Do you (still) believe it was members of Anonymous that hacked the PSN?

[Porcupine_I]

irstupid said:

Porcupine_I said:

irstupid said:

Porcupine_I said:

buglebum said:

Porcupine_I said:

greenmedic88 said:

Porcupine_I said:

i remember them saying something along the line of "the strongest attack is yet to come"

That's called monumentally bad timing.

Stealing personal data and billing information doesn't really seem to fit with their MO, but then again as a group with no central leadership, any number of members with the group's resources at hand could choose to use them to make potential physical gain rather than just spout rhetoric and be a nuisance for corporations.

Plus they also said they wouldn't attack PSN as they acknowledge this ultimately hurts consumers and more importantly, it kills their image as consumer rights advocates.

Ultimately, no one individual speaks for Anonymous and the reality is, ANY member or anyone claiming to be a member can release a statement or make a video on behalf of everyone, even if they don't speak for everyone in the group.

extremely bad timing indeed.

but nobody knows yet what the attacks intention had been or if any data has actually been stolen.

so far it is known PSN has been hacked and data has been accessed.

as for not attacking PSN, they could not have known Sony would shut down PSN completely after the hack. that might have been the moment that someone realized they had crossed a line from being annoying to being a criminal.

i'm not saying "they" did it, but they are the ones who cried wolf, and the wolf actually showed up.

 

LOL Are you serious? Don't be absurd, you sound almost guilty with that paper thin explanation! It sounds to me like you know full well anonymous had no part in it and you're just coming up with "the dog ate my homework" excuses like a 5 year old would.

what? are you telling me, if someone threatens to break into your house, and the next day someone does, you would not suspect the one who said he would?

that is the only point i was trying to make, what is absurd about it?

yep but in same sense, when is the perfect time to break into that house?  when someone else says they are going to.  That way the blame finger will be pointed at them and not the real crook.

who knwos if this was anon or not.  might have been someone who saw an oppertunity to do something while making it seem like someone else is to blame

really? you break into a house when the owners have already been warned it would happen? is that really the perfect time?

but my question was if it is absurd to suspect them? although it wasn't you who flamed me like the five year old he accused me to be.

well house isn't best example, cause you would assume they wouldl be on lookout.

but lets take a typical csi tv case.  how often does a murder happen and there HAPPENS to have been some argument between the victom and some guy that results in "i'm going to kill you" statement.  That guy is never guilty.

But if you really do want to kill someone, waht better time than when they get in a huge argument and near blows with someone else.  The blame finger will point to that person very quickly.

ok, so, a fictional TV show is a better example then my house?

how about you just answer my question: is it really absurd to suspect them? that is all i want to know.