Anti-sec group hacking image warehouses affecting ATSers' posts and threads

now its called garbage in equals garbage out and well, if its digital it can be manipulated... and well just like someone can assume you Identity... well, they can edit your life ... since computers facilitate is vulnerabilty of human existance - I firmly believe the use of computers to replace human jobs should be outlawed... humans deserve freedom and computers force comformance... and are currently in a position to over rule humans..

Seems unlikely that a script kiddie could get into imageshack - you never know though. Remember the whole Gary McKinnon debacle!

I can kind of see where these guys are coming from - there are a lot of kids out there with very minimal skills who just use existing well known exploits. It takes time and patience to learn the hardcore stuff and I would expect being more frugal with the release of info would stop a lot of people. It would though have the downside of giving the people who really know what they're doing much more of a free reign.

P.S. Where is Gary now? Guantanamo?

I'm up for a disciplinary because of it (more on that later if anyone wants to know?).

I'd be up for reading a thread on that.

Just to add (and I have a computer security background), - I think a lot of people are reading too much into this. It's probably not a false flag anything and they probably don't have a shady agenda. They're bringing an issue in computing to the forefront by pushing it. This is something that is discussed frequently on computing message boards, in universities etc. - how to deal with plugging holes and removing exploits.

What IS interesting, and related to an ATS theme a bit more is how the media would spin this (as judging by many in this thread the point has been missed, so it's obviously not that straightfoward for the average person to understand).

Also if this sort of cyber activism becomes more commonplace (and there are obviously people out there with the necessary skills) - then what might we see them doing in the future? Although I doubt very much this has anything to do with Anonymous, I think the implications and similarities are interesting.

[edit on 11-7-2009 by Nova]

This is'nt like before. This time everyone and everything is getting owned

Lol, I found that statement pretty funny. I'm shaking in my boots, I tell ya.
Do these people have no life? What a BS cause, for real.

Do you think people should disclose how to make bombs?

The idea behind the movement is: responsible disclosure. Not, don't tell anyone.

Currently exploits are released to everyone, and security companies make money off of them. Rather then holes being properly fixed by developers, often the public has to rely on security software. Many believe this is leading to a sort of cyber-police state led by the security companies. Anti-sec probably believes full disclosure does more to scare the public into buying security software rather then any good.

Also, it takes time to release patches, security updates, etc. Hackers (script kiddies) that know what they are doing, are only gonna be using the most up-to-date stuff, before any patches have been released. There are many sites that show multiple exploit releases daily.

Imagine that an exploit comes out, and it could be used to retrieve credit card information. Would you want that exploit released publicly?

Anti-sec is supporting responsible disclosure. Rather then just sending out the information for everyone to use, the exploit would be sent to specific people, so the issue is properly taken care of, rather then released to everyone where it can be actually used for exploitation.

It is widespread (basically "sheep" mentality) for most people in a computer-related profession to believe in things like open-source code, full disclosure of bugs, etc. I give kudos to anti-sec for going against the grain.

If hackers actually did proper disclosure, and forced people to fixed their software, we wouldn't need such a large security industry...

These hackers are going to ruin it for everyone else. Because of them the feds will be forced to take full control of the internet.
Maybe that's the plan all along?
Maybe it's really the government posing as script kiddies?
Maybe it's a case of problem, reaction, solution?

reply to post by Nova


False-flag in the sense that it may be a covert government operation to own the web... the media will preach hysteria - identity theft, credit card fraud etc, etc.

From personal experience Identity theft is a pain, but as it's become more common, so the systems to deal with it have improved - I had mine stolem, it was very annoying, but it was all sorted out in 2 weeks, I've had more real-life inconvenience changing a bank account.

Let's face it, even though the various governments won't come out and say it, they seemingly have determined the internet is too "dangerous" a thing for it not to be in their control. The internet is potentially more of a threat to governmental control than Saddam Hussein, Ossama Bin-Laden etc. Can anyone here offer any reason why a government wouldn't want control of the internet?

For the sake of clarity, a few people here are not understanding the terms (i.e. the last few posts).

A script kiddie is not a hacker with skills - it's someone who copy and pastes widely published exploits to cause trouble. By not publishing exploit information in a full disclosure it makes it harder for people with not enough knowledge to write their own hacks (script kiddies).

Just thought I'd clear that up.

Script Kiddies

Originally posted by Alxandro
These hackers are going to ruin it for everyone else. Because of them the feds will be forced to take full control of the internet.
Maybe that's the plan all along?
Maybe it's really the government posing as script kiddies?
Maybe it's a case of problem, reaction, solution?

That is PRECISELY what is happening.

Time to download all that alternative data we take for granted and archive...

I think I see whats really happening here. If I were the government (the same government that has lately been all over the news and internet telling the world how horrible the internet is in the hands of the public and that needs to be taken from the public and solely placed into government hands)....if I were THIS government, uh hem, Rockefellers.... I would see to it that our government attacked the internet in full force wreaking all kinds of havoc and then blaming the public for it. This is most likely the same tactic that every rogue government uses all throughout history.....Nero (burning Rome, blaming Christians) Hitler (burning Reichstag - Blaming standing government and Jews)
The highly suspected same tactic used during the 911 attacks which suggest some faction within American government appeared to have attacked our own country for population support to go to war - we all know this story I won`t expand on it. More to the point, to me this sudden outburst in hacking the internet infrastructure in conjunction with the recent warnings by the Rockefellers that the internet needs to be taken from the people (because we are a threat to liberty and freedom) NOT THEM AND THEIR MURDERING OR MISAPPROPRIATIONS OF GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FUNDS, but -`We The People`-, who discuss their misdeeds .......WE ARE THE THREAT! This is just a technological form of a country`s self infliction to bring about a desired result regarding tyrannical policy.....This to me seems to be the government, once again, attacking a problem with +3rr0rism +actics and blaming the people..........that way they have an ostensible reason for taking the internet away from us, all the while looking like they are doing it for our own good. We have to once again ask the age old question, who has the most to gain from this senseless act Problem......Reaction......Solution!

[edit on 11-7-2009 by Phenomium]

False-flag in the sense that it may be a covert government operation to own the web... the media will preach hysteria - identity theft, credit card fraud etc, etc.

Like I said, I doubt it because this is a legitimate issue in the computer security world. If it was a false flag to create panic / promote their cause they could have just taken down any major site like facebook / myspace and called themselves whatever they wanted (including Anonymous).

Originally posted by Nova

False-flag in the sense that it may be a covert government operation to own the web... the media will preach hysteria - identity theft, credit card fraud etc, etc.

Like I said, I doubt it because this is a legitimate issue in the computer security world. If it was a false flag to create panic / promote their cause they could have just taken down any major site like facebook / myspace and called themselves whatever they wanted (including Anonymous).

They have only gotten started.

they will get caught and be considered terrorist and get life terms. bunch of morons, god forbid people making money off the internet. pffft..

Most probly a new group of hackers trying to make a name for them selves.

reply to post by Nova


Perhaps, I'm trying to look at both sides here - it could be one or the other, I don't see a third option(!).

What I do see, is either an attempt to make/keep the internet in the hands of the public OR a ruse to clamp down on it.

OPTION 3: Just some pesky hackers, messing with the big boys.

Originally posted by Nova
For the sake of clarity, a few people here are not understanding the terms (i.e. the last few posts).

A script kiddie is not a hacker with skills - it's someone who copy and pastes widely published exploits to cause trouble. By not publishing exploit information in a full disclosure it makes it harder for people with not enough knowledge to write their own hacks (script kiddies).

Just thought I'd clear that up.

Script Kiddies

And what most people refer to as hackers are actually crackers...

Originally posted by Nova
Like I said, I doubt it because this is a legitimate issue in the computer security world. If it was a false flag to create panic / promote their cause they could have just taken down any major site like facebook / myspace and called themselves whatever they wanted (including Anonymous).

But their actions are the kind of actions they claim to be against. They are simply playing the role of "script kiddie" which puts even more demand and legitimacy on the security industry.

It's not like they wrote a worm/virus that would fix security holes in peoples computers or anything.

They went and did exactly what they say they are against.

I don't look at what people say, I look at their actions. If I listened to what people say, I might actually think GWB cared about freedom, or that Obama meant change.

They are doing exactly what the definition of terrorism is, attacking innocent people while making claims about the current security industry, at exactly the same time this cybersecurity bill is going on which is basically say what is going on currently isn't right(or they wouldn't need it).

So I have to ask. If the group is what they say they are, then why are they purposely playing into the hands of their "enemy"?

Originally posted by BornPatriot
now its called garbage in equals garbage out and well, if its digital it can be manipulated... and well just like someone can assume you Identity... well, they can edit your life ... since computers facilitate is vulnerabilty of human existance - I firmly believe the use of computers to replace human jobs should be outlawed... humans deserve freedom and computers force comformance... and are currently in a position to over rule humans..

Friend, open source is the answer. Yes, proprietarily programmed robots are a threat.

Open source is the answer.

I might suggest you read my book, and would be honored if you did. It's available here: files.abovetopsecret.com...

It explains how we can solve things here on our li'l pearl in space.

Originally posted by badmedia

They are doing exactly what the definition of terrorism is, attacking innocent people...

Wow wow ... easy on the hyperbole there bm.

First of all they didn't hurt, much less 'terrorize' anyone, they even went out of their way to preserve the images they temporarily replaced with their own. Quite frankly that seems a more difficult and considerate thing to do than partially or wholly erasing the database.

Pretty much the equivalent of a protest that slows down traffic a bit on the road, so let's not go nuts and call these folks terrorists shall we? Lest we help the ptb label any of us 'terrorists' because we choose to do a little more than type on a forum or yap it up at the bar.

[edit on 11 Jul 2009 by schrodingers dog]

Originally posted by schrodingers dog

Originally posted by badmedia

They are doing exactly what the definition of terrorism is, attacking innocent people...

Wow wow ... easy on the hyperbole there bm.

First of all they didn't hurt anyone, they even went out of their way to preserve the images they temporarily replaced with their own. Quite frankly that seems more difficult and considerate thing to do than partially or wholly erasing the database.

No, that is very easy to do. I can do that in 1 line of a .htaccess in about 2 seconds. All you do is put in the path of the image you want, and it will automatically serve that 1 image for everything. I do this little edit all the time on my servers for 404 images. Rather than showing a 404 error, I have a 404 image that will popup in it's place. Easy to just do it for the entire site.

All they have to do for the entire job, changing the images and everything is add this line:

Redirect / www.imageshack.com...

Yes, you read that right. The entire job can be done with that 1 line, and not touching the individual images. It would have been alot more work to actually remove all the images, not less.

They have hurt the business of image shack, and caused inconvience to everyone who uses that service. "Nobody was hurt"? I'll bet you money that image shack is losing money because of it.

If it is just a matter of "hurting people", then I guess we can just rule out all viruses and worms that attack the net, since they didn't physically hurt anyone?

Pretty much the equivalent of a protest that slows down traffic a bit on the road, so let's not go nuts and call these folks terrorists shall we? Lest we help the ptb label any of us 'terrorists' because we choose to do a little more than type on a forum or yap it up at the bar.

It's not hyperbole, that is what a terrorist is by definition. They are trying to use fear in order to bring about an agenda. I didn't write the definition.

I understand why you are cringing at it, and I can agree because the word is thrown around selectively when it suits the purposes of people. But the reason I am saying it is because it is exactly how these people are going to be portrayed, called and so forth and used as an excuse for why the cybersecurity act etc is needed.

I hope I'm wrong, and it is speculation so we will have to see what happens. I am just very very skepitcal of their claims due to their actions. Maybe they are just not being very smart in what they do, I dunno. But either way they are playing to the hands of those they claim to be against. Attacks like that don't make people stay away from security experts and such, it makes them run towards it.



[edit on 7/11/2009 by badmedia]