Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Anonymous Under Civil War?

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the oroboros-is-hungry dept.

Stoobalou writes "Civil war appears to have broken out in the ranks of headless 'hacktivist' collective Anonymous, with claims that a rogue admin has seized control of two key sites used to coordinate the loose-knit group's online direct action. The news follows speculation that a breakaway group of Anonymous members was responsible for the hacking attacks on Sony's PlayStation Network and Online Entertainment Network, which saw personal information, including credit card details, stolen from as many as 100 million users' accounts."

5 of 301 comments (clear)

  1. Re:It was only a matter of time by gl4ss · · Score: 5, Informative

    well.
    if ANYONE who uses a pseudo-name online has a disagreement with anyone who has a pseudo-name online, then anonymous are fighting.

    stop calling any specific group anonymous. everyone is anonymous and anonymous is everyone.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  2. What? by bmo · · Score: 5, Informative

    Oh fucking please. Anonymous was a cohesive group that is now in "civil war"?

    Anonymous is /b/ on 4chan and a bunch of other chans. There is no "leadership" - there is more or less "consensus" for varying values of "consensus" when it comes to a protest or a network attack. Anonymous is about as cohesive as a fist full of jelly.

    >Ryan

    Ryan is extremely angry because a small group of Anonymous rescued all the old data from Encyclopedia Dramatica by getting it from archive.org before Ryan could get it deleted and then put up their own mirror of the old ED wiki. That's what this is about. Nothing to see here. Move along.

    Here's the rebuilt ED wiki, hosted in Switzerland:

    http://encyclopediadramatica.ch/Main_Page

    That Ryan is raging buttmad over what "Teh Internets" has done "to him" is delicious irony.

    --
    BMO

    1. Re:What? by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Informative

      i'm not interested in killing anonymous

      i'm interesting in dispelling the dreamy mythology of wanna be teenaged anarchists about the supposed untouchability of anonymous and anarchist activity in general

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  3. Re:How is this possible? by jeff4747 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Couldn't you trivially make something hack proof by running the server in a VM, and using a hardware authentication system for accessing the server that runs the VMs?

    No.

    How are hackers going to get past a measure like that?

    Well, VM software isn't free of exploits. Nor are the other hardware and software used in your proposed solution. Plus, the infrastructure required to use RSA-style dongles isn't cheap.

    Making it hard to break into isn't the same as making it impossible to break into.

  4. Re:Stealing IP addresses? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Informative

    Anon's sites arn't actually illegal to view, so no need for a proxy unless you're bragging about your 1337 ski115. When it comes to the DoS, Anonymous relies on hideing in numbers. When you've got 10,000 script kiddies attacking, plus a couple of skilled attackers with botnets, then it's just not practical to track down and charge even a small fraction of those IP addresses. Expensive, time-consuming, and by the time it's gone through the legal system Anonymous will be on to a new target anyway.