Iranian Cyber Army Moves Into Botnet Renting

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Iranian Cyber Army Moves Into Botnet Renting

Posted by Soulskill on Tuesday October 26, 2010 @12:14AM from the god-help-you-if-you-dent-the-drywall dept.

angry tapir writes "A group of malicious hackers who attacked Twitter and the Chinese search engine Baidu are also apparently running a for-rent botnet, according to new research from Seculert. The so-called Iranian Cyber Army also took credit last month for an attack on TechCrunch's European website. In that incident, the group installed a page on TechCrunch's site that redirected visitors to a server that bombarded their PCs with exploits in an attempt to install malicious software."

63 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

No Connection with Tehran by explosivejared · 2010-10-26 00:17 · Score: 4, Insightful

It seems that there is no real connection between this group and Tehran. It's important to remember that when there is real discussion going on about conflict with Iran. That being said, this group does seem to be motivated by some sort of Iranian nationalism. It's just a further reminder of how small groups and individuals can inflame international imbroglios, leaving state actors in a bind. Think the Netanyahu and Obama administrations' paralysis over how to handle the settlers in the West Bank.

--
I got a catholic block.
1. Re:No Connection with Tehran by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-26 00:20 · Score: 0, Funny
  
  It seems that there is no real connection between this group and Tehran. It's important to remember that when there is real discussion going on about conflict with Iran. That being said, this group does seem to be motivated by some sort of Iranian nationalism. It's just a further reminder of how small groups and individuals can inflame international imbroglios, leaving state actors in a bind. Think the Netanyahu and Obama administrations' paralysis over how to handle the settlers in the West Bank.
  Nuke all those Arabs.
  America, Fuck Yeah!
2. Re:No Connection with Tehran by zrbyte · 2010-10-26 00:22 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Yes. Welcome to the 21st century, where more and more power can be concentrated in the hands of smaller and smaller groups of people. For better and for worse.
3. Re:No Connection with Tehran by sznupi · 2010-10-26 00:26 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Still, "Iranian Cyber Army" is awfully convenient.
  
  --
  One that hath name thou can not otter
4. Re:No Connection with Tehran by DarkKnightRadick · 2010-10-26 00:29 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  It seems that there is no real connection between this group and Tehran. It's important to remember that when there is real discussion going on about conflict with Iran. That being said, this group does seem to be motivated by some sort of Iranian nationalism. It's just a further reminder of how small groups and individuals can inflame international imbroglios, leaving state actors in a bind. Think the Netanyahu and Obama administrations' paralysis over how to handle the settlers in the West Bank.
  Except, you know, the Iranian president doesn't like anyone who isn't a Muslim.
  As for how to deal with the West Bank "settlers", move 'em out (same with the Gaza Strip folks). That is Israeli territory. Period. They have a legitimate claim to that land as it was legally bought by Jewish settlers a long time ago at more than fair prices and NO ONE was forced to sell their property.
  
  --
  "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
5. Re:No Connection with Tehran by johnhp · 2010-10-26 00:29 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think your West Bank comparison holds water, because it's not as if the settlers have no support from the government. Israel has been perfectly willing to tell us to fuck off over the West Bank, while I would bet that the Iranians want no part of any "cyber terrorist" organization, at least not one that operates outside of their direct control.
6. Re:No Connection with Tehran by Xest · 2010-10-26 00:45 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  "It's just a further reminder of how small groups and individuals can inflame international imbroglios, leaving state actors in a bind."
  No I'm pretty sure the whole nuclear issue is what's got the state actors in a bind in this case.
  Obama and Ahmadinejad could likely not give a flying fuck what a bunch of script kiddies are upto.
7. Re:No Connection with Tehran by sznupi · 2010-10-26 00:45 · Score: 1
  
  They don't like anyone perceived as supportive / keeping in power the brutal Shah regime of 3 decades. You know, the one started with 1953 coup d'etat; read about the circumstances, consequences, think how you would perceive such actions.
  They have good relations with India (with which they collaborate in supporting anti-Taliban Afghan government...you know, the one also US-backed), Japan, South Korea, China, Brazil, Cuba, Venezuela, CIS; generally not exactly Muslim.
  And formal legality of something isn't a terribly good argument. Not only because it's easy to push the stakes; I'm pretty sure what any dictator does anywhere is legal, to use the most extreme example.
  
  --
  One that hath name thou can not otter
8. Re:No Connection with Tehran by chrisG23 · 2010-10-26 00:50 · Score: 1
  
  You do realize that when the term "settlers" is used in conjunction with the west bank and gaza, and the term "settlements" as well, its not in reference to Palestinians. It is in reference to Israelis moving in an establishing new settlements there. In places that Palestinians have been living in for a long time. So if you were to move out settlers, you would be removing the Israelis that are moving there.
9. Re:No Connection with Tehran by wmac · 2010-10-26 00:54 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, you mean this one:
  
  http://d.yimg.com/kq/groups/28137547/sn/1480601627/name/JEWISH+AHMADINEJAD.jpg
  
  http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR-I7DwsCxvhbdcC6_kCCvZEXD8tVTg1R7CSanjma2m0oqU95s&t=1&usg=__ovlHlg-NLLtGBqKgiV58UyrJCEY=
10. Re:No Connection with Tehran by pyrosine · 2010-10-26 01:00 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  This is actually a very smart move, by masking their actions behind political or even religious ideals (providing they dont actually support that cause), they will confuse people into looking into more details than need be. Could quite easily be a group in America with no affiliation to Iran, meaning they have achieved their goal of misdirection extremely well.
11. Re:No Connection with Tehran by hesaigo999ca · 2010-10-26 01:03 · Score: 1
  
  Interestingly enough, this model you speak of, will only force governments to start enforcing more and more older or new policies amongst people, think of it like someone that has a pilot's license....they can fly a plane into a building, before 9-11, we would not have imagined people doing this, but it takes one to change things and improve policies, now not just anyone can fly planes, and trust me, the security checks to learn how to fly big airplanes are ridiculous now (whether effective is another matter, but at least the attempt is there).
  So now we own a computer, or many computers, just like a car you have to learn how to drive one first , you don't just buy one, then get on a road and start trying to drive. Computers can be seen much the same way, just because you own one does not mean you know how to operate it properly....or completely.
  I think we should enforce more policies at the ISP level to catch the botnets, and force infected people to not only treat their machines (cant get back on the net till they do)....but also educate them more on how things work.
  Of course I actually believe in positive reinforcement too, so I may be way off on this one, but I think this type of botnet show of force, will only prove to governments they must step in more then they are now....and force ISPs to do more.
12. Re:No Connection with Tehran by captainpanic · 2010-10-26 01:04 · Score: 1
  
  What the OP meant to say is that the peace negotiations between Israel and Palestine can be ruined by a single rocket propelled granade shot by a dissident Palestine who ignores whatever leadership they have there.
  Similarly, countries outside Iran will demand from Iran that it stops these cyber attacks... even though the group that did the attacks is not related to the official government.
  The situation in the Middle East is older than the discussion about Iranian nuclear ambitions. Obama and Ahmadinejad give "a fuck" about whatever keeps the public busy on all sides of the conflict. They are politicians, and they care about the opinion of the people (because they try hard to influence and change that opinion). If that is a bunch of cyber kiddies, then they care.
13. Re:No Connection with Tehran by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-26 01:06 · Score: 0
  
  As for how to deal with the West Bank "settlers", move 'em out (same with the Gaza Strip folks). That is Israeli territory. Period.
  Congratulations, you win today's award for most uninformed comment. Maybe go look up what the word "settler" means when we're talking about the West Bank?
14. Re:No Connection with Tehran by DigiShaman · 2010-10-26 01:07 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  You can blame national media and the speed of light. For better and for worse.
  Thought experiment: You thought WWII would have been won with all that coverage in hi-def bloody detail for all the public to see? I would say not. I would also say that's why we lost in Vietnam. Being that war will and is always nasty. The only way to win one is to not provide media coverage to the public.
  
  --
  Life is not for the lazy.
15. Re:No Connection with Tehran by elrous0 · 2010-10-26 01:15 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, because ethnic cleansing never comes back and bites anyone on the ass.
  
  --
  SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
16. Re:No Connection with Tehran by Sulphur · 2010-10-26 01:31 · Score: 1
  
  A strange game, the only way to win is not to play.
  Would you like a nice game of chess?
17. Re:No Connection with Tehran by Sulphur · 2010-10-26 01:33 · Score: 1
  
  The Iranians are not Arabs, and they invented Chess.
18. Re:No Connection with Tehran by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-26 01:48 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  If the ISPs are forced to lock down botnets and shut down suspected botnet traffic, they will also shut down anything they think are copyright or patent violations too. Friend point out a new song on YouTube and you go listen to it? Next thing you know the ISP has chopped your pipe and you are looking at sitting through 30 hours of mandatory "copyright compliance reeducation" classes which is a loop of the "don't copy that floppy" from the 80s.
  Don't forget patents. With the combination of app stores and activation infrastructures, there is going to come a time where piracy will be hard to do, so people will move to F/OSS apps for their work (GIMP from Photoshop, OOo from MS Office). What will be the next shoe that drops are dubious software patents that get enforced on the end user level by a RIAA-like authority.
  I'm sure eventually someone will find some obscure patent that they can use against vi or emacs, and demand that they pull all text editors from all OS distributions, and of course, their text editor will cost $100 per user per machine. Then some patent enforcement agency will start running nmap against machines and demanding anyone with a UNIX based box pay up or be sued for punitive damages (hundreds of millions). Sound far-fetched, but this is what is going to happen next once piracy isn't an issue.
19. Re:No Connection with Tehran by rtechie · 2010-10-26 02:39 · Score: 1
  
  It's extremely unlikely this group has any connections with Iran whatsoever, ad hoc or otherwise. Iran simply doesn't have a big hacker community. This is almost certainly an international group (maybe in China) that is using the recent Iranian cyber attacks as a "cover" for the typical hooliganism.
20. Re:No Connection with Tehran by PitaBred · 2010-10-26 02:40 · Score: 0, Flamebait
  
  You expect someone who says "America, Fuck Yeah!" to understand the difference between Persians and Arabs?
  
  --
  My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
21. Re:No Connection with Tehran by Xest · 2010-10-26 02:44 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, but the only people who pick up on the movement and actions of this "Iranian Cyber Army" are sites like Slashdot, the mainstream public don't care, mainstream news will give a brief report of a hacked site, and really, that's it.
  It's just not something that registers on the political radar other than a very brief mention unless some country is looking for an excuse, but when Iran is busy playing the nuclear game, when it's had fraudulent elections, it's not hard to find an excuse and again, a few script kiddies don't matter.
  For what it's worth, even in Israel, rocket attacks happen far more frequently than on the news without Israeli response, or without affecting peace negotiations., they only become an issue when one side needs them to become an issue. Did you know there'd been at least 8 this month alone, 13 last month? -
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel,_2010
  These had no effect on the peace deals precisely because politicians recognise the nature of situations like this where individuals will try to derail processes. Individuals can only derail such processes if there is no serious political will to truly follow through with them in the first place. It is not the rocket that derails it, it is the will of politicians to not follow through, and they'll find an excuse whatever it is, if they can't find one then hell, they might even manufacture one. If they are serious, then they'll attempt talks regardless of actions like rocket attacks- which was the case with the latest attempt which, as you can see, were carried out despite constant attacks against Israel and constant Israeli responses over that period.
22. Re:No Connection with Tehran by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-26 02:50 · Score: 0
  
  Persia is no more.
23. Re:No Connection with Tehran by maxume · 2010-10-26 03:18 · Score: 1
  
  In 1996 Tom Clancy wrote some fiction about an angry pilot flying a 747 into the Capital building during the State of the Union.
  He needed to get Jack Ryan into the presidency without being any more preposterous than usual.
  
  --
  Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
24. Re:No Connection with Tehran by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-26 03:36 · Score: 0
  
  Of course we would have won WWII, they dropped bombs on our soil. We lost in Vietnam because we shouldn't have fucking well been there in the first place and we inevitably ended up no different to the French, Chinese and others who tried to fuck with them. Much like another little country we're trying to fuck now.
25. Re:No Connection with Tehran by geminidomino · 2010-10-26 03:47 · Score: 1
  
  and they invented Chess
  Sincere: I thought that was the Chinese... (scary, I've been on the internet so long I've started talking like the Elcor...)
26. Re:No Connection with Tehran by pushing-robot · 2010-10-26 05:01 · Score: 1
  
  No, they invented checkers.
  
  --
  How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
27. Re:No Connection with Tehran by orgelspieler · 2010-10-26 05:13 · Score: 1
  
  Don't you realize that the ultimate terrorist might be a goddamn Gook. Stop being such a racist!
  Mods, before marking me as flamebait, please Google "ultimate terrorist goddamn Gook."
28. Re:No Connection with Tehran by thomst · 2010-10-26 05:13 · Score: 1
  
  Think the Netanyahu and Obama administrations' paralysis over how to handle the settlers in the West Bank.
  There's no "paralysis" on Netanyahu's part - it's a deliberate policy. Because of the batshit-crazy Israeli parliamentary party-list proportional representation seat-allocation system, he's forced to cater to extreme Zionists in order to hold onto a majority large enough to keep his government in power. Since personal power is more important to him than statesmanship, the settlers therefore are allowed to get away with anything short of outright murder - and, more often than not, they get away with that, too.
  The only way to achieve peaceful co-existence between Israel and Palestine is for Israel to recognize an autonomous Palestinian state - and that will never happen, unless and until the Knesset's party-list proportional election system is reformed. And (surprise!), since the reforms would have to be adopted by the Knesset itself (which would cost all those tiny, religious-extremist parties their seats), it's about as likely as meaningful election finance reform in the United States.
  And, mind you, most Israelis are in favor of such reforms - just as most Americans favor reforming our campaign finance system. In Israel's case, it'd probably require the adoption of a formal constitution - something the Knesset has resisted since Israel's formation. In America's case (thanks to the Roberts court), it'd take a constitutional amendment stripping corporations of the right to spend money to influence the outcome of elections.
  Please exhale.
  
  --
  Check out my novel.
29. Re:No Connection with Tehran by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-26 06:02 · Score: 0
  
  Um, I think it's a reference to "Team America: World Police", and meant sarcastically...pull out your credit card and rent a sense of humor...
30. Re:No Connection with Tehran by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-26 06:12 · Score: 0
  
  I know, it's absolutely horrible to have representation in parliament. We should cancel that and replace it with the American's 2-party system. You are, by the way, implicitly endorsing genocide ... just the murder of jews instead of palastinians.
31. Re:No Connection with Tehran by DarkKnightRadick · 2010-10-26 06:29 · Score: 1
  
  Wow. Paranoid much?
  
  --
  "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
32. Re:No Connection with Tehran by Philomage · 2010-10-26 06:50 · Score: 1
  
  One thing that's always bugged me about other nations' inability to see that settlement is a military activity is the fact that Machiavelli explicitly stated in The Prince that the way to take and hold territory was to start with settlers... both giving an excuse to send in the army "in defense of the poor defenseless settlers" and providing influence and control over the area.
  If this was known 700 years ago, how come it's not known now?
33. Re:No Connection with Tehran by sjames · 2010-10-26 07:31 · Score: 1
  
  I'm fairly sure they're very well aware of that. They just want to establish a sort of deniability.
34. Re:No Connection with Tehran by Philomage · 2010-10-26 07:39 · Score: 1
  
  That my nation would "want to establish a sort of deniability" about ethnic cleansing bugs me even more.
35. Re:No Connection with Tehran by Xest · 2010-10-27 03:06 · Score: 1
  
  You can't blame politicians in a proportional representation system like that. If the population continues to vote someone in who is catering to minority elected extremists then the population are explicitly granting support for that through their vote.
  The system isn't the problem, the problem is the electorate that votes for both extremist parties, and parties who are willing to work with and cater to extremists.
Nooooo!! We're all doomed! by CaptSaltyJack · 2010-10-26 00:31 · Score: 1

http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41631000/jpg/_41631814_cybermen3_416bbc.jpg
bot net armies all over the world by digitaldc · 2010-10-26 00:35 · Score: 1

Who knows where they are from or what their motives are?

Is there any actual evidence what they are or where they are from? Or are we just told to believe some article on 'Good Gear Guide' as fact?

What we need is an all-out bot-net army war to keep them all busy fighting the forces of good vs. evil.

--
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Silly mind games. by zill · 2010-10-26 00:48 · Score: 1

so-called Iranian Cyber Army
Maybe it should be pointed out in the title that this group of script kiddies have nothing to do with Iran.

Wait a minute, maybe that's exactly what Tehran wants us to believe. By having Iran in the name, it would actually draw suspicion away from Iran because presumably they would want to keep their secret hacker army secret and would never name it something so obvious.

But then again, maybe the script kiddies are using reverse psychology. By using one of the most deceptive names possible for the actual Iran Cyber forces (supposing that it exists), they easily associated themselves with Iran, the perfect scapegoat in today's political climates.

However maybe there's a deeper level to it. Perhaps Ahmadinejad realized that any group named "Iranian Cyber Army" will be thought of as using Iran as a scapegoat, so he intentionally gave his cyber army that name so that he can 1. complain about being a victim to another "Zionist conspiracy" and 2. operate his cyber forces without drawing suspicion.

So on and so forth...

Regardless of their actual identity, seems like this "Iranian Cyber Army" also specializes in psychological warfare.With three simple words, they've manage to waste 20 minutes of my life.
1. Re:Silly mind games. by Larryish · 2010-10-26 02:20 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  More likely it is a false flag operation to drum up support for more U.S. occupation.
This news was brought to you by the people by santax · 2010-10-26 00:56 · Score: 1, Troll

who brought you WMD's in Iraq and a double-rape case against wikileaks. Come on... they may be Muslims but they aren't retarded.
1. Re:This news was brought to you by the people by santax · 2010-10-26 00:57 · Score: 1
  
  That one was for the folks who blame the Iranian government :) Should have put that in the same message.
2. Re:This news was brought to you by the people by c6gunner · 2010-10-26 04:06 · Score: 1
  
  I don't remember angry_tapir having anything to do with those articles ....
It weren't no Iranian Cyber Army by PolygamousRanchKid+ · 2010-10-26 01:05 · Score: 1

It was these folks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbionese_Liberation_Army
Most of them are working posthumously . . .

--
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
1. Re:It weren't no Iranian Cyber Army by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-26 02:43 · Score: 0
  
  You joke, but I have heard (having grown up in the same social circles as her) that after Susan Saxe was imprisoned, the prison management was enlightened enough to let her help with the prison computer systems . They stopped letting her do that, after they figured out that she was, shall we say, abusing the situation.
Irrelevant by Kupfernigk · 2010-10-26 01:19 · Score: 2, Insightful

The example of WW2 is totally irrelevant. With current levels of surveillance and sigint, Germany would have been stopped long before they invaded Austria. The "hi-def coverage" of Kristallnacht and other Nazi atrocities would have let everybody know what was going on, before Hitler could re-arm Germany. Hitler was reassured by his American contacts that the US was at least neutral and possibly pro-German up until well into 1940. A German Wikileaks would have ensured that did not happen.
I expect to get moderated flamebait, but the reason the US lost the Vietnam war was quite simple, exactly the same as why Hitler lost against the Soviet Union: despite their awful Governments, both the Russians and the Vietnamese preferred their awful Governments to the alternative. The American inability to understand that not everybody wants to be American is itself a cause of war.

--
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
1. Re:Irrelevant by DigiShaman · 2010-10-26 01:35 · Score: 1
  
  Freedom/Democracy = American = bad!???
  Clearly there's a level of miscommunication going on. But if you could poll people individually, what citizens of a 3rd world nation wouldn't want to be an American, or Europian for that matter. Oh hell, the influx in immigration is proof alone.
  Illogical. Your answer does not compute.
  
  --
  Life is not for the lazy.
2. Re:Irrelevant by techwrench · 2010-10-26 02:09 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think it is a matter of becoming more Free and Democratic, as it is losing National/Cultural Identity in the process.
  
  --
  It's You and I against the World... When do we attack?
3. Re:Irrelevant by imakemusic · 2010-10-26 02:51 · Score: 1
  
  There is definitely some miscommunication going on. For instance you didn't finish the middle sentence in the above comment. Instead, realising that you had no data to back up your assertions, you waved it away and pointed at immigration, as if that proves something.
  You seem to be saying that if some people from another country migrate to yours then it follows that all the people in that country (even people that may have had the chance to move but decided instead to stay where they are) would rather live in your country than their own. All it really proves is that some foreigners are still dreaming the American dream.
  The GP didn't imply that democracy is bad. Or that America is bad (good strawman there). His point - which, incidentally, you appear to be reinforcing nicely despite apparently trying to refute - was that some Americans appear to believe that their country is better than all others in all ways and that their lifestyle is to be desired and revered by the rest of the world when in fact this just isn't true. Sure America is pretty cool in a lot of ways and there are (what I would consider) worse places to live but nobody and no country is perfect. Some people are happy where they are even when they live somewhere which a westerner might consider deplorable. Just because you would rather be where you are than where someone else is doesn't mean that person feels the same.
  Also (because I'm feeling particularly picky) you can have an influx of immigrants but an influx of immigration is illogical - does not compute.
  
  --
  Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
4. Re:Irrelevant by DigiShaman · 2010-10-26 03:58 · Score: 1
  
  You seem to be saying that if some people from another country migrate to yours then it follows that all the people in that country (even people that may have had the chance to move but decided instead to stay where they are) would rather live in your country than their own.
  Not all, but look at the numbers of human migration to western nations. America being one of them.
  His point - which, incidentally, you appear to be reinforcing nicely despite apparently trying to refute - was that some Americans appear to believe that their country is better than all others in all ways and that their lifestyle is to be desired and revered by the rest of the world when in fact this just isn't true.
  When you have mass immigration to your country, it's easy to see why some American feel this way. Pride aside, the numbers and change in culture from outside influence carries a lot of weight.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States
  Really though, it's all relative. Someone from N. Korea would risk life and limb just to immigrate to China. The quality of life is a huge step up. I'm simply saying that all opportunities being equal, most people would choose a western nation to live if they plan on uprooting their lives and start a new one to begin with.
  
  --
  Life is not for the lazy.
5. Re:Irrelevant by c6gunner · 2010-10-26 03:59 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  The example of WW2 is totally irrelevant. With current levels of surveillance and sigint, Germany would have been stopped long before they invaded Austria. The "hi-def coverage" of Kristallnacht and other Nazi atrocities would have let everybody know what was going on, before Hitler could re-arm Germany.
  Um. Kristallnacht happened months AFTER Austria was under the rule of Germany, so I'm not sure how coverage of it would have stopped the invasion of Austria.
  
  A German Wikileaks would have ensured that did not happen.
  If a German Wikileaks were allowed to exist, Germany wouldn't have been a problem in the first place. The thing is, sites like wikileaks are GREAT at stopping liberal democracies, while they tend to be pretty powerless against oppressive dictatorships.
  
  despite their awful Governments, both the Russians and the Vietnamese preferred their awful Governments to the alternative. The American inability to understand that not everybody wants to be American is itself a cause of war.
  That is, of course, complete nonsense. In Russia you had a single faction fighting under one government with support from external forces against an invader. In Vietnam you had two opposing sides fighting each other, with one receiving support from the US and the other receiving support from Russia and other communist nations. You'd have to have absolutely no understanding of either conflict in order to claim that there's any significant similarity between them. And you’d have to be a complete moron to suggest that the US actually wanted to turn the Vietnamese into Americans.
Hackers are hackers by dorinmouss · 2010-10-26 01:41 · Score: 1

and will be, from all over the world :(
You got it wrong. by khasim · 2010-10-26 02:09 · Score: 1

But if you could poll people individually, what citizens of a 3rd world nation wouldn't want to be an American, or Europian for that matter. Oh hell, the influx in immigration is proof alone.
While the average citizen WOULD jump at the opportunity to move to Europe or the USofA ... that does NOT mean that the average citizen would NOT fight against the USofA should the USofA invade his country.
It's a simple difference between friendly and hostile.
1. Re:You got it wrong. by sjames · 2010-10-26 07:24 · Score: 1
  
  Or they are well aware that they will NOT become the 51st state (or a full member of the EU) that way, but instead will be saddled with a corrupt puppet government that will oppress them even worse for the sake of foreign corporate interests.
Let's talk about the elephant in the room by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-26 03:51 · Score: 0

All these problems are caused by Microsoft Windows, an OS so flawed that a server can tell it to install and run software without any interaction from the user of said computer.
Make Microsoft Windows illegal and 99% of the problems will end.
Persians are not Indians by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-26 04:44 · Score: 0

Chess was invented in India.
1. Re:Persians are not Indians by poopdeville · 2010-10-26 06:42 · Score: 1
  
  The India we know today is not the India of antiquity. The Persian Empire controlled much of the Indian subcontinent during the time of Alexander.
  
  --
  After all, I am strangely colored.
Obviously not, we're talking about a swarm of bugs by Nicolas+MONNET · 2010-10-26 07:06 · Score: 1

It's a Zerg rush! /plays way too much
Dear Mr. Gunner, by Kupfernigk · 2010-10-26 08:29 · Score: 1

The thing is, sites like wikileaks are GREAT at stopping liberal democracies, while they tend to be pretty powerless against oppressive dictatorships.
And your evidence for that is?

And you’d have to be a complete moron to suggest that the US actually wanted to turn the Vietnamese into Americans.
Do you know what a straw man argument is? Because you use it.
You seem, if I may say so, to have a minor anger management problem. Using terms like "moron" does not strengthen your assertions; you clearly think name calling is an argument.
And you might consider that Vietnam was an utterly unnecessary war; Ho Chi Minh was a realist, and if the US had supported him after DBP instead of taking over from the French, he'd have been a fervent believer in liberal democracy. I suggest you learn some history - every a biased historian like Barbara Tuchman is a lot more realistic about this than you are.

--
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
1. Re:Dear Mr. Gunner, by c6gunner · 2010-10-26 10:51 · Score: 1
  
  And your evidence for that is?
  You're joking, right?
  
  Do you know what a straw man argument is? Because you use it.
  Yes, I do, and no, I don't, respectively.
  You stated that the Americans are unable to "understand that not everybody wants to be American". In the context of your narrative, the implied suggestion is that Americans wanted the Vietnamese to become Americans - otherwise that entire sentence makes no sense, and doesn't fit into the rest of the argument. Now, you can try to backpedal, if you want, and make all sorts of excuses, but nothing you say will turn my statement into a "straw man argument".
  
  You seem, if I may say so, to have a minor anger management problem. Using terms like "moron" does not strengthen your assertions; you clearly think name calling is an argument.
  No, I clearly think you're a moron; I've explained why your argument is shit.
What a research group! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-26 09:54 · Score: 0

This so called "security research group" is interesting. There is only one published article in this Israeli site, and it's the botnet claim. It seems to me a propaganda site, rather than a real research lab.
If you can also publish articles on NY times with posting a single article on a Blogspot weblog, please post a HOWTO on slashdot!