Beta
×

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

Thank you!

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

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

New York Times and Twitter Attacked By Syrian Electronic Army

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the oh-no-not-the-twit-o-sphere dept.

Security 169

cold fjord writes with news that the NY Times website was disrupted by hackers Tuesday afternoon. "In an interview, Mr. Frons said the attack was carried out by a group known as 'the Syrian Electronic Army, or someone trying very hard to be them.' The group attacked the company’s domain name registrar, Melbourne IT. The Web site first went down after 3 p.m.; once service was restored, the hackers quickly disrupted the site again." The Times wasn't the only site to be attacked: "Earlier today, a Twitter account allegedly belonging to the Syrian Electronic Army, a pro-Syrian-regime hacker collective, claimed to have taken over The New York Times website, Huffington Post UK's website and Twitter.com, by hacking into each of the site's registry accounts." The group was definitely able to change contact info for Twitter's domain. The Wall Street Journal notes that this is the same group that targeted media organizations a few months back. "When the SEA hacked the Twitter account of the Associated Press earlier this year, it posted a false headline to the account that said the White House had been attacked. The hoax caused U.S. stock markets to briefly lose $200 billion in value."

cancel ×

169 comments

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

NYT and Twitter attacked (4, Insightful)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | about a year ago | (#44693599)

and nothing of value was lost...

Seriously, there's something I've never understood about electronic "warfare": unless you attack real targets and do something useful, such as penetrating your enemy's command network to steal plans or cryptographic keys or something, what's the point?

Re:NYT and Twitter attacked (4, Insightful)

ls671 (1122017) | about a year ago | (#44693673)

It's psychological warfare, a variation of propaganda.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_warfare [wikipedia.org]

Re:NYT and Twitter attacked (1)

lennier (44736) | about a year ago | (#44693745)

It's psychological warfare, a variation of propaganda.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_warfare [wikipedia.org]

So... then this is probably someone from Assad's regime trying to make the Syrian rebels look like as much of a random force of brute pointless chaos as Anonymous?

If this was the rebels, they need to hire a new PR agency.

Re:NYT and Twitter attacked (5, Interesting)

Adult film producer (866485) | about a year ago | (#44693851)

Not likely. The SEA is likely a small but very smart group of american/europeans. The whole Syrian thing is just a cover story.

Re:NYT and Twitter attacked (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693863)

The SEA are funded by Israel and the US.

Re:NYT and Twitter attacked (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693965)

The SEA are funded by Israel and the US.

And Israel is funded by the Illuminati!

Who are funded by the Underpants Gnomes!

Who don't need to be funded by anybody because

...

Profit!

Re:NYT and Twitter attacked (3, Funny)

MysteriousPreacher (702266) | about a year ago | (#44694227)

Drat. How due you realise this?

We kept this perfectly secret apart from the clues we inexplicably planted in Denver Airport and the symbols we in included on banknotes.

Re:NYT and Twitter attacked (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694375)

Who are funded by the Underpants Gnomes!

Who don't need to be funded by anybody because

...

Profit!

Please use the correct name.

They are called the Danish Underpants Brigade [pantsoff.dk]

Re:NYT and Twitter attacked (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694829)

And Israel is funded by the Illuminati!

Actually Israel appears to be funded by the US (taxpayer).

Re:NYT and Twitter attacked (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44695115)

So we're the Illuminati?

Re:NYT and Twitter attacked (2)

MachineShedFred (621896) | about a year ago | (#44695011)

Then this attack had exactly the wrong effect. Shutting off Twitter and the New York Times is going to put me in a better mood, and make me want the conflict to escalate into them attacking Facebook, Instagram, and Reddit.

Have yourself a good time, Syrian Electronic Army! Take out the Internet's trash and do the rest of us a big favor.

Re:NYT and Twitter attacked (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694113)

and nothing of value was lost...

You missed the part about making stock markets drop. Frankly, I think they most likely did it for the LULZ; but if you recall, there was an investigation into short-selling of reinsurance companies before 9/11. I don't know what actually came of that investigation. The Bin Laden family is probably more sophisticated than these SEA guys, but we shouldn't underestimate them. Once you figure out how to move markets with disinformation, you can plow more R&D back into moving markets, as well as funding actual acts of terror which also move markets... and... well, it's exponential until it hits some kind of natural hard limit. They can't drive the S&P to zero, but they don't have to in order to make a *lot* of money.

We're being played by somebody, somewhere. Our fucking brilliant leaders won't figure it out until they've lost lives as well as $billions.

Re:NYT and Twitter attacked (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694507)

You missed the part about making stock markets drop.

Maybe we shouldn't let those those people rule our world until they grow up and stop being such nervous nellies then.

Re:NYT and Twitter attacked (4, Insightful)

bluegutang (2814641) | about a year ago | (#44694407)

Obligatory XKCD [xkcd.com] ...

Re:NYT and Twitter attacked (4, Insightful)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about a year ago | (#44694869)

unless you attack real targets and do something useful, such as penetrating your enemy's command network to steal plans or cryptographic keys or something, what's the point?

Exactly, just like terrorists. They should target army bases and stuff, right? What's the point of bombing, for example, marathon run audiences? Surely nobody is going to react to that...or will they?

Arabs don't the media (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693601)

That's for sure.

Re:Arabs don't the media (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44695107)

Arabs don't the media? What the fuck does that mean?

Syrian Electronic Army.. (3, Funny)

meglon (1001833) | about a year ago | (#44693627)

Is that like the Electric Moog Orchestra?

ELO (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693725)

Electric LIGHT Orchestra bagdouche. Turn back. Turn back. Turn back.

Re:ELO (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | about a year ago | (#44693949)

It's a totally different [youtube.com] and real [wikipedia.org] thing, bub. Here's your ticket to the moon.

Re:ELO (4, Funny)

guttentag (313541) | about a year ago | (#44694009)

Great. Now I've got this mental image of Bashar al-Assad [wikipedia.org] with a bunch of kids with late 70s haircuts in a Damascus bunker rocking out to Don't Bring Me Down [wikipedia.org] while they take down U.S. media sites.

My site is running, serving The New York Times...
You've got me thinking SEA's a waste of my time...
Don't bring me down... no no no no no
I'll tell you once more before I email Melbourne
Don't bring me down...

What is your favorite superhero? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693637)

Whats your favorite color?

Security questions are such a fucking joke.

Re:What is your favorite superhero? (2)

Cinder6 (894572) | about a year ago | (#44694031)

Agreed. They all seem to want you to put in information that anyone could find by browsing your Facebook profile (assuming you have one, natch). It's better to answer them with random words (in case you have to answer them to a live rep) and use a password manager to keep track of them.

Another option is to perform a simple substitution. Instead of answering "What was the name of your first pet?" correctly, put down your mother's maiden name. Your pet's real name will go under, say, a question asking where you were born. That would be an entertaining tech support call.

Re:What is your favorite superhero? (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year ago | (#44694077)

What is your favorite superhero?

Sounds like an occasion for a good Iron Man vs. Batman religious debate: Two billionerd techno-vigilantes, one with the cocky attitude of a cat that just got a jar of cream, the other with the surly attitude of a cat that just got a jar of cream stuffed up its ass.

Who's your favorite? Who would win a match?

Re:What is your favorite superhero? (1)

Errol backfiring (1280012) | about a year ago | (#44694783)

What is the average airspeed of a swallow?

This security type was already broken in Monty Python's Holy Grail.

Suspiciously well timed... (5, Insightful)

gagol (583737) | about a year ago | (#44693647)

So, first a story about the army being ready to raid the country, and just now a cyber-attack originating from syria happens... How do we know it's not US electronic warfare machine fabricating a bening attack to foster popular support for the coming war? After all, false flags before wars are the norm and not the exception.

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693701)

I don't doubt the us gov is capable of false flag. But if they were to make a false flag attempt, why something so lame?

Joe Six-Pack didn't notice and wouldn't care even if he did.

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (3, Insightful)

gagol (583737) | about a year ago | (#44693741)

Because it is harmless, but can be pushed as a threat in the medias? I just dont see what strategic interest Syria would try to bring the US army to its civil war. Or maybe it is the russians looking for a good old proxy war with the US...

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a year ago | (#44695383)

Or maybe it is the russians looking for a good old proxy war with the US...

You really, honestly think that this would happen without an agreement? We have more to lose in any conflict with them, but they stand higher chances of losing, because they're already broke.

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (4, Insightful)

ToadProphet (1148333) | about a year ago | (#44693913)

It was on the front page of Fox News, so Joe Six-Pack likely noticed.

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (1)

sociocapitalist (2471722) | about a year ago | (#44694711)

Joe Six-Pack

Funny the two completely opposite and conflicting images that brought to mind when I read it.

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (5, Interesting)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about a year ago | (#44693953)

I don't doubt the us gov is capable of false flag. But if they were to make a false flag attempt, why something so lame?

So Twitter was rated #1 by the EFF on resisting government warrant(less) data grabs and the NYT has recently started tipping over to the side of working with Snowden and Greenwald.

Other than that, I can't see any motivation to pick those two high-profile American targets.

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year ago | (#44694089)

Other than that, I can't see any motivation to pick those two high-profile American targets.

If it is in fact Syrians, I don't know what they expect to accomplish for their cause.

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (2)

artor3 (1344997) | about a year ago | (#44694297)

The NYT also published an Op-Ed today entitled Bomb Syria, Even if It Is Illegal [nytimes.com] . I think it's quite easy to imagine some nationalist Syrian hackers targeting the site. That seems far more likely than some dark government conspiracy. Many major international players are already signalling support for the US bombing Syria. Why would Obama fake a minor hack against some newspaper? What would he have to gain? The downside if caught seems much, much greater than the tiny potential upside.

Bad Move (1)

ThatsNotPudding (1045640) | about a year ago | (#44695085)

the NYT has recently started tipping over to the side of working with Snowden and Greenwald.

The same Gray Lady that jingoistically trumpeted for war against Iraq.

I wouldn't trust anyone at the NYT farther than I could throw them.

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (1)

EzInKy (115248) | about a year ago | (#44694293)

What you talking about AC? My retirement account lost money because of their actions, and it's been made clear on here that it will be made certain that none of us older age types can feel depend on social securityc! I say bomb them back to the stoneage!!

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (3, Informative)

XcepticZP (1331217) | about a year ago | (#44695145)

And who forced you to base your retirement on investments? Oh, that's right... Inflation and fear.

Either way, you're a sick human being if you think innocent people should die because "your retirement account lost money" due to their supposed actions.

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (1)

MachineShedFred (621896) | about a year ago | (#44695027)

Because the Government is the only organization besides the New York Times that seems to care about the New York Times. Oh, and Twitter isn't exactly hard to hit - they do it to themselves enough.

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693717)

what interest does the US possibly have to start a war in Syria??? do they even need a reason? or is wasn't this already foretold after Iraq?...gotta employ the people somehow, i suppose

Re: Suspiciously well timed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693845)

I don't know what to believe anymore: http://www.globalresearch.ca/deleted-daily-mail-online-article-us-backed-plan-for-chemical-weapon-attack-in-syria-to-be-blamed-on-assad/5339178

The whole thing is fishy - why is it okay that the U.S. is supporting the jihadists in Syria anyways?

Re: Suspiciously well timed... (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year ago | (#44693925)

The whole thing is fishy - why is it okay that the U.S. is supporting the jihadists in Syria anyways?

I know you've been taught that 'jihadist' means 'anti-American terrorist,' but it's really not true. Give up the conditioning. A jihadist can be good, or bad, or even non-violent.

I'm not saying we should invade Syria, just that a jihadist isn't what you think it is.

Re: Suspiciously well timed... (1, Insightful)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year ago | (#44694131)

The whole thing is fishy - why is it okay that the U.S. is supporting the jihadists in Syria anyways?

I know you've been taught that 'jihadist' means 'anti-American terrorist,' but it's really not true. Give up the conditioning. A jihadist can be good, or bad, or even non-violent.

I'm not saying we should invade Syria, just that a jihadist isn't what you think it is.

I don't think any of the terrorist organizations are jihadist. They appear to be people who are outraged at some real or perceived wrong, and have convinced themselves that killing innocent people is proper redress.

Just like Timothy McVeigh.

AFAICT the only way Islam enters into Middle Eastern sourced terrorism is as part of the definition of "us" vs. "them".

Re: Suspiciously well timed... (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year ago | (#44694171)

I don't think any of the terrorist organizations are jihadist.

I wouldn't go that far [wikipedia.org] . Think of christians in the middle ages, willing to kill for religion. In a lot of ways the middle east is stuck in the middle ages. So you'll have guys who think it's ok to kill people just because they are Sufis or 'wrong sect.' You'll find people believing this even when they are relatively well off.

Re: Suspiciously well timed... (2, Insightful)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#44693959)

The correct answer is that it is a forgery. So you shouldn't believe it at all.

Britam Defence, David Goulding and Philip Doughty [dailymail.co.uk]

An article on 29 January reported allegations on the internet that the US Government had backed a plot to launch a chemicals weapons attack in Syria and blame it on the Assad regime. ... We now accept that email was fabricated and acknowledge there is no truth in any suggestion that Britam or its directors were willing to consider taking part in such a plot, which may have led to an atrocity.
We apologise to each of them and have agreed to pay substantial damages.

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693867)

the goal is iran.. it always has been... the syrian thing has been ongoing for a few years.. it takes a lot of money for food, logistics etc, and weapons to humans fighting a provisioned government.. saudi/us supported insurgency in the first place..

since its hard to get world support for an iranian attack, it might be easier to do it using syria, iran's major ally in the region.. if they somehow lure iran in on it.

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (0)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year ago | (#44694107)

what interest does the US possibly have to start a war in Syria???

None whatsoever.

Unless they want to inflict some collateral damage to keep people joining terrorist organizations.

Let's sit this one out and let someone else put their foot in it.

wrong flag (-1)

globaljustin (574257) | about a year ago | (#44693829)

US electronic warfare machine fabricating

This is false flag (real Syrians wouldn't think to hack 'the onion'...seriously), but you've got the wrong culprits.

These are *Western* hackers-for-hire...could be Canadian, US, Mexican, French, Russian, Philippino...whoever is willing to do these attacks for money!

'the US' is us...as in we Americans here...'the US' could mean our Federal gov't or it could mean a company based here, or the American population...depends on the contex

if the "Syrian Electronic Army" is somehow connected to the CIA, FBI, NSA, WTF, etc....well they are **criminals**

if Obama is behind it then **he** is a criminal (I don't think so at all, but I know someone will respond saying I work for the White House)...

we know that the oil industry used the CIA to manipulate the region...it was a CIA operation, on CIA letterhead, but it was not legal...it was wrong

but you're a fool if you stop there...the CIA was just a tool for international Oligarchs...that's who's behind this....people with a financial stake in the Oil revenue that runs through Syria

BP...British Petroleum...they're the origin of this shit

its reductive and just derails the discussion to blast out "bah it was false flag...CIA...Obama is behind it!" whenever we see evidence of shennanigans

This is about century-old revenue streams and the wealthy interneational families they enrich....**when used as intended** the American system of government is a force to challenge this Oligarchy

"Real Syrians..." (1)

EzInKy (115248) | about a year ago | (#44694403)

Real Syrians want the US gone. Now personally, I'm okay with Syrians just as long as they are willing to listen to non-Syrian views. I'm willing to listen to their viewpoints, why aren't they as open to mine? I'll even give a preview....free drugs, free sex, and free religion. I'm willing to listen to their views of freedom as well.

Re:"Real Syrians..." (3, Interesting)

globaljustin (574257) | about a year ago | (#44694423)

interesting comment...

Now personally, I'm okay with Syrians just as long as they are willing to listen to non-Syrian views

word me too...this whole mess started as an outgrowth of the Arab Spring.

Egypt and Syria are getting the 'divide and conquer' treatment from the global Oil Oligarchs. It's just like Iran in '79.

Here's what they do: Take the (IMHO inevitable) progressive democratic revolution in a country ruled by an aristocrat installed by foreign oligarchs...

Now, find an extremist group that is local and non-progressive...

Then, turn them against the progressive rebels, enflame, maybe hire some hacker/thugs to make up some 'internet army' to cause trouble and confusion...

Bam...

There's how the Iranian Revolution, the Arab Spring in Egypt and Syria now got turned into a conflict between "conservatives" and "liberals"...

Status quo is maintained...which is all the Oil Oligarchs ever wanted in the first place...

Syrians are our friends. They want to be humans and exist just like us. They want the freedom of self-determination w/o some asshole dictating shit and controlling society for personal gain. I think we should help them.

To be clear (1)

EzInKy (115248) | about a year ago | (#44694465)

Are you saying that Syrians are open to hearing arguments for free sex, drugs, and religion? If such is the case I'll be out protesting in the morning any interention in a country that guarantees such liberties!

Re:To be clear (1)

globaljustin (574257) | about a year ago | (#44694541)

free sex, drugs, and religion

see, this is nice...i like it...it's a classic feedback loop of human society

free sex = more humans

free drugs = more sex

free religion = more drugs

lust->ecstasy->guilt

why not...it's in all the religions of the region anyway

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (-1, Troll)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#44693849)

So, first a story about the army being ready to raid the country, and just now a cyber-attack originating from syria happens... How do we know it's not US electronic warfare machine fabricating a bening attack to foster popular support for the coming war? After all, false flags before wars are the norm and not the exception.

So your thinking is that it won't be the use of chemical weapons on a civilian population killing over a thousand people in violation of international treaties, and in the face of repeated warnings from the international community that have been openly stated that will rile people up? It will be some nuisance grade hacking of twitter and a newspaper? And, it has to be a "false flag" to boot? You need to get out more, that is utter nonsense.

As explanations on Slashdot I find that "false flags" are greatly overused. It often seems to be the preferred "go to" explanation for everything. The problem is, you have a hard time with meaningful discussions if everything is a "false flag."

If you really want to go down the "false flag" route, how do we know you aren't part of a disinformation campaign aimed at discrediting the US?

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693893)

So your thinking is that it won't be the use of chemical weapons on a civilian population killing over a thousand people in violation of international treaties, and in the face of repeated warnings from the international community that have been openly stated that will rile people up?

Yeah... you got any proof that the rebels or even a covert op didn't launch the alleged chemical weapons? Because Syria launching chemical weapons makes about as much sense as Obama nuking Texas.

I know, I know, you were damn sure Iraq had chemical weapons too, right? And they were throwing babies around, right? And Iran will have a nuke... what... 3 years ago now?

You're a fucking brain-dead fool who is the very target of the absurd propaganda the rest of us shake our head at. You're at the bottom of the intelligence scale, son.

It's Iran you Idiot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693957)

Save your false flag discussions for a classroom.

How did the civil war get this far along in Syria? American government is funding/supporting the revolutionaries.
Plenty of despots in the world and the U.S. government is especially interested in this one. Look at all the relationships between Iran and Syria.

At best, this is another nation-building exercise like Kuwait, or Iraq. Does anyone remember when there was Kuwaiti testimony in Congress about Iraq military destroying hospitals and taking babies from imagined incubators prior to re-taking of Kuwait under Bush 41. Here we are again, except this was real.

The only thing we'll do is make Iran more nervous setting up shop in Syria. Which is likely the point of the anyway.

Re:It's Iran you Idiot (0)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#44693993)

The Iraqi military was removed from Kuwait by military force because it had illegally occupied and annexed Kuwait, not because of rumors about incubators. It is a red herring.

There is plenty of opposition to the Assad regime in the Arab and Muslim worlds to provide the funding for the opposition, along with plenty of volunteers to help in the fighting.

Re:It's Iran you Idiot (2)

AHuxley (892839) | about a year ago | (#44694049)

So when its the good 'freedom fighters' they are just volunteers? Same flags, same funding, same tactics, same world views but in Syria they are just volunteers vs their actions in Iraq, Afghanistan, spreading into Africa and other regions?

Re:It's Iran you Idiot (0)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#44694787)

Among the volunteers are al Qaida fighters. Happy? Not everyone volunteering to fight in Syria against the government is al Qaida ... which reminds me. The Taliban are becoming a global menace. So now both the Taliban and al Qaida are fighting in Syria.

Pakistan Taliban arrive in Syria, and more are to come, CNN told [cnn.com]

Re:It's Iran you Idiot (3, Informative)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year ago | (#44694157)

The Iraqi military was removed from Kuwait by military force because it had illegally occupied and annexed Kuwait, not because of rumors about incubators. It is a red herring.

There's a difference between reasons, real reasons, and stories you spread around to get the population riled up to support your actions.

Like the Kuwaiti lady that testified to the US Congress about the atrocities, and forgot to mention that she was a Kuwaiti Princess.

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693975)

I don't necessarily disagree with you that false flags are overused as an explanation, but they are also highly likely in situations like this. Which do you think is more likely to capture American attention: possible chemical attacks on their own populace or an interruption to the twitter service the average American uses? No, we aren't going to war over a twitter outage, but it does help frame them as "the new bad guys" for the sake of the proles.

I'm assuming you've done more investingating into it than I have. So why did they choose these specific targets? What did they hope to achieve?

Re:Suspiciously well timed... (0)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year ago | (#44694139)

As explanations on Slashdot I find that "false flags" are greatly overused.

Yeah, Lizard Men don't use flags.

If you don't want to turn in your Paranoid Conspiracy Theorist badge, you've got to look for the conspiracy behind the conspiracy.

(But who's manipulating the Lizard Men?)

indeed (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | about a year ago | (#44694019)

we must consider the false flag gambit

but there's also the false false flag angle

finally, there is the distinct possibility we could be dealing with a false false false flag attack!

(twiddles fingers, eyes darting)

NSA up to its old tricks again. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693711)

If I had to guess, someone (name rhymes with banana-rama-me-m-mobama) wants war.

Twitter accounts compromised, too... (1)

Cl1mh4224rd (265427) | about a year ago | (#44693759)

I've heard several reports today of people receiving direct messages from apparently compromised accounts. The direct message apparently contains a link to a website asking the potential victim to confirm their password.

Warfare? (0)

edibobb (113989) | about a year ago | (#44693783)

This sounds like a couple of teenagers having some fun. I'll bet they're thrilled at all the publicity its getting.

Re:Warfare? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693871)

Yeah I'm wondering what they call it when they go in with planes, bomb the shit out of every city with white phosphorous, murder civilians by the thousands, deploy killer robots that shoot anything that moves and torture any survivors in secret prisons, where they are kept eternally without trial or even informing them as to why they are arrested. Then put a phony puppet government and use the entire country for a money laundering operations while keeping it in a state of constant civil war so they can justify their presence there while selling weapons to both sides.

Oh yeah... they call it "freedom" now.

Silly me. Gotta update my dictionary.

Re:Warfare? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693895)

The problem isn't your dictionary, it is your medication level. It appears to be too low to prevent psychotic episodes.

A Note to all you Captains of Industry (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693813)

This kind of shit is going to be commonplace. Get your heads screwed on straight will ya?

I CALL BULLSHIT (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693835)

False Flag

Rob Malda did it. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693839)

The famous Commander Taco ( well, famous around here anyway )
now works for the NSA. His job at WaPo is merely a cover.

You read it here first.

AND FRANCE SURRENDERS !! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693859)

In anticipation of an attack, France has formally surrendered !!

Re:AND FRANCE SURRENDERS !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694167)

The UN was going to roll over first, but the French beat them to it!

Re:AND FRANCE SURRENDERS !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694199)

Less funny. More racist.

Re:AND FRANCE SURRENDERS !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694367)

France has been to Libya 2 years ago, and if you read newspapers, they are ready to engage military actions in Syria too.
Stop the craptalk.

Re:AND FRANCE SURRENDERS !! (2)

jbeaupre (752124) | about a year ago | (#44694437)

Don't forget Greenpeace. France totally kicked Greenpeace's ass.

Re:AND FRANCE SURRENDERS !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694455)

Next you'll be talking about freedom fries.

Theatrics (3, Insightful)

jmd (14060) | about a year ago | (#44693873)

I am putting money on a flase flag that FOIA will release in 20 years. Sad part is the story is always the same. Just different details.

Remember in the Stratfor hack some of the documents detailed a consortium of people planning chemical attacks in such a way as to place blame on Assad.

Re:Theatrics (0, Troll)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#44693909)

I believe you are referring to this [dailymail.co.uk] . It was fabricated.

Putting your money on a "false flag" for something this cheesy is, quite frankly, a stupid bet.

Re:Theatrics (4, Informative)

erikkemperman (252014) | about a year ago | (#44694033)

Putting your money on a "false flag" for something this cheesy is, quite frankly, a stupid bet.

I won't pretend to know if it is... But folks remember the last time the US presented "conclusive evidence" and it turned out to be fabrication. Why isn't this evidence presented? Why are others, such as SG Moon, reserving judgment for now?

Much of these rebels are affiliated to AQ, why are you so sure supporting them is a good idea?

Again I don't know either. I just think you're jumping to conclusions prematurely.

Re:Theatrics (1)

MachineShedFred (621896) | about a year ago | (#44695049)

I just really wish that the US (and mostly the CIA) would learn from the foreign policy mistakes of the last 50 years. Every time we get involved in one of these middle-eastern sectarian wars, it just gets worse for the US.

Iran in the 1950s
Israel / Lebanon / Syria / Egypt in the 1960s
Iran in the 1970s
Iraq / Iran, Afghanistan, and Lebanon in the 1980s
Iraq / Kuwait in the 1990s
Iraq / Afghanistan in the 2000s
Afghanistan in the 2010s...

We should just GTFO and let them kill each other like they obviously want to. They don't need our help in that regard.

Re:Theatrics (1)

mpe (36238) | about a year ago | (#44694867)

I am putting money on a flase flag that FOIA will release in 20 years. Sad part is the story is always the same. Just different details.

Unlikely to be that soon. 30-60 years appears to be the more usual timescale.

Site Up, Just Misdirected (4, Interesting)

guttentag (313541) | about a year ago | (#44693875)

Since the domain registrar is what was attacked, the site is still "up," just not reachable at the name nytimes.com. You can still access the site from its IP address: 170.149.168.130 [170.149.168.130]

Note that many links on the site will not work because they point to the nytimes.com domain. To read articles you'll have to copy the link, paste it into the location field and change "www.nytimes.com" to "170.149.168.130"... for example:

Clicking a link on their home page attempts to take you here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/28/business/media/hacking-attack-is-suspected-on-times-web-site.html [nytimes.com]
But that won't work, so you want to change it to:
http://170.149.168.130/2013/08/28/business/media/hacking-attack-is-suspected-on-times-web-site.html [170.149.168.130]

The CSS is still pointing to nytimes.com, so the page will look funny, but at least you can read it.

Re:Site Up, Just Misdirected (4, Informative)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about a year ago | (#44694111)

or add nytimes.com to your host file with the correct IP address, browse as usual.

Re:Site Up, Just Misdirected (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694165)

This does not work well for me. Adding nytimes.com to my hosts file does not redirect www.nytimes.com (or the many other prefixes used by the nytimes web site). I would have thought the nameserver at nytimes.com (170.149.168.30) would resolve these subaddresses. Can some DNS expert explain what's going on here and what can be done on the client side to work around the issue?

Re:Site Up, Just Misdirected (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694601)

Adding nytimes.com to your hosts file is not pointing it to a new name server. It's just a manual resolution entry for that domain.

Since www.nytimes.com is technically a different domain from nytimes.com you'd have to add an entry for that too.

I'm not an expert.

Re:Site Up, Just Misdirected (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about a year ago | (#44695035)

7:30 AM still can't get there via name. Interesting.

Sorry, (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44693947)

but there's a real war going on there. If you think Syria (proper) is wasting time fucking with ridiculous (worthless) news sites, then you're barely thinking. Some very powerful "people" have serious hard-ons for Syria and they're gonna do whatever they can do to dick them vigorously. You dullards will watching recaps of this bullshit years from now and bitching, feeling stupid, just as you when you see Colin P talking of weapons of mass destruction.

Re:Sorry, (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694055)

The Syrian government is "winning" the war. The only thing it has to fear right now is the possibility that Russia and China may not be able to keep outsiders from intervening. And the only way Russia and China won't be able to defend Assad is if it is shown that he's using chemical weapons on civilians. Obama doesn't want to go to war (it's expensive, financially and politically, Americans will die, and the U.S. will end up having to stick around for 20 years after the end of the war to prop up the country), but he put his foot in his mouth last year by drawing a "red line" Assad could not cross. So if the public is stirred up about news of chemical weapons attacks, he'll have to act. One way to stop that from happening is to silence major news outlets that are fanning the flames of public opinion with daily updates on the chemical weapons. Sometimes all it takes is a day without reading about something to make people lose interest. Or a day without the ability to publish news to make a news organization reconsider how hard it's pushing a story.

Re:Sorry, (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year ago | (#44694173)

Obama doesn't want to go to war (it's expensive, financially and politically, Americans will die, and the U.S. will end up having to stick around for 20 years after the end of the war to prop up the country)

OTOH, it may be in the national interest, because it would give the pundicks at FOX news something new to complain about. I'm tired of going into a place of business that has them on, and being treated to incessant Bengazi outrage and "Obamacare is making everyone's insurance rates go up".

And the NSA couldn't stop this? (1)

durin (72931) | about a year ago | (#44694041)

Wasn't the NSA surveillance program supposed to put a stop to things like this?

Re:And the NSA couldn't stop this? (1)

AHuxley (892839) | about a year ago | (#44694137)

The NSA like role will be to help identify the private phones of the military leadership in Syria.
The senior staff will get a few calls about standing down their better performing/more complex Russian weapons. The UK/CIA backed 'freedom' fighters can then advance and there will be a pure flowers and candy victory.
After the US backed freedom fighters/mercs win if the staff did as they where told, clean identity papers/cash will be offered.
If the defence networks light up or any real defensive role is taken, the senior staff will face cleansing during the fog of war/trials.
ie the NSA is very busy :)

Re:And the NSA couldn't stop this? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694187)

Wasn't the NSA surveillance program supposed to put a stop to things like this?

The NSA is hardly going to stop the very thing they are likely doing, i.e. pretending to be some obviously BS "Syrian Electronic Army". It's so fake, it's laughable. But in the Land of the Liar and the Greater Fool, it doesn't matter. Most Americans don't even know what a false flag operation is, they are so fucking stupid.

Very Nice Site (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694085)

http://it.slashdot.org/ is very nice site. I have some more one nice site www.chatstudio.webs.com

I have a great idea (0)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about a year ago | (#44694101)

1) Hack news paper, put up false headline
2) Wait for stock market to drop, buy large
3) Sell when stock market recovers

Also... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694153)

Slashdot was attacked by idiot submitters and editors that believe twitter can
have any impact on the market at all.

Why Melbourne IT? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694175)

It seems suspicious to me that twitter and nytimes would be using this dreadful (Known as expensive, but increasingly not very good) Australian registrar.

I suspect the real chain of events is:
1. Attacker creates Melbourne IT account.
2. Either those sites weren't blocked from transferring registrars, or the attacker found a bug in Melbourne IT's systems that let them transfer the domains.
3. Once the domains were transferred, it was easy to change the records using the normal DNS tools for that registrar.

Melbourne IT needs to comment on what happened.
Also keep an eye out for these domains to transition to another registrar ASAP.

Re:Why Melbourne IT? (1)

theskipper (461997) | about a year ago | (#44695249)

Hard to believe but the domains were definitely registered at Melbourne IT. So this wasn't a typical hijack and transfer attack. Melbourne IT has always been absolute bottom-rung as far as service goes, why such large orgs use them remains a mystery. Their reputation for security is the only thing they had. Now that's been vaporized.

I think it may have been a little more local. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694285)

I would not be surprised at all if this was a local attack, designed as a false provocation to build the case for invasion. It will be interesting to watch and see what other "attacks" happen. Though, if Syria is gassing it's own people, something should be done and the UN is too incompetent to fulfill it's charter. It seems the United States gets to re-evaluate it's position as world police every few years when some wack job government goes berserk on it's people and the UN is too busy being the UN to do anything about it. If the UN had been around during U.S. based slavery and the civil war, I don't see anything playing out differently than it did.

Not impressed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694415)

I work for a company that was "hacked" by SEA. They use phishing attacks to get passwords from company e-mail. The real message is that companies need to immediately stop putting important passwords in e-mail. Nobody talks about that aspect.

These idiots had access to do much worse than they did (in terms of code injection), but I don't think they had the creativity to do it, fortunately.

If you believe this... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44694585)

... you'll believe anything.
What utter nonsense. Syria are the victims in all of this, thanks to Zionists and Zionist symathisers in Congress.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

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

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

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

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