By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

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

Tagged games:

 

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

Yes 143 41.81%
 
No 93 27.19%
 
Don't Know 34 9.94%
 
View results plox 72 21.05%
 
Total:342
Porcupine_I on 27 April 2011
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.



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

Around the Network
Galaki on 27 April 2011
Muhshuhu said:

I still blame sony though, such a large hole should have been caught in testing. They also should have been using a 256 bit encryption instead of a 128,  atleast for the credit information.


The thing I want to know is whether they encrypt the data at all, including passwords.

From all the breaches done before to banks, etc. They hackers got personal infos and not passwords because passwords are hashed etc.

Base on the news so far, it seems Sony store the passwords the same way as all the other pieces... i.e. plain text.



Pre-order limited edition Blue Slime Condoms

buglebum on 27 April 2011

LOL Anonymous had no part in this, people who voted yes aren't aware of the facts and are just angry looking for ANYONE to blame. Anonymous take responsibility for all their actions. They are anonymous in that the members generally don't know each other but they always admit any attack they make.

 

End of story, if you're calling them liers (which the people voting "yes" are) It just goes to show ignorance and lack of understanding of a hacking group that has a history of ALWAYS admitting their acts.

 

:)



buglebum on 27 April 2011
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.



buglebum on 27 April 2011
Muhshuhu said:

I like a lot of the replys i'm reading, I'm glad a lot of people are actually viewing the groups past actions and drawing a conclusion.

A few points/corrections on anon
For those of you saying they aren't claiming the attack because it would make the gaming community mad, you seem to forget who exactly you are accusing. This is the group that points and laughs when people rage like this. They simply don't care how you feel.

If it was a few within anon, it was the more skilled individuals who did it without bringing up the plan with the rest of the "hive". Although anon has been internally split before on issues, there was always a fairly large group for the plan. Going against the entire hivemind of anon, means you are not acting on behalf of or part of anon while doing this.

Some of you are also forgetting that these more skilled members are still ducking various police organizations for what they did to H.B. Gary (Highly illegal, but I got a laugh from it), and past actions, so doing another highly illegal thing to such a huge target would only get them caught sooner. While anon doesn't always make the smartest choices, they know when to lay low and watch things burn.

I still blame sony though, such a large hole should have been caught in testing. They also should have been using a 256 bit encryption instead of a 128,  atleast for the credit information.

QFT ^

 

To over estimate people's intelligence. It's so obvious to anyone you took 5 mins to have a look into their past they had nothing todo with this.

To have voted yes is to have voted "I am a lazy person who doesn't think before answering serious questions".

 

Vigilante mobs R' us. Well done VGchartz members...oh yep, we're in the SONY forum..makes sense now :)



Around the Network
Porcupine_I on 27 April 2011
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?



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

irstupid on 27 April 2011

don't really care.  if it were them, well they sure did F up sony. 

the most genius thing they could have done would have been to hack in, steal all the personal info, then delete all the info.

that way morally they really aren't doing any crimes to people, yet at the same time look what it did to sony.

I hope that this is the case and its not some person actually USING this info, or SELLING this info. 



irstupid on 27 April 2011
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



Porcupine_I on 27 April 2011
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.



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

slowmo on 27 April 2011
fps_d0minat0r said:
slowmo said:
fps_d0minat0r said:
slowmo said:

More to the point you wouldn't be having this discussion if it wasn't for Sony's security holes so does it even matter who did it?


yes it does because those same people can go around hacking most security systems in the world.

maybe you dont know but security does not equal invincibility. its just there to stop masses of people hacking. professional hackers will at some point get past any security put in front of them.

You give way too much credit to the "professional" hackers, they don't always get through.  As for saying it matters, it really doesn't do any good to go around making accusations with zero evidence.  It is more likely that this is the work of an independent who piggy backed on the back of Anon's original attack to probe for holes they could exploit.


i never said they dont fail, i said "at some point get past any security put in front of them." and when the attack is concentrated like it is on sony, it happens quicker.

i dont have evidence but my assumption is realistic. I personally dont think an independent would take such a big risk. I also dont think it is being done for the money because they will get tracked down easily.

remember anonymous tried to stop people buying sony products but their protest failed? well just look at all the people trying to build up hate against sony and its security rather than the ones who actually breached it. Its possible it was done to negatively affect sony's PR and thats what anonymous are known for doing in all of their previous attacks.

The first sentence is irrelevant as I'm not going to argue what you wrote or meant there isn't any point.  Security can win against hackers as eventually time will mean hackers get bored and give up, that's why it's a constant battle.

The last sentence is once again hypothesizing with no factual evidence, doesn't prove a thing.

The bolded is the interesting part of your statement though.  You do realize that most criminals know they're likely to get caught at some point don't you?  The real proffessionals really don't care about doing time as long as the time is worth it.  If you make several hundred thousand pounds and hide the money (which is possible) then 5-10 years is a worthwhile cost to these people.  The point is you're not going to get caught for everything you do so you make as much money as possible so when you do have to pay the price, it really isn't such a shock.  The people that do this aren't casual bedroom hackers in it for fun usually, it's serious organisations with big aspirations.  I would say this attack and stealing this data is more likely to be orientated around someone independent for financial gain than any other sort of group.  You're assumption is no more realistic than me pointing a finger to someone in the street and saying they did it, you're just guessing.