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.
Interestingly, both The New York Times and Twitter name servers appear to have been registered through the registrar Melbourne IT. This led some to posit that a breach at the registrar allowed changes to be made, possibly with an administrative account. This would explain why the changes are being made across several companies. The New York Times has now confirmed that his is true.
So why do they do it? The group appears, based on its past attacks, to have pretty simple motivations: attention for itself and punishment for Western media organization they perceive as biased against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The Syrian Electronic Army actually makes a lot more sense if you think of them as pranksters who also happen to love Assad than as state-aligned hackers in pursuit of concrete
The effect of the hacks is typically not to steal information or sabotage institutions, but rather to hijack the targeted outlet for a few minutes, plastering it with the group’s message and perhaps some condemnation of U.S. policy toward Syria. Their hacking power seems to exist purely to demonstrate their hacking power, taking down popular sites purely to claim credit for it. To paraphrase the great Web comic XKCD, it’s less like breaking into the New York Times than defacing the New York Times.
In a tweet, the hackers claimed to have gained access to the DNS servers for Twitter.com, along with the Huffington Post UK. Tests showed the records were indeed changed, but nameservers continued to redirect to the correct IPs, and the change was most likely a result of the breach in a DNS records holding site.
Twitter's image server, hosted separately at twimg.com, may be a different story. Multiple users on Twitter reported their backgrounds being changed to Syrian themed images, and DNS records first found by security reporter Brian Krebs confirm that twimg.com was briefly redirecting to an SEA-affiliated site.
For the NY Times, the situation was (and remains) equally serious with subdomains being created and even reports of the homepage being redirected. The NY Times has since issued a statement claiming the issues were related to an attack on the company’s domain name registrar Melbourne IT.
“The New York Times Web site was unavailable to readers on Tuesday afternoon following an attack on the company’s domain name registrar, Melbourne IT. The attack also required employees of The Times to stop sending out sensitive e-mails.”
HuffingtonPost UK also had its DNS records altered but as 4pm PST both HuffingtonPost UK’s whois and DNS records as well as those of Twitter’s appears to have been corrected. Twimg and NY Times’ still include records pointing to the SEA.
Originally posted by sulaw
Syria took down the NYtimes for 10mins.....
NSA hacked the country in 2.5mins....
Well played NSA.... Well Played....
Originally posted by Zarniwoop
reply to post by ATSmediaPRO
ETA: Hmmm....
Interestingly, both The New York Times and Twitter name servers appear to have been registered through the registrar Melbourne IT. This led some to posit that a breach at the registrar allowed changes to be made, possibly with an administrative account. This would explain why the changes are being made across several companies. The New York Times has now confirmed that his is true.
Sou rce