're really trying to take down Amazon, just send a message. If they really wanted to screw with Amazon, they'd be targetting the DNS servers and routers which allow traffic to get to Amazon. Or they'd be throwing a hell of a lot more traffic there way. This is just a way of tapping them and suggesting that this sort of flip flop whoring can be costly.

DDOSing (5, Insightful)

Dan East (318230) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502396)

I think that those holding the reigns of the botnets doing the current DDOSing are making massive mistakes employing them at this time. Not only that, the targets they are choosing are not valuable. Take for example visa.com and mastercard.com. Have you ever been to those sites? For all intent and purposes they are superficial, and have nothing to do with the logistics of the financial services they provide. If you go to either site and try to view financial information you will be given a list of banks that issue that type of card, which provides links to the respective banks that actually issue cards.

Furthermore, the various governments of the world are watching this whole affair with intense scrutiny, and the powers that be will be alarmed over the power wielded by these botnets. It will serve as a wake-up call. By utilizing their resources, these people have shown their hand and provided the evidence and forensics needed to aid in the dissemination of those nets.

As far as Amazon goes, they are so distributed and have such massive resources that I doubt a DDOS attack would have much effect. I might be wrong, but there is a world of difference between Amazon and public relations sites like visa.com and mastercard.com.

Re:DDOSing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502534)

visa and mastercard.com may not be valuable to their day to day runnings (although apparently some useful stuff was brought to a halt, thus losing them revenue), it does serve another purpose. how many people now know that mastercard and visa blocked wikileaks donations that didn't know previously?

the beauty and bane of Anonymous is that it isn't really a group. there may be instigators but if they all fell off the planet tomorrow, or all decided to stop, people would just fill their places because all it takes to organise a DDOS is spamming a few flyers on the chans calling on people to point LOIC at site a at time b.

Re:DDOSing (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502662)

I think that those holding the reigns of the botnets doing the current DDOSing are making massive mistakes employing them at this time. Not only that, the targets they are choosing are not valuable. Take for example visa.com and mastercard.com. Have you ever been to those sites? For all intent and purposes they are superficial, and have nothing to do with the logistics of the financial services they provide. If you go to either site and try to view financial information you will be given a list of banks that issue that type of card, which provides links to the respective banks that actually issue cards.

Yeah, that's the problem, unless the online merchants have to redirect through those sites in order to get to their payment processor or 3DSecure. In fact, taking out 3DSecure would put a major dent into the Verified by Visa/MasterCard SecureCode stuff - retailers hurting might end up just dropping that since a DoS of that would prevent anyone from checking out on those retailers. Would definitely hurt Visa/Mastercard's attempts at forcing everyone to use 3DSecure if it keeps going down for everyone during a major holiday season.

Hitting Amazon isn't terribly interesting. Hitting Amazon's secure site could be more interesting as it could possibly make checkout slow enough that real customers abandon their purchases.

No official attack orders yet (3, Informative)

Predius (560344) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502404)

11:50EST and the target change off api.paypal.com hasn't taken place. There is serious internal strife as to weather or not to attack Amazon at all given that they so far haven't been able to reliably take out paypal.

Re:No official attack orders yet (2)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502712)

To be fair, I'm guessing that has to do with PayPal being unredeemably evil and Amazon being only very evil.

DDoS Attacks, or Rightful Protest? (5, Insightful)

bradgoodman (964302) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502420)

One could argue that people launching DDoS "attacks" are in-fact perusing a rightful protest.

Isn't having a script to continually request a page for one web site the technical equivilant of marching back and forth in front of a building holding a picket sign?

Why should people have the right to do both if they are unhappy with - and wish to protest a government, company or organization?

I am *not* saying it is right or legal for people to write trojan horses to set up botnets to con others' computers to unknowingly (or unwillingly) do ones bidding - but isn't it completely within an individuals right to do this themselves, from their own homes, with their own equipment?

P.S. I don't think the Wikileaks leaks did *any* damage whatsoever. It may have "undignified" a few "dignitaries" - but that's it. Period. In reality, I think it does the world a *lot* of good when everyone suddenly can see everyone elses cards - and know their thoughts and opinions.

Re:DDoS Attacks, or Rightful Protest? (2)

emgarf (727623) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502562)

If you are depriving someone else of their right to choose to be a patron of an online -or- brick/mortar store by a DoS, it's not a righteous protest any more.

Re:DDoS Attacks, or Rightful Protest? (1)

tycoex (1832784) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502656)

Bravo, if I had mod points you would receive one.

Re:DDoS Attacks, or Rightful Protest? (1)

Aqualung812 (959532) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502672)

One could argue that people launching DDoS "attacks" are in-fact perusing a rightful protest.

Isn't having a script to continually request a page for one web site the technical equivilant of marching back and forth in front of a building holding a picket sign?

No, it is not the same as a sign. To me, a DDoS is the same as anti-abortion people locking themselves to the doors of a clinic, or WTO protesters blocking the streets so the meeting can't happen.

You have the right to protest, but you don't have the right to force people's actions.

Re:DDoS Attacks, or Rightful Protest? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502722)

No one couldn't.

They are intentionally attacking another company's property to prevent other people from using it. There is absolutely nothing ethical or admirable about their behavior.

If they really wanted to protest they wouldn't stop at amazon, would get rid of their visa and mastercard credit card and debit cards and wouldn't use PayPal. Those are valid, non violent and ethical forms of protest.

This is just a bunch of kids that haven't grown up yet.

Inaccuracy? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502438)

LOIC is a tool that has been around for a while. Why would they say it was released Thursday?

Shunning (2)

srussia (884021) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502440)

Shunning [wikipedia.org] plus Direct democracy [wikipedia.org] equals this.

Going Off Half-Cocked (1, Insightful)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502472)

What's more likely, that these tech companies received National Security Letters and can't talk about them under threat of theft, caging or worse, or that these tech companies all just fell over and made up legally and technically bogus excuses because they're idiots?

The only positive result that can come out of these attacks is that the next tech companies might push back against the government harder, but if there's a chance you're taking out innocent bystanders you're doing wrong - end of story.

please stop (1)

Cybertoy (1095633) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502480)

please stop calling them hackers. Anonymous are NOT hackers.

Going from stupid to outright insane... (2, Insightful)

mseeger (40923) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502492)

When someone who says "X is violating the freedom of speech rights" and tries to shut him/her/it up as punishment, than that person has not yet grasped the principle of "freedom of speech".

On the tactical level: Disrupting Amazon such a short time before christmas? Fox will have a field day.... At best it will convince the average man/woman on the street, that Wikileaks is evil (since they won't distinguish between Wikileaks and their anonymous supporters). It's like saying "We are facing a supperior enemy, let's make more of them". To mee it looks like some kind of Anti-Sun-Tzu or Clausewitz-in-reverse. Is there goal beyond "venting frustration"?

CU, Martin

Amazon? (2)

cgenman (325138) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502494)

How exactly do you take Amazon's servers offline? Amazon is the people you cloud your servers to when you're out of capacity. Visa / Mastercard / Paypal... Sure. Plausible targets. DDosing Amazon is like trying to DDos Google, and only 1 hop away from ddosing 127.0.0.1.

Now, if they specifically targeted one part of Amazon's infrastructure... say, their payment validation server, they might be somewhere. But all of Amazon?

Re:Amazon? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502626)

We are talking about 4chan folks here, give'em a break willya? Pinging an IP constitutes hacking on their eyes.

Yeah, sure, there are a few who actually know

Old new is no news (1)

kiwix (1810960) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502514)

LOIC has been around for a long time. According to Wikipedia it was allready used for Operation Chanalogy, almost three years ago.

I hope (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502552)

they get arrested. I had enough of these low life bleeding hearts.
Amazon is a private enterprise and they decide how they run their joint. If you don't like it, well, get the fuck off their lawn!

Digital riot (3, Interesting)

demonbug (309515) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502582)

A bunch of angry idiots decide to have themselves a little riot, do some burning and head-cracking, and so far hardly a comment questioning whether this is in any way appropriate? I don't like the efforts to destroy/discredit Wikileaks any more than most here, but I hope the perpetrators of these "retaliatory" crimes feel the full weight of the law coming down on them. Absolutely disgusting to be violently attacking a business because that business made a decision that you disagree with. I have no patience or sympathy for these criminals (and I'm about out of patience with the fucktards who call themselves Anonymous).

You want to call a boycott? Fine. I might even join you. But the second you start attacking them and doing damage, you have crossed the line and deserve to be thrown in jail. There is no valid reason for this, just a bunch of thugs looking for some amusement.

Inviting prosecution (3, Informative)

The Dodger (10689) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502602)

The use of this LOIC tool that this group are encouraging people to download onto their PCs and fire up to launch these DDoS attacks will be easily detectable and tracable. I'm sure that the companies that are being attacked will be keeping records of the malicious traffic, to be passed on to the police who will, in turn, be able to tie the IP addresses back to broadband connections.

So, I wouldn't be surprised if we see raids, confiscation of computer equipment and (in the UK, at least) charges brought under the Computer Misuse Act. I wonder what the average decline in income is, due to one's inability to get certain jobs because of a criminal record.

And, by the way, those who think that they can get away with it by claiming that it must be a virus infection are deluded - forensic examination will reveal the deliberate downloading of the LOIC tool.

Self-defeating (3, Insightful)

hessian (467078) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502608)

The powers that be: You need strong government and law enforcement because most people are unruly vandals.

Anonymous: We believe in a more anarchistic world, and so we're going to vandalize things until disorder comes about.

Silent Majority: Guess the powers that be called that one right.

BAD idea (3, Interesting)

Joey Vegetables (686525) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502610)

There are morally, ethically and legally sound ways to protest Amazon's actions if you feel as I do that they were unacceptable. Committing crimes against it, and its customers, is not one of those ways. It is not morally acceptable, and it takes away any moral high ground one might otherwise have had. FYI, I believe Amazon was coerced to some unknown but probably large degree by the government. There is no way to be sure, but I believe that it was, and I have tempered my own response accordingly. I have canceled plans to move some hosting to Amazon in 2011, both to protests its actions and also because it has demonstrated an unwillingness to host material of a potentially controversial nature. However I continue to do business with it as a retailer, since as far as I'm aware Amazon's retail business has behaved in a morally, ethically and legally sound fashion.

I went to Amazon and made a purchase (0, Troll)

Windcatcher (566458) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502612)

Maybe later today I'll look for somethig else to buy. I'd like to hear someone announce a valid reason why their hatred of the US is so blindingly intense that they consider actions like this appropriate. In the meantime, I'm going to support Amazon and any other victims of these people.

"Amazon had valid reasons for dropping wikileaks" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34502674)

So they could sell all the data wikileaks collected as an eBook: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B004EEOLIU ??

Counterproductive (1, Insightful)

davev2.0 (1873518) | more than 3 years ago | (#34502688)

If some company does something involving Wikileaks that this group does not like, this group will punish that company with DDoS and other actions, right?

So, if I own a company, why should I provide any kind of service to Wikileaks? If I decided I don't want to provide my services to Wikileaks because someone is attacking them or I don't like what they are doing, which is my right, I am going to be pilloried by an anonymous group who are hell bent on hurting me and my business for doing something they do not like.

These attacks are showing companies that they should not do business with Wikileaks and any site like Wikileaks.

These attacks are hypocritical as well. The attackers are saying to these companies "You must do as we wish. You must associate with Wikileaks even if you don't want to or find their behavior objectionable." They are attempting to impose their will upon others from a position of secrecy.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...