Anonymous unleashes new attacks on PayPal

page: 3
24
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by pandora0629
 


As I said show me where repeatedly reloading a website is illegal?

Maybe, just maybe, if you can prove intent, but that's fairly hard to prove you know someones intentions, beyond a shadow of a doubt




posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 





You never stated why you need these sheep for your network. After all with 24 mega university servers churning out infections for you, what possibly could a know nothing sheep who volunteers to ddos contribute to the size and power of your botnet?



My answer




And for explanation,my network is one of many "agressive" network but if you want to sink huge battleships, you need more than one powerful network


Read again, please



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by TinfoilTP

Originally posted by VonDoomen
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 


Good luck proving these kids willingly helped and weren't hacked by super hackers to make them part of e botnet.



That is the easiest part of all.
ISP records, confiscated computers
Easily find the evidence of the recieved anonymous "care package" files they downloaded.

These sheep are too stupid to be able to hide their tracks, which is why they got caught in the first place.

Childsplay to bring conspiracy, accomplice and other charges connecting them to the identity theft, terrorism charges.
They will go up the river just like the getaway driver in a seven eleven heist.



Easiest part of all? You really make me lul.
First off, you still need to prove what person in that house did it. You have to prove they knowingly did it. You have to prove they weren't hacked into and turned into part of a botnet.

On top of that, anyone who is the least bit intelligent in computers will do a few things before they ever do activities like this. Such as googling " disable windows anti forensics" Herpaaaaaderp.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 02:42 PM
link   
I'm really gettin sick of hearing about these annonymous ass clowns



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 02:42 PM
link   
I have read on this thread that "Anonymous" are committing a serious crime.

Allow to me break this down in order for you to understand my point.

"Anonymous" are a group of people who have above average Computer Skills that can take down a Website and cause a headache for the Government/Corporations/Companies. . . . . but that is all they can do. They are not killing anybody. They are not forcing families out of their homes. They are merely causing a disruption in the Cyber World. Yet this is deemed an horrific terrifying ordeal that MUST carry a severe punishment.
(I say that because after all, "Anonymous" are branded Terrorists and that is what Terrorists do, right?)

Now lets go to the real world. The USA/UK and other European Countries invaded Iraq, based on LIES about WMD, whilst killing the leader of the country, taking over the Oil Supply, and killing many innocent Civilians, and the whole world does what?......... NOTHING!!!!! And because NOTHING has been done about it, the US/UK and the rest of Europe decided that it would be fun to go and kill Bin Laden, then start bombing Libya as they continue to cripple the Economy, forcing hard working people into poverty.

My point is this: Two wrongs do not make a Right. Yes "Anonymous" are being naughty, but so are the Governments of the Western World.
If "Anonymous" are to be charged for their crimes, so should the US/UK and European Government for THEIR crimes.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Prozium
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 





You never stated why you need these sheep for your network. After all with 24 mega university servers churning out infections for you, what possibly could a know nothing sheep who volunteers to ddos contribute to the size and power of your botnet?



My answer




And for explanation,my network is one of many "agressive" network but if you want to sink huge battleships, you need more than one powerful network


Read again, please


Ok now it is clear.

The sheeple are your secondary networks.
Which is an admission that either
1) your own network is too weak to get results alone
2) your network alone is too vulnerable and will be taken out faster
3) all of the above

I think you guys are done once people realize they are just being used and there is a higher chance of them going to jail than you initially got them to believe.
Attack recruitment and your power diminishes exponentially.
This justifies the hard sentences on the sheep that get caught and the reason we see this article here today of anonymous complaining about the sentencing.
Anonymous is showing fear and now we can all understand why.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   


modern cyber operations.


There was a DOS bug that sunk onto web pages to stop YAHOO from something.
Also various forums have had such problems and they just block the offending senders.
Unless PayPal has a bunch of dummies in charge and can't handle these net situations
there can't be that much of an impact.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by VonDoomen
[ Easiest part of all? You really make me lul.
First off, you still need to prove what person in that house did it. You have to prove they knowingly did it. You have to prove they weren't hacked into and turned into part of a botnet.

On top of that, anyone who is the least bit intelligent in computers will do a few things before they ever do activities like this. Such as googling " disable windows anti forensics" Herpaaaaaderp.


That's why they are sitting in jail, because of their "least bit intelligent" brain.
They downloaded a tools packet. That right there proves intent and is easy to trace the download.
And lol on the windows anti forensics. ISP FTW. herp that in your derp



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 


Well let's hope none of these people use encrypted transmissions.


Like I said, a few dummies have been caught. Mostly ignorant young "rabelrousers" doing this at their parents house.

It's a little bit harder when you get people who actually know what they are doing and take precautions, such as encryption or using public wifi networks.

Otherwise, the anonymous issue wouldn't be an issue at all right?

Also, did you not read the story above from a certain unscrupulous character about infecting university computers who are in turn infecting other computers? Are we to believe all of these unfortunate people/computers are guilty too?
edit on 7/27/2011 by VonDoomen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by VonDoomen
 


If the govt can decrypt foreign powers diplomatic coms, the encryption the public has access to is a piece of cake.
I hope they do feel secure with encryption, that will let their guards down and make it all the easier.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by PatriciusCaesar
 


I'm growing more and more disfranchised from Anonymous. Starting to look like a bunch of kids who really have nothing better to do. Although I'm angry myself at the lack of Paypal's support of Assange, innocent people shouldn't be hurt for the companies idiotic practices.

Real hacking would have been to break into their servers and replace the Paypal logo with something more interesting, like "Support Julian Assange" or make Paypal forfit their transaction fee towards his account. You know, something that will make Paypal really think and not harm people who rely on Paypal, people like me who support(ed) Anonymous.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 04:20 PM
link   
I actually agree with what anonymous is doing. revolution comes in many forms (disclaimer I am in no way connected to them) but why don't they hack the banks insurance companies and govt cia fbi nsa nasa and any other abreviated organization. the only problem I see is if or better yet when anon gets some real power will they become as corruptible as the organizations they go after?



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 05:00 PM
link   



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 


So we are to believe they would just go ahead and use a public form of encryption? Would it be beyond them to create their own? We know that government officials have a hard enough time dealing with y
also, I highly doubt these other governments are using their encryption properly. These government officials aren't exactly IT people. Secondly you can have a big bad 512 encryption, but that doesn't mean squat if your password is 7-14 characters long. So I would assume these anonymous people are a lot better at IT activities than your run of the mill characters, and they probably take more precaution.



posted on Jul, 27 2011 @ 07:28 PM
link   
Anon is the revolution that this country needs





new topics
 
24
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join