It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The Slow And Painful End To Hacktivism. Pt 1

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 10:21 AM
Hell ATS,

I welcome you to the first part of this three part series, this series will cover my view on the slow decline of competent hackers, and successful Hacktivism.

I will mainly focus on the media profile built around Hacktivism

It is a given that there has been a significant rise in successful data breaches in this century alone.
(The 15 Worst Data Breaches Of The 21st Century)

In theory, the best possible way to reduce the amount of hacking of confidential information would be to frame the hackers for a crime that can only be done in a digital environment.

This would essentially be the perfect scenario to take near full control of the internet, full control is nearly impossible and people would find a way round this, likely using peer to peer networks to create a small network infrastructure that can reach out to other factions. This would essentially create a rogue entity.

A rogue internet would simply be nearly impossible to control. This is a Hacktivists dream, an uncensored internet with no entity in control of the structure.

Judging by the Feds way of handling hacking claims and hacking charges, the judgements made by those in power are simply harsh and unjustified ( Swartz )
(Unless its phone hacking.... with the nothing to see here mentality from the media and justice system)

Swartz’s supposed crime was legally downloading thousands of academic articles from the online database JStor with the intent to illegally share them on the Internet for free.

Does this sound like an abuse of computer system? A breach in security? A simple unbiased answer would be; NO, you could essentially compare this crime to that of loaning too many books from a public library.

The fine line between hacker/terrorist/criminal is a delicate but easily broken one.
(Hacker or Criminal?)

We are now receiving a constant stream of negative articles regarding hacktivism, these corporations are happy to victimise the hackers for breaching security, but have next to no explanation into how or why it happened in the first place. They focus on the negative and not the positive side to the hacker breaching their security systems, the positive side being that he or she successfully hacked a system, therefore exposing the vulnerabilities of a computer system.

The broken justice system has now led to hackers treading with extreme caution, an overall negative profile built around hacking or exposing vulnerabilities.

The bottom line is the negative influences on hacktivism has now lead people to think of hacking negatively ,people now agree with the harsh and unjustified punishments of those who breach security.

Slowly but surely hacking is on the decline, although the articles seem to say its on the rise, but only the prosecutions of those said activists remain in the main stream media's agenda.

posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 10:38 AM
The whole notion of the hacktivist movement is a complete turn-about of moral fiber. We live in a world of lies and illusion but when someone tries to bring fourth the truth, they are considered criminals for doing so? Does everyone see the wrong in this? I say to everyone out there, if you have access to the truth, it is your duty as a member of the human race to let it be known to all!

posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 10:54 AM
Hacktivism has suffered many blows over the last year. Many key members have been arrested and are facing long sentences for something that amounts to acts of peace protests and civil disobedience. Anything that is deemed a threat to the present power structure will be classified as such. I read an article yesterday that the Pentagon stated that protests are a form of low level terrorism. I mean get real the US would not exist today if was not for acts of civil disobedience and protest.

Every movement from the 60s has been infiltrated and destroyed by intelligent services. I use to partake in Environmental protest. I saw it happen there. Groups were infiltrated and destroyed from within. The Environmental movement here in the UK died a sudden and decisive death. I guess the same tactics have been used with Anon. However here the gameplay is different.

Anon by definition is trans regional in nature. No single government can destroy Anon. Unlike former movements Anon does not exist much in the anologue world. It exists in the digital. Any barrier that is put in place can be removed or worked around. That is the nature of the internet.

Technology now allows anyone who chooses to use tools to make themselves Anon. Such privileges use to be attributed to the wealthy and members of society. Infomation can now be published and moved at such speed that no government of intelligence agency in the world can contain it.

They can continue to arrest and smear hactivists. But they are fighting a loosing battle. The generation bought up on the internet do not buy the crap from MSM. They are use to getting there info from the net. The more this continues to happen the stronger the results. Truth is more powerful than lies...


log in