Internet Vs. the Government

[hey]

I don't think they really want to steal people's identity. I'm sure they just want to show off their hackorz skills and how leet they are. I think that they went wrong, however, when they published the information on public websites. If they want the common people to rise up and support them in their crusade against evil corporations and shady government then they shouldn't stick it up the common people's asses. Or mess with my ability to play League of Legends.

Not really. Because when your credi card gets charged $3000, you know who's fault it is? It's the company who left it in plaintext on their unsecured servers fault. It's no more the hackers fault for taking it than it would be a person who saw a pile of cash sitting outside a bank with a "do not steal" sign next to it. Yes, they took it, but no fucking duh, it was right out in the open. The companies you chose to trust with your name, email address, ssn, cc number, etc could have done something to prevent it getting stolen, but they chose not to. Don't blame lulzsec for it, blame the companies that are essentially leaving your information out in the open with nothing more than a do not steal sign protecting it.

[Kensaki]

Who does it take to make a logical leap like it's not the thiefs fault hes stealing?

[Correction]

Not really. Because when your credi card gets charged $3000, you know who's fault it is? It's the company who left it in plaintext on their unsecured servers fault. It's no more the hackers fault for taking it

[thestalkmore]

Not really. Because when your credi card gets charged $3000, you know who's fault it is? It's the company who left it in plaintext on their unsecured servers fault. It's no more the hackers fault for taking it than it would be a person who saw a pile of cash sitting outside a bank with a "do not steal" sign next to it. Yes, they took it, but no fucking duh, it was right out in the open. The companies you chose to trust with your name, email address, ssn, cc number, etc could have done something to prevent it getting stolen, but they chose not to. Don't blame lulzsec for it, blame the companies that are essentially leaving your information out in the open with nothing more than a do not steal sign protecting it.

Murder victim should have had a gun.

Rape victim should have worn a trench coat.

Ain't no crime without a criminal.

[jmc]

Not really. Because when your credi card gets charged $3000, you know who's fault it is? It's the company who left it in plaintext on their unsecured servers fault. It's no more the hackers fault for taking it than it would be a person who saw a pile of cash sitting outside a bank with a "do not steal" sign next to it. Yes, they took it, but no fucking duh, it was right out in the open. The companies you chose to trust with your name, email address, ssn, cc number, etc could have done something to prevent it getting stolen, but they chose not to. Don't blame lulzsec for it, blame the companies that are essentially leaving your information out in the open with nothing more than a do not steal sign protecting it.

How about we blame both the company, and the hacker group?

And please stop with the random pile of money left in the open. It's not a good scenario to compare with what they have done

[Day]

ITT Thieves are doing gods work. Robin Hood syndrome up in this bitch.

[hey]

How about we blame both the company, and the hacker group?

If you want to apply blame where it actually belongs, then sure, that makes sense too. I was just trying to show that these companies that don't give a shit about security are also to blame.

And please stop with the random pile of money left in the open. It's not a good scenario to compare with what they have done

How about money left in a dumpter, without the sign? All it requires to find it is to look in the dumpster, which is not something most people would do, but anyone who tries snooping around a little will find it.

[Day]

How about analogies are always fucking dumb.

[jmc]

How about analogies are always fucking dumb.

This ^^

But you cannot say the money is left in the open anyways.

They had to breach some type of security to gain access.....laughable "security" but still

[Chun Liroy]

I just wish someone was informed before they start spouting nonsense.

[Feedmenow]

I just use prepaid cards for online games, and I have a bunch of online and offline games that I've been wanting to get to. No skin off my nose so far.

Sure, the grey-hat hacking might get much more attention than white-hat efforts, but it also means that they're going to be in deep shit when they get caught. It'll be fun to watch the trainwreck at the end.

[Qalbert]

i love you for this

[Jb1210a]

Sure, the grey-hat hacking might get much more attention than white-hat efforts, but it also means that they're going to be in deep shit when they get caught. It'll be fun to watch the trainwreck at the end.

Does this make them a martyr then?

I'd be compelled to say that nothing ever gets done without a reaction to some injustice, if being thieves for the lulz means forcing companies to properly safeguard my info I allow them to have, then I'm on board.

[Senoska]

I think lulzsec summed this up themselves rather well:

Do you think every hacker announces everything they’ve hacked? We certainly haven’t, and we’re damn sure others are playing the silent game. Do you feel safe with your Facebook accounts, your Google Mail accounts, your Skype accounts? What makes you think a hacker isn’t silently sitting inside all of these right now, sniping out individual people, or perhaps selling them off? You are a peon to these people. A toy. A string of characters with a value.This is what you should be fearful of, not us releasing things publicly, but the fact that someone hasn’t released something publicly.

[Talint]

Hurr durr guvrnment bad yay anarchy.

Bunch of prepubescents need to read their social contract theory.

[Kuya]

Guartz where are you

[Senoska]

Hurr durr guvrnment bad yay anarchy.

Bunch of prepubescents need to read their social contract theory.

I think you need to read the definition of a strawman.

[Talint]

I think you need to read the definition of a strawman.

No, I just don't take anarchists seriously.

[6souls]

This morning's victim;

UK's Serious Organized Crime Agency

The UK Serious Organised Crime agency has taken its website offline after it appeared to be a victim of an attack by hacking group Lulz Security.

Soca said it had taken its website offline to limit the impact attack on clients hosted by its service provider.

Soca.gov.uk had been unavailable for much of Monday afternoon, with an intermittent service restored later.

Lulz Security has said it was behind the denial of service attack which had taken the website offline.

Earlier on Monday, as the agency launched an investigation, LulzSec tweeted: "Tango down - in the name of #AntiSec".

The group has hit a number of high-profile websites in recent weeks, including the CIA and US Senate.

Soca appeared to be the victim of a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack, where large numbers of computers, under malicious control, overload their target with web requests.

In a statement given to BBC News, a Soca spokesman said: "Soca has chosen to take its website offline to limit the impact of DDOS attack on other clients hosted by our service provider.

"The Soca website is a source of information for the general public which is hosted by an external provider. It is not linked to our operational material or the data we hold."
Embarrassment

Earlier on Monday, a LulzSec Twitter posting seemed to confirm the nature of the attack.

"DDoS is of course our least powerful and most abundant ammunition. Government hacking is taking place right now behind the scenes," it said.

The latest attack will come as an embarrassment for Soca, which is tasked with investigating cybercrime.

"It is not going to please the boys in blue one bit," said Graham Cluley, senior technology consultant at security firm Sophos.

Mr Cluley added that it was wrong to confuse DDoS with the kind of hacking that can lead to confidential information being stolen.

However, he warned that LulzSec was capable of both types of attack.

"They have in the past broken into websites and stolen e-mail addresses and passwords, so there is a lot of harm can be done."
Big Lulz

When Lulz Security first appeared in May, the group portrayed itself as a light-hearted organisation, bent on creating online fun and Lulz (laughs).

Soon after, details of its hacking exploits began to emerge.

The first involved stealing and publishing a database of US X-Factor contestants, including their e-mail addresses and phone numbers.

It followed up with a mixture of website denial of service attacks and intrusions where data was taken and made available on the internet.

On June 19, LulzSec declared that it would begin targeting government systems, calling the campaign Antisec.

"Top priority is to steal and leak any classified government information, including e-mail spools and documentation. Prime targets are banks and other high-ranking establishments," said a post on the group's website.

The reason for LulzSec's greater focus on government is unclear, although it appears to have recently ended a feud with the more politically-motivated group Anonymous.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13848510
http://twitter.com/#!/LulzSec/status/82836801731043328

[Chun Liroy]

Let's make a twitter account, no way someone could find us by using that information. At least women attention whores give us tits.