×

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!

Anonymous Takes Down Turkish Government Site

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the turkey-need-not-be-pejorative dept.

Government 117

arisvega writes with word that the group of hackers known as Anonymous "has taken down a Turkish government website in a protest against recently introduced Internet filters that many consider to be censorship. They also appear to have published a manifesto. Turkey has a long history of Internet censorship, with the country's ISPs having blocked YouTube and numerous other sites in the the past couple of years." From the linked manifesto: "(The Turkish government) has blocked thousands of websites and blogs while abusive legal proceedings against online journalists persist. The government now wants to impose a new filtering system on the 22nd of August that will make it possible to keep records of all the people's internet activity. Though it remains opaque why and how the system will be put in place, it is clear that the government is taking censorship to the next level."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

117 comments

The website is (2)

vajorie (1307049) | more than 2 years ago | (#36412846)

Re:The website is (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36412968)

Burn the Turkish flag [flagburningworld.com]

Re:The website is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36413576)

Burn the Turkish flag [flagburningworld.com]

Dude, I've seen you shamelessly spamming your shitty little site like that here before. For anyone who hasn't visited- don't bother. Trust me, it's the blandest, most uninteresting execution of the provocative-sounding title one could imagine. Click on some icon-sized flag and a boring short animation of it burning plays before it disappears and a tally increments.

That's it. I'm sure that it's a US government plot to stop angry Middle Eastern gentlemen from burning their flag by making the whole process seem as anodyne as possible. Yaaawwn.

Re:The website is (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 2 years ago | (#36416044)

That's something I didn't quite get, what's so "horrible" about burning a flag? Are we so dependent on totems and fetishes, after all those years of civilization?

Don't get me wrong, if someone loves his country or is proud of its achievements, or just likes it lots, all fine and nice. I enjoy living where I live as well and if push comes to shove, I might consider defending it with arms. But getting worked up about someone burning the flag? Fffft. If it keeps you warm, have fun. You bought it, it's your property, you may destroy it. No problem with that. Burn my (the one I own) flag and you pay for it!

Yes, it's a symbol of a nation and I guess burning it is a statement that the person doing so does not like that nation. Ok. Accepted. You don't like my country. Now please explain why I should care.

Re:The website is (1)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413066)

http://www.tib.gov.tr/ [tib.gov.tr]

Or maybe you just slashdotted it...

Re:The website is (1)

vajorie (1307049) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413300)

It was my jailbait for you all.

slashdotted it...

BTK [wikipedia.org] had an announcement about TIB on a Turkish newspaper today, saying that they will get the IP addresses of the attackers and will "possibly punish them" for it (1 [gelecekonline.com], in Turkish). I posted the link so we all can have a touristic visit to a Turkish jail.

PS. Turkish media are now reporting (most probably upon government directives) that the attacks were not successful despite initial reports.

Re:The website is (2)

xenopain (1153495) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413186)

For all trying to check whether the website is still down, TIB actually blocked connections out of Turkey to their website as a precaution against this attack. Soon they will cut the cord and claim their website is not affected at all.

Re:The website is (3, Funny)

vajorie (1307049) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413508)

TIB actually blocked connections out of Turkey to their website as a precaution against this attack.

DoS'ing yourself to avoid being attacked... They are experts in security!

These fucktards regulate the internet in my country...

Re:The website is (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 2 years ago | (#36416048)

Ultimate security is in a disconnected computer. That part of the ISO27001 they got right.

Now let's talk about that "availability" part of the trinity "security - integrity - availability".

Re:The website is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36416062)

That was "confidentiality - integrity - availability", morpheus.

Hacking increase (4, Interesting)

thecounterweight (2256980) | more than 2 years ago | (#36412864)

Is it just me or has the number of news stories relating to someone being hacked or DDOSd dramatically increased in the past few months?? From PSN (which I am a member of), to the wave of recent LulzSec and Anonymous stories, I cant ever remember a streak of hacking like this one. Loving equilibrium, I think It would be awesome if someone at least attempted to hack LulzSec. They seem less interested in making the world better like Anonymous, and more interested in just showing off their hax0rz skillz.

Re:Hacking increase (2)

DurendalMac (736637) | more than 2 years ago | (#36412922)

They've found that they're getting more and more media attention and loving it.

Re:Hacking increase (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36413142)

exactly. Also taking down a site. pfsst big deal. If you have a few thousand computers most people can take down most sites (not the big ones). As most sites are not even ready for it.

Now putting a tor link on the site and making the computer a tor entry point. NOW that would have made a statement...

Can be done by a 1 person in less than... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36414374)

5 minutes time... easily. You don't need DDOS (multiple machines) to suck up the connections either: 1 single man can do it.

APK

P.S.=> Can you "counter" for it? Yes, & a couple ways:

I feel the 2nd is more effective, personally...

---

1.) Via software OR hardware router firewall tables - IF you want to take that route, it's an ONGOING HASSLE, if the hacker/cracker KNOWS what they're doing, keeping @ it (that is, IF the hacker/cracker doesn't know ways around it, & trust me, there are that too)

AND, perhaps MORE EFFECTIVELY?

2.) Using features in your Operating System's IP Stack, such as that found in Windows!

E.G.=> SynAttackProtect , which tells the system in the case of the Syn-Ack type attack, to drop trying to re-communicate with systems that are "bombing you" with unrouteable requests...

In fact, here is a write up on that much:

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc938202.aspx [microsoft.com]

---

There you go!

(NOW - Hopefully, some Linux person will post the equitable substitute they use, & some Mac folks too, so others can GAIN by this on their platforms also!)

... apk

Re:Can be done by a 1 person in less than... (1)

UBfusion (1303959) | more than 2 years ago | (#36415888)

You didn't say how many more minutes it would take before I hear a knock on my door... Thank you for helping me get arrested.

Simple way to avoid that (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36415980)

That's don't pull crap like DoS/DDoS attacks then (IF you're doing so).

APK

P.S.=> Yes, it's THAT simple... apk

Re:Hacking increase (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36413404)

They're also getting more police attention. Now we get to find out how good they really are. It's not what you can do, it's what you can get away with.

Unless the press get bored, which they almost certainly will. Then the public will forget and the police can go back to sleep.

Re:Hacking increase (1)

Securityemo (1407943) | more than 2 years ago | (#36412978)

Anonymous has no agenda, because people or groups who are operating under the Anonymous banner do not communicate or coordinate with one another. Sure, the case might prove to be that in reality there's only one small active group that are actually competent and driven enough to pull off "advanced persistent threat" status - but it might as well be any number of people and groups involved. And even then, that group would probably shift, or new groups and people could take up the banner.

Someone could start hacking charities tomorrow and claim to be "Anonymous".

Re:Hacking increase (1)

cozzbp (1845636) | more than 2 years ago | (#36414570)

True, but if the organization's name was "hackingsensation!" people could still start hacking charities tomorrow claiming to be that group. It's not so much the name "Anonymous", but the fact that they are a hacking group.

Re:Hacking increase (1)

xantonin (1973196) | more than 2 years ago | (#36415634)

Every time I see a story about "anonymous" I just replace the word with "unknown people", and all the stories make more sense.

Re:Hacking increase (2)

xilefone1 (2257002) | more than 2 years ago | (#36412994)

To be specific, media coverage about hacking has increased. Actual hacking activity might have increased. The two are very separate things.

Dear Anonymous: A question... apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36414086)

What about folks like myself that use firewall rules tables & HOSTS files to filter out KNOWN BAD SITES that put malware onto your system?

IS THAT "CENSORSHIP"?

What about DNS systems that do so, such as ScrubIT, OpenDNS, & Norton DNS also??

AGAIN - IS THAT "CENSORSHIP"?

I.E.-> Is blocking out/filtering things that are KNOWN to screwup a person's machine (or worse, server systems that have great importance for whatever reasons) "censorship" to you?

I mean, if so? You guys have it ALL wrong...

NOW - I know that the guys @ "LulzSec" aren't totally assinine & bogus: How so? Well...

Because they told the NHS they had problems, in exposing admin passwords, & telling them about it here http://uk.ibtimes.com/articles/160624/20110610/lulzsec-lulz-security-nhs-health-service-cyber-attack-weak-hack-hackers-hacked-sony-nintendo-network.htm [ibtimes.com]

(Rather than abusing it)...

How about you guys @ "Anonymous"???

APK

P.S.=> To thecounterweight: YES - It's increased, massively, & you're NOT the only one noting it... a poster named KevMar submitted to the "recent" section here on the same note:

http://slashdot.org/journal/266490/Year-of-the-Hack [slashdot.org]

And, I can tell you, point-blank (from filling a HOSTS file & my firewall rules tables since 1997 vs. known bad sites & servers online that screw up your system) that all manner of online bogusness has increased... massively, & by MANY orders of magnitude.

E.G.-> Back in 1997-2007, I had MAYBE 500,000 entries of known bad sites/servers in my HOSTS file... now, since then? The growth is PHENOMENAL, & I have nearly 1, 430,000 entries...

I.E.-> I've had to NEARLY TRIPLE what I had in only 1/2 the time it took me to get to 500g's of entries!

(That tell you anything?)

They're doing it because nobody did anything about it or does anything about it... so they go with it! No consequences involved... & only NOW are gov't.'s & such doing a little about it, after massive damage has been done!

Nope, as-per-usual, it's "the community taking care of itself" & doing what I do: Protect yourself... nobody else will!

...apk

Re:Dear Anonymous: A question... apk (1)

byornski (1022169) | more than 2 years ago | (#36415536)

Yeah, triple isn't really what most people call "MANY orders of magnitude".....

Point's there (3x as many in 1/2 the time) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36415662)

Of the original batch I had "collected up" & found myself circa 1997-2007, which is a decade long span... albeit, that tripling came in less than 3 yrs. time & 3x to me? Is many orders of magnitude (especially over a timeframe (think differential equations)).

So, "nitpick all you want" but... there you go!

HOWEVER, while I'm here? This is what really "amazes" me, about 'humanity-in-general':

Do I think the gov't. of Turkey is right? No, but... I see their point (lame as it is, & transparent as it is: Those in POWER? Their BIGGEST FEAR is losing said power! They'll do ANYTHING to keep it - this eventually leads to their downfalls).

HOWEVER - That's just from MY perspective, & it's not MY place (or the USA, or anyone BUT Turkey) to make judgements (because my nation also pulls its share of shit, but it's not us regular folks, it's our leaders (and they sure aren't in gov't., that's for SURE & same with Turkish folks I imagine!))...

So - by way of comparison: Do I think the "hacker/cracker" guys are right, by the same token? No... but, I do see their point.

What they don't realize is, is this: Turkey's OWN people will figure it out, & do something about it... sticking your neck out, the way these "anonymous" guys are? Dumb... really dumb!

E.G.-> Ever seen the film, "Layer Cake"? If not, do...

Because the main character "XXX" makes a VERY powerful & true statement in it:

"KNOW & RESPECT YOUR ENEMY - IT IS ONLY VERY, VERY STUPID PEOPLE THAT THINK THE LAW IS STUPID... "

APK

P.S.=> They're not, & when pushed? Kevin Mitnick of ALL people could tell them that... they ought to learn by history on that note!

They're also forgetting this is a NATION, with all of a nation's resources - & one that stands to lose things, & that? That's one of the 2 most dangerous people there is (the man with everything to lose)...

The other is the man with nothing to lose! Anyhow - there you are, my rant on this entire fiasco & others like it (sooner or later, you're "going down" & that's all there is to it, IF you keep pushing)

Nations' do things like go to war, or blow folks away, when pushed... some "Food 4 Thought" for ANONYMOUS

... apk

Re:Dear Anonymous: A question... apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36415640)

Simple: If it's voluntary, it's not censorship. If you threaten me with violence if I try to circumvent your "protection", then there's something horribly wrong there...

There is, I agree: HOWEVER... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36415742)

It's not MY place, to tell Turks how to live (or "how to set in order their own house", so-to-speak)... by the same token, nor is it "Anonymous'" place either.

Sure - I heard they helped allegedly spark some revolutions elsewhere... they're dumb for it imo.

They're playing with fire man...

Turks? Hey - They aren't the USA, or the UK (nations who play things "by the law"), catch my drift?

They're "the man with EVERYTHING to lose" & they may not play by the same rules as you saw, say, Kevin Mitnick or Gary McKinnon, get (trials & prison etc.).

They might track these "anonymous" people, who *THINK* they're untouchable (they're not, trust me), & just dust them.

Sound nuts? Think about it, IF You were the turks & stood to lose control. Put yourself in THEIR shoes. Setting an example, a RADICAL example, often "cools a lot of folks' jets", & fast.

Do I think the Turks are right? No, by no means, but... they'll burn themselves in the end pulling games like this (people, sooner or later, don't take shit - especially if it comes to their kids starving OR being killed).

Do I think "Anonymous" is right?? Not really, but I see their point... I just think they're letting their prior "games" get to their heads & egos. They're very foolish keeping it up is all. People like gov't.'s & NON- US/UK gov'ts?? Do NOT play by the USA/UK "legal rules"... they dust people if pushed.

That's all I am saying.

APK

P.S.=> I said this in another reply here, it fits:

E.G.-> Ever seen the film, "Layer Cake"? If not, do...

Because the main character "XXX" makes a VERY powerful & true statement in it:

"KNOW & RESPECT YOUR ENEMY - IT IS ONLY VERY, VERY STUPID PEOPLE THAT THINK THE LAW IS STUPID... "

... apk

Re:Dear Anonymous: A question... apk (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 2 years ago | (#36416058)

Is that censorship? Depends. Opt-in (or even opt-out), it's not. If you filter "for" me without me having a say in it, and you being the government, then yes, it is censorship, even if the intent is good.

Censorship is or is not. There is no "good" censorship, and neither is there "limited" censorship. If you're sincere about protecting your people, offer them a free filter, maybe make it mandatory for ISPs to carry and advertise it to their customers so nobody could possibly claim he didn't know about its existence, but the ultimate choice has to be in the citizen's hand.

Everything else IS censorship. Intent does not matter.

Re:Hacking increase (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36415612)

I thought so too, but it's an illusion.

The reason is, that when we humans think of red, and look around, our brain automatically highlights all red things. It's the neural similarity-detecting pattern-matching in action.

The same thing can be seen with every other news story.

I also suspect, that now everyone who did such an attack either calls himself "Anonymous", because that's cool right now, or even just gets called that.
And I also suspect that "LulzSec" is just one group of people, who liked being recognized as a group, but who formerly called themselves "Anonymous", until they realized that "Anonymous" is not a group. (Perhaps by tons of /b/tards being angry at them for causing the misunderstanding. [Just a guess, of course.])

Also, believe me: Anonymous, being a word like "skaters", "geeks" or "goth", used for a subculture, and for a particularly angry too, almost by definition constantly attacks "itself".
Like Emacs vs. VI, or KDE vs. Gnome.

You can bet, that there are /b/tards right now planning on kicking their asses. (And we know from the press release, that the CIA is already doing operation W.T.F. [yeah, stupid name, but not a joke] for months now.)
You can also bet, that LulzSec will go for the holy grail of the Pentagon or something. The more they get under pressure, the more they grow, and the earlier it will happen.
(And Anonymous is just a source of chaos and rage. By definition :)

But don't worry, as they don't care for real evilness or harm. They would e.g. prefer very much, to post Goatse pics as wallpapers on all pentagon computers, over launching nukes or something. Only government groups would do that. Which doesn't mean some government group will get in with them, and simply blame Anonymous later.

Remember just this: They are doing it for the "LULZ" (schadenfreude).
Remove the ability to gain that joy, and the wave dies down asap, like it never existed.

Re:Hacking increase (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36415688)

Of course I meant: "Which doesn't mean some government group won't get in with them, and simply blame Anonymous later."
Stupid double negation. ^^

You've made a STRONG point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36416026)

If I caught your intended meaning: For all ANYBODY knows? This is another agency entirely pulling the crap, & calling themselves "anonymous" (or "lulzsec" for that matter).

Who knows who REALLY is this "anonymous" group!

(Because as I am sure you all have heard OR read the past few days now? Hacker/Cracker types get "busted", even these guys... what happens with them?? Well, "Dead, Jail, or 'Rock-N-Roll'" (rock & roll being put into work for those they 'attacked', happens more than you'd think) but either way - not good!)

Whether it's true or not also, I've been reading that a lot of these guys that do get caught, get put into the 'employ' of state agencies, to do their work for them!

(Be it legit stoppage of others doing 'hack/crack' work, OR, illegitimate stuff too, & calling themselves "anonymous" for all we know).

That's the problem - none of us has the REAL story here: It could be anyone, hiding who's REALLY "@ the wheel" of this madness-N-lunacy in other words.

No... until the "wild west online" subsides? It's just best to protect yourself as best you can, imo @ least. Messing with LARGE powerful corporate entities OR nations?? Bad business - dangerous business.

APK

P.S.=> Heh, what makes me sickest of all, about the world today? Loads, and LOADS, of deceits... I mean, why "besmirch your own reputation", when you can have "anon" take the blame, right (which is what I think you meant)? OR, get a couple of your "enemies" to 'dust' one another... while you sit back in the wings, laughing & gaining by it!

... apk

Re:Hacking increase (1)

xantonin (1973196) | more than 2 years ago | (#36415622)

They are called LulzSec for a reason, and I'm sure that reason is for the lulz. So I can't really agree with you that an organization that does things for the lulz should do anything more meaningful...

Re:Hacking increase (1)

UBfusion (1303959) | more than 2 years ago | (#36415874)

What gets published in the media as "news" is heavily filtered and several criteria have to be met before an event becomes "news". One of the criteria is whether the item has brought enough ad clicks in the recent past and the PSN hack certainly did.

Do you really think that the hacking of a minor gov site would make the news in e.g. CNN two years ago?

The number of such news stories recently has increased but it's mainly positive feedback: the more publicity the villains get, the more they are at it.

They could have been more successful if... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36412868)

... they could actually find a TR government site that works.

Re:They could have been more successful if... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36413052)

Presumably, this all has something to do with the elections in Turkey on Sunday, 12 June...

It is against the censorship regulations. (1)

xenopain (1153495) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413124)

It is not related to the elections at all - it is against the the censorship regulations that will come into effect on August 22, which is proposed by TIB.

Re:They could have been more successful if... (1)

vajorie (1307049) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413330)

Try this one [turkiye.gov.tr]. It works, and as a bonus, you can learn how to say "Citizen: The Shortcut to the State" (the site's title) in Turkish!

Call me (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36412874)

... when they take the government down.

One reason for censorship (0)

Epeeist (2682) | more than 2 years ago | (#36412878)

One of the people responsible for making injunctions against websites is Adnan Oktar, AKA Harun Yahya. Just another creotard but seemingly with a lot of power. Question, where does all the money come from to publish his "Atlas of Creation" and give it away free?

Re:One reason for censorship (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36412986)

What is a creotard?

Re:One reason for censorship (2)

Securityemo (1407943) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413004)

Creationist retard?

Re:One reason for censorship (1, Funny)

Palmsie (1550787) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413130)

Redundant.

Re:One reason for censorship (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 2 years ago | (#36414212)

I don't think it's redundant. It's useful to distinguish how someone is retarded, such as Creationist, Republican, or Cubs Fan.

Re:One reason for censorship (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36415004)

How do you abbreviate Republican retard? Retard?

Re:One reason for censorship (1)

Johann Lau (1040920) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413904)

it's using retarded people to make one feel better about having just as little clue as anyone else as to why there is something and not nothing.

hah.

Re:One reason for censorship (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36414894)

Careful there, you're going get slashdot on the black list!

EU membership (3, Interesting)

Hitman_Frost (798840) | more than 2 years ago | (#36412884)

I'm really not sure we should be letting these guys into the EU until they start making some changes to the way they do things.

Re:EU membership (2)

dryriver (1010635) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413170)

Its the other way around. Ever since the EU - France/Sarkozy and Germany/Merkel in particular - pushed a then EU-membership-eagerTurkey away in the mid 2000s with silly religious-geographic arguments, like "Turkey isn't and never will be a European Country", privacy-rights and other human rights in Turkey - like the right to peaceful protest/assembly - have become seriously eroded. Turkey in 2011 is a true Orwellian 1984 state where people are afraid to discuss politics or religion over the phone or internet, where going into important business meetings you are routinely asked to check your smartphone/mobile phone at the door, where anytime anything crime related happens, police magically get hold of 'detailed Internet records' of the perps immediately. It wasn't like this when Turkey was still headed for EU membership. All of this happened AFTER the EU basically stopped/stalled/pseudo-rejected Turkey's memberhip talks.

Re:EU membership (1, Insightful)

vajorie (1307049) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413370)

Turkey in 2011 is a true Orwellian 1984 state where people are afraid to discuss politics or religion over the phone or internet, where going into important business meetings you are routinely asked to check your smartphone/mobile phone at the door, where anytime anything crime related happens, police magically get hold of 'detailed Internet records' of the perps immediately.

I live in Turkey: all of this is outright lies except the last one, which occurs "elsewhere" as well (as in "think of the children").

Re:EU membership (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36413472)

Right, it is worse. people even go to jail before their book makes it to the publisher.

Re:EU membership (1)

vajorie (1307049) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413352)

I'm really not sure we should be letting these guys into the EU until they start making some changes to the way they do things.

But, my highness, please... let us in... it's so warm and cozy in there!

/sarcasm

Re:EU membership (1)

cavreader (1903280) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413826)

Don't worry the don't have snowballs chance in hell of ever being admitted. The only reason they have not been shown the door yet was because the US was supporting them but that is no longer the case.

turkey's fascist-imperialist lover party=akp (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36412970)

shame on islamist-fascist akp. the usa and obama (imperialist state) supports the akp and akp sent many intellectual and patriot people to prison and they welcomed the pkk terrorist at habur. we need another mustafa kemal to be independent again.

Concerns.. (1)

laxguy (1179231) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413026)

Is no one else concerned with the fact that these guys get to do whatever they want, to whom ever they want, and there are no repercussions? I understand the way Anonymous works, it's difficult to track these people down. But you can't tell me that with the recent trend in public hacks that many of them aren't performed by the same group of people.

Anonymous doesn't have any type of real leadership, and there has never been a very active group of core members, it's more or less "hey we're going to attack this site" and then a bunch of basement dwellers rise up and start DDoS'ing. After they get bored they leave and move on.. But many of these recent attacks have seemed more organized than previous Anonymous doings.

Are people not concerned with their actions? I understand that so far they've been doing things that people can agree with "LOLSONYREVIL" "TURKEYCENSORINTERNETS" and blah blah. But the more attention we give them, the bolder they're going to become.. what happens when they decide that they want to fuck with the US or the some major company in the States.. I don't think people will be quite so willing to wave off their actions then.

Re:Concerns.. (1)

Securityemo (1407943) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413074)

Okay. If you're so concerned, go track them down then.

Or what do you propose? Warrantless raids/espionage on proxy servers/bots/Tor nodes all over the world? Because that's what it would realistically take to catch "them".

Re:Concerns.. (1)

Securityemo (1407943) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413116)

Attendum: I agree that it's not a good thing that you can get away with evil/bothersome things like carding and vandalism over the net. I'm just saying that it's pretty much impossible to track someone who doesn't wish to be tracked when the only information you have is the IP address of the last proxy in a chain stretching across the globe. That's just the reality of the situation.

The only way to remove that would either be to remove all technical possibility of exploitation and attack from the net, or removing all technical possibility of anonymity.

Re:Concerns.. (1)

artor3 (1344997) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413286)

Or moles, warrants for access to server logs and wiretaps, and basically all the tools that are already used to track organized criminals. I know they like to bill themselves as these supernatural, everywhere-and-nowhere crusaders, but they're not. They're a bunch of losers and man-children who, until recently, didn't attract enough attention to be worth taking down. That may be changing.

Re:Concerns.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36413384)

True, but if they're even a little bit intelligent (doubtful), then finding them will be incredibly difficult.

Re:Concerns.. (1)

Securityemo (1407943) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413494)

Yeah, they're probably just male twenty-thirtysomethings who're in it for excitement, like it seems most every member of a hacking group throughout history. I've studied this a bit, and it's fascinating how similar their behaviour seems to be.

And if they're "internet-based" (eg, accepting members from online) you could infiltrate them. Warrants probably woudn't be as effective, though, since you need the jurisdiction involved to cooperate. And you're basically still relying on the attacker to make a mistake, in practice.

I think it's this that's my basic point, that the entire "game" seems to be played with the attacker's advantage. It seems too easy to "commit the perfect crime", over and over again.

Re:Concerns.. (1)

preaction (1526109) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413146)

I'm more concerned with what happens when the so-far-silent majority decides they are a threat and does something. It can only mean another step on the road to Treacherous Computing.

Re:Concerns.. (1)

xenopain (1153495) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413160)

How much traction do you think their actions will get if they do that?

Re:Concerns.. (1)

Securityemo (1407943) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413268)

Interesting point, but if we're talking about a small and competent hacker group, they technically wouldn't need "traction" to operate. They'd need motivation, though. Then the question is, what motivates them?

If they're normal human beings they'd stop when the damage of their actions wasn't outweighed by their perception of "greater good"/"the target had it coming".

Re:Concerns.. (2)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413178)

They've been getting arrested. [google.com] The law moves relatively slowly, but if they keep hacking different sites, eventually they will get caught. Just like the Washington DC sniper [wikipedia.org].....sure, one snipe and he got away with it, but when he kept doing it, he got caught. And my guess is they will keep doing it, because excitement is addicting and intoxicating.

Re:Concerns.. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36413878)

Anonymous hardly does any harm.
They are only effective because the public reacts to their actions.

For example, Anonymous helped the revolution in Tunisia to happen. On their own, Anonymous were useless, but the Tunisians reacted to what Anonymous did and this fueled the revolution.
Anonymous is effective because the population gets angry at the government or the population realizes the government is in reality weak and powerless ("The government failed miserably at protecting itself from HACKERS - what the hell do we have to fear, then?").
Anonymous works as a tiny spark, then populations of countries around the world must provide the fuel.

DoS attacks, even hacking are not that bad at all. These things are at most inconveniences.
I know, you will probably tell me "Look how they bankrupted ACS:Law and nearly destroyed HB Gary! They can be dangerous."
But if the population did not like Anonymous and cared about this issue (for example, imagine Anonymous hacked a charity for homeless children and stole the money), the people of Anon would become a lot easier to find. People who know something would start talking, the police would receive more help (i.e. better training, tools, more funding, etc.)...
Anonymous are protected in large part because nobody really hates them. If the government decided to give the police a few million dollars to help find Anonymous, most people would scream "In this economy?? You want to spend millions just to find kids who do pranks on websites??".

Note also:
We're not talking of legalizing what Anon does, so there is no issue of "if you say it's ok for Anon, then it should be ok for everyone else, even bad guys"
We're only talking about moral approval.
I approve of what Anon does because they go after powerful people and groups (e.g. corporations and governments) who do a lot of harm to society. I would not approve the same actions if they were done to cause harm to innocent or good people. It's like how murder, abduction and assault are illegal except when the police does it to put a criminal in jail. (I know, Anon are not the police... my point is, some actions are not illegal or wrong by themselves; instead, whether those actions are wrong depends on the situation).

Finally:
Laws, voting, etc... It's useless.

- Corporations pay off politicians. They help the politicians they like to get elected. If this fails, they can still pay the politicians we elected so that those politicians act in the interests of the corporations. We can not know in advance which politicians will not let corporations bribe them either. It all depends on luck: hopefully, we'll be lucky enough to elect the right guy but since we can't really know who he is until he's been elected.... You get my point.

- Using laws against corporations and politicians: it doesn't work. Many judges seem biased towards certain issues, or they simply tend to rule in the interests of the people who made them judges. Also, corporations can hire LOTS of expensive lawyers so Mr. Average Joe can't really hope to successfully sue a corporation who did something wrong to him.

- Changing the laws: it doesn't work in indirect democratic systems, where laws are made by the government. If the politicians are bribed by corporations or care about their own interests, they won't make laws that benefit society.
A few countries have Direct Democracies, such as Switzerland. Over there, any citizen can, at any time, suggest a new law or change a law. There are 2 phases:
1) Get enough people to sign your proposal (it has to be a fixed number, for example 1 million). This is done to show many people are interested by your idea, and putting your proposal up for voting is not a waste of time.
2) If you get enough people to sign, then the entire country is asked to vote on it. What politicians think of your law suggestion is irrelevant, the population is the only one who makes the decision. If the majority is in favor of your idea, your suggestion becomes a new law.

The only problems with this:
a) Your suggestion of a law must be properly worded, it has to be clear, it can't contradict other laws in place and of course it can't violate the Constitution (all of this is logical).
b) You need support to get all the signatures in phase 1 since you need many.
c) Once a law is made, it can't be challenged for a few years (e.g. 2 years) or else we might end up voting on the same law every month because we can't really agree on it. (Not different from what we have now).
But it can solve a lot of problems. You think corporations bribe politicians? Propose a law that bans financing candidate's campaigns! Or make a law that says a campaign can't cost more than $XXX so that every candidate gets an equal chance and is judged on their ideas instead of their advertisements. At least with such a system the population can always regain control of the government.

Re:Concerns.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36415720)

"I approve of what Anon does because they go after powerful people and groups (e.g. corporations and governments) who do a lot of harm to society" . So you support breaking the law because it is for a good cause ? Who gets to define what qualifies as a "good cause". People can have widely varying opinions on what constitutes harm. These attacks are also tend harm the users more than the organization they are going after. Their attacks are just given the government more ammunition in their fight to regulate Internet content and access laws.

Re:Concerns.. (1)

Demonoid-Penguin (1669014) | more than 2 years ago | (#36414372)

Is no one else concerned with the fact that these guys get to do whatever they want, to whom ever they want, and there are no repercussions? I understand the way Anonymous works, it's difficult to track these people down. But you can't tell me that with the recent trend in public hacks that many of them aren't performed by the same group of people. Anonymous doesn't have any type of real leadership, and there has never been a very active group of core members, it's more or less "hey we're going to attack this site" and then a bunch of basement dwellers rise up and start DDoS'ing. After they get bored they leave and move on.. But many of these recent attacks have seemed more organized than previous Anonymous doings. Are people not concerned with their actions? I understand that so far they've been doing things that people can agree with "LOLSONYREVIL" "TURKEYCENSORINTERNETS" and blah blah. But the more attention we give them, the bolder they're going to become.. what happens when they decide that they want to fuck with the US or the some major company in the States.. I don't think people will be quite so willing to wave off their actions then.

I hear you brother! And I'd be with you too, but, but - all those young people flaunting their youth, and all those women flaunting their their, um, attractiveness, and all those successful people flaunting their success, and all those people doing things and thinking and standing up to the pricks and threatening the bullies. Oh I'm with you brother - if we don't stop this now people *will* walk on my lawn.

Dick

Doesn't sound difficult (1)

ArchieBunker (132337) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413034)

How big of a pipe does a country like Turkey really have?

Re:Doesn't sound difficult (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36413150)

hopefully bigger than armenia

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/06/georgian-woman-cuts-web-access

Re:Doesn't sound difficult (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413606)

Turkey is a G20 member, and has higher GDP than most EU countries (if it were a EU member, it'd rank 7th, above Sweden, Finland and Denmark).

GDP vs GDP per capita (1)

Patron (2242336) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413698)

The GDP per capita however would be 2nd from the bottom, between Bulgaria and Romania (source: wikipedia).

Re:GDP vs GDP per capita (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#36414436)

Yeah, GDP is capita is how rich the populace is (very roughly speaking). Total GDP is how rich the country as a whole is. So, speaking of "how big of a pipe does Turkey have", GDP is the relevant metric.

Re:GDP vs GDP per capita (1)

Patron (2242336) | more than 2 years ago | (#36415222)

You're right, I was just a little confused with your comparison. I was just thinking that GDP per capita would be then be more relevant since Turkey has more than 3 times the population than Sweden, Finland and Denmark combined. Now Poland on the other hand is roughly half as large, populated and "rich" compared to Turkey.

Re:Doesn't sound difficult (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36413968)

Turkey is a G20 member, and has higher GDP than most EU countries (if it were a EU member, it'd rank 7th, above Sweden, Finland and Denmark).

yea! I remember they had banknotes in ... millions! wow ! all the people were millionaires! ;-}
fantastic.. 5 milion bir ekmek ;-}

homosexuality censorship too (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36413208)

They also block sites that mention the fact that Ataturk was homosexual. (Ataturk is founder of the nation)
They think that is a blemish on the nation so they stick their head in the sand. it is why they have blocked youtube a couple of times for example.

Re:homosexuality censorship too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36415474)

Ataturk was homosexual

[citation needed]

Turkey is nice enough to (2, Insightful)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413424)

giving shelter to Syrian citizens (refugees) from the persecution from the Syrian government & military right now...

Re:Turkey is nice enough to (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 2 years ago | (#36414234)

Yes, and America drops food after we bomb the shit out of an area. No matter how desperately these people need the food, it doesn't make up for the bombing.

At first i hoped it was for another reason (1)

markass530 (870112) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413802)

at first I Hoped it was because of turkey's continued denial of the Armenian Genocide.

Dear "Anonymous": I'd like to ask U a question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36413948)

What about folks like myself that use firewall rules tables & HOSTS files to filter out KNOWN BAD SITES that put malware onto your system?

What about DNS systems that do so, such as ScrubIT, OpenDNS, & Norton DNS also??

I.E.-> Is blocking out/filtering things that are KNOWN to screwup a person's machine (or worse, server systems that have great importance for whatever reasons) "censorship" to you?

I mean, if so? You guys have it ALL wrong...

APK

P.S.=> I know that the guys @ "LulzSec" aren't totally assinine & bogus: How so? Well...

Because they told the NHS they had problems, in exposing admin passwords, & telling them about it here http://uk.ibtimes.com/articles/160624/20110610/lulzsec-lulz-security-nhs-health-service-cyber-attack-weak-hack-hackers-hacked-sony-nintendo-network.htm [ibtimes.com]

(Rather than abusing it)...

How about you guys @ "Anonymous"??? apk

Re:Dear "Anonymous": I'd like to ask U a question (1)

Yeknomaguh (1681980) | more than 2 years ago | (#36414392)

This is completely different than filtering malware sites and the like. You would do well to read up on the problem in Turkey before posting. The Turkish government has lately been censoring the crap out of any journalist who speaks poorly of it. This blanket censorship has widely been seen as the next step of censoring the masses. This might help educate you a bit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_Turkey [wikipedia.org]

I believe you, but how long before they feel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36414526)

Otherwise? I know that governments (especially governments) FEAR dissent (because the BIGGEST FEAR OF THOSE IN POWER? LOSING THEIR POWER, of course)... I am just curious on these guys' "motivations" is all!

Like I showed in my posting though - you can see the "LulzSec" people doing something actually sort of "good" (in warning the NHS about exposed admin pwds)... but this "anonymous" faction? Who knows!

It's why I asked it (and you can almost BANK ON IT, they have people around here... this is rated by many places as "the #1 tech site online", E.G.-> http://www.topsite.com/best/tech [topsite.com] )

APK

P.S.=> Trust me, I have read on this & everything like it I can find since 1995 or so, the ONLY time I was ever "hacked" & that was on IRC - where I learned about security really on the #Windows95 channel there, the "official help channel for Windows users" endorsed by K. Mardem Bey the creator of MIRC in those days - inspired me to TRY to help on the security front in fact (see below).

I've read extensively read about hacker/cracker types, and put out things to help "average joe" out there as best I could since 1997 (which Neowin picked up on in 2001 & rated highly http://www.neowin.net/news/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text [neowin.net] , & currently this version of that guide too:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE [bing.com] which wherever it was posted (almost) on 15/20 forums its on, was made either a:

---

1.) Sticky/Pinned thread
2.) Essential Guide
3.) Most Viewed
4.) & even got me PAID (quite unexpectedly, @ the topmost results in that query no less - "The Lord works in MYSTERIOUS ways" is all I can say about that)

---

In a way, I can see doing some of this stuff... but, eventually? These guys are making a BIG MISTAKE, because the worst thing a "criminal" can do?? UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER & KNOW-HOW OF THE LAW... apk

Yes... (0)

Stormy Dragon (800799) | more than 2 years ago | (#36413950)

How dare Turkey decide it has the power to decide what websites people should and shouldn't be allowed to visit and then deliberately block people from visiting unapproved websites... ...Only Anonymous is allowed to do that.

Re:Yes... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36414040)

anonymous doesn't censor web sites lol, they dont try and allow or stop people from visiting websites in this case they are defending freedom of the web.

Re:Yes... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36414116)

anonymous doesn't censor web sites lol, they dont try and allow or stop people from visiting websites in this case they are defending freedom of the web.

They DDOS websites they don't like, thus preventing people from visiting those websites. Their cure for the disease is the same disease they're trying to cure. Except it's working against people they don't like, so it's ok.

China anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36414230)

Shouldn't you try to take down the Chinese Firewall then? Why hasn't this been done yet by groups like Anonymous?

Here's what you do (1)

gelfling (6534) | more than 2 years ago | (#36414580)

Every time you find an Anonymous person. You cut them apart, with power tools on television. I mean it's all fun and games when you go after pussies who run banks and movie studios in the US but countries like Turkey or Russia's grasp of 'due process' is abstract, at best.

There's going to be a new reality show on tv - 'Pressure Drop', where they just take nerds and kick them out the helicopter.

And I'm ok with that.

Re:Here's what you do (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36414964)

And how hard would it be to frame people as being members?

Re:Here's what you do (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36415270)

Got you there Anonymous Coward.

Re:Here's what you do (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36415408)

Every time you find an Anonymous person. You cut them apart, with power tools on television. I mean it's all fun and games when you go after pussies who run banks and movie studios in the US but countries like Turkey or Russia's grasp of 'due process' is abstract, at best.

There's going to be a new reality show on tv - 'Pressure Drop', where they just take nerds and kick them out the helicopter.

And I'm ok with that.

Oh that's rich... Hey, every time I do something Anonymously I'll simply instead reveal myself as acting under the direction of gelfling...

They go after the "leaders" of Anonymous -- Welcome to the club. I hope you bounce real good.

Re:Here's what you do (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 2 years ago | (#36415464)

Every time you find an Anonymous person. You cut them apart, with power tools on television. I mean it's all fun and games when you go after pussies who run banks and movie studios in the US but countries like Turkey or Russia's grasp of 'due process' is abstract, at best.

There's going to be a new reality show on tv - 'Pressure Drop', where they just take nerds and kick them out the helicopter.

And I'm ok with that.

Oh come now, we all see through your thinly veiled attempts to prove you are not a leader of Anonymous; Your overly outrageous statements actually support this view.

How do you explain the fact that many Anonymous members claim that they were secretly taking direction from you!?

You will be punished for your crimes against no one in particular!

Re:Here's what you do (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36415514)

So there's this amorphous group of people who dDoS websites for a good cause or just for fun, and annoy some people, and entertain some other people, and you think it's okay to kill suspected members of these groups for that? How is that in any way proportionate?

You sound like the kind of person who'd be burning witches at the stake, or help those poor jews take their "shower".

so which country's next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36415328)

thailand?
the list is long. and getting longer by the day.

Isn't it where a dead dictator is still in charge? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36416074)

What was it? turkmenbashi or smth?

There is not such thing as a "group"... (1)

w4rl5ck (531459) | more than 2 years ago | (#36416542)

... called "Anonymous". A group is defined as not only people sharing the same motives and taking concurrent actions, but also some "working together" routine, organization, and structure.

All of this is missing in Anonymous; it's more like a swarm, then a group.

This critic is similar to that one could state against the idea of having a "Anonymous Leader" arrested in Spain.

There is no defined leader in a swarm of birds, as they are not really a group; they just coincidently fly together into the same direction. If you are interested in such logical rule-based swarm "auto"-coordination, check out the Sanderling, which is a little bird occupying many seasides. You will see hunt through flat waters in something that looks like "groups" of birds, but in reality, those are not at all tied together, and just coincidently appear in the same place at the same time doing the same thing.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...