United States Sentencing Commission website hacked(ussc.gov)
ussc.gov
United States Sentencing Commission website hacked
http://www.ussc.gov/
114 comments
You're assuming your alternatives are within their intellect or capability (whether in terms of ability to pull it off or ability to get information that does not exist / never happened). I don't think they are. So a question: is this action better than no action at all, which is the reasonable alternative for these people? I reckon you're right that this is a waste of time.
Often the people most critical of activists and actions are the ones not doing any activism themselves.
Let's say this Anon's action inspires other Anons within the federal government to take in a USB key and torrent a few GB of internal emails. Then it's a huge win. Any Anons with sysadmin skills will now join the federal government (they're always hiring), turn off logging, bundle up a tar, cover their tracks, and put it on the web. Nothing will take down a .gov faster than shining some sunlight on their Pentagon Papers. If caught, each Anon can invoke federal whistleblower statutes and dare the courts to jail them and spawn one hundred more Anons. Some will no doubt be jailed, but the power to administer computers is now the power to hold unjust institutions accountable. This is information war.
Ask Bradley Manning how that whistleblowing thing works out. I think it's important to realise doing things like that, whether ultimately for the good or the bad, comes at a huge personal risk.
To be fair Bradley Manning was prosecuted because he bonded (they had very long chats) with the guy who was supposed to relay that information. If you read the chat transcripts you can tell that Manning was very troubled at the time and wanted someone to talk to. IMHO this does not necessarily apply to someone who works at the DOJ and uses an anonymous channel to submit confidential documents to e.g. Cryptome
It worked out with the Arab Spring didn't it?
"Manning and WikiLeaks were credited as catalysts for the Arab Spring that began in December 2010, when waves of protesters rose up against rulers across the Middle East and North Africa after the leaked cables exposed government corruption" [1]
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning
"Manning and WikiLeaks were credited as catalysts for the Arab Spring that began in December 2010, when waves of protesters rose up against rulers across the Middle East and North Africa after the leaked cables exposed government corruption" [1]
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning
Manning and WikiLeaks may have been credited by some as catalysts for the Arab Spring, but they were not.
Mohamed Bouazizi's self-immolation was the catalyst for the Arab Spring. It's not as if Tunisians needed anyone to tell them how corrupt their government was. Once Tunisia looked like it might fall, revolutionaries in other countries started planning their own protests.
Mohamed Bouazizi's self-immolation was the catalyst for the Arab Spring. It's not as if Tunisians needed anyone to tell them how corrupt their government was. Once Tunisia looked like it might fall, revolutionaries in other countries started planning their own protests.
Preamble: I'm not saying anything one way or another about who or what was or wasn't causal to the Arab Spring movements.
That said, you really need to learn the difference between proximal and ultimate causes.
That said, you really need to learn the difference between proximal and ultimate causes.
Amnesty International are one of the organisations that credit Wikileaks as being a catalyst for the Arab Spring.
"One example highlighted by Shetty was Tunisia, where WikiLeaks revelations about Ben Ali's corrupt regime combined with rapidly-spreading news of the self-immolation of a disillusioned young man, Mohamed Bouazizi, to spark major protests." [1]
[1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/13/amnesty-internat...
"One example highlighted by Shetty was Tunisia, where WikiLeaks revelations about Ben Ali's corrupt regime combined with rapidly-spreading news of the self-immolation of a disillusioned young man, Mohamed Bouazizi, to spark major protests." [1]
[1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/13/amnesty-internat...
Have you got any references refuting this claim then. "but they were not" just isn't that convincing on it's own.
Absofuckinglutely this. These 'hacks' annoy IT directors and allow self-described Deliverators to congratulate themselves amongst their script-kiddie nmap brethren in some private IRC. Then there's the more altruistic 'hacking' which uncovers truths obfuscated by those who've wronged in the interests of greed and cronyism.
This prank is immature, ineffective and honestly a waste of taxpayer money - additional personnel will be hired and major unnecessary purchases will be made of consulting services and software and equipment which we'll likely have to foot the bill for.
You're doing nothing to protect our civil liberties or expose the misdeeds of the corrupt and complacent. Try again.
This prank is immature, ineffective and honestly a waste of taxpayer money - additional personnel will be hired and major unnecessary purchases will be made of consulting services and software and equipment which we'll likely have to foot the bill for.
You're doing nothing to protect our civil liberties or expose the misdeeds of the corrupt and complacent. Try again.
The video does mention some documents leaked that are password-locked and encrypted, and that they will start seeding some redacted information from it to media outlets. So we'll probably see soon if any of it is real.
Exposing emails, hacking the FBI? This is not at all helpful.
Murdering politicians, assassinating police officers and judges, freeing the wrongly imprisoned by force. A willingness to die fighting. Any or all of those would change things, possibly for the better. But this, this is a waste of your time and ours.
Murdering politicians, assassinating police officers and judges, freeing the wrongly imprisoned by force. A willingness to die fighting. Any or all of those would change things, possibly for the better. But this, this is a waste of your time and ours.
So, here's a free piece of advice: Put away the Guy Fawkes mask, turn down the RATM and read a book. You live in a real democracy. Not a perfect one, those don't exist, a real one. That makes you more free than most people alive today and all the dead ones. All of them. Your frustration shouldn't primarily sourced in the brokenness of the system, but in how the vast majority of your co-citizens disagree with you that it's broken - or, at least, fundamentally disagrees with what the solution is.
Your mission as a citizen in a democracy is to convince your fellow citizens that this is wrong and that it should be fixed. The second you pick up a weapon, you lose. Game over.
Your mission as a citizen in a democracy is to convince your fellow citizens that this is wrong and that it should be fixed. The second you pick up a weapon, you lose. Game over.
Can you say martial law?
I know several officers who belong on either side of the integrity fence. Losing the bad ones violently will only turn the good ones against whatever good you're hoping to accomplish.
This is absolutely the worst thing they could do. There are plenty of politicians, police officers and judges who are doing everything they can to free those wrongly imprisoned. Besides that, not everyone who works inside the "machine" is evil; most are just doing their jobs to whatever capacity they can and I assure you, they don't sleep well when their work is used for injustice.
Violence is the worst option. Ask India. They got independence peacefully after violent rebellion failed.
I know several officers who belong on either side of the integrity fence. Losing the bad ones violently will only turn the good ones against whatever good you're hoping to accomplish.
This is absolutely the worst thing they could do. There are plenty of politicians, police officers and judges who are doing everything they can to free those wrongly imprisoned. Besides that, not everyone who works inside the "machine" is evil; most are just doing their jobs to whatever capacity they can and I assure you, they don't sleep well when their work is used for injustice.
Violence is the worst option. Ask India. They got independence peacefully after violent rebellion failed.
At the time India gained independence, the British Empire was in shambles, and was financially derelict after World War 2. A strong argument can be made that it was the implicit threat of violence which the UK would be totally unable to handle at the time is what ultimately led to Indian independence.
The situation is not a particularly effective argument that non violent solutions are always preferable, or even possible.
The situation is not a particularly effective argument that non violent solutions are always preferable, or even possible.
hernmannj314, this comment could be read as encouraging the ("helpful") deaths of a variety of civic officials. Even if there were an appropriate forum for such loathsome sentiments, hn is certainly not it.
It could also be read as a dramatic exaggeration of the parent's claim that one class of crime was better than another and that we should be willing to commit crimes of civil disobedience based on pragmatism and not be tethered by morality or legality. I tried to point out the absurdity of that claim by extending it as far as I could, by arguing that we should murder government employees so long as it "might" make the world a better place.
I thought it was clear by copying the words of the parent in my post what I was doing.
I thought it was clear by copying the words of the parent in my post what I was doing.
> Even if there were an appropriate forum for such loathsome sentiments, hn is certainly not it.
This behavior is the inevitable result of lynch mobs throughout history though. Rile up the people enough and stuff like this is a byproduct. Even in the American Revolution the people started off by torturing unpopular British officials by tar-and-feathering them. One can't have their cake and eat it too.
This behavior is the inevitable result of lynch mobs throughout history though. Rile up the people enough and stuff like this is a byproduct. Even in the American Revolution the people started off by torturing unpopular British officials by tar-and-feathering them. One can't have their cake and eat it too.
What's your point? hn is still not the place for such behavior to be framed as "helpful".
You're right, I wasn't very clear. My point is that HN has been kind of a rallying point for some of the more intellectual opposition to anything and everything regarding how Swartz's case was handled (at least, once he killed himself).
But all of the people calling for heads to figuratively roll need to be really careful about the effect of their rallying cries. Like "having one more drink" while carrying your car keys, decisions and actions made now can spiral out of anyone's control and lead to even more anguish down the road.
Mob rule is very much a package deal, you don't just get to keep the good parts and disclaim all the rest.
But all of the people calling for heads to figuratively roll need to be really careful about the effect of their rallying cries. Like "having one more drink" while carrying your car keys, decisions and actions made now can spiral out of anyone's control and lead to even more anguish down the road.
Mob rule is very much a package deal, you don't just get to keep the good parts and disclaim all the rest.
> Murdering politicians, assassinating police officers and judges...
Regimes that start by abandoning the rule of law tend to have problems adopting it back later on. It's so much more convenient not to worry about following rules.
Regimes that start by abandoning the rule of law tend to have problems adopting it back later on. It's so much more convenient not to worry about following rules.
Dudes. This is not at all helpful. Sitting at the front of the bus just creates more of an excuse for a crackdown.
Seriously? This again?
Anonymous is not Rosa Parks.
Anonymous is not Rosa Parks.
The analogy compares actions, not things.
Defacing a website from behind who knows how many layers of anonymizing proxies isn't being black and sitting at the front of a segregated bus, either.
Both are forms of civil disobediance. Neither need cause significant damage other than to sensibilities. The number of those layers is irrelevant.
[deleted]
This. I think hacktivism and subsequent whistle-blowing can do good, but this is pissing in the wind.
By that token so is voiding your ballot, but if that were the only form of expression available to you, you might be happy to be able to make even that small squeak. Voiding your ballot (and in the same way, defacing a website) sends a message to your peers and the authorities that you are dissatisfied and that alone can be solidifying. That is one of the purposes of any protest, be it disassociating yourself from an injustice or creating graffiti to propagandize for your cause. It creates, at minimum, an opportunity for a group acknowledgement of that dissatisfaction. However imperfect the expression, it can still contribute to positive change. (I would also, for example, say self-immolation is a terrible waste, but it's damn hard to dismiss. In the same way, Aaron Swartz's death says something timeless, whether he intended it or not, and however regrettable or frustrating or futile or "selfish"...)
Is the sentiment of disapproval here due to one wrong being used against others (which I echo) or fear ("excuse for a crackdown")?
Is the sentiment of disapproval here due to one wrong being used against others (which I echo) or fear ("excuse for a crackdown")?
Yes, sadly, most cases of whistle-blowing in the government sector end up in retaliation and prosecution of whistle-blowers themselves and little to no change in the relevant agencies.
Wikileaks had a great potential. It's like a startup set out to disrupt the market of public/government relations. But it was washed away into near-irrelevance. And not only because the forces they stood up against are immensely powerful, but also because most people, really, don't care.
Nonetheless, I'm glad whistle-blowers exist and have guts to speak up. The case of Wikileaks and others did reveal how deeply corrupt are those in power and how grand their appetites are.
Wikileaks had a great potential. It's like a startup set out to disrupt the market of public/government relations. But it was washed away into near-irrelevance. And not only because the forces they stood up against are immensely powerful, but also because most people, really, don't care.
Nonetheless, I'm glad whistle-blowers exist and have guts to speak up. The case of Wikileaks and others did reveal how deeply corrupt are those in power and how grand their appetites are.
The article I read simply stated that the FBI was made aware of someone plotting to kill protesters, not that they were planning to do it themselves.
Other than that, I get the point of your post.
Other than that, I get the point of your post.
Yes, that's why he said to find out "who was planning to kill the protesters".
And a waste of perfectly good security flaws. Save that hole in Apache for something good.
Agreed. It gives them a new boogyman. A terrorist that cannot be named or specified by race, ethnicity, or any other factor. It opens the door to anyone they deem a threat being detained in relation with "anonymous". The very thing that made them will kill them. When the boogyman is nobody, it incriminates everybody.
[deleted]
[deleted]
The site contains links to 9 encrypted files, one for each of the current Supreme Court Justices.
The files are intended to be concatenated into a single file named: Warhead-US-DOJ-LEA-2013.aes256
(US-DOJ-LEA = United States - Department of Justice - Law Enforcement Agency)
aes256 is apparently the encryption scheme used to encrypt the files.
File names (and sizes): 1115 MB total
The contents are various and we won't ruin the speculation by revealing them. Suffice it to say, everyone has secrets, and some things are not meant to be public. At a regular interval commencing today, we will choose one media outlet and supply them with heavily redacted partial contents of the file.
Should we be forced to reveal the trigger-key to this warhead, we understand that there will be collateral damage.
It is our hope that this warhead need never be detonated.
Summary: the file contains "various secret contents", the file has one encryption key to reveal all data, they intend to release previews of the data, they may not release the encryption key (although chances of this seem unlikely).
The encrypted data is almost certainly larger than the unencrypted data, my guess is the unencrypted data is closer to 600MB to 900MB (In the ballpark of the size of a standard 700MB data CD).
Initially I thought the 9 files may contain data about each of the SC Justices, or perhaps information intended for each of them. However, I think their names on files were simply chosen for effect.
The files are intended to be concatenated into a single file named: Warhead-US-DOJ-LEA-2013.aes256
(US-DOJ-LEA = United States - Department of Justice - Law Enforcement Agency)
aes256 is apparently the encryption scheme used to encrypt the files.
File names (and sizes): 1115 MB total
Scalia.Warhead1 (150 MB)
Kennedy.Warhead1 (108 MB)
Thomas.Warhead1 (150 MB)
Ginsburg.Warhead1 (150 MB)
Breyer.Warhead1 (150 MB)
Roberts.Warhead1 (23 MB)
Alito.Warhead1 (150 MB)
Sotomayor.Warhead1 (101 MB)
Kagan.Warhead1 (133 MB)
The contents are various and we won't ruin the speculation by revealing them. Suffice it to say, everyone has secrets, and some things are not meant to be public. At a regular interval commencing today, we will choose one media outlet and supply them with heavily redacted partial contents of the file.
Should we be forced to reveal the trigger-key to this warhead, we understand that there will be collateral damage.
It is our hope that this warhead need never be detonated.
Summary: the file contains "various secret contents", the file has one encryption key to reveal all data, they intend to release previews of the data, they may not release the encryption key (although chances of this seem unlikely).
The encrypted data is almost certainly larger than the unencrypted data, my guess is the unencrypted data is closer to 600MB to 900MB (In the ballpark of the size of a standard 700MB data CD).
Initially I thought the 9 files may contain data about each of the SC Justices, or perhaps information intended for each of them. However, I think their names on files were simply chosen for effect.
There's something strange about those file sizes. If they were a split set, wouldn't they all be the same size except for one?
The only explanation I can think of is the data was `tar`d, then `split`, then compressed (to make the varying sizes), then encrypted, which seems more than a little insane.
The files are Base64 encoded, which means they are considerably larger than their equivalent binary.
The only explanation I can think of is the data was `tar`d, then `split`, then compressed (to make the varying sizes), then encrypted, which seems more than a little insane.
The files are Base64 encoded, which means they are considerably larger than their equivalent binary.
Yeah it seems strange to me too, it's possible the server I was downloading from had incomplete files... it seems like Kennedy.Warhead1, Roberts.Warhead1, and Sotomayor.Warhead1 should be 150 MB... those are the file sizes reported by the server though.
$ curl --head http://www.easyseattleshortsales.com/Roberts.Warhead1 | grep -e "Content-Length"
Content-Length: 23883776
https://twitter.com/aestetix/status/295121141805223937
Based on http://66.153.19.162/clarity1.txt through clarity3.txt, it looks like NIH docs.
Based on http://66.153.19.162/clarity1.txt through clarity3.txt, it looks like NIH docs.
That second link is down, what was it?
Does anyone know of any live mirrors of these files?
Would be interesting to run some tests of them.
I wonder at the legal implications of possessing them though?
I wonder at the legal implications of possessing them though?
Only tangentially on topic (but more interesting that the actual content of the video I think), but I suspect no warhead reentry shield would actually be shaped as pointy as that.
Although you would think a more aerodynamic shape would reduce the drag and therefore heat of reentry, the reality is not quite so simple. In fact, the opposite is actually true. As you make the reentry shield blunter (increasing the drag coefficient as you do so) the heat load the shield needs to take actually drops. The reason for this apparently is that blunt reentry bodies form a sort of cushion of air around themselves that separates the shockwave caused by reentry from the reentry vehicle itself, insulating it.
I suppose sharp pointy warheads are more theatrical though.
Although you would think a more aerodynamic shape would reduce the drag and therefore heat of reentry, the reality is not quite so simple. In fact, the opposite is actually true. As you make the reentry shield blunter (increasing the drag coefficient as you do so) the heat load the shield needs to take actually drops. The reason for this apparently is that blunt reentry bodies form a sort of cushion of air around themselves that separates the shockwave caused by reentry from the reentry vehicle itself, insulating it.
I suppose sharp pointy warheads are more theatrical though.
It's important to note that the purpose of a heat shield on a warhead is significantly different from that of a manned vehicle or scientific probe. For the latter, the goal is to safely and efficiently transfer as much kinetic energy as possible (subject to acceleration limits) to the atmosphere so that parachutes will survive being deployed. For a warhead, (disregarding burrowing nukes), they don't care how much kinetic energy is expended since they don't want the warhead touching down. In fact, they would prefer to minimize the amount of time that reentry takes, and so want to minimize the amount of kinetic energy lost to heating the atmosphere. For burrowing nukes, they want the nukes traveling as fast as possible, as long as the impact won't break the nuke, which is somewhere in between the airburst and manned vehicle design cases.
It has to be pointy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtahqXjFcxU
Good one! Is it worth watching the whole movie?
IMO, yes.
It helps if you're familiar with Sacha Baron Cohen's sense of comedy and aren't easily offended.
Somewhat off topic, but this has been bothering me for a while now:
about the role of aaron swartz in all this... initially I read he was facing "up to 35 years" in prison. After his death people started speaking of "up to 50 years". In relation to the USSC hack I have started seeing 50+ years pop up.
I feel like these exaggerations do not do anyone any good. The actual facts are horrible enough - bloating them up like that does not support his cause, rather, imo might undermine it, as it reduces the credibility of anyone arguing his case.
about the role of aaron swartz in all this... initially I read he was facing "up to 35 years" in prison. After his death people started speaking of "up to 50 years". In relation to the USSC hack I have started seeing 50+ years pop up.
I feel like these exaggerations do not do anyone any good. The actual facts are horrible enough - bloating them up like that does not support his cause, rather, imo might undermine it, as it reduces the credibility of anyone arguing his case.
35 years was the maximum under the laws he was originally charged with. 50 years was the maximum after the supplemental indictment that added additional charges. Under the sentencing guidelines a judge shouldn't, but still could have sentenced him to the maximum.
If the goal is to change the law and the argument is that the penalties are absurd, the fact that the penalties are absurd is very relevant and not an exaggeration.
If the goal is to change the law and the argument is that the penalties are absurd, the fact that the penalties are absurd is very relevant and not an exaggeration.
"Win the lottery and you could receive up to $200 million!!! Buy your ticket today!!!"
And yet we say the lottery is a tax on people who are bad at math...
And yet we say the lottery is a tax on people who are bad at math...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the sentencing guidelines based on the maximum penalty? In other words, the absurdity of 50 years in theory is what creates the absurdity of seven or ten years in practice. If the maximum penalty was one year or less then the guidelines would have discounted that to something entirely rational for cases like Aaron Swartz, but it wasn't, causing the disproportionality.
Buying a $1 lottery ticket would be a whole lot more rational if the rare case resulting in $200M caused the average case to result in $35M.
Buying a $1 lottery ticket would be a whole lot more rational if the rare case resulting in $200M caused the average case to result in $35M.
As far as I understand them, the sentencing guidelines group related charges into a single charge. E.g. the "computer fraud" and "wire fraud" charges that are for some reason separate under CFAA would count as just one conviction under FSG. So even if we was convicted for 1 or 5 charges relating to the same underlying accusation you should still get the same recommended sentence.
Since I'm not a lawyer I don't want to try to analyze further but there's also provisions about whether to make multiple sentences concurrent or sequential (which can also add time).
You don't have to take my word about the maximum sentence though: Jennifer Granick was very critical of the U.S. Attorney's handling of the case and her estimate of the FSG recommendation (based on trumped-up loss calculations) was 1-2 years in prison.
There is a reason to add charges though: It can make the jury more likely to convict by helping along their sense of "splitting the difference", makes the court of public opinion turn that much more against you, etc.
Since I'm not a lawyer I don't want to try to analyze further but there's also provisions about whether to make multiple sentences concurrent or sequential (which can also add time).
You don't have to take my word about the maximum sentence though: Jennifer Granick was very critical of the U.S. Attorney's handling of the case and her estimate of the FSG recommendation (based on trumped-up loss calculations) was 1-2 years in prison.
There is a reason to add charges though: It can make the jury more likely to convict by helping along their sense of "splitting the difference", makes the court of public opinion turn that much more against you, etc.
>As far as I understand them, the sentencing guidelines group related charges into a single charge.
Even so, I believe the maximum penalty under the CFAA is still 20 years on its own. The fact that there are multiple possible charges with such disproportionate penalties for a single underlying action just underscores the need for systematic reform.
>There is a reason to add charges though: It can make the jury more likely to convict by helping along their sense of "splitting the difference", makes the court of public opinion turn that much more against you, etc.
In other words there isn't a legitimate reason to add charges but there are a number of cynical and illegitimate reasons.
Even so, I believe the maximum penalty under the CFAA is still 20 years on its own. The fact that there are multiple possible charges with such disproportionate penalties for a single underlying action just underscores the need for systematic reform.
>There is a reason to add charges though: It can make the jury more likely to convict by helping along their sense of "splitting the difference", makes the court of public opinion turn that much more against you, etc.
In other words there isn't a legitimate reason to add charges but there are a number of cynical and illegitimate reasons.
The text to speech voice seems pretty good. Can anyone point out what TTS engine they might be using ?
It sounds somewhat like 'Brian' http://www.deskshare.com/text-to-speech-voices.aspx
Its really impressive. Want to know too.
In terms of effectiveness, compared to other Anonymous campaigns, I feel pretty safe in saying the visibility of this campaign is going to be very high.
Link to video for when site is inevitably repaired
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=...
For others wondering; the file names refer to the Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Justices_of_the_Supreme...
They blackholed the dns it looks like, but http://www.ussc.gov/ is still up.
I grabbed the page in case that goes down too:
http://pastebin.com/8sezs36b
I was impressed when they hacked mit.edu, but geesh, how did they get a .gov -- that's pretty crazy.
Huh? Have you seen how the various .gov sites are being run? Their security is generally pretty pathetic. Most of their security comes from the fact that they will hit you like a ton of bricks if they catch you.
no its not.
Here's the introduction from "Anonymous Operation Last Resort 101"
*1. Welcome to #OpLastResort-TwitterStorm!
You have been selected to assist this important Operation because we're pretty sure you know how to cut and paste. #OpLastResort is a long-term Op devoted to honoring the memory of Aaron Swartz and continuing his important work. Anonymous has prepared content that they would like shared with the world, and it's up to us to make sure it goes everywhere. Other Operatives will be spreading the news to major MSM outlets, YouTube, Facebook, and other websites while you participate in the push to bypass the bias and get the word out directly to the people via Twitter."
(Further details: http://pastebin.com/d2nvt263)
*1. Welcome to #OpLastResort-TwitterStorm!
You have been selected to assist this important Operation because we're pretty sure you know how to cut and paste. #OpLastResort is a long-term Op devoted to honoring the memory of Aaron Swartz and continuing his important work. Anonymous has prepared content that they would like shared with the world, and it's up to us to make sure it goes everywhere. Other Operatives will be spreading the news to major MSM outlets, YouTube, Facebook, and other websites while you participate in the push to bypass the bias and get the word out directly to the people via Twitter."
(Further details: http://pastebin.com/d2nvt263)
The narration seems to be in the style of v for vendetta, quite amusing to see such a portentous message on a hacked site. They've also made entire site editable.
http://www.ussc.gov/index2.cfm
http://www.ussc.gov/index2.cfm
Don't know if you've seen any other Anon releases, but they almost always deliver the message in this style.
That's true, but they are one-upping themselves with every release. I find the packaging of their message this time is very impactful.
Topiary was the genius behind all the LulzSec antics, before him Anon releases lacked creativity. Topiary made anon realize the impact of PR.
Is this video part of some game CGI and they just reproduced it? Or did someone do this from scratch? How much time would it take to do from scratch?
Topiary was the genius behind all the LulzSec antics, before him Anon releases lacked creativity. Topiary made anon realize the impact of PR.
Is this video part of some game CGI and they just reproduced it? Or did someone do this from scratch? How much time would it take to do from scratch?
>they are one-upping themselves with every release
This!
Also, I wonder what it's like to be 14 today and watch this. Anonymous would certainly make a strong impression on me if I was ten years younger.
This!
Also, I wonder what it's like to be 14 today and watch this. Anonymous would certainly make a strong impression on me if I was ten years younger.
I should see that movie, just so I'll get all the references these hacktivists keep making to it.
Also a lot of War Games quotes and clips in this one, for some reason (?)
It plays like an intro for a videogame (warheads??). It's all so over the top. Is it too much to ask that people hijacking a website show some subtlety in their craft?
Also a lot of War Games quotes and clips in this one, for some reason (?)
It plays like an intro for a videogame (warheads??). It's all so over the top. Is it too much to ask that people hijacking a website show some subtlety in their craft?
I wonder if it's entirely safe to use that link. They are probably trying to make some kind smokescreen and feed the feds with your IP addresses.
What exactly is the data in the warhead links?
AES256 encrypted files, apparently juicy stuff
The site has been dropped from DNS but IP still returns. The mirrors are slow/down, and file keys are the extortion:
http://www.zdnet.com/anonymous-hacks-us-sentencing-commissio...
Gotta love the trailing: && rm -rf /
Classy ;-)
Classy ;-)
The cool thing about hacking government sites. No one will be in the office on the weekend.
Does anyone have a pic of what it looked like? It is down now. (DNS doesn't resolve).
Google cached page:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://...
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://...
They made this tweet 10 hours before it went down -- https://twitter.com/OpGJResisters/status/294901397147766784
I wonder how this played into the hack...
I wonder how this played into the hack...
I don't want any reforms that come from blackmail and extortion. Any good that they would do would be wiped out once the really powerful extortionists show up.
By all means, though, let's see what's in those files.
By all means, though, let's see what's in those files.
I don't think they actually expect (or fully want, for that matter) their demands to be met before they release the decryption keys. They want to be seen as confident enough to present a deal, but their ultimate power trip fantasy is to see powerful people forced to resign from office, and then for the reforms to happen after the destruction has happened.
Also, would it have killed them to provide sha-3, or at least sha-1 or md5 sums? People are speculating here (and presumably elsewhere) that some of the uploads were corrupted.
Also, would it have killed them to provide sha-3, or at least sha-1 or md5 sums? People are speculating here (and presumably elsewhere) that some of the uploads were corrupted.
It's been a couple of hours since the hack. How does a major gov website not have a plan to act on this quicker? I wonder if they even have an alert letting them know something happened.
Given the small time window for an attack to be viable I have to wonder why a more concise and succinct message wasn't used. It does make me wonder if the bark is bigger than the bite.
[deleted]
What about the rm -rf / on the command line?
Tricky, but not a lot of people know how/where to use that command line in the first place.
Tricky, but not a lot of people know how/where to use that command line in the first place.
You can't actually execute `rm -rf /` on most modern systems anyway. There's a flag to force it, but you'd have to be pretty determined to nuke your system.
Yes you can, btw here is a video of it being executed just for kicks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTXWQriVgH8
Sure you can. (Just gave it a shot on a Ubuntu VM the other day while exploring shared library linking.)
Do some systems really have a flag more forceful than -f ?
Do some systems really have a flag more forceful than -f ?
no but you can execute
rm -rf /*Screenshot of the site: http://imgur.com/fOU8BgU
Self-righteous idiots. Who made them judge and jury of the world? Do something positive.
Who made you the judge and jury of their actions?
USSC or Anonymous?
;)
;)
Essentially it's a form of terrorism. They are saying do things our way or we burn your house down. They don't believe in democracy and so what's left? A world where the best people at malicious hacking rule? The same skills they used to do this can shut down power plants, bring down air planes, and wreck general mayhem. They are saying the people in power are corrupt. Some how we have to trust they will never become corrupt.
Before I posted my original comment. I had a moment of fear. What if I pass them off and they decide to ruin my life. Maybe as an exercise size for one of their noobs.
Before I posted my original comment. I had a moment of fear. What if I pass them off and they decide to ruin my life. Maybe as an exercise size for one of their noobs.
>> They are saying do things our way or we burn your house down.
No, they are protesting events that are generally perceived as a gross injustice of the judicial system.
>> They don't believe in democracy and so what's left?
Says who? To me, they seem to be the very embodiment of civil disobedience (and thusly of democracy).
>> The same skills they used to do this can shut down power plants, bring down air planes, and wreck general mayhem.
I don't understand how is that related to anything. Yes, a variety of things can be used for good AND BAD purposes.
>> They are saying the people in power are corrupt. Some how we have to trust they will never become corrupt.
In other words, let's not remove the corrupt people because the people who would replace them COULD be corrupt as well.
>> Before I posted my original comment. I had a moment of fear.
The thing about fear is that it's not necessarily rational.
No, they are protesting events that are generally perceived as a gross injustice of the judicial system.
>> They don't believe in democracy and so what's left?
Says who? To me, they seem to be the very embodiment of civil disobedience (and thusly of democracy).
>> The same skills they used to do this can shut down power plants, bring down air planes, and wreck general mayhem.
I don't understand how is that related to anything. Yes, a variety of things can be used for good AND BAD purposes.
>> They are saying the people in power are corrupt. Some how we have to trust they will never become corrupt.
In other words, let's not remove the corrupt people because the people who would replace them COULD be corrupt as well.
>> Before I posted my original comment. I had a moment of fear.
The thing about fear is that it's not necessarily rational.
The very embodiment of civil disobedience? I think not. They are anonymous thugs and vandals and nothing more.
Some examples of said thuggery would not hurt.
Essentially it's a form of terrorism.
"One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter".
"One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter".
Reminds me of https://xkcd.com/932/
[deleted]
One hour since, they have not restored the website.
I notice that justice.gov is down.
This will end well :/
"It is our hope that this warhead need never be detonated."
Putting a press release on a website where it doesn't belong has been done; it's old news. We know you can hack a drupal site owned by the .gov, we get it. Don't blow your wad on something obvious, get documentation that would make Woodward and Bernstein cream their pants over how many pageviews it'd get and publish that.
Hack the FBI and find out who was talking about killing protestors at Occupy Houston; hack Corrections Corporation of America and find out what they talk about during their board meetings; get their financials and spill them to the foreign press. Any or all of those would change things, possibly for the better. But this, this is a waste of your time and ours.