Slashdot Mirror
Web Site Hacks Rise as War Rages in Iraq
An anonymous reader noted a Reuters news story talking about Website Defacement during the war. Apparently protesters and hackers are defacing hundreds of US and UK sites, both corporate and government.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
i'm surprised reuters didn't get hit for carrying the story.
Anything you say will be held against you.
I remember this also happening during the war in Yugoslavia a few years back.
nobody can get to them anyway, they're too busy sucking bandwidth with Flash ads saying "WAR!" and streaming RealMedia. Heh.
At least after Sept 11, news agencies went to static HTML versions of their news sites.
The less fluff, the better. We just want the friggin news.
how many of these hack attacks are exploiting known issues?
Slashdot has found its own niche and comments on non-mainstream tech issues related to the war, instead of just parroting the regular feed. Way to go!
When men used to be men
None of these claims are true. /. and defaced index.pl to show this story!!!
/. ever been defaced by e-vandals?
Someone has just hacked into
But seriously.....has
Arc
Perhaps, if we can't explain why we're at war, we shouldn't be at war?
All this does is make other hackers/crackers/what ever look bad. It will not convert people. It will just piss them off.
Free speech is getting expensive...
See How to Overthrow a country, and do it yourself, now!
I went to 4 anti-war protests, and no one could explain why we were truely at war.
Why are you asking people who think the war is unjustified to justify the war?
The great advantage of having a reputation for being stupid: People are less suspicious of you.
Does anyone else find it offensive that the author draws a distinction between "protesters" and "patriotic" hackers? They seem to imply that protesting the war would be unpatriotic.
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
Why is it not the other way around?
rm -rf all Iraq government sites
It just doesnt seem like the smartest thing to do, defacing your own national websites. Hey, our troops are fighting for us across the ocean, lets not support them. You voted, your leader chose to go to war, what is your problem?
Also, hey, our economy is doing poorly, lets deface some corporate sites in a hope they lose millions to lots sales and extra security costs.
Stupid stupid stupid. If you want to protest a war, have a PEACEFUL protest. Protesting a war by doing illegal and hurtful things is the pot calling the kettle black.
These people lose all public respect and support by doing stupid, negative things.
[I can picture a world without war, without hate. I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it]
Some l33t h4X0R says: "Ohh YeaH BabY...Ur SiTe Has BeeN DeFaceD."
Believe it or not, Mr L337 has acurately described what he is doing with this "protest". He is defacing public/private property, and that is a crime.
The protests on the Streets of San Francisco are not "Civil" though they are assuredly disobedient. Sitting outside of a lunch counter, or not taking the bus, that is civil disobedience. Dragging newspaper vending machines into the street to block trafic, or breaking into a server to alter index.htm is illegal.
Lets remember that words have meanings, and in describing these acts, "Civil" is not an accurate term.
"Inattention makes clowns of us all" -Bean
Yesterday, in Boston, protesters sat down and blocked the Mass Ave Bridge, a major 4 way bridge. They also blocked people from getting to work at the Boston Stock Exchange and government buildings. Why prevent people from getting into work that have nothing to do with the war? Let them earn their living. What if an ambulance or emergency crew need to get over the bridge? Why are you drawing our police away from homeland security issues?
I have also seen a lot of graffitti- notably defacing of said Mass Ave Bridge with permanent spray paint. I have also seen private business buildings hit with the "no war" graffitti. I think some protesters are just in it to get on TV and know very little about what they're protesting.
Feel free to protest, but don't infringe on my rights when doing so.
This is pretty much the level of sophistication of most of the antiwar protests I've seen thus far, in the streets or on the internet.
If I was a protester with genuine antiwar convictions, I'd be pretty annoyed that my credibility was being destroyed by 14 year-old script kiddies... not to mention the uninformed, loony-left, stringy-haired wannabe hippies pulling juvenile "look at me!" stunts on the streets of San Francisco.
I have to admit I can't explain why we're truly at war either, economicly it will be disasterous, it has ruined the international diplomatic ties the US once had, and it makes the citizens of the Uninted States more at risk to future terrorist attacks and in the worst case senario could start World War III
No, I can't explain why we're truly at war either, it baffles me. It is the most ill-conceived thing our government has done in my lifetime. Pray tell, why are we REALLY at war?
It isn't because Iraq has violated UN mandates, Isreal has violated more, and we still support them. It isn't because they have weapons of mass destruction, North Korea has more in that catagory, and we're trying "diplomatic means" to deal with them. It isn't because of Saddam's human rights record, or we'd be at war with China, not granting them favoured trade status. It isn't because the inspections were failing, the inspectors themselves thought the process was working, and shouldn't they know? Come, come, since you're so ready to critisize others for being unable to explain the cause of this war, explain the real reason we are at war, instead of alluding to it in an ambigious manner...
Little Brother, watching the watchers
Can you explain the current fiscal policy that the national reserve has put in place of lowering interest rates to stimulate economy growth? Do you know why they dont just set them to 0 in times of good growth? Maybe if you have studied economics.
Can the average American dictate foreign policy for the United States? Same answer, no, unless you did your doctoral in polysci and are smart++.
Can the average joe schmoe vote and decide who is best to lead them and make such decisions? Yes.
Don't hate the player, hate the game...democracy is what we stand for and seem to be criticizing lately?
[I can picture a world without war, without hate. I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it]
OK. I had a hard time driving around SF yesterday because of people doing more or less the same thing. On the one hand, they are blocking access to cyber places - and on the other they are blocking access to real ones. I was wondering if anyone could explain the logic behind protesting a war that is already started? Does anyone really believe that our government is going to stop and say, "Gee, we better stop this war so that those guys from Berkley will move off the Altimont Expressway..."
All I can see here is people giving Saddam (or what's left of his regime) fuel for his fight. He can say, "Look, the American people don't believe what their government is doing. Stop surendering and kill kill kill!!!" This would cause more loss of life to american soldiers. So... Can anyone explain what the protesters are hoping to get out of this? (Other than a permanent record...)
-anocelot
This tagline brought to you by 1500 monkeys in just under 17 years.
The point is not that there is no explanation, there certainly is. The point is that the protestors don't take the time to understand what the reasons are, and instead blindly protest under the umbrella of "war is bad". If anti-war protestors can't even be bothered to understand the pro-war arguements, how can they expect to effictively counter them?
Stupid like a fox!
well, perhaps there might be a few small differences (dead people, for instance), but why split hairs....
You have the technical ability and cutting edge hacking tools to crack into a major government website and deliver the ultimate statement on the state of affairs that just might be read by millions... ...and you put "Ohh YeaH BabY...Ur SiTe Has BeeN DeFaceD."
Now, if some cracker was to break into the enviromental controls for Saddams bunker and sufficate his dumb ass, I don't the US would be that pissed about the situation, other than slapping some general around and saying "Why didn't you think of that dipshit!"
However, defacing websites only sends one message... your an idiot who can use script kiddie tools...
Why don't you do something more productive, like participate in the Democratic process and let your elected officals know how you feel about the war, what you think your country should be doing to prevent war.
Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
...'Nam a few more years back.
Of course, I'm also crazy.
I love the doublethink brought out over the last few years.
Having War will give Peace
Disobeying the UN will give it purpose
Cowardice is the refusal to injure thousands of innocent civilians living in Baghdad opposing a major power's whim.
Bravery is the ability to order the deaths of 100,000 Iraqis without wincing or bringing up your Caesar salad.
Apparently, well-fed young men sitting in millions of dollars' worth of military hardware and dropping bombs from 30,000ft on impoverished people who have already had all their arms taken away are exemplars of 'bravery'.
War on Terrorism... In the words of Terry Jones: "You can wage war against another country, or on a national group within your own country, but you can't wage war on an abstract noun. How do you know when you've won?"
Geez... The doublespeak is astounding.
My favourite one was the attack of "Shock and Awe" that the US is parading, or as the CBC puts it "Anger and Confusion". No one is shocked, no one is awed, everyone is angry and everyone is confused in Iraq.
It's pretty darn hard to be in awe of a nation that is invading you.
Oh wait... we aren't invading iraq, or occupying iraq. Even though they are raising american colours over Iraqi cities that have been.. umm.. liberated...
Yeah.. that makes sense.
Stop playing word games, open your eyes, and you'll see what's happening.
Or you can just live in doublethink and apathy. That's the way a good patriotic citizen should live I guess.
Defacing web sites to protest the war is the stupidest thing I've heard of since those congress critters banned the word "french" from the capitol cafeteria menu.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
They have to get louder because they are being drowned out by all the "Go America" bullshit. The media has not given anything near equal voice to anti-war arguments as they have to pro-war rhetoric. The numbers of protestors have been grossely underestimated, and as for the polls that you think tell you 70% are in favor, they are completely fraudulent. I have watched several over the last weeks, and every time the results start to go in the anti-war direction, the questions are changed or the poll is dropped. Besides, any idiot knows you can get any result you want depending on how you phrase the question.
Example: Do you or would you:Now, since a lot of people are holding out for UN approval so we don't look like a bunch of assholes, you're going to have a lot of votes for B. You'll have some votes for A because about 1/3 of Americans are complete idiot hicks who think Saddam and Bin Laden are the same guy. Now when reporting the results, simply mash A and B together and say 70% support the war. It's not true, but it's not completely false either.
If you think the media is liberal and would naturally want to skew opinions towards anti-war sentiments, I suggest you check out Alterman's book "What Liberal Media"
A dreadful, evil, warped and [gasp] evil dictators is hiding weapons of mass destruction right in the heart of the United States.
We must stop Bill Gates!
"As a writer / novelist you might want to spellcheck your sig.
Or is it somehow "unfair" to talk about the left's economic involvement in the middle east?
Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses
I just wish that the government wouldn't spend their lives so cheaply
Do you think that the US Gov't is spending the lives of its soldiers cheaply? I can't think of any army in history that places so much value on the lives of individual soldiers as today's US Army. To accomplish a given mission, the Army would rather spend millions of dollars on high tech surveillance and "smart" missiles than risk the life of a single US soldier in actual combat.
The soldiers may be brave and willing, but the Army is so risk-adverse they are willing to do almost anything, at any cost, to avoid American combat casualties.
I wouldn't be surprised to learn that at the end of the war, more soldiers die from accidents than actual combat. Probably, the Army's mortality rate won't be much higher than it would be for a similar-sized group driving on American highways, or smoking American cigarettes.
According to Internet Traffice Report, overall global traffic is down the last three days. Not that it shows the whole picture. I'm sure that the shape of that traffic in the last few days has changed dramatically.
So you assume that just because we don't agree with you, we must be ignoring you? Why is that? Because you think you have some kind of monopoly on The Truth or something? You're no better than you claim Bush to be, if that's really your attitude.
You have rights. I have rights. I cannot interfere with your rights, and you cannot interfere with mine. And yes, that means that if you wish to protest, you must do so in such a way that doesn't disrupt people's lives. Not only are you not attracting converts by doing so, you're in fact breeding resentment among the very people you should be courting.
Yes, the so-called PATRIOT act is a gross violation of everything this nation stands for. That's no excuse to violate people's rights even further.
A Patriot is someone who loves their country, and works to help better it.
A Patriot is not silent on government corruption, illegal wars, or anything else that they think hurts the long-term health of the country.
A Patriot does criticize. They criticize at times of extreme political unrest. They ask questions when questions need to be asked.
And yes, a Patriot will perform acts of civil disobedience, when extreme situations warrent it.
A Patriot does not, under any circumstances, cowtow to the party line and 'fall in' as to not 'cause ripples'. A Patriot stands up and shouts to the fucking ceiling, 'something is wrong', when they feel something is wrong.
(And you know what's really funny? I'm Canadian. You know, one of those countries that's not 'the greatest nation in the whole world'. Whattajoke that phrase is. The hubris knows no bounds.)
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
1) Saddam is far more likely to use his weapons than North Korea is.
2) Isreal has violated tons of mandates, and has a particularly sinister leader right now. We don't attack them because they're simply not a threat. Though there is a good case to stop supporting them.
3) Saddam isn't linked to 9/11. But I'm sure he wouldn't mind it one bit if some Al Quaeda boys borrowed some weapons to blow up New York. Oh please, you say? Al Quaeda doesn't like the beer-drinking, cursing, sacreligious Saddam? Well guess what? They hate us more.
4) China's government is on a remarkable progression to more Democracy and free thinking. I know because I lived there (I'm not Chinese either). Their human rights records are bad, but they'll get better.
5) The majority of the world isn't ready to cut off all diplomatic ties to the US because of the war (they might disagree, but only a few countries like France and Russia are really rabidly anti-war). That would be political suicide for them. Also, let's take France for instance. I thear a lot of folks saying "it's all about the oil." It is. France gets most of their oil from Iraq. It's no wonder they don't want us in there. Do you really believe the French are so anti-us involvement because they sympathize for the people in Iraq? Come on!
6) Iraq does pose a threat. They've got the weapons, and Saddam is crazy enough to use them. Don't believe me? We gave him weapons of mass destruction in the early 80's when he was fighting Iran. He used some against Iran, but there are others that are unaccounted for. Don't blame me as an American for being a little bit worried that he could use them (or being extremely pissed off at the lack of foresight the Reagan Administration had for giving them to him). Hell he's been dodging weapons inspectors for some time.
Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
You've got to be kidding. The entire world has been pleading with the US to present some evidence that this war is justified, and the US keeps coming up empty. You think we have secret info that we can't share with the world that would justify it? If it existed the Bush admin would have brought it out in order to get the UN mandate it sought. In the absence of real evidence, we are just supposed to assume there is secret evidence somewhere they won't tell us about?
Dude.. 45 countries have supported us. thats three TIMES the number who would have had to vote positive in the UN.
45 countries' governments, not 45 countries' populations.
Of those who dont, only a handful really matter.
China matters, France matters, Germany matters, Russia matters, Canada matters, India matters. These are the big players around the world today. How much US foreign policy does Albania influence? This doesn't even take into account the fact that although many governments are with us, much of their population is against us, as is the case in Spain and Japan, and almost certainly any Arab members.
Economically, its already helping. Looked at the stock exchange lately?
a) a one-week rally does little to mark the end of a multi-year recession,
b) I think he may be referring to the record-breaking deficits we're already racking up as a result. To say that this is helping the economy and then to point at one rally is not convincing.
One) Hussein will use the weapons he is undoubtedly building against Israel soon enough. That is a doomsday scenario you dont want to see.
Since when does speculation build the foundation for unilateral military action? Even if you're right, you're assuming he could continue to develop these weapons with the entire world's eyes trained on him.
Two) He (hussein) has been thumbing his nose at us for 12 years, ignoring our sanctions, and recently, openly mouthing off. THere is little doubt that he has ties to the terrorist activities of the last several years, at least in those who actually read the press, and dont necessarily swallow the leftist jargon hook, line, and sinker.
a) Thumbing your nose at the U.S. does not justify a war.
b) Once again, linking Iraq to Al Qaeda is pure speculation until someone comes up with some real evidence. We've been pursuing this angle for almost a year now, and have yet to produce a convincing argument. If the administration had what even they considered to be a convincing argument, they would be waving it for the world to see at every single press conference.
If we leave the US as a huge target that never retaliates, there is _nothing_ stopping every islamic crackpot in the world from taking a shot at us.
There was a huge campaign in afganistan that overthrew an islamic fundamentalist regime, and I think we made our point very clearly. Attacking Iraq, which is not a fundamentalist nation (it's not even an Islamic nation), is not making a point about Sept. 11th. There are dozens of hotter terrorist spots we could be focusing on.
Those reasons, along with the very real threat that he has nuclear weapons, are the reasons we are at war.
Absolutely unfounded. Not only do we have zero evidence of any Iraqi nuclear capability (after years of searching for it), but there are dozens of other dangerous nations that DO have nuclear capabilities, and we seem to have little interest in them.
The original post was right on the money. If we take away the speculation and the emotions, it leaves us with a very weak case for going to war. The majority of people and governments of the world recognize how weak the case really is, and that is why there is very little support for this war abroad.
Anti-war does not mean left-wing, as those fine fellows at the Cato Institute will point out.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Believe it or not, Mr L337 has acurately described what he is doing with this "protest". He is defacing public/private property, and that is a crime.
... both broke laws, and did jail time, in efforts to show such laws were unjust and should be repealed. They succeeded.
... they probably expect to commit and crime and get away with it. If so, then you are right in pointing out that what they are doing isn't civil disobedience, else they'd turn themselves in and allow themselves to be arrested to bring more attention to the issues they are protesting. Instead, they are likely just petty vandals using an opportunity to strike out at institutions they hate.
... I don't like the corporatization of America, or the corporate hijacking of the UN through the WTO and WIPO, any more than the next person. However, I cannot relate to or condone their behavior either ... unless they turn themselves in and face the music, they are merely vandals, not civilly disobedient protestors.
Very true.
The protests on the Streets of San Francisco are not "Civil" though they are assuredly disobedient.
"Civil" in civil disobedience refers not to civility (politeness), but to civilian, or disobedience to civil authority. There is a profound difference in both definition and implication.
In other words, the actions of those protestors snarling traffic in SF may not be civil (def: polite or cordial), but it most assuredly is "civil disobedience" (disobedience to civilian authority).
A person engaging in civil disobedience expects to be arrested and to "pay" for their crime, but choose do break the law regardless as a political statement. Ghandi and Martin Luthar King, Jr. are two such examples
A protestor on the street of San Francisco blocking traffic is most certainly engaged in "civil disobedience" and, unless they are an imbecel (quite possible based on some of the rhetoric I've seen from that direction), they fully expect to be arrested and pay for their crime. This tradeoff is worthwhile in their view, as it gives them media exposure with which they can get their message across.
Web defacement might possibly be another such form of civil disobedience, though I suspect you're right in that those doing so don't expect to get caught
I can relate to the hatred (in part)
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Is it just me, or does it seem that we would be better off if high schools taught a class in things like well-managed protest, writing letters to representatives, contacting the media and generally affecting society without being an asshole?
Oil prices dropped from $40 to $24 per barrel in the past couple weeks. I hereby challenge your assertion. 90% of Iraq's oil is not even being tapped into. More supply over the next 10 years will come online from Iraq, thereby lowering prices even more due to more supply. Production prices for oil in Iraq are insanely low. Oil companies will suffer. Hollywood liberals will benefit because they will be able to afford more gas for the huge SUVs they hide in the garage while they are out protesting.
If Saddam is ousted, the biggest winners will be the Iraqis. They have an educated and willing middle class who is able to build/maintain a country. They are eons ahead of Afganistan. Iraq has the possibility to be a modern Arab country, such as Qatar, Kuwait, and a few others. Once Iraq goes this way, others will likely follow, including Iran.
I love (note sarcasm) how in the very country these anti-war people seek to save, they would be killed, tortured, or raped for the very actions they do to try to save it.
Do they not see the irony?
The irony is tired and cliched, and a contains two strawmen to boot (the purpose of the war and the purpose of the 'anti-war people'). This sort of arguement dates at least to the war against Vietnam...
The fact that your country gives you a right to protest does not give it the right to invade countries that don't.
Dude.. 45 countries have supported us
I am a citizen of one of those countries. By polls 80% of our population is opposed to the war. It is not a coincidence that the supporting countries are relatively small and poor. Their governments have been easier to bribe and pressure. The only country in the worlds where the population is supporting the war is USA, and that's because of the propaganda in mainstream media (the same people who support the war, also believe that it was Saddam Hussein who organized 9/11, which is clearly a nonsense).
Even in UK, 70% of people are against the war.
Economically, its already helping. Looked at the stock exchange lately?
Wrong again. The stock market is just climbing out of the hole where it fell because of the uncertainty. Now that the end is near, we're just restoring the equilibrium.
Where were all these protestors when Clinton got us into Bosnia?
There's a huge difference between ending a war, and starting one, hence the the protests.
If we leave the US as a huge target that never retaliates, there is _nothing_ stopping every islamic crackpot in the world from taking a shot at us.
Iraq is a secular country, and Saddam Hussein is certainly not an islamic crackpot. He has done absolutely nothing to the US that would justify attacking his country and killing hundreds of thousands of people (the first Gulf war killed 100-200000 people and it was mostly in deserts, it is going to be mostly in cities this time).
When men used to be men
Saved all us information security folks the grief of our non-technical managers asking if we are going to get hacked...
-Rob
Even if they had one, the 2 main iraqi sites are of the net, the nameserver of www.uruklink.net, NIC1.BAGHDADLINK.net is returning a different bogus IP every 32 seconds. The original IP, 62.145.94.237 behind satelite, is not returning packets. Also www.iraqi-mission.org is no longer available.
Is this the US goverment hacking these servers, or is it script kiddies having a field day?
Understand that essentially NO ONE is as right-wing as the american Republican party. Up here in Canada, your Democrats appear pretty center (akin to our Conservatives) while your Republicans appear hard-core right (some would compare them to fascists, but I'm just trying to educate here, not stoke the flames).
This is simply because America is really the least socialist, most capitalist western nation out there. Chirac is OUR idea of right-wing (and France's), but certainly not yours.
Jeremy
The website we run at work was defaced by "Hackers Against War", they exploited a bug in the software we use (php-nuke) to replace all the stories on the front page with an inane antiwar statement and comments in French about their feelings for some girl. The pathetic thing is that our site already had a lot of antiwar articles up on it, so if their true motives were to express an antiwar opinion they failed horribly in that they obscured substantive antiwar commentary with their drivel AND forced us to take the site offline while we fixed things.
While I'm sure there are some groups out there with genuine political motives, based on this and some other things I've seen I really believe that this is just scriptkiddies looking for something trendy to do.