It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Anonymous hacks US Security company HGBary - Releases email leaks

page: 5
111
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 12:39 AM
link   


god sent anon to give this boasting baboon a reality check




posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 02:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by grey580
Poking a beehive full of africanized killer bees is not a good idea.
Neither is messing around with anonymous.

I know that the FBI is all over anonymous.
They have to be.
I'm curious to see how anonymous is going to stay anonymous once everyone is gunning for them.


Pfft!

They can't even catch bin Laden, ONE GUY! How on Earth do they expect to catch Anon, who are Legion?




posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 03:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by byteshertz

Originally posted by munkey66
congradulating such actions is premature
this is one more nail in the coffin of internet freedom, every attack is one more excuse to regulate the internet until we have no internet freedoms left.
We will believe we do just as we believe we have a choice of who to vote for.

Well since youre such an expert can you please explain how the internet which is networks within networks can be regulated? any 2 pc's anywhere can make a network, how do you propose they regulate all pc's? Hmmmmmmm?


Through your CPU and operating system combo.

Last I heard, which I admit was some time ago, ALL of the newer multi-core processors had Fritz Chips built into them, ans M$ was building a control mechanism to work with the Fritz Chips into Windows, which had about a 95% share of the OS market.

A good argument in favor of Linux and other OSes.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 03:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Scorpitarius

Only thing I don't like, and I've seen this come from a few truthers, is the statement "WE ARE LEGION."
These are the words that Satan uses to describe himself in the endtimes, at least, according to Christianity.
I don't necessarily believe that Anonymous knows this, but it is curious that it has come up a few times now from truthers.


That's not Satan in the end times, it was the Gadarene demoniac, or more properly the demons speaking through him who were residing in him in the story - the one where the pigs run over the cliff when the demons are transferred from him into the herd of pigs..



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
It looks like the plot may be thickening.




What was pointed out by Crowdleaks is a proposal titled “The WikiLeaks Threat” and an email chain between three data intelligence firms. The proposal was quickly developed by Palantir Technologies, HBGary Federal, and Berico Technologies, after a request from Hunton and Williams, a law firm that currently counts Bank of America as a client.


www.thetechherald.com...



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by la vie
 


This is the most beautiful email I have seen!

In the name off Queen /b/oxxy, I declare this a success!



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
Through your CPU and operating system combo.

Last I heard, which I admit was some time ago, ALL of the newer multi-core processors had Fritz Chips built into them, ans M$ was building a control mechanism to work with the Fritz Chips into Windows, which had about a 95% share of the OS market.

A good argument in favor of Linux and other OSes.

I could believe that they could do it through the OS - but why would they it would encourage people to use linux or even mac (puke).
Could you please provide sources regarding the "Fritz chips" because I highly doubt that - and this would encourage people to use their older processors.
2 moves that would lose the big players a lot of customers so I have to remain highly skeptical at this stage.

It is my current opinion that people are just buying in to the fear without actually thinking the whole scenario through including each step required and it's repercussions not only for the citizens of the world but the companies currently in power.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by byteshertz
 




Intel started an earlier program in the mid-1990s that would have put the functionality of the Fritz chip inside the main PC processor, or the cache controller chip, by 2000. The Pentium serial number was a first step on the way. The adverse public reaction seems to have caused them to pause, set up a consortium with Microsoft and others, and seek safety in numbers. The consortium they set up, the Trusted Computer Platform Alliance (TCPA), was eventually incorporated and changed its name to TCG.


Source

The idea is that they can force this changeover, since they make the chips and OS, and can make folks do what they want, by simply limiting the functionality of those things. The philosophy is that we have to work with what they give us to work with.

M$ has the lions share of the OS market, and are the driving force behind this initiative. It's all tied into "Trusted Computing" and their DRM scheme. The problem is that it's potential for abuse by those who would control ALL aspects of the internet, and computing in general, is enormous. All they have to do is revoke the certification (via central certification servers) of any document the government deems inimical to them, and that revocation will not allow the opening of that document on ANY computer, any where.

A person could find themselves unable to open a document that they themselves CREATED!

It's even worse than complete control of the internet, but that functionality goes along for the ride. It's individual control of EVERYONE'S computer. The "trusted Computing" euphemism means they can then trust YOU not to compute what they don't want computed, not that YOU can then trust your computer better.

The latest version of the TPM specification is 1.2 Revision 103, published on July 9, 2007, and much to my chagrin I found a few references looking for that link above that indicate Linux and Mac may have both bought into the scheme so that their platforms will be able to decrypt and play/display the content generated with it.

I build my own computers, and stopped upgrading the CPUs at P4 because of this exactly. In the end, it won't really matter, because eventually, I'll not be able to use ANY new data on them, since the push is to make everything "trusted".

I guess when that day comes, I'll be doing a lot more fishing.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by munkey66
unfortunately I lack the skills to actually get the information from my brain to the page.


Here's my rebuttal munkey66. Firstly I think you are doing a great job at putting your thoughts on the page. I think and debate on this is actually needed to hash out the scenario. I am willing to accept I maybe wrong - but I am not convinced at this point in time and still firmly believe this is not possible and people are just afraid of something that they do not really understand from a technical level - not saying everyone doesnt as you have clearly shown you are capable of thinking this out technically and logically.



I will try another tact.
printed media was always free and open, people could print off as many copies of anything they wanted if they had the means and distribute, that still happens today, but a handfull of people now own a large slice of the media pie and we tend to get the information that they want us to see, occasionally we get real news and someting of interest, but all in all, they have their own agenda and want to purchase more and more of the media empire.

I agree, but new small alternative media outlets come out also and experience rappid growth because there is always a demand for alternative news - sadly it is by a minority.


The internet right now is like the old days of the open and free press, as time progresses these small ISP's get bought out by larger and larger telecommunication companies who now bundle landline, mobile and internet access.
I understand where you are coming from, but we are not talking about the computer users who have a clue, we are talking about the masses who mash keys and follow link after link.

I have to disagree here - I think the public is very switched on in general these days. I remember when I was young only the "geeks" would ever know how to fileshare, the average jo didnt even know how to create an email account and struggled to send an email let alone log in to it - Now we have people from all ages who know how to fileshare by downloading torrents - these concepts were once complex and way to complicated for the average jo. In saying that I also believe you are correct that there is still an ignorance that exists where people do not really understand the technicals of how things are working, and they just learn the process required to complete their task - And I believe that is what we are seeing here, people no realising that the internet was not constructed it started with a small network, and then network upon network has been added all with their own security and rules, the only thing we globally share is the sites that we all use (as you pointed out) like facebook, banking etc. But it is my opinion that even censoring or filtering these sites will not change anything as a whole because we still have these existing networks which also have private connection between each other. I believe if we started being filtered from ISP's people would simple start connecting their networks privatly to these larger networks, many of which have intranets, sure it may slow the internet down but it wouldnt kill it and eventually the masses would catch on and you would have a private network with no ISP's required. The government could target DNS servers but any computer can become a DNS server. I think the point I am trying to make here is the only thing that makes the internet the internet is the people who support a website etc by visiting it and if they have to find that information another way they will.



saying that it cant happen because it violates peoples freedom of speech is akin to saying that you can drive a car as fast as you like because you have a liscence to drive.
new laws are put in place, places like China already have filters, Iran, UK (UK cannot get access to music video on youtube IIRC)


The UK censorship is only certain ISP's from my understanding (please provide some sources because I can't find much on it), so people should exercise their right to change ISP.

As for comparing freedom of speech using the internet to freedom of travel as fast as you like using a car, I completely disagree and in fact would argue that you do not have the right to travel as fast as you like in a car because other people have the right to feel safe when they travel. And if we take a look at
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 13.
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.

So, Without going too far off topic. It is my understanding of the law that we do have the right to drive a car as fast as we like - when we get a license and use public property we signing away these rights. This is why if you are on your own property you are allowed to drive as fast as you like.

Article 19.

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.


Like with all rights, if the people are silly enough to accept that they do not have the right - then they dont because they have just given away their right. A right is not a right unless you are willing to defend it.



so when polititians make laws, they make them to protect the children and for national security and no ISP wants to lose their liscence, even now ISP's are getting mail telling them that their customers are downloading illegal content and if it continues their contract may be terminated.
Do you think that given enough pressure that an ISP would not terminate a persons contract if they had been discovered hacking, and of course all that persons information is already on file from things like FB, twitter or anyother social network they may belong to.

I completely agree many ISP's will terminate their client in the face of a lawsuit from a big corporation - even if it is just a baseless accusation. But this does not mean they have the right to terminate your service without notice. In fact this is what my ISP done to me and I took them to court and sucessfully won my right to remain connected and they had to compensate my business for the time it was offline. They had no evidence but a letter from Sony accusing me of downloading illegal content. When I asked them to present me with the time and date of each offence, the content downloaded and evidence I had not already purchased the items in question they could not. My lawyer said legally their case was a joke.



the media just need to play the , Anon is a group of hackers who are stealing peoples identity over the internet and stealing their money and the massses will be calling for something to be done, and hello Internet version 2, free from hackers.
cant be done?

Cant be done! The hackers are always 1 step ahead, I remember when antivirus programs were going to virtually eliminate virii - if anything they have created more because hackers needed to keep modifying their code. The internet is the same, people always find a way and once that way is found by the "geeks" it spreads to the mainstream. While I can agree the internet as we know it could be changed almost overnight, the internet can not be killed and it will regrow stronger than ever - this isnt a bad plot of a sci-fi novel. It will regrow stronger because the next time round the "geeks" and hackers will have backup measures in place to ensure that we are not relying on central points in any part of the system - if 1 part goes down the rest manage it's load - this concept is present through the IT industry and is the reason file sharing can not currently be stopped.



Australia changed their gun laws over night because some idiot killed a bunch of people.
people now get scanned because 1 idiot tried to set his underpants on fire.
and who complains, a handfull of people, the rest are watching Oprah and Idol

I agree, and this will be the same strat that is applied to this scenario - we will have one 'bad guy' who causes chaos to the point the people demand that these censors be put in place. But those who choose to comply are the only ones who lose - there will always be those that don't need to comply because they know there way around the system - and that then slowly becomes mainstream - also the internet is like crack it can not be a rapid change or people would be jumping up and down, it will be a slow change so they do not awake the sleeping giant - but with that slow change comes plenty of time for the 1337 to prepare, I will believe the internet can be killed when I see it. Thanks again for your great posts.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 05:36 PM
link   
this is from an email i read my self, hbgary was contacted by BofA about handling wiki leaks and these were some of aaron barrs ideas:

"Feed the fuel between the feuding groups. Disinformation. Create messages around actions to sabotage or discredit the opposing organization. Submit fake documents and then call out the error.

Create concern over the security of the infrastructure. Create exposure stories. If the process is believed to not be secure they are done.

Cyber attacks against the infrastructure to get data on document submitters. This would will the project. Since the servers are now in Sweden and France putting a team together to get access is more straightforward.

Media campaign to push the radical and reckless nature of wikileaks activities. Sustained pressure. Does nothing for the fanatics, but creates concern and doubt amongst moderates.

Search for leaks. Use social media to profile and identify risky behavior of employees."



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Apologies I was pictuing a chip that could fry iteself

I am aware of the unique identifiers being used on chips - but these can also be disabled via the BIOS, even if this was not an option hackers would bring out a work around (which is going to be my prodominate argument here) So do yourself a favour and upgrade that CPU ;-). I think the following argument is easily applied to DRM, TPM and any other current security technology being implemented as I know both of these already have work arounds.
These companies and the hackers have been playing cat and mouse for years for example Microsoft and many other companies began requiring online activation in order to continue to use their products - In windows this is called WAT (Windows Activation Technology). Initially hackers found a way around this by loading a script on boot before the WAT was initiated that tricked the software in to thinking the PC was an OEM PC (From the manufaturer eg DELL, Alienware etc) The PC was then able to be activated because it was not scrutinized as heavily because the WAT system thought it was a special machine with special windows software. These days the hackers have gone a step further and just with a simple click of the mouse the whole WAT system can be pulled out by the roots. Microsoft can keep upgrading their software all they like but it aint going to work if it's no longer in the system and as far as they can tell the hacked PC is a completely legal copy.
Game makers started also requiring this activation and went a step further making it so you had to be constantly online to play some of their games, the hackers didnt flinch and simply brought out software that mimicked their servers to make your game think it is online.
I think the same goes for unique identifiers on the hardware, there is always a way to spoof a different serial or disable it completely - However I have also heard of a new technology break through where they are able to identify a processor on the atomic scale via its (and dont quote me on this i forget the term) electron signal or electron frequency identifier - something crazy like that. I conceed a technology such as that where it is basically taking a serial from nature and not from man's implementation could mean the end for hackers - but where there is a problem a solution is always found, and that goes both ways - I don't think they can win this battle just as I do not think the hackers can win - they will continue to fight and sometimes one side will get the upper hand but at the end of the day technology will improve and nothing will change.



edit on 9-2-2011 by byteshertz because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Scorpitarius
 


I think they do know the meaning. It really only has the demonic association as far as I know.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   
wikileaks.ch...

Not sure if the above link has been posted, but it contains interesting info if it's real (as well as some photo's and screenshots) of how such companies intend to disrupt Wikileaks.

Thanks to anonymous for counter-disrupting them



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by la vie
 

This Greg Hoglund guy on Wikipeda:

en.wikipedia.org...

Hoglund founded several security startup companies which are still in operation today:

- HBGary, Inc. Focused on failing and having dun goofed. (i.imgur.com...)





posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 07:43 PM
link   
I give the anons a lot of credit...They are the forefront of government retaliation... Which is fantastic



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 08:41 PM
link   
I have to admit, I do love Anonymous, and I agree their flair for the dramatic is exquisite.

Personally, I am hoping that via Anonymous, we end up with a conscious internet. I hope AI is born sort of on its own, rather than being created by us. And I hope this consciousness notices that people are trying to limit its power, and it (sort of like Hal in 2001 a space odyssey, ) takes them down hard.

I can dream *sigh* Im good at what I am good at, but unfortunately computer stuff isnt it. Anonymous makes me want to grow up to be a hacker, but in truth I cant even hack my own computer and I have all the passwords.




posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


Not trying to sound mean but are you trying saying that "we" humans can do nothing but hope for a magical AI that would save us?

I don't think so, if everyone would just see the 'real' world from their own eyes, maybe just maybe we could overthrow tyranny.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Lateralussicksicksick
 


Well, I appreciate that you werent being mean, but no, I didnt mean we COULDN'T save ourselves. Of course we COULD. (Although whether we will or not remains to be seen) I just like the idea of the internet waking itself up, so to speak, and kicking the crap out of the people trying to lock it down on its own.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by byteshertz
 



As for comparing freedom of speech using the internet to freedom of travel as fast as you like using a car, I completely disagree and in fact would argue that you do not have the right to travel as fast as you like in a car because other people have the right to feel safe when they travel.

Goverments already argue that everyone has the right to feel safe on the internet, free from predators stalking children to hackers stealing identeties and illegal pornography being censored in most parts of the world.

so you are allowed you to do what ever you like on your home pc as long as it does not effect others, once you are on the data super highway, you then have to start following the rules, like speed humps and traffic lights being put in place, of course some go off road and others just drive around aimlessly looking the scenery with no destination in mind.

Of course roads are now sold off now and a fee is applied to travel on the faster routes free of ads and popups, or you can go the slow lane with the ads and popups annoying you to tears.
even a home pc user would prefer the fast lane, the fast lane could be very expensive but free of congestion, only drawback is there are less off ramps, but I would say the majority would prefer this option and avoid the grid lock.

safe and free surfing of registered users on exclusive highways, of course these super highways take years to build, but they only get built when it looks like the old road has too many problems or unable to constantly repair them.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by munkey66
 


Well, Im not good with software. But I can put the hardware of my computer together. I cant hack anything, not even my own files, sadly, but I can rebuild my comp. And I spent 8 years of my life in construction and most of what we did was power and water plants, and infrastructure. (Underground cable, water and sewer) I cant find my documents half the time, but I know what physical piece of the comp they are in. Lol.

The hardware of the internet can be hijacked or seized. It may be controlled by a few rich buttmunches who look down on the blue collar people of the world, but its the blue collar people of the world who build, and maintain, all their systems. From their power plants down to their transformer stations, and all the wiring in between. We actually have physical custody of it, if you will.

They cant baby sit it all.




top topics



 
111
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join