Slashdot Mirror


MasterCard Hit By WikiLeaks Payback Attacks

An anonymous reader writes "MasterCard's website has been hit by a distributed denial of service attack. Netcraft describes how the attack uses a voluntary botnet of LOIC (low orbit ion cannon) users to swamp sites with traffic. PostFinance, the PayPal blog and Swedish prosecutors have been targeted previously."

11 of 715 comments (clear)

  1. Idiots! by santax · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't target the website, target the servers that do the money-traffic!!!!

  2. Mastercard: Thanks Slashdot by cdrudge · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And now because of Slashdot linking to MasterCard, their denial of service attack increased even more.

  3. Re:Wikileaks Vs Sites of Ill Repute by girlintraining · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Visa and Mastercard contribute loads of cash to political candidates -- you may recall recently the whole credit reform stuff making headlines? Well, Congress reached back and asked them to kill wikileaks as a return favor. Good old boys network... has nothing to do with ethics, since they have none: They're a business.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
  4. Re:why mastercard? by epiphani · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You actually make a very interesting point.

    For the purposes of elections and raising funds for a political party, monetary donation is considered an exercise of free speech. That is the premise that allowed billions of extra funds from private individuals to go towards the election without any tracking.

    Yet, financially supporting an organization deemed "terrorist" by the government is not a function of free speech. Now the lines are becoming even more blurred, given Wikileaks isn't even termed a terrorist organization. They are, however, denying the public the ability to support them financially.

    By the same logic of the courts, this should be an issue of free speech. Mastercard et al are impeding free speech.

    --
    .
  5. Re:why mastercard? by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, you see, the text of the First Amendment states "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech". In this case, instead of making a law, they're just suppressing speech by strongly suggesting to the corporations that it would be in their best interest to comply.

    With the Wikileaks case, the powers that be have demonstrated quite clearly that they don't give a damn what's legal and what's not legal. They're going to do what they're going to do, and screw the Constitution if it gets in the way.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  6. Re:Stupid action by pitchpipe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Such stupid actions will only serve to discredit Wikileaks further.

    Undoing some moderation here but I must say: BULLSHIT! The only reason the government and these companies are going after Wikileaks is because Wikileaks has dirt on them, and Wikileaks has credibility. Your statement notwithstanding.

    --
    Look where all this talking got us, baby.
  7. Re:Stupid action by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    quite rightly distancing itself from Wikileaks because of some very illegal activities.

    What is wikileaks doing that is illegal? And are they distancing themselves from the newspapers that are republishing the leaks? It's not quite right. It is a couple of very large corporations colluding to remove freedom of speech, when the speech in question reflects badly on them.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  8. Re:Stupid action by geminidomino · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Whoever is doing it, such attacks are just plain wrong. Attacking infrastructure may be harmful and amounts to terrorism

    Oh for fucks sake, NO, it doesn't!

    Terrorism is coercion through FEAR (or, dare I say it, "terror?"). It is NOT embarrassing hypocritical governments. It is NOT interfering with our corporate overlords. It is NOT inconveniencing an ignorant and apathetic populace in their yearly December feeding frenzy.

  9. dude, get a grip by falconwolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    you're comparing this to anti-segregation protests???

    Who needs to get a grip, one who equates one protest with another or one who ridicules such comparisons?

    Quite frankly voters can not make informed decisions when they are not informed. Wikileaks is informing voters of what their government is doing.

    Falcon

    Now as for "informed voters" that is another subject.

  10. Re:Stupid action by Biggseye · · Score: 5, Insightful

    this is ammo for those that wish to control the Internet. This can not end well.

  11. Re:Stupid action by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you read he cable, what it says is this: Russia wants to enact a law that would force all credit card transactions to be processed in Russia.

    Which of course is not the case in "the land of the free, home of the brave", the Glorious USA, where in the spirit of freedom and competition all credit card transactions are welcomed to be processed by assorted small companies in Russia, Finland and Monaco and are not nearly exclusively dominated by a pair of nasty anti-competitive global US-based cartels like Mastercard or Visa who own all the processing facilities almost everywhere and enjoy protection of bought-and-paid-for politicians!

    Oh, wait...