Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Anonymous Now Attacking Corporate Fax Machines

Posted by Soulskill on from the distributed-denial-of-stationary dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Anonymous has claimed responsibility for distributed denial of service attacks against several anti-WikiLeaks websites this month. In a novel twist to the campaign, Mission Leakflood has started a new DDoS attack against fax numbers belonging to Amazon, MasterCard, Moneybookers, PayPal, Visa and Tableau Software. Some numbers have already stopped responding, and Twitter and PostFinance have since been added to the target list."

22 of 410 comments (clear)

  1. A what? by jamesl · · Score: 5, Funny

    What's a Fax Machine?

    1. Re:A what? by pspahn · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's a machine that stores, retrieves, and serves Fax. Fax such as "how many licks does it take to get to the center of a tootsie pop" and "how often does Google watch me in the shower?"

      Current forms of Fax Machines are Wikipedia, and Answers.com. They serve their purpose and serve it well. Previous incarnations include the Rosetta Stone, Newpaper Rock, and the Black Monolith. While comparatively primitive by modern standards, these archaic Fax Machines undoubtedly sparked the minds of those who used them.

      Honorable mention goes to Baghdad Bob for keeping faithful to the true heart of Fax Machines, though ultimately his Fax were deemed inaccurate.

      --
      Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
    2. Re:A what? by makubesu · · Score: 4, Funny

      An additional source of confusion is that Fox uses a Faux machine to generate its stories.

  2. Not Very Anonymous by bit+trollent · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I love how all these "Anonymous" noobs are basically reporting themselves to the authorities by running Denial of Service attacks from their home computer.

    "Sorry, the FBI took all our computers dad. I was doing some 1337 hacking for 'Anonymous'"

    1. Re:Not Very Anonymous by Coldegg · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It doesn't matter... I'm not sure how much time you've spent with the police or in front of the judge, but it's really a pain. For most people, having to go through all of those things can be life impacting. It is hard enough for alot of thee people once corporations grab onto them (see DMCA, etc). It's a whole lot worse when you've pissed off the federal government and they latch on.

      It will be interesting to see how this goes down... but I have a strong feeling that there will shortly be a large numbers of household raids w/ electronics confiscations. Good luck telling them that your machine was hacked. With that defense, you might see your computer again after a few years of courthouse battle.

    2. Re:Not Very Anonymous by EdIII · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You may never see your computer again period.

      Innocence is truly not a factor in these cases. They will come down on your hard enough to "put the fear of God" in you, so that you never make the mistake of even thinking of being an activist. That is if you are truly innocent, too.

      Regardless, your computer is now evidence in another case, one that they will be building against the person that hacked your machine. Of course, that investigation could go on for years, then the inevitable court cases, multiple jurisdictions, possibly multiple countries involved, etc.

      By the time you get your computer back from the evidence room everything will be on the Internet (translation Google) and accomplished by omni-present holographic interfaces in your whole house, including the shitter. More than likely you will get a form first asking if you want to donate it to the Smithsonian.

  3. This is just going to get worse by secretcurse · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm betting this just gets worse for a while. These attacks are all being carried out for attention, and they've been generating tons of it. They even get extra credit with the several "Are the attacks over???" articles I've seen over the past two days or so. These articles are adding fuel to the fire.

    --
    I'm using all of my mod points to mod ancient memes down. Please join me.
  4. Re:Ah, Wardialing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I get this feeling that this is mostly a prank to weed out the kids, if even to amuse (or protect) the ones that know what they're doing.

    First, DDoS app used by masses of kids that don't know how to obscure who they are. Now wardialing fax machines? Not only are they more easily traced, but there are very specific laws about it (at least in the US) that have been around forever. No grey area here... people are going to find themselves in trouble. :(

  5. Mommy won't be happy... by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 5, Funny

    when the feds bust down the door to her house because you've been dialing out of her basement.

    1. Re:Mommy won't be happy... by brainfsck · · Score: 4, Interesting

      According to the instruction image, they're using an online faxing service behind a proxy.

      Seems unlikely anyone will go after dozens of kids behind international proxies.

  6. Junk faxes are against the law by rminsk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and FCC rules generally prohibit most unsolicited fax advertisements. In addition, the Junk Fax Prevention Act, passed by Congress in 2005, directs the FCC to amend its rules adopted pursuant to the TCPA regarding fax advertising.

    1. Re:Junk faxes are against the law by aBaldrich · · Score: 4, Insightful

      DDoS is against the law too. That doesn't stop them from doing it.

      --
      In soviet russia the government regulates the companies.
    2. Re:Junk faxes are against the law by Fluffeh · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and FCC rules generally prohibit most unsolicited fax advertisements. In addition, the Junk Fax Prevention Act, passed by Congress in 2005, directs the FCC to amend its rules adopted pursuant to the TCPA regarding fax advertising.

      A Black Fax doesn't advertise anything or solicit anything and therefore cannot be realistically prosecuted under either act. I did actually read the Junk Fax Prevention Act in quite a bit of detail. It specifically covers advertising of some sort, no matter how it is passed as "Savings, information, value to the customer etc..." it has to be an ad of some sort.

      So, Junk Fax Advertising is indeed against the law, but it is NOT against the law to send a fax to someone without prior dealings, or without their permission or without an "Opt out" clause.

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    3. Re:Junk faxes are against the law by Planesdragon · · Score: 4, Informative

      So, Junk Fax Advertising is indeed against the law, but it is NOT against the law to send a fax to someone without prior dealings, or without their permission or without an "Opt out" clause.

      Bollocks. It may not be against THAT law... but sending faxes with as benign an intent as annoying someone can be criminal. In NYS, for instance, you'd be violating the penal code.

      Aggravated harassment in the second degree.

        A person is guilty of aggravated harassment in the second degree when, with intent to harass, annoy, threaten or alarm another person, he or she:

        1. Either (a) communicates with a person, anonymously or otherwise by telephone, or by telegraph, mail or any other form of written communication, in a manner likely to cause annoyance or alarm; or (b) causes a communication to be initiated by mechanical or electronic means or otherwise, with a person, anonymously or otherwise, by telephone, or by telegraph, mail or any other form of written communication, in a manner likely to cause annoyance or alarm; or

        2. Makes a telephone call, whether or not a conversation ensues, with no purpose of legitimate communication; ....
        Aggravated harassment in the second degree is a class A misdemeanor.

      There may be a federal equivalent elsewhere in the law. Good rule of thumb: If it interferes with someone else, don't assume you're not violating any laws until you talk to a lawyer.

      (And don't get hang up on that "how could they figure out my intent!" argument. Near every criminal locked up in the state had a jury of their peers infer their intent. [the exceptions being those who pled guilty])

  7. Yeah - Why not add a Federal Perjury Charge... by bit+trollent · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That defense may actually work if your computer is actually part of a botnet. Otherwise, you will likely find yourself learning more about computer forensics and perjury laws. No, your not going to just be able to lie to the FBI about your computer and get away with it.

    The police / FBI may have a little trouble with 'the botnet defense' when they discover that your computer is not actually controlled by a botnet. Or is your computer under botnet control?

    For those naive enough to take 'the botnet defense' seriously:
    If the police are talking to you, you have already lost
    The kind of lawyers that can actually get you off cost alot of money
    Lying to the police is easier in theory than in practice
    Your best defense against the police is silence. Just shut your mouth and get a lawyer.

    "They can't arrest us all"
    No, but they can log all of our IP addresses and arrest whoever they want. They can't arrest every drug user, but that doesn't stop them from filling the prisons with them. If you want to stay out of trouble, you should do your best to make yourself a small target.

  8. Re:Nice blunder! by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    These large companies probably don't even have real fax machines. All a black-page fax would do is put a black-page PDF in some inbox or file share somewhere.

  9. Re:Okay that's some funny shit by tlhIngan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Actually, the best method would be to use a Black Fax rather than something like stick figures or Goatse. Better yet, not only a simple Black Fax, but one that is looped, so that it endlessly feeds itself through the fax - assuming the originator is a fax machine itself. Otherwise if the fax is originating from a computer or IP address of some sort, then multiple pages of plain monotone black - with the emphasis on MULTIPLE :)

    That hurts, but is pretty juvenile and easily dealt with.

    The best way to do it is if they faxed all those cables that Wikileaks has released. Black pages can be recycled easily. Sensitive data? That has to be shredded. And people who aren't supposed to be looking at these things may end up seeing them.

    Imagine all the banks and Paypal and Amazon having to now deal with printouts of all the cables themselves - do they shred them? Recycle them without shredding? Also imagine people who shouldn't be looking at them looking at them accidentally (like all those trying to apply for federal jobs).

    DDoS the fax? Doesn't do much. But use the fax to DDoS the company is more interesting because someone has to handle the document in the end, and they have to look at the incoming fax to determine routing. They may have to read the cables whether they want to or not to figure out if it's something to can or forward. Black pages - canned easily (and since it's all electronic these days, costs disk space). But pages and pages of readable material...

  10. Re:Ah, Wardialing by Amouth · · Score: 4, Interesting

    the law states that i can't falsify who i am when faxing - and that at the receivers request i must stop sending unsolicited faxes.

    problem is... if i'm always busy (dialing your fax number) you can't exactly call me to ask me to stop - nor can you fax me to ask me.. best they can do and is within the law is to call the bell and request either an operator override and block the number and have the bell send the request.

    either way given the short window given for this DoS as long as people aren't trying to hide who they are when sending them then they aren't breaking the law.

    --
    '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
  11. Why attack Twitter? by TimFreeman · · Score: 4, Informative

    Why attack twitter? http://www.twitter.com/wikileaks seems to be working fine, and the explanation at http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/06/why-wont-wikileaks-t.html#comment-958285 for why Wikileaks didn't appear in trending topics makes sense to me. Everyone seems to agree that #cablegate did trend. The issue of why Twitter should be attacked is not mentioned at all in the original article.

  12. Re:Ah, Wardialing by Jurily · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You seem to think that the US == the entire world.

    You seem to think geography matters when the big dogs want to put you behind bars. Just ask Julian.

  13. Re:Ah, Wardialing by jeff4747 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Assuming myfax is "the bad guys", then yes.

    Otherwise, you've managed to destroy an innocent company.

    Go team!

  14. Re:I AM SPARTACUS - google civil disobediance by eriqk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a million geeks saying I AM ANONYMOUS just like the guys saying I AM SPARTACUS in that old movie.

    You do know how that ended, right?