×

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 Target the Sun After Phone Hacking Scandal

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the it-was-a-fadeaway-fake dept.

Security 363

nk497 writes "LulzSec have come out of retirement to target Rupert Murdoch's News International, hacking the website of The Sun, redirecting it first to a spoofed page reporting his death and then to Lulz's Twitter feed. 'The Sun's homepage now redirects to the Murdoch death story on the recently-owned New Times website,' the hackers said via Twitter. 'Can you spell success, gentlemen?' The hackers also started to post email addresses and passwords they claimed were from Sun staff, and said to have accessed a mail server at now-defunct News of the World."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

363 comments

Ob. Mr. Burns (5, Funny)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805428)

"Since the beginning of time, man has yearned to destroy the Sun."

Re:Ob. Mr. Burns (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36806208)

well, we did succeed, and killed 9 of them:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houyi

Re:Ob. Mr. Burns (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806316)

They're not going to destroy it, they're going to use a denial-of-service attack: they're going to stand over people who are at the beach sunbathing.

Personally I think it's just an excuse to leer at women in bikinis.

Hackers... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36805468)

Hacking hackers.

Re:newsworld arent Hackers... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36805974)

they are cyber criminals . Do you know the difference?

Is this what it has come down to? (4, Insightful)

McFortner (881162) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805474)

So, because they did something ethically wrong and against the law it's OK to do the same to them? I thought we had gotten beyond the whole "eye for an eye" thing.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (2)

cheaphomemadeacid (881971) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805516)

well they 'virtually' killed murdoch while the guy that outed news of the world got the same treatment, without the virtual that is. Oh my bad, police say the death of the whistleblower wasnt suspicious, he probably died of natural causes....

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (3, Funny)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805814)

Oh my bad, police say the death of the whistleblower wasnt suspicious, he probably died of natural causes....

Revenge is a natural cause of death, isn't it?

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36805518)

Not in the US where those rednecks still have barbaric punishments like the death penalty for being retarded [deathpenaltyinfo.org].

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36805720)

Good sir, your derp dangerously exceeds your herp. Maybe you should move to Texas so you could be executed? Oh wait, they don't execute retards like you so boldly claim.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (3, Informative)

Xtravar (725372) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805988)

He's mistaking "elected" with "electrocuted". Yes, they elect retards in Texas.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36805990)

O rly [nytimes.com]. There's another person executed by the USAsian rednecks for being a retard.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (3, Insightful)

causality (777677) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805898)

Not in the US where those rednecks still have barbaric punishments like the death penalty for being retarded [deathpenaltyinfo.org].

Yeah yeah, I know I'm replying to a troll, but...

He isn't on death row for being retarded. Saying that makes me question your mental abilities. He's on death row for murdering a 17-year-old. The fact that his IQ is 68 doesn't make the victim any less dead or his family any less bereaved at having to bury their child.

There are good arguments against the death penalty. The fact that so many people on death row turned out to be innocent (i.e. because of DNA evidence) is one of the most rational. After all, you can release someone who is in prison but you can't raise the dead. The logic here is quite straightforward. However, your emotional rhetoric and willingness to distort truth as you have done is only going to weaken your position.

There are no shortcuts to actually making a solid case about a worthy subject. No, you haven't discovered the first.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (0)

scubamage (727538) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806158)

Well argued, and good points. I'm assuming you studied debate? You never really put him down, only told him how to strengthen his position for a rebut. Good post. I like it.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (2)

causality (777677) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806254)

Well argued, and good points. I'm assuming you studied debate? You never really put him down, only told him how to strengthen his position for a rebut. Good post. I like it.

Just about everything I know about argumentation is from paying attention and observing those who were more skilled than I. I have never formally studied it, other than thumbing through the book Art of Deception, but my main interest in that book was to better understand rhetoric and how it is used to deceive. The book is not very useful for those who view argumentation as a way to get closer to truth. The book is written for those who think a debate is a contest that they must win at all costs (I suppose to score a point or impress an audience or some other frivolous thing) no matter how wrong they may be. There are people like that and it is well to understand how they think.

Otherwise... Most of the time, formal study turns a living art into a dead thing to be dissected. I'd much rather have an intuitive practical understanding. The difference is, someone who only knows a thing from formal study is confused and uncertain when confronted with a new situation for which they do not have a battery of predetermined answers. I greatly prefer a fluid, dynamic, principled understanding. That kind of understanding is truly my own.

If I have the use of reason it is because I truly love reason. The flaws in the GP's post are therefore plain to me, with or without instruction.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36806394)

Hey faggot nigger kike. Go die in an oven.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36805522)

They're black hats, it's what they do. When some kid at school is acting like a total dipshit to everyone else and the authorities don't care, the solution is not to ask him politely to stop. The solution is to give him a black eye, then ask, then give him another if he refuses.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (4, Insightful)

causality (777677) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805806)

They're black hats, it's what they do. When some kid at school is acting like a total dipshit to everyone else and the authorities don't care, the solution is not to ask him politely to stop. The solution is to give him a black eye, then ask, then give him another if he refuses.

While I would place emphasis on the "authorities don't care" part, you're absolutely right. There are people with whom you cannot reason. In fact, they hate reason because reason would tell them to change their ways and they're addicted to the gratification and feeling of superiority they obtain from being that way. That kind of egomania is the only sort of (pathetic) life they have.

It is not your fault if someone will not cherish reason. That is their decision; let them reap what they sow. It does not make you a bad person to do what is necessary (but no more) to handle someone like that. It is in accordance with how they have chosen to live. In the case of a bully like in your example, it may in fact be a turning point in life that will end up being the best thing that ever happened to them. It would amount to giving him, albeit a harder way, the correction and guidance that his parents (or more likely, parent) so thoroughly failed to deliver.

After doing what needs to be done, then there is opportunity to take the high road and have an attitude of "sorry it came to this, but you had it coming." Gloating and being glad it happened would just make you a bigger bully who will eventually run into one who is bigger still. That path won't reform anyone. So yes, you're absolutely right but it has to come from a certain level of understanding. The real mistake is to coddle a person like that out of some misguided sympathy (what the unwise think is compassion) because they interpret it as weakness, as submission, and they'd be right.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36806378)

In the case of a bully like in your example, it may in fact be a turning point in life that will end up being the best thing that ever happened to them.

Based on my extensive experience with bullies, odds are much higher that they will simply beat you to near unconsciousness on the spot (rare), or if unable or unsure of their chances, wait until a later date with which they can sucker punch you unexpectedly and then proceed with the whole beating into unconsciousness thing. Oh yeah, or get a few of their other bully friends together, since the last thing bullies are concerned with is a fair fight.

This idea of bullies realizing the error of their ways when someone stands up to them is a myth, or at least, rare enough so as to appear mythical. I've never taken a beating in my life without dishing out a little of my own, but in the end, I still took the beating. Sure, I could defer it to a later date from time to time, but I took the beating nevertheless. The only alternative was to live in fear checking over both shoulders...

YMMV, of course. (and I truly hope it does)

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (4, Insightful)

FyRE666 (263011) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805524)

I fail to see how adding a redirect to their homepage and posting some phone numbers is on par with hacking a dead girl's phone and deleting her voicemail. Plus all the other reprehensible shenanigans the NotW staff were up to (and if they were doing it, there's a fair chance other areas of the empire were doing the same.)

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36806222)

Will people please stop saying "hacked her phone" when they mean "guessed a (probably default) passcode for her voicemail"? "Unauthorized access of a computer system" or however the UK laws word it, sure -- I don't condone it, legally and ethically wrong all the way. But it's in no way hacking.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36806338)

"Hacked" is only 6 letters. Your pedantry requires far more typing. Maybe "Accessed" is a better substitution.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36806322)

If it's the same statute, there really is no legal difference. NotW caused the family to think their daughter was still alive. Lulzsec will cause the court to think nothing on NotW's servers is evidence. Crime's crime.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (0)

rafe.kettler (1946264) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805544)

I don't really consider this to be "ethically wrong". They hacked their site. These people killed a girl (and perhaps a whistleblower as well).

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (1)

scubamage (727538) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806166)

They killed a girl? I thought they just hacked her phone? Not in any way defending News Corp, they deserved to be keelhauled.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36805554)

This is more like "deface your webpage for ripping out my eye", than "eye for an eye".

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (0, Troll)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805564)

Mail servers have been hacked. Let's just see how many ethical wrongs they did, shall we?

I thought we had gotten beyond the whole "eye for an eye" thing.

I'm sorry, why is the US in Afghanistan again? Please keep your double standards away from me. You're not perfect either, you're just a dickhead that wants everyone else to believe how moral you are. Lulzec couldn't have picked a nicer target and I hope they find serious dirt on News Corp and their ilk.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (0)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805840)

Please keep your double standards away from me. You're not perfect either, you're just a dickhead that wants everyone else to believe how moral you are.

Sounds like someone needs a little time with Stuart Smalley [youtube.com]

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36806472)

I'm sorry, why is the US in Afghanistan again?

Oil.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (4, Insightful)

Groo Wanderer (180806) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805572)

When you have bought your way out of governmental oversight and any possibility of legal repercussions, how else does one get punished for flagrant illegal behaviour. What you are seeing is the people fighting back against a system that has been thoroughly co-opted by those with more resources. It is classic guerrilla warfare, and more power to Lulzsec for doing it.

It also made me smile, so win/win.

            -Charlie

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (1)

Idbar (1034346) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805948)

While it makes me smile too. I just hope this doesn't give an excuse to deflect the problem, and consume more resources tracking the LulzSec group instead of proper investigation of the actual News Corp.

I mean, it's not that they aren't trying to look like the victims [theatlantic.com] instead of the perpetrators [guardian.co.uk]

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (2)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806336)

For those who had forgotten, LulzSec is also responsible for hacking such monsters as Nintendo, Sega, and Eve Online.

So while there is a kind of poetic justice to NotW getting hacked, forgive me if Im still anticipating LulzSec getting "vanned".

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (5, Insightful)

causality (777677) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805600)

So, because they did something ethically wrong and against the law it's OK to do the same to them? I thought we had gotten beyond the whole "eye for an eye" thing.

Until we decide that corporations should be second- and third-class citizens compared to breathing human beings, you can expect more of the same.

It's a serious mistake to blame vigilantes as though they happen in a vacuum. That kind of thinking has been tried for a very long time now and it has gotten us absolutely nowhere. It doesn't solve anything. Vigilanteism is the least of things it fails to address. It doesn't change anything. It provides more of the same problems we've always had.

Instead you need to look at the conditions of the environment, the steps that were taken to make them that way, and how they bred the desire to do such things. That's if you are actually interested in really working towards a solution for what you perceive as a problem, so interested in fact that you're willing to put aside the gratification of condemnation and try something that might work.

The root of the problem is that a corporation can do things that would cause any individual person to suffer some serious prison time. The equivalent of "prison time" for a corporation would be to freeze their assets and stop them from doing any business whatsoever for a set period of time. You may say "okay Causality but what about the rank-and-file workers who would be financially harmed by this?" To that I say, maybe that would make people more reluctant to work for known assholes like Rupert Murdoch and maybe that would be a good thing for everyone.

Just as a loan officer has to charge higher fees for risky loans, let Murdoch pay his employees above the standard rate to compensate them for the risk that his asshattery might get them shut down. That would be more like making corporations pay some of the social costs their tactics inflict on the world around them.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36805656)

When the government ceases to mete out justice this is what happens. Get over it. If you don't like it please fix the governments so we don't need to do this ourselves.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (4, Insightful)

causality (777677) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806146)

When the government ceases to mete out justice this is what happens. Get over it. If you don't like it please fix the governments so we don't need to do this ourselves.

Thank you, kind sir or madam, whoever the anonymous figure may be. To me, what you say is the most intuitive thing in the world but for some it is a hard doctrine. They are stuck in a crime-and-punishment model that fails to account for why certain crimes happen in the first place. It's the same reason we have a War on Drugs instead of an expectation of responsible use.

I'm trying to model and expound this kind of understanding. I'm trying to contribute such that the conversation addresses the higher levels of how and why these things manifest, rather than the low level of how undesirable they might be. Therefore, it's nice to hear from someone else who understands this.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (2, Insightful)

lattyware (934246) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805886)

This is because of the phone hacking thing? I just thought this was because reading The Sun is roughly equivalent to torture.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (-1, Troll)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805996)

It's because people don't like fox, and they don't like Murdoch. Therefore breaking the law, is perfectly okay since they also hate them, because they have some irrational fear of him.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36806200)

Protesting while breaking the law is different than breaking the law to reach some economic gain that also harms someone else. In my opinion, morals supercede law. Laws are created by men, some laws are just and others are not.

I feel bad for any innocent bystanders of Lulzsecs or anonymous attacks but most of the time you should thank them for exposing corporations that claim to have security but are really full of wholes easily exploitable.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36806232)

Give this man a masters in psychology. You obviously nailed it.
The real question is: am I being sarcastic?

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (2)

digitig (1056110) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806236)

Then when they get rid of him, they will find everything is just the same as it was, because the problem isn't Murdoch, it's the system that rewards him for doing what he does.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36806168)

I would say it is more ethical to act on justice/mischief than greed/pursuit of power.
I found it quite satisfying to hear what had happened. Especially when two senior police officials have resigned over this issue. Obviously law enforcement has failed in this instance and I see nothing wrong with what lulzsec did.

Re:Is this what it has come down to? (4, Insightful)

CheShACat (999169) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806326)

Well, no, firstly Lulzsec will have done it "for the lulz" not for "an eye for an eye". They also had beef against The Sun after the Ryan Cleary arrest, and The Sun's appaling coverage of it. Any other reason one might throw into the mix is just gravy.

As a viewer, one can find the whole episode deliciously ironic without needing to take either side of the moral argument.

All down (5, Interesting)

norriefc (1998536) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805478)

AFAICT every single NI UK based website is currently offline.

Looks like their DNS servers are offline. (1)

Cybertect (85900) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806350)

Maybe News International threw in the towel and pulled the plug on them.

Re:All down (3, Informative)

scubamage (727538) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806362)

Their DNS server got taken down, and their admins have taken down public facing servers from what I've gathered.

Is It Wrong? (5, Interesting)

causality (777677) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805480)

Is it wrong that I'm amused to see this?

It's not like government was going to do anything to the corporation other than a slap-on-the-wrist fine that's certain to be less than the profits made by the act. That they may throw low-level employees under the bus doesn't change this. At least someone somewhere is trying to make sure that corporate malfeasance actually does have some kind of consequence.

I have always believed that a properly-functioning government, not owned by monied interests and willing to take effective and severe action against misbehaving corporations and their executives would have prevented both Anonymous and LulzSec from ever getting started. As I see it, they are only stepping in where the government has grotesquely failed. Everything that is bad about vigilanteism is caused by failing governments.

Re:Is It Wrong? (0)

McFortner (881162) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805514)

Is it wrong that I'm amused to see this?

Yes, yes it is.

Re:Is It Wrong? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36805662)

If you're dumb.

Re:Is It Wrong? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36806274)

Hello Rupert, welcoem to Slashdot

Re:Is It Wrong? (0)

c0lo (1497653) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805562)

Is it wrong that I'm amused to see this?

TFS quote:

The hackers also started to post email addresses and passwords they claimed were from Sun staff, and said to have accessed a mail server at now-defunct News of the World.".

Necrophilia... Can't be good.

Re:Is It Wrong? (1)

Oh Gawwd Peak Oil (1000227) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805590)

I have always believed that a properly-functioning government, not owned by monied interests and willing to take effective and severe action against misbehaving corporations and their executives would have prevented both Anonymous and LulzSec from ever getting started. As I see it, they are only stepping in where the government has grotesquely failed. Everything that is bad about vigilanteism is caused by failing governments.

I don't know how things are in the U.K., but here in the U.S., if any politician so much as suggested trying this, there would be such a massive hue and cry from a huge section of the country about "Government overstepping their bounds!" and "Socialism!" that they wouldn't know what hit them.

In other words, government will never be able to stand up to corporations and take "effective and severe action" against them. We're pretty much screwed.

Re:Is It Wrong? (3, Interesting)

causality (777677) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805970)

I don't know how things are in the U.K., but here in the U.S., if any politician so much as suggested trying this, there would be such a massive hue and cry from a huge section of the country about "Government overstepping their bounds!" and "Socialism!" that they wouldn't know what hit them.

If enforcing the law when an individual breaks it isn't socialism, then neither is enforcing the law when a corporation breaks it.

In fact you could even say it's less of an "overstep" or "socialist" when the law is enforced against corporations. I mean, supposedly we have government by the consent of the goverened, meaning individual people have a type of sovereignty that they have willingly surrendered as part of a social contract. Corporations, however, are entirely creations of the state. Since the state created them, it makes perfect sense for the state to regulate them with no need for recourse to any "social contract" type of argument.

Not that I disagree with your assessment of what would happen. The average American really has no idea what kind of vast, powerful interests are arrayed against them. Propaganda and demagoguery are their tools of choice because when the manipulations are successful, the victims think they are defending their own ideas.

Re:Is It Wrong? (3, Interesting)

Stormthirst (66538) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805826)

Rebecca Brooks: Arrested - former News International chief executive - hardly a low level employee
Les Hinton: Arrested - chief executive of Dow Jones - again hardly a low level employee

News International's share price has dropped 6%, which whilst isn't a fine, but will certainly hammer the profits of the organisation as a whole.

You have to bear in mind, most of this is going on in England, where there isn't nearly the obvious corruption you get in American politics. There is corruption - it's government and comes with the territory - but its no where near as blatant. Even the Commissioner and Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan police have resigned, even though they had nothing to do with it, nor any knowledge of it going on.

Re:Is It Wrong? (1)

causality (777677) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806012)

Rebecca Brooks: Arrested - former News International chief executive - hardly a low level employee Les Hinton: Arrested - chief executive of Dow Jones - again hardly a low level employee

News International's share price has dropped 6%, which whilst isn't a fine, but will certainly hammer the profits of the organisation as a whole.

You have to bear in mind, most of this is going on in England, where there isn't nearly the obvious corruption you get in American politics. There is corruption - it's government and comes with the territory - but its no where near as blatant. Even the Commissioner and Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan police have resigned, even though they had nothing to do with it, nor any knowledge of it going on.

The real question is whether the top-level executives at News Corp were looking the other way. The other real question is whether we will acknowledge that the shareholders soundly deserve to feel the effects of what they have chosen to invest in. If assholes like those who run News Corp have a hard time attracting investors while more ethical companies have no such difficulties, that's a win for everyone.

Still, what you say is at least something positive and it is good to hear. I'm happy to discover I was wrong about something because it means I don't have to remain ignorant. Thank you for setting me straight on that part.

It's fortunate for everyone that this happened in England where the corporations don't dominate government to quite the same degree as in the US.

Re:Is It Wrong? (0)

Groo Wanderer (180806) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806230)

The real question is whether the top-level executives at News Corp were looking the other way.

Easy enough to answer, no they didn't know. They _SAID_ so themselves, and had the same policemen they are alleged to have bribed for leaks, tracking, and other things clear them. What more do you want? How dare you bring that liberal smear job in to this reputable forum!

The other real question is whether we will acknowledge that the shareholders soundly deserve to feel the effects of what they have chosen to invest in.

Of course not, they are the victims here as much as Murdock and his paper are! They were hacked, and the damage is immense. Feel sorry for them, and make sure that the poor innocent victims only trying to game a supposedly fair system for profit are protected. I feel we should have a bailout and a few laws passed to make reporting on this kind of thing illegal.

If assholes like those who run News Corp have a hard time attracting investors while more ethical companies have no such difficulties, that's a win for everyone.

No, you miss the point entirely. News Corp is the victim here, they were hacked! The people in charge apologised too, what more do you want a pony? Remember who is victimised by this.

It's fortunate for everyone that this happened in England where the corporations don't dominate government to quite the same degree as in the US.

OK, I can't play Fox commentator any more, I have do this part straight both as a member of said media and as a person who doesn't like this level of stupidity. What planet do you live on? The only difference is that it is better hidden in England, they are subtle, something that has been entirely lost in this country because things are so blatant there is no need for subtlety.

              -Charlie

Re:Is It Wrong? (1)

scubamage (727538) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806372)

I'm hoping they do. I set an alert with my brokerage so I should be getting a text when their stock gets to 50 cents a share. There is money to be made off of NI's misery; rather poetic I think.

Re:Is It Wrong? (5, Informative)

digitig (1056110) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806388)

Even the Commissioner and Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan police have resigned, even though they had nothing to do with it, nor any knowledge of it going on.

Er -- Rebekah Brooks admitted to paying the police for information -- a criminal offence carrying a maximum penalty of £10000 or two years in prison -- in front of a select committee hearing in March 2003. If they had no knowledge of it going on that was either incompetence or a willful turning of a blind eye. Given the perks that the Commissioner got from from NI (which might be considered bribery in themselves) then their position was untenable.

Re:Is It Wrong? (1)

drb226 (1938360) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805870)

...would have prevented both Anonymous and LulzSec from ever getting started

Disagree. Some people simply want to "stick it to the man", defy authority, be rebellious, and work for "justice" in their own way. Or they just want to screw around with people. AnonyLulzSecWhatever is bound to form, regardless of the governmental circumstances.

Is there really a problem here? (4, Funny)

zcomuto (1700174) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805484)

It's not like the Sun ever posts anything remotely approaching actual news or something with a factual grounding, so what difference does it make if the homepage redirects to the actual Sun homepage or a spoof? Neither is actually news.

Re:Is there really a problem here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36805888)

Which makes me wonder why they even bothered hacking phones if they just make up a bunch of dirt anyway.

Why Isn't Anyone Slagging Cell Carrier's Security? (1)

theshowmecanuck (703852) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805536)

Yes it was very bad of the News of the World to hack these people's phones/voicemail. But how come we haven't heard anyone go after the cell phone providers for a shitty security setup. Sure the people's passwords might have been easy, but I remember when that guy hacked Paris Hilton's T-Mobile account. Everyone was slagging the shit out of T-Mobile as well as the hacker. And if the people who's accounts were violated because of poor passwords, why hasn't anyone commented in the news about this either? Are these points not sensationalistic for them?

Re:Why Isn't Anyone Slagging Cell Carrier's Securi (0)

s7uar7 (746699) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805936)

It's worse than a poor choice of password. UK mobile carriers used to use a default 4 digit PIN that could be used to access your voicemail from another line. Most people didn't bother changing it from the default, so all you had to do was get directed to their voicemail (by simultaneously calling their number from another phone) and then enter the PIN.

Re:Why Isn't Anyone Slagging Cell Carrier's Securi (4, Interesting)

scubamage (727538) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806054)

The hackers of Paris Hilton's phone weren't being employed by a massive multinational corporation to hack the phones. The people who did hack the phones saw jail time - something that will never happen to anyone who actually ordered the crimes to be committed in the case of News Corp. Until we start instituting nuremburg style trials for large corporations where there are serious consequences for malfeasance, this is going to get worse. At least in China the executives get executed when this shit happens.

Re:Why Isn't Anyone Slagging Cell Carrier's Securi (1)

Tetch (534754) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806314)

ISTR Paris Hilton's phone's password turned out to be just the name of her dog, or something equally stupid ... which wouldn't require hacking, just a lucky guess.

As most of us here understand, mobile voicemail hacking just requires brute-forcing a PIN - 4 digits in the case of UK cellphones ... or just 2 digits in the case of my home ansafone :-)

So there isn't much security on a cellphone's voicemail to criticise in the first place.

So much for retiring (1)

msobkow (48369) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805604)

Guess they haven't figured out how to retire without working. It's a common problem from what I've heard. :)

Re:So much for retiring (1)

Killerchronic (1170217) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806114)

More like they retired because they got worried and then got bored after realising nothing else happened. Most of their latest tweets were following a sodding car chase, someone sounds bored and looking for more attention to be honest.

News Corp is making themselves out as victims (5, Informative)

SpazmodeusG (1334705) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805622)

Link [google.com]

News Corp was already pushing this storey as if they are victims, I see no good from actually giving them something to claim victimisation over.

Re:News Corp is making themselves out as victims (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36806212)

When I saw several of these clips on Rachel Maddow's show I wanted to get on a bus and go tomato the Fox News building.

Admitted PR firm maestro: Okay, yes it is a hacking issue. Now ignore that they were the ones hacking. Now look at these people who got hacked. We should deal and fix the problem of people getting hacked unless they are your sister company. In that case we should let them and your bosses slide despite that you have helped taken down organizations with far less undercover evidence against them as a whole.

Re:News Corp is making themselves out as victims (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806234)

Did you expect anything different. News corp has been trying to make everyone believe there is a LiBrAl CoNsPeRcY going on. When you have a bunch of hackers directing their attacts at conservative sources, it proves their point and strengthens their resolve.
This type hacking crap helps no one, and makes the problem worse.

IMPORTANT (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36805640)

They got all the news international emails as well, to be posted tomorrow.

That includes wade and co.

People, this could be massive ^^

Way to go (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36805646)

I don't know about 'Success', but I can spell 'Compromised and Contaminated Evidence' what with this lot and our idiot MPs crashing around it will be amazing if anyone gets prosecuted for this sordid mess.

Re:Way to go (1)

Danny_Freak (1043608) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805798)

Depends how long they have had access to the systems, imagine if they had copies of data since before the shitstorm broke, perhaps from the repository alleged to have been ordered to destroy data by a high rankng NI executive? Who knows what data they plan on releasing? Could focus the minds of some spineless politicos...

Re:Way to go (4, Insightful)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805808)

Doesn't matter if anyone gets prosecuted. Damages are $8 billion and counting, and News Corp is about to lose its credit rating. No court in the world could dish out this sort of damage.

Oh for fuck's sake (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36805754)

The name of the newspaper is The Sun. For a website that capitalizes "the" in headlines as often as not, you'd think they could at least get it right the one time that it SHOULD be capitalized.

They are not targeting "the Sun". They are targeting The Sun. Bonus points if you can figure out how to italicize it in the headline. HTML isn't that hard.

Re:Oh for fuck's sake (0)

lattyware (934246) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805930)

You are right, HTML isn't that hard - and it's not intended to be used to style - such as italicizing - anything. You could emphasize it.

Hacking? DDoS is more like it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36805762)

I don't see hacking, I only noticed the domain won't resolve. So its back to ddos again, as always. Lame; guess the only "inteligence" here is that they seem to have targeted the DNS server.

Totally not impressed here.

Re:Hacking? DDoS is more like it... (3, Informative)

norriefc (1998536) | more than 2 years ago | (#36805830)

I don't see hacking, I only noticed the domain won't resolve. So its back to ddos again, as always. Lame; guess the only "inteligence" here is that they seem to have targeted the DNS server.

Totally not impressed here.

That's only because NI went scorched earth and took down all their NI UK based websites. There are screenshots and videos floating about the net

meh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36805858)

publicity-addicted "hackers" continue to kick over anthills and declare themselves the hellspawn of king kong and godzilla

still waiting for these internet tough guys to grow a pair and hack someone worth bragging about

NSA: lol come at us bro
AntiSec: ... hey look some fifth-string military contractor left a mail server unsecured!

The Sun probably did it anyway (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36805896)

What if Lulz-sec was The Sun and its just a convenient way to make themselves look like the victims and continue to hack into more things for "news" stories.

I thought I took my medication today.

Couldn't be arsed to sign in for this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36806016)

This could not have happened to a nicer newspaper. I know it probably isn't the Lulz doing the "hack" (more than likely some spin-off of the Socialist Worker Party, i.e. one of them with some sort of knowledge and half a brain), but I do really applaud the effort. Fair play old chap(ess).

They have gone too far!!! (2)

DaveAtFraud (460127) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806092)

News International I understand. The Sun, too, I guess. But why in the name of all that is holy would they take down Page 3?

Cheers,
Dave

Re:They have gone too far!!! (1)

digitig (1056110) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806448)

News International I understand. The Sun, too, I guess. But why in the name of all that is holy would they take down Page 3?

Well, duh! This is the internet. Do you really think that taking down page 3 would have any measurable impact on the amount of porn available?

Yay! let's give Murdoch a defense! (0, Flamebait)

blair1q (305137) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806268)

Murdoch's lawyer: If it please the court, I would now like to present evidence that a group calling itself Lulzsec hacked into computers belonging to my client and altered them, thus rendering police evidence entirely unreliable.

The Queen: Case dismissed. What's for lunch?

Re:Yay! let's give Murdoch a defense! (2)

FyRE666 (263011) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806382)

In contrast to your understanding of how the UK functions, you'll find that our Queen is not actually involved in the judicial process.

Re:Yay! let's give Murdoch a defense! (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806470)

I think you'll find she's the one in whose name it all happens. I was taking a little literary license by inserting her bodily into the scene. If you wish to best enjoy the theatricality of it, read the Queen's lines in Miranda Richardson's voice.

It was all the work of Anonymous and 'Louise Boat' (1)

Cybertect (85900) | more than 2 years ago | (#36806446)

Apparently

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DG7IURgryjA

For non-UK readers, Sky News is part of News International's UK TV operation.

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...