Discussion on Lulzsec

As much as I hate to draw attention to what appears to be a script kiddie group spun off of the popular "Anonymous", I think it could turn into an interesting discussion.

If unfamiliar, check out this article.

Targets thus far have included:

• The CIA website (DDoS)
• The public U.S. Senate Website (hacked, but no sensitive data obtained)
• Various seedy websites (personal info was stolen and leaked)
• Sony's gaming network
• Possibly the recent bitcoin scandal

I don't think anyone that knows even an iota about info sec is impressed, but I find it interesting because of the brazenness of the attacks.

Who would seriously take on the risk associated with attacking the various targets above "for the lulz"? A bunch of script kiddies? Maybe. They certainly appear to lack the talent (notice they are carpet bombing instead of using a scalpel).

The obvious result of highly publicized but relatively non-damaging attacks like this would be a tightening of policy at the government level. Thus, it seems logical that the group responsible is an agency rather than a bunch of script kiddies. I remember reading something recently about the "Protect IP" act or something along those lines.

Now where did I put that tinfoil hat...

Are you kidding me? I mean, have you even been on an image board before? The traffic from posting up a single link is enought to bring sites down... yet alone LOIC.

You're right. Thus:

Quote:

---

I don't think anyone that knows even an iota about info sec is impressed

---

*edit*
My point is the best way to justify new legislation that would allow the tracking of anyone online at any time would be to masquerade as a bunch of dumba** teenagers that can't be easily tracked and somehow have the power to significantly disrupt internet services.

Anonymous and their LOIC do a fine enough job poking sticks in hornet nests. Maybe this is just a copycat group. Maybe this is what happens when only 1 in 4 kids can get a summer job. Who knows.

It's a far out idea, but consider that the same organizations that kidnapped hookers and doped them up on LSD "for the lulz" in the 60's are still in existence today.

But I want to make the internet completely unfriendly and inaccessible to the common man. It's whats needed to disrupt E commerce.

Personally, I have been getting quite a kick out of their antics... Even if they are an agency sponsored group, they are extremely entertaining.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keezel

It's a far out idea, but consider that the same organizations that kidnapped hookers and doped them up on LSD "for the lulz" in the 60's are still in existence today.

---

Yea it was hard to get volunteers to do Acid in the 60s ;) We owe the net to drugs anyhow; Berkeley is known for two things; BSD, and LSD, and Alexander Graham Bell, was a pretty Heavy Coke head when he came up with the Telephone system used to get online :

How else do you explain looking someone straight in the eyes and saying "I wanna talk to someone who isn't even here!" :)

The point of an agent provocateur is that they bullbait people into attacking a target that would otherwise be productive to the protesters' cause and to discredit the people involved.

This does neither.

Attacking governmental sites is something thats noble and worthwhile. It's something that each and every dissident should praise and aspire toward.

Quote:

---

Who would seriously take on the risk associated with attacking the various targets above "for the lulz"? A bunch of script kiddies? Maybe. They certainly appear to lack the talent (notice they are carpet bombing instead of using a scalpel).

The obvious result of highly publicized but relatively non-damaging attacks like this would be a tightening of policy at the government level. Thus, it seems logical that the group responsible is an agency rather than a bunch of script kiddies. I remember reading something recently about the "Protect IP" act or something along those lines.

---

As you said "interesting" :D

I am sure that many of us can remember the days when this sort of thing, and most malware was done for "the shits and giggles", rather than any identifiable objective.

Then everything seemed to take on a more "professional" (for want of a better word) approach with either a criminal or political objective in mind.

Perhaps things have turned full circle, so to speak; and this group are really in it for "the lulz"? I guess they would have to pick on high profile sites to get the attendant publicity, if that is what they are seeking?

On the other hand, I do rather like the conspiracy theory angle that it might be government sponsored to pave the way for new legislation :cool::eek: After all, they wouldn't be worried about the risk, but would obviously be vulnerable to "whistle blowing".

I guess that we will just have to let the case develop, and see if any more concrete motivation becomes apparent?

Well one of the things you people have to understand is that the world isn't run by jews or the illuminati... instead its exclusively run by stupid people.

So the next time you hear a theory don't think in the scope of anything elaborate at all. Think more along the lines of "this is a stupid idea".

Like planting a bug up a cat's anus and having it wander in a busy road. Or calling a poison ink pen a secret weapon against Castro... then realising it wasn't mightier than the machine gun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The-Spec

instead its exclusively run by stupid people.

---

Cablegate was a big insight into how dumb our leaders really are. Their behavior is strikingly similar to what we all experienced in high school.

Quote:

---

Well one of the things you people have to understand is that the world isn't run by jews or the illuminati... instead its exclusively run by stupid people.

---

You forgot "cunning bastards" and freemasons. :cool:

In a non-democratic society you have to be cunning to get to the top and stay alive. ;)

In a Democracy it is the majority (stupid people) who elect the leaders..........and guess what happens?:eek:

Quote:

---

So the next time you hear a theory don't think in the scope of anything elaborate at all. Think more along the lines of "this is a stupid idea".

---

That doesn't always follow..........some ideas are flawed because they are over-complex. Hence the saying: "KISS".

Quote:

---

Like planting a bug up a cat's anus and having it wander in a busy road.

---

Haven't heard of that one, but it sounds like something out of Langley?

Quote:

---

Or calling a poison ink pen a secret weapon against Castro... then realising it wasn't mightier than the machine gun.

---

"The pen may not be mightier than the sword; but it's a damn sight easier to write with" :D

Quote:

---

You forgot "cunning bastards" and freemasons

---

Nope. Still stupid... look at the ridiculous regalia and goofy hats.

Anyone following the Antisec stuff? It is pretty entertaining. Check twitter for #antisec.

I think this is going to bite them in the ass down the road considering Barack is considering digital attacks as "acts of war". That is grounds for life in prison and death penalty?

Our government is fond of wars that can't be "won" by a clear and distinct victory. Perpetual war is necessary to justify the freaking massive budgets demanded by our intelligence and "defense". Same with our police force, incidentally. How often do we really need soldiers with body armor and fully automatic weapons to handle civil disturbances? And yet no-knock raids are increasingly common because SWAT teams need to justify their existence, otherwise have their budget cut.

Thus we have a war on "drugs" and a war on "terror". The war on terror is the most successful yet, as a "terrorist" need only be called a terrorist, and a whole new set of rules applies.

Digital attacks are likely to be thrown under the "terror" umbrella too because it is convenient. Thus, you're not throwing a hacker in prison for live. You're imprisoning a terrorist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keezel

Our government is fond of wars that can't be "won" by a clear and distinct victory. Perpetual war is necessary to justify the freaking massive budgets demanded by our intelligence and "defense". Same with our police force, incidentally. How often do we really need soldiers with body armor and fully automatic weapons to handle civil disturbances? And yet no-knock raids are increasingly common because SWAT teams need to justify their existence, otherwise have their budget cut.

Thus we have a war on "drugs" and a war on "terror". The war on terror is the most successful yet, as a "terrorist" need only be called a terrorist, and a whole new set of rules applies.

Digital attacks are likely to be thrown under the "terror" umbrella too because it is convenient. Thus, you're not throwing a hacker in prison for live. You're imprisoning a terrorist.

---

That's a nice post Honestly; I think the ideal that eventually, we'll be putting smart people in jail for a simple screw up in something, is probably going to be true.

I mean look at what Nixon did when he started the DEA and war on drugs; He created a massive underground just like the original drug laws did, which is stupid of course, because our Constitution, is supposed to guarantee certain rights to us as people, and human beings, and a drug law, prevents it.

As for Terrorists, I do find it humorous that they stopped calling it "The War Against Terror" because people realized an acronym was too funny not to print lol. Nothing like seeing some red neck with a huge "****" sign lol.

I've also seen pictures of a guy who has a sign essentially saying "Get a Brain Morans!!!!" and.... That was priceless to me; A guy who's saying someone is stupid and spelling moron wrong, that's awesome lol.

Quote:

---

Our government is fond of wars that can't be "won" by a clear and distinct victory. Perpetual war is necessary to justify the freaking massive budgets demanded by our intelligence and "defense".

---

Not quite, as it is not the only method, and isn't to justify budgets. The problem is that a capitalist economy requires "growth" to prosper, and what we might consider "wastage" is actually artificial growth. The cold war arms race and the space race are examples of non-combative approaches, and Vietnam would be the classic combat scenario.

You might notice that the US economy was relatively strong during these periods. The theory is that you need some sort of "wasteful" activity that stimulates the economy (takes up the slack) without fueling inflation due to the multiplier effect. Shooting stuff into space or dropping it on Vietnam fits the bill.

Quote:

---

"Get a Brain Morans!!!!"

---

Maybe he was dyslexic and couldn't spell "Brian" (it is capitalised?), and Moran is a well known surname, as in "Bugsy Moran" :cool::D:p

What a joke if they coin digital attacks as an act of terrorism.

Quote:

---

What a joke if they coin digital attacks as an act of terrorism.

---

I am afraid that I don't see any joke there at all. For the past 10 years I have advocated that terrorists are a shower of wankers for believing that leaving a bomb in a restaurant or a supermarket would actually achieve anything other than stir up mass hatred for them and their causes.

It was obvious to me back then that the internet was the way the World was going, and presented you with selective and identifiable targets.

Sometimes I actually wonder who sets these things off............news footage of innocent dead just pisses people off.........which benefits whom???????????

:eek:

What I am suggesting is that if you can believe that government agencies, either sanctioned or on their own, and either directly or through agents provocateurs, can do such things................ why not cyber attacks.

Hey, the Chinese government have already been accused haven't they?

the theory put forth by nihil, sounds like a good possibility, what better way to get the hornets arroused.

I guess it's not a mystery anymore. So much for my conspiracy theory. The A-Team dug deep enough and ID'd all of the major players. Names, IP addresses, facebook sites, etc. The full "reveal" document can be found here: http://pastebin.com/iVujX4TR

Dammit keezel !!!

You might at least have posted a spoiler warning.............you know how I love conspiracy theories? :D

It's a shame, becasuse there were 2 other supposed lulsec "Dox's" dropped via pastebin, so now's there's 3 different one's.

P.S:> there not the real doc's. ;) and here's the dropped Dox's for A-team. http://pastebin.com/1MUPY2P7

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nihil

In a Democracy it is the majority (stupid people) who elect the leaders..........and guess what happens?:eek:

---

Without getting into a definition of primary elections or caucuses-I would surmise that the stupid people are mostly lead by media attention given to the participants seeking election. People are only as smart as the information they have, imo. Not like most people would take the time to make sure their sources of information are reliable, including those in government.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by illv

I think this is going to bite them in the ass down the road considering Barack is considering digital attacks as "acts of war". That is grounds for life in prison and death penalty?

---

I couldn't agree more. Doesn't matter if it was a group of people working for an agency, or what I think it was, which is just a bunch of kids having some lulz to make themselves feel important. It will strengthen support to remove civil liberties on the internets for US citizens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keezel

Our government is fond of wars that can't be "won" by a clear and distinct victory. Perpetual war is necessary to justify the freaking massive budgets demanded by our intelligence and "defense".

Digital attacks are likely to be thrown under the "terror" umbrella too because it is convenient. Thus, you're not throwing a hacker in prison for live. You're imprisoning a terrorist.

---

He said it better than me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The-Spec

Are you kidding me? I mean, have you even been on an image board before? The traffic from posting up a single link is enought to bring sites down... yet alone LOIC.

---

I think you're giving too much credit where it isn't due, even with 4/7/9/420chons all working together AnonIB took ages to bring down, and it certainly wasn't a result of a low orbit idiot causer, it was by finally getting authority involved. "LOLZ, I can't reach it, we are victorious, werlegionz, lololol." The last nifty thing any chon did was the '09 Time online top 100 poll. Just my opinion, though.

Quote:

---

The last nifty thing any chon did was the '09 Time online top 100 poll.

---

I don't know. I found it pretty entertaining when they skewed Justin Bieber's online poll to say he should perform in North Korea next. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keezel

I don't know. I found it pretty entertaining when they skewed Justin Bieber's online poll to say he should perform in North Korea next. :D

---

That was funny, but that was all done by spamming "We must make this happen!" threads. The Time thing had a few inventive scripting things going on.

That was a year after I swayed the polls to have Zone-H shut down.

It always pissed me off that nobody wanted to retaliate against Time magazine for making that faggot Zuckerberg person of the year. It was all about advertising the movie...

But atleast Julian Assange made it to the third or so page and most of the more irrelevant candidates where cut out of the magazine completely.

I will say this though, for the Time thing and the timing in particular. It was highly ironic that a man who sells people's personal information to corporations was made man of the year, and the man who freely exposes corrupt corporation (and government) information to the public was thrown in jail.

lulzsec is still posting. anyone smell a comeback?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by westin

Personally, I have been getting quite a kick out of their antics... Even if they are an agency sponsored group, they are extremely entertaining.

---

I'm finding all of these groups' actions entertaining.:D

Anything interesting happen recently? I've kept up with some things, most of them are just the things everyone knows about - like what makes it to the news, but I find it difficult to keep up with everything.

Try here:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07...t_uk_launches/

And here:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/

Plenty of amusing stuff :D

There was an interesting article in PCMag basically reiterating the point I made when I started this thread. I feel one iota vindicated. Perhaps it is tinfoil hat time after all!

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2387203,00.asp

Hmmm, it is a point of view but I see one major problem. If you look the Register mainpage I linked you will see several reports of these hackers being arrested?

If this is true, then they don't seen much like subversives or government stoolies. They just seem bloody incompetent to me for getting caught so easily.

I don't know what the general feeling would be in your part of the World, but over here the public might well be expected to take the view that the authorities are catching them easily enough so just increase the penalties to deter them more?

If I were running this project on behalf of a government, I can assure you my people wouldn't get caught and I wouldn't pick on silly targets. It would be public utilities, transport, healthcare, education, welfare benefits. Now that would really piss off a lot of voters and get support for new legislation (as opposed to just beefing up penalties).

Whilst the targets to date have been high profile, they are more likely to be looked on as mildly amusing pranks rather than anything insidious or subversive.

In a way it does sort of put the pieces of the puzzle together, for some time now i have read different News about how different Government's over the globe have had talks about "Censoring" certain parts of the interwebz.

But on the other hand, all major news vendors seem to go from one hot topic, run with it for a month or 2, then the next big thing will popup and they will non-stop talk about that.

For as long as the Internet is "Online" there will always be Virus/ Malware / Crackers etc The Government can throw lot's of money into trying to "Cull" this issue, but it's defiantly a battle they cannot win.

Just look at this "Deep Net" the Government has been trying for years to clean/sanitize but they have only made a small ripple in the ocean.

OK HYBR¦D, I know that I am being a bit pedantic here, but strictly speaking this isn't "censorship"

Censorship isn't what governments really want, as people see where stuff has been removed and start looking elsewhere for what their government doesn't want them to see.

What we have seen have been countries such as China and some Islamic states trying to "filter" the internet content available to their citizens for religious or political reasons. I believe that other nations have looked at things like pornography, gaming, pharmaceuticals, file sharing, and the like?

I think that the issue here is more one of monitoring or surveillance (such as "predator") which have more of an impact on your personal privacy.The argument against this is usually that if the government need a court order to open your mail or intercept your telephone calls, then they should need the same for your internet communications.

Governments are trying to work around this by attempting to separate internet connectivity from other forms of communication......"50,000 pings a minute will take out your internet but 5 tons of spam mail would cost too much and you could sell the paper for recycling"

It's a bit like DRM in my opinion...........sounds like a good idea but no-one has found a way to make it work. Right now all the proposals I have seen look more like surveillance without supervision. :(

Quote:

---

Just look at this "Deep Net" the Government has been trying for years to clean/sanitize but they have only made a small ripple in the ocean.

---

What exactly is that? as I understand the term it is the part of the internet not accessed by search engine spiders? If that is the case then I don't see how government could hope to clean or sanitise it.........how would they even know it needed doing or where to start? also, it is far too big.

EDIT:

Almost forgot: Happy birthday keezel ::birthday :drink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nihil

Censorship isn't what governments really want, as people see where stuff has been removed and start looking elsewhere for what their government doesn't want them to see.

What we have seen have been countries such as China and some Islamic states trying to "filter" the internet content available to their citizens for religious or political reasons.

---

What they want and what they effect are completely different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nihil

What exactly is that? as I understand the term it is the part of the internet not accessed by search engine spiders? If that is the case then I don't see how government could hope to clean or sanitise it.........how would they even know it needed doing or where to start? also, it is far too big.

---

It's using "darknets", and it's not so much that spiders don't find them, but that they consider them unimportant. Lookup "network telescopy", it's interesting...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nihil

What exactly is that? as I understand the term it is the part of the internet not accessed by search engine spiders? If that is the case then I don't see how government could hope to clean or sanitise it.........how would they even know it needed doing or where to start? also, it is far too big.

---

Probably easier to quote wikipedia regarding DeepNet :)

Quote:

---

The Deep Web (also called Deepnet, the invisible Web, DarkNet, Undernet, or the hidden Web) refers to World Wide Web content that is not part of the Surface Web, which is indexed by standard search engines.
Mike Bergman, credited with coining the phrase,[1] has said that searching on the Internet today can be compared to dragging a net across the surface of the ocean: a great deal may be caught in the net, but there is a wealth of information that is deep and therefore missed. Most of the Web's information is buried far down on dynamically generated sites, and standard search engines do not find it. Traditional search engines cannot "see" or retrieve content in the deep Web – those pages do not exist until they are created dynamically as the result of a specific search. The deep Web is several orders of magnitude larger than the surface Web

---

Quote:

---

Size

In 2000, it was estimated that the deep Web contained approximately 7,500 terabytes of data and 550 billion individual documents.[2] Estimates based on extrapolations from a study done at University of California, Berkeley in the year 2000, speculate that the deep Web consists of about 91,000 terabytes. By contrast, the surface Web (which is easily reached by search engines) is about 167 terabytes[dubious – discuss]; the Library of Congress, in 1997, was estimated to have 3,000 terabytes.[3]

---

Taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_Web

Personally i would use a Sandboxed OS while digging around the darknet. Firefox & Tor addon are easier ways to access.

Looks like the lulz are still flowing... sun.co.uk is still redirecting to oracle, last I checked... [classic] -- Which is a switch from the previous redirect to lulzsec's twitter feed. I guess the hiatus is over. :)

http://www.technewsworld.com/story/N...t-72901.html-- If you can trust the news... :)

Hmmmm, hadn't heard about "Oracle", what we had was a redirect to a fake news article:

http://www.marketingweek.co.uk/secto...028519.article

en Espanol::D

http://www.etcetera.com.mx/articulo.php?articulo=8482

@HYBR|D

You seem to think that the Dark/Deep net is a dangerous place......why should this be so?

If most of it results from dynamic queries, how would you go about infecting it?

Just curious as to the mechanisms. :)

darknet is not evils? It's just seen that much, cause people use google?