×

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!

LulzSec Hacks the US Senate

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the going-for-the-gusto dept.

Government 344

jfruhlinger writes "LulzSec might not be as famous as Anonymous — they're really best known for hacking sites they like, to prove a point about security — but they may have just raised their profile significantly, posting what appears to be data taken from an internally facing server at the US Senate. However, the fun-loving group might find that the Senate reacts a lot more harshly to intrusions than, say, PBS did." The group also recently grabbed data from Bethesda Softworks.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

344 comments

Interesting (4, Interesting)

Jibekn (1975348) | more than 2 years ago | (#36429924)

I hope these guys are as good as they claim to be, otherwise we will be seeing their faces with the caption "Further arrests from anonymous hacking group"

Re:Interesting (1, Insightful)

gweihir (88907) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430012)

I hope these guys are as good as they claim to be, otherwise we will be seeing their faces with the caption "Further arrests from anonymous hacking group"

They are not. Competent black hats do not brag publicly. These are attention whores with some mediocre IT security skills. Most break-ins are not that hard to do.

Re:Interesting (2)

TooMuchToDo (882796) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430166)

Competent black hats *who take the proper precautions* brag publicly. Insert pic of "Good luck! I'm behind 7 proxies!" dude here.

On another note, does Amazon keep any sort of network/VM logging from someone who spun up/used/spun down a virtual machine with a prepaid visa card?

Re:Interesting (3, Insightful)

LearnToSpell (694184) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430196)

Competent black hats *who take the proper precautions* brag publicly.

No. There is zero benefit to having people know what you're up to as a black hat. That's like leaving riddles inside the bank safe.

Re:Interesting (3)

lambent (234167) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430240)

Two things come to mind:

"Those who speak, do not know; those who know, do not speak."

and ...

"Loose lips sink ships."

You're correct; there's no benefit to these childish displays. Their juvenile antics will be their own downfall.

Re:Interesting (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430430)

You have brain rot, seek medical help.

Re:Interesting (3, Insightful)

Jeremi (14640) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430254)

No. There is zero benefit to having people know what you're up to as a black hat. That's like leaving riddles inside the bank safe.

Unless, of course, your goal is to get publicity and make a point about something. (if Lulzsec or whoever just hacked into senate.gov and didn't tell anyone, do you think we'd ever hear about it?)

Re:Interesting (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430256)

Assuming perfectly rational actors... which don't exist.

In the real world, people are complex, and just because you don't see a clear "benefit" to a behavior doesn't mean it won't occur.

And before you claim "but then they wouldn't be competent", I suggest you read up on the No True Scotsman fallacy.

Re:Interesting (3, Informative)

TooMuchToDo (882796) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430306)

You're either a black hat for two reasons: a) financial gain or b) publicity. You keep your mouth shut if you're in scenario A. B? Not so much.

Re:Interesting (1)

newcastlejon (1483695) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430434)

That's like leaving riddles inside the bank safe.

That seems like a good idea, if you're not The Riddler. There is non-zero benefit to having someone believe you are something you are not.

Heh... intrigue in the US Senate: who'da thunk it?

Re:Interesting (1)

Slutticus (1237534) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430776)

Competent black hats *who take the proper precautions* brag publicly. No. There is zero benefit to having people know what you're up to as a black hat. That's like leaving riddles inside the bank safe.

Not really. It's like leaving riddles in a bank safe that is so insecure that almost anyone can just walk in and take customers money. It's like leaving riddles that humiliate the bank operator into taking the right fucking precautions to protect the customers money.

Re:Interesting (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430200)

On another note, does Amazon keep any sort of network/VM logging from someone who spun up/used/spun down a virtual machine with a prepaid visa card?

No, but they have shipping addresses of everybody who ever ordered a Guy Fawkes mask, which should be close enough for government work.

Re:Interesting (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430288)

Records are kept. They just poked a group that has access to those nice taps the NSA once put into AT&T down on Folsom street. http://www.eff.org/files/nsa/att.pdf
That group also has access to massive computing power and the actual guys that wrote the algorithms underlying whatever encryption the group uses. This will be quietly fixed and three or five or twenty years from now whoever did it will get a knock at the door. Anon's motto applies to bureaucrat wronged even more than Anon - They do not forgive, they do not forget, expect them.

Re:Interesting (3, Interesting)

Ruke (857276) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430246)

These guys aren't black hats; they're a different breed. They're clearly not in it for the money. They're not in it to help people. They're in it for the chaos, and the power trip, and, well, the lulz.

They're probably going to get caught, but I don't think it's quite fair to characterize them as "incompetent," just because they're playing a different game than everyone else.

Re:Interesting (1)

mirix (1649853) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430340)

chaotic-neutral-for-the-lulz hat, then?

Re:Interesting (2)

Ruke (857276) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430426)

Day-glo orange hat, maybe? I honestly don't believe that they're in it for the technical side of hacking, which is what brings the best white- and black-hats to the table. They're in it for the social and political aspects of hacking. They don't look at a system and say, "How can I do this?" but rather have a set of tools, and say "Who should I do this to?"

Re:Interesting (1)

simoncpu was here (1601629) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430458)

Chaotic Neutral: Youtube users, BitTorrent users
Chaotic Evil: LulzSec
Chaotic Good: Open Source developers, especially kernel hackers

Re:Interesting (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430764)

Uhhhh - I'm not buying any of that. BitTorrent and YouTube aren't exactly "chaotic". Neutral, I might buy into.

LulzSec evil? Nahhh.

Open source developers aren't chaotic at all. As a group, I'd rank them somewhere close to "lawful good". Of course, your idea of "lawful" may differ drastically from my own idea of "lawful". I don't recognize deep pockets as having authority to write law, ie, Microsoft, Oracle, Apple, AT&T, IBM, etc ad nauseum. "Lawful" means, or should mean, "for the good of the people", not "for the good of the companies".

Re:Interesting (5, Interesting)

biodata (1981610) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430022)

I'm sure we will see this anyway. It's easy to arrest a few people on suspicion whether they did it or not. It doesn't matter if anyone gets convicted, the arrests are just a bit of media theatre and have to happen soon after the event. Like in Spain, Holland, Turkey, etc.

It's a TRAP! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430154)

I suspect in reality, these loops are being quietly funded by nefarious MAFIAA. The goal of these high profile intrusions is to build support toward passage of laws enabling MAFIAA and their puppet government to further encroach upon bill of rights that protects citizens against unreasonable search and seizures.

Fed Reserve is up next (5, Interesting)

milbournosphere (1273186) | more than 2 years ago | (#36429930)

Apparently, Anonymous announced an intention to go after the federal reserve next: http://gizmodo.com/5811546/anonymous-goes-after-federal-reserve [gizmodo.com] . It'll be quite interesting if they attempt it. I'm interested in seeing how the fed handles this.

Re:Fed Reserve is up next (2, Insightful)

gweihir (88907) | more than 2 years ago | (#36429982)

It is good criminal practice, to stay on "annoyance level". If you exceed that, law enforcement comes after you. If you exceed that enough, the people that come after you actually know what they are doing, are well funded and very, very persistent. If these clowns really manage to break into or do several damage to the federal reserve, they will end up in federal prison for a few decades. May take months or years to get them, but they will get caught.

Re:Fed Reserve is up next (5, Funny)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430094)

Severe damage to the federal reserve. Hahaha that made my day, thanks. Buddy, the damage has already been done. There's nothing left.

Re:Fed Reserve is up next (0)

Aldanga (1757414) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430142)

The Federal Reserve is the central banking system of the US [wikipedia.org] , not a federal reserve of money.

Re:Fed Reserve is up next (0)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430164)

Severe damage to the federal reserve. Hahaha that made my day, thanks. Buddy, the damage has already been done. There's nothing left.

Mod parent left, obvious.

Re:Fed Reserve is up next (1)

Ruke (857276) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430270)

While I don't disagree with you, I'm not sure that they're the type to take your advice. Nothing these guys have done has been a "good idea;" honestly, they seem more the type to try, just to see if they can, and, if they can, to brag about it.

Re:Fed Reserve is up next (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430592)

Lock them up in the Federal Reserve

Somebody is on a power trip (4, Insightful)

gweihir (88907) | more than 2 years ago | (#36429932)

Usually these end in tears. Only the most stupid black-hats (and that is all these morons are now) brag publicly.

Re:Somebody is on a power trip (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430032)

With luck they'll post the senators' porn site usernames and passwords.

Re:Somebody is on a power trip (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430034)

Most likely have nothing to live for and are probably wanting to end it all by making others suffer.
It could well be one person who is most likely going to blow his own face to pieces on the first knock.

Of course, I may be taking it to a few extremes.

Re:Somebody is on a power trip (5, Funny)

Dragon Bait (997809) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430272)

Most likely have nothing to live for and are probably wanting to end it all by making others suffer.

Are you talking about the hackers or the senators?

Re:Somebody is on a power trip (3, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430082)

All things considered, LulzSec has a better track record than the US Senate.

Re:Somebody is on a power trip (3, Informative)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430384)

Yet the US senate has the law on its side, and LulzSec does not.

Re:Somebody is on a power trip (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430498)

No law, just big guns.

Re:Somebody is on a power trip (3, Insightful)

selven (1556643) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430758)

I take it you have not heard of the concepts of "lawful evil" and "chaotic good"?

Re:Somebody is on a power trip (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430134)

They might even find a cruise missile headed their way. Multiple of them, for each node associated in the attack.

Ok, so I'm kidding - a little. But the last thing you do is fuck with the feds. They will get their pound of flesh. That you can safely bet on.

Re:Somebody is on a power trip (1)

Jeremi (14640) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430234)

Ok, so I'm kidding - a little. But the last thing you do is fuck with the feds. They will get their pound of flesh. That you can safely bet on.

Wait, I thought the Federal gov't was incompetent at everything except wasting taxpayer money. Which is it?

Bethesda (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36429934)

Why target Bethesda? And what are their plans for a bunch of forum accounts? I don't get it.

Re:Bethesda (3, Insightful)

gweihir (88907) | more than 2 years ago | (#36429950)

They want attention. They do not care what kind of attention. Like some emotionally disturbed kids.

Re:Bethesda (1)

ctrimm (1955430) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430202)

Any press is good press. The more spotlight they get, the more impact their actions have.

Re:Bethesda (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430496)

It's this idea that they somehow "impact" people beyond those they actually hack that I don't understand at all. Silly people with big egos.

LulzSec IS anonymous (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36429970)

LulzSec IS Anonymous, but Anonymous isn't LulzSec. Geez people! It isn't that complicated.

Re:LulzSec IS anonymous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430502)

Not everyone did set theory. Pity about that -1 eh?

And so it begins.... (1)

Sawopox (18730) | more than 2 years ago | (#36429976)

All I can picture in my head is a mash-up of War Games, National Treasure, Highlander, and Mortal Kombat. If there data post is legit it represents a huge breach in security. More importantly, it's one of the first times a breach has been brazenly flaunted.

I want to see some Juicy stuff (3, Interesting)

future assassin (639396) | more than 2 years ago | (#36429978)

As much as I like chaos brought to the powers that be none of this hacking will have any long lasting effects. want to see some serious info leaked that damages someone with real power. I'd rather see these guy dig out info that calls out the hypocrites in positions of power.

Thanks Guys (5, Insightful)

cozzbp (1845636) | more than 2 years ago | (#36429996)

Now we can be sure to have legislation that will screw us over even more!

Re:Thanks Guys (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430146)

I'm waiting for, "Cyber-attacks against cyber-sites affiliated with the US government and its various agencies are acts of cyber-treason, indistinguishable from regular-ol-treason, when perpetrated by US citizens (and punishable as such)."

After which comes the vague interpretations of "cyber-attacks" and "sites affiliated with".

God... it's painful enough watching the gov prefix anything technology related with "CYBER".

Re:Thanks Guys (1)

drpimp (900837) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430542)

I am waiting for ...
Fingers to get pointed at [INSERT ROGUE NATION] and we start a another un-just war. /halfempty
On the brighter side maybe these guys [IT staff of the compromised servers, I am looking at you] will actually start considering tougher security on front facing servers /halffull

Re:Thanks Guys (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430266)

We've been getting screwed by legislation long before this crap started happening. If the shaming of public officials forces a little humility on them, it can't be a bad thing. That is, unless you have a fiduciary interest in a sitting Representative?

Vizzini Says: (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430000)

Vizzini: But it's so simple. All I have to do is divine from what I know of you: are you the sort of man who would put the poison into his own goblet or his enemy's? Now, a clever man would put the poison into his own goblet, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.

Re:Vizzini Says: (1)

gweihir (88907) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430030)

Risky. What if the other one is a great fool? There is ample evidence these for a significant part of the population and that intelligence and education are not reasonable predictor of this state.

Re:Vizzini Says: (1)

fishingmachine (1363025) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430176)

clearly the expected thing to do would be to build up an immunity to a specific poison for years and poison both

Re:Vizzini Says: (1)

CronoCloud (590650) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430586)

And never go against someone who's read or seen The Princess Bride a thousand times, when death is on the line.

Is hacking spate supporting internet lockdown? (4, Insightful)

Savantissimo (893682) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430042)

It seems like the recent outbreak of high-profile cases of computer break-ins is almost calculated to provoke legislation locking down the internet. First the kill-switch proposal, the announcement by the US military that computer intrusion would be considered an act of war, now a constant drumbeat of reporting in the media about major cracks.

Perhaps the hacks are all just being done by people who don't see how useful such stories are to those who want to assert control over the net, but it would be foolish to think that the "problem-reaction-solution" method has stopped being used by those who are after power, or to discount the possibility that some of this hacking and the publicity it receives is actually being provoked or even orchestrated by those seeking to expand government control over the internet.

Re:Is hacking spate supporting internet lockdown? (1)

biodata (1981610) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430088)

Who would a lockdown benefit the most? Who would be paid huge federal grants to build the locks? Oh yes, the people who know how locks work. Well played anon.

Re:Is hacking spate supporting internet lockdown? (4, Informative)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430184)

Perhaps that's exactly why the hacks are occurring...

It seems like the recent outbreak of high-profile cases of computer break-ins is almost calculated to provoke legislation locking down the internet. First the kill-switch proposal, the announcement by the US military that computer intrusion would be considered an act of war, now a constant drumbeat of reporting in the media about major cracks.

Perhaps the hacks are all just being done by people who don't see how useful such stories are to those who want to assert control over the net, but it would be foolish to think that the "problem-reaction-solution" method has stopped being used by those who are after power, or to discount the possibility that some of this hacking and the publicity it receives is actually being provoked or even orchestrated by those seeking to expand government control over the internet.

Its remarkable how quickly the PATRIOT Act was "created" after 911. Most likely was waiting in a desk drawer waiting for something to polarize the public... Now we have teams of hackers that could literally be anyone, causing security problems across the board, from government, to business, to gamers. Clearly the people will now agree the government must put an end to it all...

Re:Is hacking spate supporting internet lockdown? (1)

Dragon Bait (997809) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430328)

Its remarkable how quickly the PATRIOT Act was "created" after 911.

And depressing how quickly it was renewed with so little hue and cry. Sigh.

Re:Is hacking spate supporting internet lockdown? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430636)

Vote the conspiracy theorist up. Though he's a nutjob the principal is perfectly sound from a Psyops perspective.

Re:Is hacking spate supporting internet lockdown? (1)

ACS Solver (1068112) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430562)

I'll say this... I'm afraid we're globally heading, and quickly so, for a regulated, locked-down Internet. We'll look back fondly at the decade of 2000s, when the Internet had already reached massive, worldwide use and importance but also remained, for the most part, free. Now we'll likely see increased efforts by some governments to censor the Internet, legislation that would allow governments to easily take down certain sites or networks, legislation that forces ISPs to keep (and reveal upon request) increasingly more information on their customers and their net use.

That's a very saddening though actually. The Internet is one of the greatest contributors ever to people's freedom - at least looking at what the Internet can be. Now though, it's headed another way and I can only hope for something to reverse that trend now.

Re:Is hacking spate supporting internet lockdown? (1)

spydum (828400) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430800)

And how exactly do you "lock-down" the internet? That isn't as simple as flipping a switch. Even the great firewall of china has it's limitations.

It's a setup. (3, Insightful)

hellop2 (1271166) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430056)

This will be used to push forth legislation making script kiddies equivalent to terrorists.

Re:It's a setup. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430100)

I am in favor of that.

Yes (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430324)

Which is unfortunate. The legislation should instead instill some sort of competence insurance program for security specialists, and compliance audits for all businesses that handle personally-identifying information (PII).

The greater the amount of PII, the higher the legal requirement for security, and the more stringent and frequent the audits.

Make PII a cost center rather than a profitable resource, and watch the situation improve dramatically.

Not what Obama meant by "open government"... (1)

jaskelling (1927116) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430058)

Or at least I'd hope not. (It's a joke, put down the pen and paper and/or your vehement email responses.) I'd actually hope this gets someone's ass kicked in the Senate's IT office. While there may not be much interesting found on there, it's still dangerous. If some silly media loving hacking group can gain access like this, it's certainly just as easy for some other malicious government or entity to get in and do worse. But I'm sure they're still too busy worrying about how to control the rights of the citizens to worry about something as trivial as this....

Re:Not what Obama meant by "open government"... (5, Interesting)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430108)

And when that ass gets kicked in the Senate's IT office, you'll have LulzSec to thank. If LulzSec could hack it, so could Iran. We should be grateful for the service they are providing.

Re:Not what Obama meant by "open government"... (1)

artor3 (1344997) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430730)

Fuck that. If they were altruistic, they'd be quietly alerting the site's owners of the vulnerabilities. Not posting the email addresses of porn accounts and trying to publicly humiliate thousands of people "for the lulz". They are sociopaths, getting off on causing others misery. They need to be locked up.

prediction for tomorrow's slashdot story (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430068)

LulzSec hacks BITCOIN!

Why is the government wasting money... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430074)

On a Solaris webserver?

Oh wait... it's the government...

Too much attention (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430080)

Am I the only one thinking that these hacks get too much attention? Inform the people who are affected, but maybe keeping this stuff from the front pages would make it less lulz?

Re:Too much attention (1)

Ruke (857276) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430312)

Who is paying them too much attention? The news organizations? They've got a tight balance that they have to maintain; they have to weigh the benefits of publishing this kind of information (a more informed public) against the costs (possibly "enabling" LulzSec). In the end, I think they made the correct decision, but that's up for debate.

Re:Too much attention (1)

fermat1313 (927331) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430746)

Who is paying them too much attention? The news organizations? They've got a tight balance that they have to maintain; they have to weigh the benefits of publishing this kind of information (a more informed public) against the costs (possibly "enabling" LulzSec).

That's precious. Do you think that news organizations really work to maintain the balance of information here? Those days are long gone, if they ever really existed. Here's what gets on the news: Stories that people click on. How else do you think we got 3 weeks non-stop of Charlie Sheen updates? Because the public needs to know? Hardly.

Uninteresting. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430086)

Looks like they got access to a web server and were able to list the apache conf and some files being served up.

Brings back memories (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430106)

The ascii art and hillarious messages of hacking groups are timeless and awesome.

Better a bunch of kids/haxors finding security problems than a foreign government explioting them for seriously unfunny purposes.

Meh ... (1)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430110)

I would've given bonus points had they manipulated the system into displaying random Wikileaks embassy cables.

Pwned (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430130)

Sorry, someone had to say it. Low-bidding IT infrastructure is like buying a bungee cord on the cheap.

Er, what? (1)

Daetrin (576516) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430136)

"LulzSec might not be as famous as Anonymous â" they're really best known for hacking sites they like, to prove a point about security"

Wait, so is LulzSec known for hacking sites they like? Or is Anonymous known for hacking sites they like? Which one of them actually likes Sony since both groups hacked them? (Even disregarding Sony's claims about the stolen PSN information, Anonymous admitted to being responsible for the prior DDoS attack.) Does Anonymous like the Scientologists or does LulzSec like InfraGard? I'm kinda confused by the claim.

Idiots or something more (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430230)

Either these people are juvenile idiots, or someone who stands to gain is responsible for the rash of the latest security breaches. Wasn't there a company recently found to be hype-ing up security threats for their own profit?

The end of an era? (1)

makubesu (1910402) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430334)

It seems like a new high profile hack happens every day. Is this just a fad? Will things calm down again? Or is this the beginning of a radical change for the internet. It used to be that you could get away with just a few weak security measures, but now that doesn't look sustainable. Not to mention the rise of DDOS attacks recently. Will we see a radical shift in the way tech companies operate? Is it really affordable to be secure? Maybe new technologies will be required to bring the cost down. Is it even possible to be secure? I'm sure all these companies thought they had locked the door tight.

I would not be surprised... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430354)

That most of the new hacks against official agencies are done for the purpose of justifying their reaction.

Like the "hunt" for Ben-laden justified military operations around the globe for a decade.

It's not like atrocious security designs were the responsibility of the people how got fat pay checks for it.

Or just how banks and credit cards are giving more and more USELESS automated new features that create ever broadening security holes.

There are two types of people: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430382)

Those who fear their government; and LulzSec.

Private key for senate.gov! (1)

mveloso (325617) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430392)

Looks like the lucky senate.gov webmaster gets to see if the key revocation process actually works.

Extreme times call for extreme methods. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36430686)

Probably students that are sick of being treated like criminals in the school system. So they do this in order to get sent to prison and be treated like a human being (and maybe get an education too).

Hacking increase! (1)

thecounterweight (2256980) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430720)

Damn, I had just posted a comment two days ago on another Slashdot thread about Anonymous hacking a Libyan website stating that there has been a huge increase in high-profile hacking this year. Now the US Senate? While I appreciate the work that Anonymous has done, this LulzSec crew seems to be much less interested in helping people, and more interested in just causing ruckus. Well see how long it takes before their lulzboat has a hole in it.

There's nothing important there (4, Insightful)

Animats (122034) | more than 2 years ago | (#36430810)

That's not some inside server. Look at their list of files. It's the Senate's outward-facing web server, "www.senate.gov". It also hosts the public web sites of individual senators. It looks like what you can see on a UNIX system with a guest account. Big deal. Every staffer on the Senate side has that much access.

They have the complete directory of all the paintings in the Capitol. The forms for registering as a lobbyist. Pictures of all the Senators. Lots of stuff for tourists. This session's voting results, in HTML. The base Apache config. Nothing exciting.

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...