Anonymous allegedly attack MI5 / MI6

www.infosecurity-magazine.com...

Ok so the link mentions two different events and groups. The first part of the article mentions 'Nullcrew' a new kid on the block who have just attacked SONY (adding them to a list of other sites attacked, such as Cambridge University, Yale University, Cambodia Army, PMT Air and many more)

But that's not what I wish to discuss.

The second part seems more important:

Meanwhile, as this report is being written, both MI5 and MI6 have come under attack from Anonymous (not NullCrew). MI6 and MI5 are both unavailable at the time of writing. Anonymous told Infosecurity that the attacks are in the name of OpFreeAsssange, the protest against the treatment of Julian Assange by the UK, Sweden and allegedly the US.

also related:

www.techweekeurope.co.uk...

Both the MI5 and MI6 websites were down for around an hour this morning, as Anonymous UK claimed hits on the two intelligence organisations in protest at the treatment of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange.

Sis.gov.uk and MI5.gov.uk were being hit throughout the morning, and were inaccessible for periods between 9am and 11.30am. Anonymous claimed it took the sites offline with distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks as part of #OpFreeAssange, protesting the UK government’s decision to prevent Wikileaks founder Julian Assange from enjoying asylum in Ecuador.

This is all I can find right now... I'm still looking.

Edit: The MI5 / MI6 sites seem to be up and running, so maybe this was a minor DDOS attack as opposed to a hack?

reply to post by mr-lizard


What a bright idea that was then.

Do we think they will be moaning much when they get carted off for 20 year stretches for compromising national security?

It is one thing to target universities, etc, but a whole other world of hurt for them when they target the security services.

No wonder people are calling for control on the internet when there are clowns like these kids on the lose.

This isn't helping anyone. Waste of their time and waste of our tax money when it comes to prosecuting and jailing them.

reply to post by mr-lizard


If I were the head of a agency such as MI5 or 6, or even the FBI or the CIA, I would intentionally leave a weak point in the IT realm of things. And watch over it like a hawk.

What comes in that backdoor means that something can go back out. Such as a virus or worm.

I've always thought that was how STUXNET was delivered.

And while using proxies to try to hide...ALL signals are traceable.

I think it could be a trap.

Originally posted by Swizzy
No wonder people are calling for control on the internet when there are clowns like these kids on the lose.

This isn't helping anyone. Waste of their time and waste of our tax money when it comes to prosecuting and jailing them.

I agree to an extent. But in some ways this may be considered a retaliatory attack for the proposed censorship and monitoring of the internet by the same agencies.

Consider this: www.independent.co.uk...

Police and intelligence officers are to be handed the power to monitor people's messages online in what has been described as an "attack on the privacy" of vast numbers of Britons.

Regional police forces, MI5 and GCHQ, the Government's eavesdropping centre, would be given the right to know who speaks to whom "on demand" and in "real time".

reply to post by mr-lizard


I do realize that one action pretty much brings on the reaction from the other side. Meaning if Anon attack a website in protest of surveillance, the opposition inturn will use THAT to call for surveillance. I just think it's extremely counter productive. Also I don't think the broad majority really know what these 'attacks' mean when they hear it on the mass media.

For example, if my mother saw this on the news she'd side with the MI5/6 just because they are the 'government' and can't do anything wrong and she doesn't realize that there's a 'fight for freedom' on the internet.

If Anon really wants to change something they need to change their image. They should stop just taking down websites, which doesn't really accomplish anything, and raise awareness otherwise. If they are so powerful as they claim then surely it shouldn't be hard to promote their cause. Even the videos they DO put out on Youtube are hard to verify whether it's actually Anonymous or some kid pretending to be Anonymous.

I don't know... I get their cause but I find it very hard to agree with the way they go about it. I think it's rather counterproductive. Have any of their 'attacks' actually paid off? I also think that they would be the first to cry and moan if one of their websites get taken down but if they take down a government website then they expect praise. I just see a lot of hypocrisy in all of this.

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by mr-lizard

 

If I were the head of a agency such as MI5 or 6, or even the FBI or the CIA, I would intentionally leave a weak point in the IT realm of things. And watch over it like a hawk.

What comes in that backdoor means that something can go back out. Such as a virus or worm.

I've always thought that was how STUXNET was delivered.

And while using proxies to try to hide...ALL signals are traceable.

I think it could be a trap.

Yes , its called a honey trap /virtual honeypots.
Back in the days of FXPing they were a common thing set up by companies to trap hackers of FTP servers

Julian Assange appears to be playing the archetypal geek with Asperger's Syndrome. There are many examples of high functioning Aspies working in high security positions such as Allen Turing of British intelligence fame, and Julius Robert Oppenheimer who we are told headed up the US atomic bomb project.

If they are setting up honey pot traps to catch Aspies on the net what are they planning to do with all they catch?