dagblog - Comments for "A look at the anon "hacking" tool ('n stuff)."

Network of WikiLeaks avengers

artappraiser — Sun, 02 Jan 2011 07:46:16 +0000

In reply to Report: FBI seizes server in

Network of WikiLeaks avengers has links to B.C., according to FBI

Affidavit obtained by The Smoking Gun claims electronic trail leads to Victoria

By Andrea Woo, Vancouver Sun; With files from Agence France-Presse January 1, 2011

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/entertainment/Network+WikiLeaks+avengers+links+according/4047354/story.html#ixzz19rUkr8f0

Report: FBI seizes server in

artappraiser — Sun, 02 Jan 2011 07:43:50 +0000

In reply to A look at the anon "hacking" tool ('n stuff).

Report: FBI seizes server in probe of WikiLeaks attacks
by Edward Moyer

January 1, 2011 2:08 PM PST

The FBI has seized a server in Texas as part of its hunt for the groups behind the pro-WikiLeaks denial-of-service attacks launched in December against PayPal, Visa, MasterCard, and others, according to a report.
During a December 16 raid, agents seized a server at Tailor Made Services, a Dallas-based co-location, or server-hosting, facility, and copied two of its hard drives, according to The Smoking Gun Web site, which said it has obtained the FBI affidavit in support of a search warrant for the seizure....

Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20026908-38.html#ixzz19rTlUtJO

I was really thinking of

kgb999 — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 03:54:07 +0000

In reply to What is disheartening is that

I was really thinking of A-Man's specifically articulated policy that we aren't allowed to "publish" anything from Wikileaks which the State Department asserts has been released illegally. It's 100% their call and I respect it ... haven't been posting on the cable contents at all (Dynacorp has apparently been buying kids for sex for a decade and we've pretty much known about it the whole time yet they keep getting contracts, BTW). It's just sort of disheartening stated Dagblog policy is that Wikileaks' output is not considered legitimate journalism, the releases are not recognized the product of legitimate whistle-blowing and the information released is prohibited for use as primary source material. It doesn't reduce my appreciation that the platform is being provided (nor change my opinion that Ghengis is the best damn sysop I've encountered in quite some time ... and one of the better ones I've ever seen).

But regarding the dynamic you're talking about ... this has seemed an emergent meta-subtext that I think is poorly formulated. I don't view it as "sides" so much. It's opinions. Everyone has one. Folks who share an opinion get lumped sometimes - sometimes lumped more fairly than other times (I think I was challenged to just go ahead and admit I'm a republican not too long ago). I'd argue that on topics where there is such a high degree of emotional investment maybe your skin is a bit over-thin. Comments such as this ignore everything but a specific pet-peeve and characterize an entire discussion based on a single line under the auspice of wishing for more substantive discussion (cue the cherry-picked meta-quotes from elsewhere in the thread proving it's not just a single line we're talking about here, dammit ... this is just an EXAMPLE!). Accepting the conversation as offered appears to lead only into an ever-tightening circle of sophisticated "I know you are but what am I" - pure meta moving directly away from your ostensible goal in making the comment in the first place.

Between you and I the only thing I can think of is that I genuinely don't get where you were coming from on that last link roundup you posted ... offered with very little guidance about your underlying thoughts and left for the reader to simply interpret; I stand behind my criticism that it came off as Drudgelike. In general you consistently offer excellent thoughts and posts. Everyone around here does. That's why I like the site.

I'm into planned

quinn esq — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 02:04:49 +0000

In reply to Ah, but you probably went to

I'm into planned adolescence.

I think I'm winning.

'Doh ... double dyslexia!

kgb999 — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 01:51:36 +0000

In reply to I let it pass the first time,

'Doh ... double dyslexia! Fuct up thing ... I went back and made it wrong. LMAO.

Ah, but you probably went to

kgb999 — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 01:48:28 +0000

In reply to "Kids" is fine.Unless

Ah, but you probably went to an institution that taught "Old Sneer Detection". They do it totally different now. The idea isn't so much to correctly detect a sneer as to understand the mechanics behind Sneer Detection. As with New Math, the one fast rule of New Sneer Detection is that if you tried to use the old method ... YOU DID IT WRONG.

Planned obsolescence.

"Kids" is fine.Unless

quinn esq — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 00:05:12 +0000

In reply to Attention-getting, yes, but

"Kids" is fine.

Unless followed by a paragraph-long sneer. In which case it's offensive.

And yes, I get to be the judge of this. After all, I went to Sneer Detection School.

Graduated cum loude.

I dunno ... if you listen to

kgb999 — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 23:55:32 +0000

In reply to That has a nice ring, but I

I dunno ... if you listen to it a few times, it kinda sticks with ya. I'll bet the .org is even still available!

That has a nice ring, but I

Michael Wolraich — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 23:14:31 +0000

In reply to Let's just say that - drawing

That has a nice ring, but I would prefer a more memorable acronym. Please work on it.

Attention-getting, yes, but

Michael Wolraich — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 23:05:00 +0000

In reply to What does any protest

Attention-getting, yes, but attention-getting activity risks backfiring if the public isn't sympathetic to the activity. You want positive attention, not negative attention.

For instance, the most effective protests during the civil rights era were those that resulted in television footage of protesters being subdued by fire hoses. The footage naturally evoked sympathy for the cause and antipathy towards the more powerful players who were blocking it.

Public suffering is not the only way to attract sympathy. Humiliating powerful players also works--like flying a plane into Red Square, prank calling Sarah Palin, or defacing the website of Pakistan's CBI.

These DDoS attacks definitely don't do the first. You could argue that they do the second, but it's a stretch. Maybe against Visa and Mastercard, but Sarah Palin? It's not as if she billed herself as a crack web security guru. On the contrary, my sense is that the most people are buying the "cyberterrorism" label, which actually hurts the cause. (Just to be clear, it's hardly terrorism, but perception matters.)

As for the second point about the validity of the cause in the eyes of the protesters, the better analogy would be the Heritage Foundation blocking the website of Feisal Abdul Rauf. It would be a protest, yes, but an abusive one. Or for a real world example, consider abortion protesters. They believe that abortion is murder and thus that forcibly blocking women from entering abortion clinics is just. If abortion were murder, they would be right, and their actions would constitute justifiable civil disobedience. But abortion is not murder, and blocking people from entering an abortion clinic is an illegitimate protest tactic.

PS Don't call the hackers "kids." Quinn says it's condescending.