Quantcast
FT: Anonymous says Anonymous hacked PSN, despite Anonymous' denial

Forums - Sony Discussion - FT: Anonymous says Anonymous hacked PSN, despite Anonymous' denial

NJ5 said:
 


What book clubs let you take stuff without even looking at you? I don't see anything different about the other examples you gave, that's why I skipped them.

The burden of proof is on you to prove that there's an organization which encompasses all of Anonymous. Good luck with that...

Your virtual machine won't necessarily stop the software from doing what it wants to do, especially if your virtual machine has network access. It can spread viruses on your LAN, etc. I'm assuming you don't reverse engineer all the software you download, so you're still at risk even if you run it on a VM first.

I don't think malware means what you think it means. If a program does exactly what it advertises and no more, it's not malware even if it does stuff that other people wouldn't like.


Thats a really shitty definition of malware. Especially once you consider the fact that the program might advertise everything it does, but not until its too late. And since I am a complete moron I give the VM complete LAN acces, and admin access too all the PCs on it. I also eat paint chips. What kind of question is that? The VM doesn't have access to squat. I don't even let it think it has a network card.

 

  "What book clubs let you take stuff without even looking at you? I don't see anything different about the other examples you gave, that's why I skipped them." 

 

Relevant because? An organization has to let you take stuff? I will let my job know they aren't a real organization then. I can't take anything at all. Same countless others that don't hand out freebies. I can't even begin to understand what you are even trying to get at here.

 

  "The burden of proof is on you to prove that there's an organization which encompasses all of Anonymous. Good luck with that..." 

No it isn't as that has never been my argument. Read my posts. Notice the use of the word cell? That wasn't accidental. That was quite intentional. Assuming the monker is willingly asscoiating with all past actions. That is how public perception works, and everyone understands that. You don't slap the name of a known group on your cell of hackers and then get all shocked when people associate you with them. It is done intentionally.

Once again, just because the cells are independant does not mean they are not real. That is a ridiculous claim. You can say there is no over arching direction, but it is an organization with stated goals and everything. Seems pretty obvious.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229

Around the Network

Since we agree that anonymous is made of completely independent "cells" (be them individuals, different groups, whatever), I don't see that there's much to argue about (except the semantics of the word "organization", which I'm not interested in arguing).



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

Gnizmo said:
NJ5 said:

I don't think there's any trickery, those people who ran a DDOS client (which AFAIK does not install itself permanently btw) were doing so knowing exactly what it does.

Those DDOS groups are not a real organization either, they're temporary in nature. Anyone can join or leave at any time without informing anyone else.


No one with half a brain should ever instal a slave program on their computer. Their has to be either trickery, or brain damage involved. No matter how seemingly innocent the variation of the program might be. It can cause all kinds of problems for both your system, and legally should a company decide to piss away millions trying to prosecute any of those involved. Of course the individuals would get a slap on the wrist at best, but the criminal liability still remains.

You are also playing semantics games here. Is my job not a real organization? I can leave at anytime without informing anyone else. No problems really. What about campus Anime/Debate/Port/Whatever clubs? Come and go as you please with no questions asked. Just because an organization uses cells, and has a free form membership does not make it any less real. They absolutely are real. You might not want to attach the disconnected cells actions together, but anyone joining the cells wants that association. Legally they cannot shar responsibility, but technically they are responsible for everything that came before once they assume the name by choice.

What makes you think Anonymous isn't merely a label people wear and do things behind in order to accomplish their own person ends, and sometimes find others joining in.  As a label, no one is sure who is using it or not.  My understanding is this is as close of a description to what Anonymous is than anything else.  And it is tough to then say there is an organization that exists.  Conversely though, there are things done under the label, so someone out there is wearing it so you can't fully say it doesn't exist either.  Usually organizations have identified members, and organization structure, and leadership used to maintain its identity and purpose.  Where is any of this in Anonymous?

What do you make of this?



richardhutnik said:

What makes you think Anonymous isn't merely a label people wear and do things behind in order to accomplish their own person ends, and sometimes find others joining in.  As a label, no one is sure who is using it or not.  My understanding is this is as close of a description to what Anonymous is than anything else.  And it is tough to then say there is an organization that exists.  Conversely though, there are things done under the label, so someone out there is wearing it so you can't fully say it doesn't exist either.  Usually organizations have identified members, and organization structure, and leadership used to maintain its identity and purpose.  Where is any of this in Anonymous?

What do you make of this?


Alright let me make a comparison I wanted to avoid. Anonymous, as an entity, is most similar to terrorist organizations such as Al-qaeda both in goals and (in a very loose way) tactics*. As far as I can tell, and what would make the most sense is to have the structure is to have all the cells independant and ignorant of each other. The name works between them, and there are some key members that over-see it all. You can say there is no co-operation or collaboration between the cells, and thats fine. No one is saying otherwise. However you cannot say there is no connection as the name is kept for a reason. Most importantly the whole concept was started by a collection of individuals most likely involved in many, if not all of their activities. There is also a lot of planning, strategizing, and general organizing that goes on behind the scenes. I will guarantee a lot of over lap between the top tier of people who are pulling this off given the similarity in targets, execution, and ability to get off scott free,

I want to stress that the above comparison is notexactly an equivalence I want to make. Mostly because of the difference between real and cyber terrorism, but there are minor other points to. Please no one take this as a means of equating a server going down, and the loss of even a single human life. There is a huge difference that I am not trying to ignore.

*When I say they are similar in terms of goals and  tactics I mean this in a very loose sense. Both intend to right grevious wrongs to better the world around them. Both do this by attacking the "source" of what is wrong in their world. There is an intent into scaring and bullying a company into behaving how the attackers want through brute force and other illegal means.

Any over-lap between the goals of Al-qaeda and Anonymous are likely entirely coincidental and I am quite certain there is no more overlap in membership than would be found just by chance.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229

You say you tried to avoid the comparison. I think you should have tried harder, because it's simply ridiculous.

The name works between them, and there are some key members that over-see it all

This is one of the points where your comparison fails.



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

Around the Network
NJ5 said:

You say you tried to avoid the comparison. I think you should have tried harder, because it's simply ridiculous.

 

The name works between them, and there are some key members that over-see it all

 

This is one of the points where your comparison fails.


So you are saying there is zero overlap at the top end between the various attacks Anonymous organizes? I don't mean to say there is a set leadership, but I will say there are a few people who could be seen as closer to constants. These would also probably be the people who run their mouths off to the press.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229

Gnizmo said:
NJ5 said:

You say you tried to avoid the comparison. I think you should have tried harder, because it's simply ridiculous.

 

The name works between them, and there are some key members that over-see it all

 

This is one of the points where your comparison fails.


So you are saying there is zero overlap at the top end between the various attacks Anonymous organizes?

 

Define "attacks Anonymous organizes".

Suppose someone has sympathy towards some of the stuff Anonymous does. He/she attacks a server and leaves a file with Anonymous's slogan. Was the attack organized by Anonymous?



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

All speculation. NOTHING new, vgchartz news that was most likely twisted into what they wanted. Hold up I tried to find the source and it just brings me to another game site, with no source of where that was from. Interesting, Seems this story could all be bullsh-t.



bannedagain said:

All speculation. NOTHING new, vgchartz news that was most likely twisted into what they wanted. Hold up I tried to find the source and it just brings me to another game site, with no source of where that was from. Interesting, Seems this story could all be bullsh-t.


Same could be said about the article about 2.5 mil credit card details up for sale on the black market, and various other rumours taken as fact by the usual members of this site.



NJ5 said:

 

Define "attacks Anonymous organizes".

Suppose someone has sympathy towards some of the stuff Anonymous does. He/she attacks a server and leaves a file with Anonymous's slogan. Was the attack organized by Anonymous?


The recent PSN DDoS, the Mastercard attacks, etc. You know the stuff someone releases press info on.I have been pretty clear on this. The exacts would be their highest profile work for this specific example. Anything that would require work to properly execute and not end up spending the next 20 years in federal pound me in the ass prison.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229