Slashdot Mirror


LulzSec Announces That It Is Done

MaxBooger writes "LulzSec, the notorious hacker group that's been on a rampage, just announced that it's disbanding. This follows 50 days' chaos during which time it took down several websites (including CIA.gov at one point), exposed passwords, exposed documents of the Arizona penal system, and at one point threatened to hit Too Big To Fail banks. Obviously, it's possible that the group will not abide by its promise to quit. Nobody knows."

265 of 412 comments (clear)

  1. as the saying goes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    if you cant stand the heat, get your @$$ out the kitchen

    1. Re:as the saying goes by Libertarian001 · · Score: 1

      I believe that's what they're doing.

    2. Re:as the saying goes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      The funny part is if they didn't disband and a significant number got nailed, everyone would be saying how stupid they were for not quitting while they were ahead.

      Course that's not to say a significant number won't get nailed eventually anyway, just noting that crowds are fun

    3. Re:as the saying goes by Phasma+Felis · · Score: 1, Troll

      Can't everyone be right? Maybe they're both cowards and idiots.

    4. Re:as the saying goes by Z00L00K · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They have made their point for now, isn't that sufficient?

      The point is clearly that no system connected to the internet is secure, and that it can be cracked given enough skills. So the best protection against a very competent attack is to avoid angering people.

      And even if you don't you shall design your systems with a multi-layered approach in mind to avoid massive breaches. Don't allow the presentation layer direct access to the database with sensitive information. Don't use the same authorization database for the web UI for administrative tasks. And if you run an application server (like tomcat) - run it under a security manager/policy that limits access to other services in case someone is able to install something malicious in the application server. You can apply a security policy to Tomcat, and that will at least slow down an attacker considerably since the attacker then needs to gain knowledge of the system. And if you add tripwires in the system that can block attackers automatically if tripped then you make things even harder. Three to five tries and the IP address is shut off for an hour.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    5. Re:as the saying goes by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Go back to 4chan, that's the heaven for AC:s who loves tits and kitchen utensils.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    6. Re:as the saying goes by Angostura · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The point is clearly that no system connected to the internet is secure, and that it can be cracked given enough skills.

      That would have been the point if there was any evidence that they had used particularly sophisticated attacks. The actual point seems to be that quite a few systems are secured in a fairly amateurish way and still subject to SQL injection, for example.

    7. Re:as the saying goes by xelah · · Score: 1

      So the best protection against a very competent attack is to avoid angering people.

      How? The world is full of angry people. There are religious nutters who hate atheists, religious nutters who hate the US, religious nutters who hate other religious nutters, governments who hate anyone in certain other countries, criminals who hate the police, anti-capitalists who hate everyone who won't give away all their money and teenagers who hate everyone. This is something which needs a combined legal and technical response, not a give up and hide response.

    8. Re:as the saying goes by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 2

      No, the point is that they are a bunch of internet tough guy bullies and once their "dox" started coming out, they turned tail and ran. They are going to try to hide, but now that those they have attacked have information on them, they are going to be hunted down.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    9. Re:as the saying goes by mcgrew · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, not the point at all. LulzSec is (was?) a vigilante group fighting organizations they perceive as evil. What they did to Sony was exactly the same thing Sony did to me, and Sony did it with no repercussions at all. The banks have been stealing from all of us for decades, and the government rewarded them with bailouts for it. I'm not sure I agree with the Arizona breaches, but most of what they did were good things.

    10. Re:as the saying goes by kikito · · Score: 1

      Their point is that they are dickheads.

    11. Re:as the saying goes by gearloos · · Score: 1

      ^this Exactly. I tried to get the Sony point across countless times but it just seems to always fall on Fanboi deaf ears of people with more money than brains. The result? Next year I'm sure Sony will have record profits. Go figure.

      --
      "Computers are a lot like Air Conditioners" "They both work great until you start opening Windows"
    12. Re:as the saying goes by The+Dawn+Of+Time · · Score: 1

      It's instructive that this got modded all the way down. The Slashdot community's love of certain types of criminal behavior is... unsettling.

    13. Re:as the saying goes by 1s44c · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Their point was never that 'nothing is secure'. They used simple well known attacks and a lot of humor.

      I see their points as:

      1) Validate user input.
      2) Don't reuse passwords.
      3) The first two rules apply to everyone including government contractors.
      4) If we can get your details so can, and so have, other groups.
      5) So called whitehats are corrupt by nature.
      6) It's still possible to be anonymous on the internet if you know what you are doing.
      7) Cloudflare works well.
      8) We are laughing at you.
      9) j3st3r ( or however you spell it ) is a script kiddie who writes very bad PHP.
      10) Send us some cash via bitcoin.
      11) PROFIT!

    14. Re:as the saying goes by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      Their point is that they are dickheads.

      Maybe. But what's better:

      Lulzsec: A bad guy who steals a bunch of details and publicly laughs at the company who let them get stolen so easily.

      Normal Hacker: A bad guy who steals your details and wipes out your internet banking account.

    15. Re:as the saying goes by kikito · · Score: 1

      The second is worse. And someone who kills my family in front of me and then burns me alive is worse than that. Your point?

    16. Re:as the saying goes by 1s44c · · Score: 2

      The second is worse. And someone who kills my family in front of me and then burns me alive is worse than that. Your point?

      I thought my point was obvious. Lulzsec have drawn attention to security issues that can be easily fixed. This might just encourage people with these kinds of security issues to fix them before the really bad guys turn up.

      Granted that may not have been their intention, we will never be sure.

    17. Re:as the saying goes by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, there's a saying "in for a penny, in for a pound" in that if your name comes up on even one of the attacks, the FBI is tagging you for ALL of them, and all the damage other crackers did with the information all your friends released.

      When you are on the hook for 50K+ instances of felony stealing $100-$500 you trigger special provisions for mass-crime and for repeat offenders so the 5-10 charges they make stick get 2x-3x multipliers plus mandatory minimum sentences, plus the tags for multiple offenses, repeat offenses which gets to multiple 20-30 year MINIMUM terms served CONSECUTIVELY. They fucked with bankers... they're in DEEP shit.

    18. Re:as the saying goes by lonecrow · · Score: 1

      Or make a big splash then accept high paying gig in new Cyber Warfare division.

    19. Re:as the saying goes by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      The point is clearly that no system connected to the internet is secure, and that it can be cracked given enough skills. So the best protection against a very competent attack is to avoid angering people.

      Yes, because everyone gets angry about exactly the same things, on which we're all agreed.

      You are a fucking moron.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    20. Re:as the saying goes by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      What I find galling is when the fanbois mod you "troll" for pointing out how incredibly evil Sony is. XCP, OtherOS, insecure servers, yet these idiots keep buying Sony. I can understand "normal" people buying Sony, but I can't for the life of me understand why a nerd would even buy a Sony product, let alone be a fanboi.

    21. Re:as the saying goes by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      I smell a troll here, no need to do the moron call.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    22. Re:as the saying goes by smelch · · Score: 1

      If you think this changes anything you're wrong. It's not like web developers didn't know about SQL injection. It's not like web developers didn't know they shouldn't just trust values in a query string (or in the post, Fiddler is easy as shit to use). They just don't do it because it's slightly more inconvenient. Manager's still don't know what the hell SQL injection is or how to protect against it, they just take their developers word for it that it is secure.

      Try to get a security fix in to a site you develop for by explaining "In case somebody like LulzSec comes around, we should probably spend a release cycle cleaning up all of our database calls by validating the user's access to any given data item and any given action before performing it" and management will laugh at you. The same for sanitizing inputs to SQL queries, and/or converting to stored procedures.

      --
      If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
  2. Good for them by OopsIDied · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Quitting while they're ahead.

    1. Re:Good for them by Zerth · · Score: 4, Funny

      In other news, mysterious hacker group YhymFrp has announced their intentions to continue what LulzSec started.

    2. Re:Good for them by DemonGenius · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Rational people know not to strive for a Pyrrhic victory.

    3. Re:Good for them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In other news, mysterious hacker group YhymFrp has announced their intentions to continue what LulzSec started.

      Rot13, huh?
      You're doing it wrong. You are supposed to encode it twice, for better encryption.

    4. Re:Good for them by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      Now could slashdot stop feeding the attention whores with 2 stories per day, pretty please?

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    5. Re:Good for them by music65536 · · Score: 1

      I agree. "So long and thanks for all the Lulz."

    6. Re:Good for them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      YhymFrp? That's a very cryptic name.

    7. Re:Good for them by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

      Now that was a bad pun.

    8. Re:Good for them by RyuhoKudo · · Score: 1

      Thx for mentioning this, I was pretty confused at first.

  3. err by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The brightest flame burns quickest. I'm surprised things even got this far.

  4. Good by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As much as I'm for protests and such, these kids were just out to cause harm because they could. They need to get a legitimate cause, and stop pissing on ( innocent ) people randomly, or be gone.

    They give the rest of us a bad name.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:Good by trapnest · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >implying all kinds of things

    2. Re:Good by bennett000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As much as I'm for protests and such, these kids were just out to cause harm because they could. They need to get a legitimate cause, and stop pissing on ( innocent ) people randomly, or be gone.

      They give the rest of us a bad name.

      Aside from doxing Arizona law enforcement, what harm did they really cause? They've really just managed to point out a lot of trivial security flaws... I suppose one could argue that they cost Sony billions of dollars, but fighting Sony was a legitimate cause...

    3. Re:Good by girlintraining · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      They need to get a legitimate cause, and stop pissing on ( innocent ) people randomly, or be gone.

      I fail to see how anything they did could be justified even if it was for a 'legitimate' cause. Taking away others' ability to participate in the community [network] is universally wrong. You lose the moral high ground and then some doing that.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    4. Re:Good by arth1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I fail to see how anything they did could be justified even if it was for a 'legitimate' cause. Taking away others' ability to participate in the community [network] is universally wrong.

      But they didn't. Sony did that, as a knee-jerk reaction. Don't blame LulzSec for Sony's ill-considered response.

    5. Re:Good by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      sounds like SOMEONE made a $600 mistake buying a PS3

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    6. Re:Good by ifiwereasculptor · · Score: 3, Funny

      In the US of A where they were born and raised
      Corporations pleased customers on most of their days
      Chilling out, maxing, relaxing all cool
      While employing people fresh out of the school
      When a couple of hackers, they were up to no good
      Started making trouble in their neighborhood
      They got in one little fight and the prez got scared
      He said "we're going to war, it's not like anyone cared"

    7. Re:Good by value_added · · Score: 1

      They serve the Laughing God. There is a definite, divine purpose. You just don't understand it.

      God, huh? Let me try ...

      Lulzsec, peace be upon them.

      Hmm. Doesn't work, does it? I'll come in again.

      Let us praise God. O Lord...
      O Lord... ...Ooh, You are so big... ...So absolutely huge.
      Gosh, we're all really impressed down here, I can tell You.
      Forgive us, O Lord, for this, our dreadful toadying, and...
      And barefaced flattery.
      But You are so strong and, well, just so super.
      Fantastic.
      Amen.

      A bit better, but still doesn't work.

      Sorry, mate. If there's greater principle at work here, or a something that's worshipped, I'd suggest it's narcissism. But then, that's a pathology, isn't it? Or more charitably, a character defect common to those not out of adolescence.

    8. Re:Good by vgerclover · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There are no innocent people.

      "I believe in karma! It means that I can do mean things to people ALL DAY and assume they deserve it! - Dogbert

    9. Re:Good by mustPushCart · · Score: 1

      Are you seeing what the are releasing? I am currently dowloading hte battlefield heroes userdata to see if I am on it. I have to take time out of my life to do shit like this cos they released user data. If they had just withheld the usernames and passwords and threatned the source with releasing them if they didnt up their security I would have been much much happier... and supportive.

    10. Re:Good by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      But they didn't. Sony did that, as a knee-jerk reaction. Don't blame LulzSec for Sony's ill-considered response.

      Wait, knocking a MMO offline because they partnered with Sony is okay, because Sony did it first? What kind of argument is that!?

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    11. Re:Good by bennett000 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I am currently dowloading hte battlefield heroes userdata to see if I am on it. I have to take time out of my life to do shit like this cos they released user data. If they had just withheld the usernames and passwords and threatned the source with releasing them if they didnt up their security I would have been much much happier... and supportive.

      Well if you're smart you use unique passwords for your online services, so log in and change your password. Give Visa/Mastercard/Amex or whomever a quick call, tell them what happened. Problem solved.

      Imagine for a second hackers more malicious than the LulzBoat stole your data (especially financial data), they probably wouldn't publicly post it, they'd sell it, or use it in other ways that are far more aggravating than spending five minutes changing a password, and/or a telephone call to your credit card company.... Granted this still doesn't make the Lulz crew's actions 'right', but there are SERIOUS online crimes going down every second...

      the worst part about the Lulz debacle isn't the possible net regulation the future holds... that's speculation. the worst part is the REAL criminals are still flying under the radar hacking the RSA, Lockheed Martin, etc...

    12. Re:Good by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      They are part of the problem. You may be familiar with the Christian Bible and it's statement that "God" dislikes lukewarm people... Similar concept. Pick a side.

      I'm Buddhist you insensitive clod and I choose the Middle Way!

      *Squish* like grape.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    13. Re:Good by Lesrahpem · · Score: 2

      Who says the Laughing God has anything to do with the writings of a bunch of drugged out desert people? You are exceedingly narrow minded if you think that only "The Bible" is a legitimate religious text and that all religious and philosophical discussion should be viewed in context to it. After all, it is the oldest religious text known to man, you know, aside from the Baghavad Gita, the pyramid texts, and the Enuma Elish.

      I don't see where you get that I am justifying anything... They claim to be doing this for "the lulz", as in, they are doing it in the name of humor. Humor is the one force in this universe that can never, ever, ever be evil. Humor always improves all situations, regardless of anything else.

    14. Re:Good by Lesrahpem · · Score: 2

      You assume that the Laughing God picks one side or the other... Humor does not pick a side, it points out the merits and flaws of all sides to the potential benefit to all sides involved.

    15. Re:Good by Lesrahpem · · Score: 1

      Who said their behavior is righteous? I don't believe I used the word righteous anywhere in my comment. If you are equating righteousness and divine purpose to be the same, then you are saying that the antichrist and Lucifer are righteous, since without them serving their divine purpose the events described in Revelation cannot happen.

    16. Re:Good by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      But they didn't. Sony did that, as a knee-jerk reaction. Don't blame LulzSec for Sony's ill-considered response.

      Wait, knocking a MMO offline because they partnered with Sony is okay, because Sony did it first? What kind of argument is that!?

      A strawman argument.

    17. Re:Good by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      "The lulz" is a concept that is as far from the sort of humor that never can be evil as possible. The "lulz" are the domain of the trickster, of Loki or Coyote, and those guys operate in a moral gray zone beyond good and evil.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    18. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They released a lot of information about completely innocent people, including real names, passwords, street addresses, phone numbers and so on.

      Well shit dude, most of that information is available in the phone book if you didn't know and it has been for years. Especially for "the elderly" who have not moved house since forever and published their information long before it was necessary to protect it from aggressive marketers

    19. Re:Good by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      Are you sure this metaphor is meant to be applied only to a particular church? It would be strange, don't you think, that such a letter would be written to all the churches if it were meant for only one of them? Also, it is addressed to "the angel of the church in Laodicea", so would you tell me that it's actually just for a particular angel to hear, and therefore not applicable to you?

      And why are you so certain that it's about said Church "not providing any benefit or blessing to those around them."? I just reread that paragraph several times, and I was not able to glean anything of the sort from it. It doesn't mention those around you at all. In fact, it focuses exclusively on your state, and the suggested remedy involves buying things from God and talking to God. It literally says nothing about providing a benefit anyone else. It seems that if you find yourself to be lukewarm you are commanded here, in no uncertain terms, to purchase salvation from God and to seek his consul. Providing benefit to those around you is not even a part of the equation as far as this letter is concerned.

    20. Re:Good by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      on the internet, or in the world in general, there is no universally legitimate cause. except doing it for the lulz - that is something parts of every culture can understand and relate to.

      it's not like the thought holes they exposed were created by them, besides, running a phone answer service? even gaddafi would have to respect that kind of rudeness. the sony stuff could have been out for years - the info just didn't happen to have been spread. and if they get caught, they can always pull some crazy card out, because obviously, you're crazy if can do such stuff and actually do it(because blabla 'could have made fortunes' with the effort put into it).

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    21. Re:Good by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      Sorry, but I disagree. I think these kids are doing good work that needs doing. Not sure about the Arizona crhacks, but I certainly am for bringing Sony down. What they did to Sony was karma, payback for thousands of us who Sony crhacked with their XCP trojan.

      I'd like to see them (or somebody) go after the Delaware cell phone telemarketing spammers at 302-394-6964. Those bastards called my cell phone ten times Friday and 12 timed Thursday. It was just an annoyance to me, as I have a flat fee plan, but it undoubtedly cost most people they robocalled money. A google search showed that there are a lot of people affected by these sociopaths, but I haven't heard about any law enforcement or government action against them. Vigilante action is warranted, since any more the US and state governments don't seem to care what kind of evil corporations do as long as they get their campaign bribes.

      LulSec gone? That's a shame, they're needed.

    22. Re:Good by Angostura · · Score: 2

      The ultimate in relativism. "We can't be bothered to think about the nuances of good and bad, everyone is flawed, we'll tear everything down nah-nah-nah-I-can't-hear-you".

      A pathetic justification for intellectual laziness.

    23. Re:Good by Lesrahpem · · Score: 1

      You are both right and wrong here. You are 100% correct, coming from the standpoint and perspective that is available to you. For this, I respect you and give you props. Now, please allow me to explain what I mean when I say that the Laughing God I refer to is not like Loki or Coyote.

      Loki and Coyote enjoy what they do and do it primarily for that reason. The Laughing God does it just for the sake of humor and has no personal desires. Anyway, all three mentioned here serve the purpose of breaking up stagnation and stalemates.

    24. Re:Good by Lesrahpem · · Score: 1

      There is more to this universe than your very limited and human concepts of good and evil. The real enemies of your existence are stagnation and oblivion, both of which are the enemies the Laughing God fights. These two forces are beyond good and evil.

    25. Re:Good by kikito · · Score: 1

      A group of gansters enters a shop, beats the person in charge with a baseball, and leaves. The guy goes to the hospital.

      And you want me to be angry at the manager because he didn't open the shop the next day. What is wrong with you?

    26. Re:Good by biodata · · Score: 1

      Noone got injured or suffered any violence of any kind, (with the possible exception of Ryan, we don't know yet). Get over these stupid violence/stealing/terrorism analogies, they are irrelevant and designed to make all this sound worse than it was.

      --
      Korma: Good
    27. Re:Good by kikito · · Score: 1

      To me, *your* comment is irrelevant and stupid. Go hide somewhere.

    28. Re:Good by The+Dawn+Of+Time · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and if that girl wasn't walking around with a vagina, she might not have been raped. Stupid victims.

    29. Re:Good by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Noone got injured or suffered any violence of any kind, (with the possible exception of Ryan, we don't know yet). Get over these stupid violence/stealing/terrorism analogies, they are irrelevant and designed to make all this sound worse than it was.

      Okey dokey, I'm sure you won't care when your bank account gets emptied because it's not real physical violence.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    30. Re:Good by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but I disagree. I think these kids are doing good work that needs doing. Not sure about the Arizona crhacks, but I certainly am for bringing Sony down. What they did to Sony was karma, payback for thousands of us who Sony crhacked with their XCP trojan.

      If Sony did anything illegal they should be pursued through the courts. Otherwise it's just vigilantism, which sounds fine until it's your bank account details and password that get posted on the internet.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    31. Re:Good by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      That was my point; XCP was blatantly illegal, yet they suffered no repurcussions at all when they should have gone to prison for it. In some situations, IMO, vigilanteism is justified. Look at some history; the cited vigialantism was certainly justified, and IMO so was this. The reason nobody from Sony went to prison for "accessing a protected computer system" was because of corruption.

      And IMO (agree or disagree, it's your right) anybody who would trust their information to an organization who would deliberately install malware on your computer, who would remove a feature you paid for after you've paid for the device is begging to get burned.

      Had Sony not done this, had Citi (and other big banks) not ran forclosure rackets, and/or had they been hacked despite doing their best to keep your information secure (and they didn't), I'd agree with you.

      And consider this -- if it's your information that was publically disclosed, the commerial black hats already had that information and were selling it. That's what they DO, but you wouldn't have known it without LulzSec. At least now you know you're in danger, and should thank these kids for making it obvious to you.

    32. Re:Good by biodata · · Score: 1

      More irrelevance. Nobody stole anything here.

      --
      Korma: Good
  5. Whew! by willoughby · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now we can finally bring the troops home.

  6. Cui bono? by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So, when the dust settles, what's left to ask is simply: Who benefits from it?

    I predict some new laws...

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Cui bono? by techsoldaten · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, something tells me this is in response to legal activity. There are surely going to be new laws, probably not ones specifically in response to hacking activity, but others that allow various governments all sorts of access to records to track down hackers.

      This will cause 'innovation' in the hacking scene, where people adapt to the new laws and develop new technologies that circumvent them and make them more challenging to implement. Hackers are simply going to go further 'underground' and be harder to track.

      This, in turn, it going to lead to a number of high profile hacks of large services who have not matured in terms of how they secure their services. This will make the news, government officials will make unfortunate comments that draw the attention of various hacker groups, who will lash out through their newly developed anonymity.

      In turn, this is going to result in new laws... stop me if you heard this before.

    2. Re:Cui bono? by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      Yeah, plus ca change.

      I think they made a laughing stock outta the billion dollar budgets of a lot of pseudo "security" experts in a random assault, kind of like digital "wilding".

      Now, it's time to make consulting money.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    3. Re:Cui bono? by TimTucker · · Score: 2

      Well, something tells me this is in response to legal activity. There are surely going to be new laws, probably not ones specifically in response to hacking activity, but others that allow various governments all sorts of access to records to track down hackers.

      The idealist in me wants to believe that we could also get more laws passed holding corporations more accountable for lax security.

    4. Re:Cui bono? by Lesrahpem · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Please allow me to draw attention to something I wrote almost exactly one year ago. It is highly pertinent to this matter. More so than might be obvious with just a quick read. Pay special attention to the specific words used and how they relate to recent events. Here is a link, and below is some copy pasta, served up just for you. http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2010/Jul/340

      Dear Uncle Sam:

      Apparently the United States is having some issues with its “cyber
      command”effort.
      This is my way of helping you out and contributing to your so-called
      “home front”. I believe the following dissertation generally reflects the
      current stance of my community in regard to your troubles. When I say
      community I am referring to hackers, the modern alchemists, wizards, and
      artists whose fore-bearers built this great nation of technology you now
      stand and rely upon.

      You make everything we are interested in illegal. As a result we are forced
      to be criminals if we want to learn the particular set of survival traits,
      commonly known as hacking. Sure there are “white hats” out there who possess
      the knowledge and skill to stop the types of attacks they, themselves, can
      come up with. They will happily work for you and do whatever you tell them.
      However, while you are sheltered within your own personal paradigmal bubble
      where all the children play nicely, the real world, 2.0 perhaps, awaits you
      outside. Out here in the real world you have been giving us the shaft in
      every way shape and form possible to discourage others from becoming like
      us.

      You didn’t want more of us. You didn’t want us to do what we know is right.
      You wanted to use us as a resource or a munition. You make the things we are
      interested in illegal so those of us who chose to learn any way are under
      your theoretical control. We’re legally criminals so we must comply with you
      and do as you like or we will go to jail.

      Now that you have exhausted your arsenal of fear, uncertainty, and doubt,
      you’ve come to realize you have some very troubling issues, the least of
      which is that your aging titanic, system of information exchange is at once
      your greatest strength and most needed crutch.

      I know you like the *bottom line*, so I’ll state it here in a language you
      can understand: We are pretty angry about how you have treated us over the
      last few decades, especially since September 11 of 2001. You have made our
      culture illegal. Now you want us to help you. You want us to conform to your
      standards and ways of living, thinking, and acting so we can protect you
      from the machinations of foreign minds.

      Do you really feel that we have any obligation or incentive to do such a
      thing? It benefits us in no tangible way to help you solve your mess. The
      more time goes on, the less and less we actually need or have any use for
      you.

      Is it so hard to approach us with the same respect and dignity you would any
      other nation? After all, while we may not technically own land or have an
      army, we are a force you know must be reckoned with. If you would approach
      us as you do other nations when you are in need perhaps we would feel better
      about exporting our natural resources: the knowledge necessary to correctly
      and securely provide and maintain the infrastructure you use for well, just
      about everything.

      I shall let this writ float along the aether, and perhaps some day, some
      way, it will reach some one who can do simple math.

      In parting, I must give you a brief history lesson; a reminder really: This
      war will be no different than every other war waged with wizards.

    5. Re:Cui bono? by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Huh? Why would it?

      The ones that do not understand and are not affected by the hacks won't care. They will not realize anything.

      The ones that understand already knew it. They will not realize anything new.

      The ones that do not understand but were affected (e.g. by having their credit card exposed) will welcome the laws and feel protected. They will not realize anything ever.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re:Cui bono? by cavreader · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Consulting Money? These ass hats did not do anything worth hiring them for. Re-packaged SQL injection and DDOS attacks are strictly amateur hour.

    7. Re:Cui bono? by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      I didn't say they were clever.

      I didn't say consultants were clever.

      But someone needs to remind a bunch of people how to do parsers and isolate data types.

      As regards DDoS, defense is a whole other strategy. Yes, you can recover. Yes, it's ugly for a few minutes. But it's survivable. And remember: most of these attacks got inside, not just hosed their TCP transports. They phished inside, got some dirty laundry, and hung it out to dry. They enjoyed watching orgs get punked.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    8. Re:Cui bono? by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Oh so you've been all over that fbi, cia and senate shit already, huh?

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    9. Re:Cui bono? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Their true position? A few more years and they can start badgering for minority group protection.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    10. Re:Cui bono? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      The realist in me realizes that such laws will first of all not be forthcoming, and second of all, even if they were, wouldn't do a thing. Or, worse, hit the wrong ones.

      Laws "against" corporations are a matter of money. Nothing more, nothing less. If someone goes to jail for it, some scapegoat will. So that certainly never had any impact on corporations. And the money involved is a cost/risk factor. How much to secure against the risk, how much to pay if it happens, how likely is it to happen? I.e. simple risk management. Once these questions are answered, you'll notice that most corporations, at least once they reach some noticeable size, will simply shrug said laws off and bear the risk, since it's cheaper, while smaller companies will have to protect themselves (and hence spend money and be less competitive, and most likely get gobbled up in the long run) because for them the fine imposed would break their neck.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    11. Re:Cui bono? by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, and you'd be amazed in how many companies amateurs are at the helm of security. Or rather, how little money and how much burden the average C(I)SO gets on his back that he simply cannot run the required security audits. Bluntly speaking, to get security up to par, the average corporation would at least have to double, more likely triple, its security staff.

      Security is a lip service business. Much like insurance. You do what law dictates, not a penny more is spent on it. If the law doesn't dictate that you have to be secure against SQL injections and DDoS attacks, it's mostly a matter of luck and whether the programmer writing the piece of software does it automatically, which in turn again is unlikely because it certainly is neither part of the testing nor of the final inspection protocol. Even if, there simply is no time for more than a cursory glance, so in effect the burden of blame is shifted on some scapegoat, most likely one of the CSOs underlings. Or, lacking said underlings, the CSO.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    12. Re:Cui bono? by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Compliance has nothing to do with security. Compliance has something to do with laws. Creating laws take time, creating auditing checkbox-ticker-tests take more time and filling them out takes some more time. We're talking months here. By the time you start ticking off checkboxes (assuming that you were fully compliant from the start, which in my 10+ years now never happened, not a single time) you're already about 8-12 months behind the reason the law was passed for.

      And a year is a long, long, long time in IT security.

      You may rest assured that all companies that got sacked were fully compliant with laws and regulations concerning security. Which essentially means jack when it comes to "real" IT security the way the average geek would think of it. Don't mix compliance with security, they're two very different beasts and sadly, the former is more important to the average CEO than the latter. Because there's very specific laws for the former, but usually just very diffuse ones for the latter.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    13. Re:Cui bono? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hopefully new laws will piss off more people enough that something decent (read: overhaul) will get done.

    14. Re:Cui bono? by Angostura · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm going to be benefit since it will help me get the CEO to take internet security a bit more seriously and move it up the priority list before rolling out new Web-based features that interface with internal systems. I suspect I'm not the only one.

    15. Re:Cui bono? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Possibly even to the extent that said CEO will decide that it's just not profitable to roll out new Web-based features. Many businesses ran pretty well on old isolated LANs for decades, and many could continue to do so.

      Sucks to be the guy who thought he was a web developer, but who better go put a new toner in the fucking LJet4 in accounting. Chop-chop now, IT dude.

    16. Re:Cui bono? by Tempest451 · · Score: 1

      I guess I can use that argument when I rob a bank. Just chalk it up to testing their lax security.

    17. Re:Cui bono? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      It's not an excuse. It's an explanation. Where security is weak, the incentive to test it with the intent to overcome it and benefit from it is high. Look at bank robberies today and a century ago, I guess you'll notice that they were more likely to happen those 100 years ago. Today, you'd be better off robbing a 7/11.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    18. Re:Cui bono? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Unlikely. His question will be "how much will the damage be", and what he means is "for how much are we legally liable". Since the change is simply nonexistent, the incentive to push more money into security is pretty much nil as well.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    19. Re:Cui bono? by cavreader · · Score: 1

      Security is a moving target that continues to present new threats on a daily basis. At minimum any company that collects and stores personal customer data should be held responsible if that data is compromised. At a bare minimum any company who does not keep their systems updated with all of the available security patches covering the OS, applications, and firmware should be held liable for damages. For large systems this is a huge undertaking but it is not unreasonable if you expect to store personal data. The risk of damaging existing applications should be declared secondary to the security concerns. The biggest excuse today, especially for big companies, is that it takes time to test the updates before deployment and this opens a window of vulnerability. This one rule would reduce the number of breaches substantially. A company would not be held to the same level of responsibility for 0-day exploits, physical intrusion attacks, or theft of information needed to exploit security holes.

    20. Re:Cui bono? by HappyEngineer · · Score: 2

      Simple code reviews can find SQL injections quite easily. Just search for the method names for executing queries then make sure that there are NEVER string concatenations which include user input.

      It's all really quite simple. Use parameters for every query and you'll never have a problem with SQL injection unless the DB library itself has a hole (much less likely than the possibility that your home grown validation code has a hole in it).

      Where I work I do this regularly. Every now and then I find crap like "foo="+ someParam in the code. When I do I call them on it loudly and publicly (in a reasonably nice way). I make sure all the developers in my group hear my criticisms. It's the only way to staunch this sort of dangerous behavior.

      I don't care if you think you've validated it. I'm not going to waste time triple checking every place that parameter is used. It's very simple to just use parameters and be almost 100% safe from SQL injection.

    21. Re:Cui bono? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Lobbyist: Lament, lament, rant, international competitiveness, lament, rant...

      Do I have to elaborate or is it evident why this will never happen?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    22. Re:Cui bono? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      I guess I can use that argument when I rob a bank. Just chalk it up to testing their lax security.

      Someone will no doubt now point out that robbing a bank is physical theft, whilst hacking into it is just moving ones and zeroes around, and therefore not even a crime because even if you transfer a billion dollars into your own account, it's not real money since we left the gold standard.
      Or something.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  7. Brazil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This group is taking down many Brazilian government sites. Local Federal police is investigating.

  8. Exactly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Once their names started coming out, and their chat logs started being dumped, they sure did tuck their tail and run away quickly.

    1. Re:Exactly by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      Good luck kiddies, the FBI may move slow, but they've got a decade to catch you for this 2 months of fame... and no doubt they WILL be spending at least 5 years hunting them down long after the thrill is gone.

  9. hmm by Dyinobal · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So the government project is done? did the government funded attacks, spark enough outrage to get new laws passed by the senate and house regardless of their long term damage?

    1. Re:hmm by JWW · · Score: 1

      What pisses me off most is that these new laws will be bad for ALL users of the Internet.

      It would be hard for me to convinced that there won't be more harm than good that will come from their actions.

    2. Re:hmm by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      Called it.

      I can't help but think that this is exactly what I would do if I were a once hacktivist turned undercover government agent trying to further the polictical agenda of censorship.
      ...
      What do you want to bet that LulzSec is taken down as soon as the powers that be wish them down, and that no real damage will come of their attacks?

      What did LulzSec accomplish? They raised the general public's awareness of the dangers of "hackers".

      It should be easy to point to their "attacks" when trying to pass more strict legislation now: "It could happen to You!"

    3. Re:hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Called what? That another slashdotter would think the same as you. Why the conspiracy theory when the simple answer, that they're a bunch of script kiddie wanna-be hackers that the law started to crack down on-fits so much better? They got one of them in the UK. How fast can they now start getting the rest? Pretty fast, unless you really believe LulzSec was some uber hacking organization. Face it, they are a bunch of dipsticks that feasted on poorly maintained websites (Bioware's old server but not the new one?). Couple that with the threat of incarceration and the Lulz just ain't worth it. That's what they did it for. Lulz, fame, and fun, not some huge civil right. "Raise the general public's awareness of the dangers of 'hackers'?" No, they didn't care anything about that so why pin that goal onto them? They did what they did for the Lulz and now want out before it gets "serious."

      I don't know why you want some grand conspiracy. Some no-name jackasses decided it would be fun to get the media and US government into a tizzy. They did. They got their name in the paper. Some fame, and now they want out. Why is that so impossible while a multi-national super-secret espionage style internal government hacking ring is your first thought?

    4. Re:hmm by Americium · · Score: 1

      I think the conspiracy he meant was more like one government hacker, not a multi-national super-secret ring, that was Stuxnet.

    5. Re:hmm by Americium · · Score: 1

      But it could happen to you, and hackers are a serious threat to our national security and our economy, especially Chinese government sponsored hackers.

    6. Re:hmm by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 1

      Paranoid delusional much?

  10. Re:Interesting, not ironic by etymxris · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yes, and they had a document release planned for Monday. Something must have just happened.

  11. Re:Cowards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What, life get too hard? Clearly someone got close to kicking them out of the game, and they ran before that would happen.

    Win the war, not the battle.

    Live to fight another day.

    I can think of others. Basically sounds like a smart idea to me.

  12. What timing... by downhole · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't remember them ever saying anything about limiting their hack-spree to 50 days. Sounds like they've pissed enough people off that they're starting to get ID'ed and arrested, and are hoping they can quit before it gets really bad. They're a bunch of weenies all right, but I don't think it's over for them. I for one will be lulzing my ass off when they all get caught and sent to pound-me-in-the-ass prison.

    --
    I don't reply to ACs
    1. Re:What timing... by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Sounds like they've pissed enough people off that they're starting to get ID'ed and arrested

      Or their asses kicked.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    2. Re:What timing... by jcwayne · · Score: 1

      Don't be so cynical. They just couldn't be sure of internet access at summer camp.

      --
      Failure to follow this advice may result in non-deterministic behavior.
    3. Re:What timing... by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      Not even remotely.

      If they were at risk, why would they post on the web and announce they're stopping or how would they even have the chance, for that matter?

    4. Re:What timing... by qzak · · Score: 1

      No tagbacks? King's X?

    5. Re:What timing... by Xest · · Score: 1

      So to you they're a bunch of "weenies".

      Tell me, what have you ever done in terms of standing up for what you believe in that could risk a long jail term?

      No? Nothing? No, sorry, whinging on Slashdot about your government doesn't count.

      Let's be realistic, agree with them or not, they've put their ass on the line to a far greater extent than people like you ever will, yet you feel you're well positioned to somehow suggest they're weak?

    6. Re:What timing... by richlv · · Score: 5, Insightful

      it's been a few beers in an airport, but still...

      do you - downhole - personally feel that sexual abuse in prisons is appropriate ?
      including all the innocents getting convicted (think movie witch hunt or other similar cases), all the minor convictions (smoked some weed) and so on ?

      personally, i would not have guts to condemn a person who would in the end find the means to kill off those who got them in the prison wrongfully. and i believe we should not make prisons a place to breed people like that.

      --
      Rich
    7. Re:What timing... by DrBoumBoum · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I see that many people here on /. seem very bitter and angry about those kids. First let me tell you that "laughing you ass off when they get raped in prison" only shows that you're a very mean and despicable individual. But apart from that those kind of hackers are really doing people a favor by exposing clearly to the general public how terrible the security of their personal data is. Rest assured that for every bragging Lulzsec there are ten quiet hackers from different governmental and criminal groups, silently collecting your data and placing back doors in your systems, and not saying a word about it. Without public exposure authorities and corporations will naturally do all they can to swipe the problem under the rug. The kind of very visible but mostly harmless actions from the likes of Lulzsec is what's necessary to have them move their ass and finally do something about the security issue. I for one see them more as the vaccine that will eventually help the Internet grow some real security than the hateful vandals that old grumps of your kind want to portray.

    8. Re:What timing... by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      Everything they did they did anonymously and believing they were "1337" enough not to get caught. They didn't sand up for anything.They didn't put their asses on the line. As soon as they started being identified, they shit their pants and are not trying to hide from the consequences of their actions. Consequences they never thought they would have to deal with.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    9. Re:What timing... by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      Tell me, what have you ever done in terms of standing up for what you believe in that could risk a long jail term?

      Standing up for something doesn't mean one has to do something illegal or grieve innocent bystanders. It's EASY to start doing illegal shit when you're also doing it anonymously. It's a lot harder standing up for something when you have to do it legally and with your real name.

      Ergo, your argument clearly falls on its face.

    10. Re:What timing... by pizzach · · Score: 1

      Approving men raping other men in prisons is wrong DaveV1.0. It's not even appropriate as a joke. The act likely screws people up so bad that they have problems returning to society which is not what prisons is for. Especially if going to prisons starts meaning you get aids.

      --
      Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
    11. Re:What timing... by Xest · · Score: 1

      Right, because when you're facing the world's finest law enforcement you can be certain that your anonymity will remain intact.

      You can't possibly be certain of that.

      Ergo, your argument clearly falls on it's face.

    12. Re:What timing... by downhole · · Score: 1

      Exactly. They aren't standing up for shit, and they don't believe in shit except pissing people off for the hell of it. The fact that they were trying to be anonymous and are running and hiding when they start to get exposed proves it.

      --
      I don't reply to ACs
    13. Re:What timing... by sonicmerlin · · Score: 1

      First let me tell you that "laughing you ass off when they get raped in prison" only shows that you're a very mean and despicable individual.

      That's most of slashdot.

    14. Re:What timing... by moortak · · Score: 2

      The DOJ disagrees with you. Page 4 of the PDF has a breakdown. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/dudsfp04.pdf

      --
      Xavier Rabourdin for president 2012
    15. Re:What timing... by DrBoumBoum · · Score: 2

      Yes, I will laugh as they ger raped in prison, because they are criminals.

      Ok but consider one thing: imagine that your son would do something stupid one day, like selling 1g of hemp to a friend to help him out or crack into a government website for the lulz, and gets caught. He's a criminal now. Will you still be laughing as he gets raped in prison? If you answer "no", then you're definitely a stinking asshole and a filthy motherfucker, because you want harsh penalties for others but will beg for them not applied to you. And if you answer "yes", then you're definitely a stinking asshole and a filthy motherfucker. So now please take a good look in the mirror and say hello.

    16. Re:What timing... by DrBoumBoum · · Score: 1

      I remember an interview from a hacker, possibly the English guy who broke into the DoD servers looking for documents about UFOs, who was saying that while he was on the servers he noticed he was not alone, there were several other intruders there with him. The interview must probably be somewhere around on the Internet to be found if anybody cares. The possible motivations to penetrate networks and leave backdoors available there are just too many for me to bother enumerating them, especially for a foreign government or agency.

    17. Re:What timing... by HappyEngineer · · Score: 1

      If that was their goal they could have done their thing in a harmless way just to prove it could be done. Stealing info and publishing it to the world (without a white hat political goal like exposing corruption to back it up) is just throwing gas on the flames for fun.

      In any case, what were the DDoS attacks supposed to prove? You can have perfect security on a site, but that doesn't help prevent DDoS attacks against it. They didn't do it for white hat reasons. They did it because they are jerks.

      Any positive effects of their attacks are secondary to their primary goal of being dicks.

    18. Re:What timing... by richlv · · Score: 1

      i probably failed at quoting - http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1211515-witch_hunt/

      but you failed at a social response.

      --
      Rich
    19. Re:What timing... by Fatalis · · Score: 1

      You think non-violent drug users are not jailed in the USA? You are a moron who projects his ideas of how it should work onto reality. USA is the leader in jailing such people. California, for instance, made it a minor offence only last year.

      --
      Deus est fatalis
    20. Re:What timing... by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      I see, so it used to be that is someone was arrested with a dime bag of pot, he would be sentenced to more than a year in jail on the first offense? Or, are you talking about a "non-violent drug user" who has a key of pot? Or, are you talking about the guy who gets arrested with 5 grams of crack?. You are a moron who doesn't know how the law actually works.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  13. Over? by gadzook33 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You knocked on the devil's door my friends.

    1. Re:Over? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah yeah yeah. Keep talking shit.

  14. I doubt it... by Lohrno · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My totally random guess here is that they are a group of people who probably knew each other well before creating this group. More than likely they have just stopped calling themselves LulzSec. They're just getting too much scrutiny most likely. I don't think this is the last we hear from them, just they won't be calling themselves LulzSec necessarily...

    1. Re:I doubt it... by Gideon+Wells · · Score: 1

      They likely knew each other to some degree to come out of no where like that. They hit big targets early on and many fast. They planned before hand and that requires some trust.

      If you believe that LulzSec exposed blog, members of this group were active under the flag of Anonymous. They are now active under the flag of Lulzsec. They'll likely be as you said, under a new flag in the future.

      --
      by Anonymous Coward: I, for one, welcome the shift from car analogies to pizza analogies. um.. overlords?
    2. Re:I doubt it... by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      You're probably right. Or at least close to.

      The announcement talks includes "our crew of six" - that statement indicates it's a small group, a closed group, and I'd guess it's a group of friends.

      And on top of that, from the relative sophistication of the attacks (especially when compared to those claimed by Anonymous) this are people that know what they are doing - indeed some of those attacks may have been prepared long time ago (as in: vulnerabilities identified, waiting for exploitation). Possibly working in the network security industry even.

      Oh well LulzSec out, Anonymous is quite silent recently - what's next? I haven't heard any names yet but it's surely just a matter of time before the next group appears, inspired by their predecessors.

    3. Re:I doubt it... by Idbar · · Score: 1

      Interestingly enough, many theories can come up. And, since I don't know anyone from that group, I could also claim this could be a government agency trying to get data from other agencies and corporations while forcing new legislation. If you ask me, very smart trick.

      Then again, it may be just a bunch of kids.

  15. The Real Question... by Stormy+Dragon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...is whether everyone else is done with Lulzsec. Unfortunately, they've likely pissed off the kinds of people who don't stop the game just because the opponent wants to quit.

    1. Re:The Real Question... by gadzook33 · · Score: 1
    2. Re:The Real Question... by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      I looked at that cartoon, and the teeth on the file look coarse enough that I have to assume the eagle is blunting each claw with it. To sharpen the claws, the eagle would be using a hone.

      Cartoonists who don't know anything at all about putting a sharp edge on anything should just blunt up the edge of their pencils with a file and go back to sleep.

    3. Re:The Real Question... by horza · · Score: 1

      That's not really going to happen now, is it. It only happens for genocidal war criminals or serial killers. Though if the police contact me with information on my mobile phone that was stolen a few years ago I will be happy to revise my opinion.

      Phillip.

    4. Re:The Real Question... by gadzook33 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, plus who ever heard of an eagle using a stool! Stupid cartoonists...

  16. It's better to burn out than fade away... by Bodhammer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Tyrell: The light that burns twice as bright burns for half as long - and you have burned so very, very brightly, Roy. Look at you: you're the Prodigal Son; you're quite a prize!
    Batty: I've done... questionable things.
    Tyrell: Also extraordinary things; revel in your time.
    Batty: Nothing the God of biomechanics wouldn't let you into heaven for

    --
    "I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
  17. i hope they dont quit by FudRucker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    maybe change their strategy and mix things up to evade capture, the world needs benevolent black/grey hat hackers to dig up dirty laundry on the establishment, let the government & police know that if they do wrong that it will be found out and exposed for all the world to see...

    --
    Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    1. Re:i hope they dont quit by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      the world needs benevolent black/grey hat hackers to dig up dirty laundry on the establishment,

      And you pick LulzSec as the most capable group for this? Hilarious.

    2. Re:i hope they dont quit by Salvo · · Score: 2

      The Information exposed by LulzSec was mainly just proof that these organisations security was too lax.
      The only dirty laundry they wanted to expose was that these systems weren't secure.

      The Paydirt for LulzSec was getting in in the first place, not any information they found.

    3. Re:i hope they dont quit by DemonGenius · · Score: 2

      maybe change their strategy and mix things up to evade capture, the world needs benevolent black/grey hat hackers to dig up dirty laundry on the establishment, let the government & police know that if they do wrong that it will be found out and exposed for all the world to see...

      I wouldn't go so far as to say "benevolent" but I prefer to live in a world where the watchers are watched and the tyrants are forced to live in fear.

    4. Re:i hope they dont quit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the world needs benevolent black/grey hat hackers to dig up dirty laundry on the establishment,

      And you pick LulzSec as the most capable group for this? Hilarious.

      I don't think he did pick LulzSec. They're just the ones doing it at the moment with a bit of spotlight. Last month it was Julien Assange, next month it'll be someone else. Most likely not you though as you'd rather trapse around the internet being condescending. Hilarious.

    5. Re:i hope they dont quit by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      And the organisations affected should be glad about that - and hopefully it inspires many more to fix their systems before LulzSec or equivalent break in, or worse, someone with seriously malicious intentions does the same.

    6. Re:i hope they dont quit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And you pick LulzSec as the most capable group for this? Hilarious.

      Name one more capable group please.
      Those who I can think of are either less benevolent or simply too incompetent to pull it off.
      There are however plenty that seem to be benevolent enough and claim that they can pull it off but talk is cheap.
      Based on merits alone LulzSec is the obvious choice.

      Could you please specify why you think it is hilarious because while it is arguable whether or not LulzSec is benevolent enough they have so far proven to be a lot better than any other alternative that is up to the task.

    7. Re:i hope they dont quit by kikito · · Score: 1

      Benevolent my ass.

      I hope they get arrested and never get to touch a keyboard again.

    8. Re:i hope they dont quit by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      In a way I wish they had leaked the UK census data. If they had it would have changed the way everyone does security forever, because no-one could rely on details like date of birth or address for verification any more. It would also have made people care about security and privacy.

      It would be hard to deal with knowing some of the data - salary, religious persuasion, sexual orientation... But I don't think things will get any better until they hit the absolute rock bottom.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  18. busted one and broke the network by defective_warthog · · Score: 1

    improve your backend before you start such endeavors.

    1. Re:busted one and broke the network by tqk · · Score: 1

      improve your backend before you start such endeavors.

      Or, realize it's foolish to go poking sticks in hornets' nests if you're unwilling to suffer (or are ignorant of) the potential consequences. Oh yeah, that and two wrongs don't make a right. Those they attacked may be cheap, lazy !@#$s that we'd all be better off without (or who should just clean up their act, damnit!), but that doesn't give them a free pass when they decide to break the rules too.

      Still, I can't think of many ways (legitimately) to fix the crap that they were purporting to fix. These days, it's simpler to accept that lots of stuff is broken and sucks. Life! Bail, and get another job (or vendor in the case of Sony). Soap box, ballot box, ammo box? I'd prefer the latter is kept locked up as long as possible, but I do identify with their frustration at the way things are turning out this century, and how little chance us peons have to affect change. Corps/shareholders/... shouldn't be so greedy and clueless, and I shouldn't be kept from upgrading a fscking Dev. server for a year and a half because my upgrades can't be fit in with the rest of the !@#$ the devs need to upgrade at the same time (true story, btw).

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
  19. Re:Cowards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So they're going to win the war by quitting, have I got that right?

    See a history book on Vietnam for an example of how well that works out in reality.

  20. They'll be back... by s0litaire · · Score: 1

    Though "LulzSec" has disbanded. the members will probably merge back into Anon or start another group.
    So expect a release on Monday as planned. It will just have a different name attached...

    They think if they change their name it makes it harder for "the Suits" to catch up with them.

    They may be right..........

    BASIC Gorilla tactics 101:
    10 Come together in a small group
    20 Make a few big Bolshie attacks
    30 Have a few lulz
    40 Disband
    50 goto 10

    --
    Laters Sol "Have you found the secrets of the universe? Asked Zebade "I'm sure I left them here somewhere"
    1. Re:They'll be back... by theweatherelectric · · Score: 4, Funny

      BASIC Gorilla tactics 101:

      No, basic gorilla tactics are to live in troops in tropical and subtropical forests in central Africa.

    2. Re:They'll be back... by AlienIntelligence · · Score: 1

      50 goto 10

      Thought it was bad programming to form goto loops?

      =)

      -AI

      --
      For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion
    3. Re:They'll be back... by VortexCortex · · Score: 4, Insightful
      You, my friend, have clearly never played that game.

      BASIC Gorilla tactics 101

      The tactics are to look at the wind-speed meter, consider elevation, and then try an angle and velocity that will strike the opponent with your explodo-banana. Refine your velocity and angle per the rules of "playing the odds" guess too much one way, and too little the other, then extrapolate the correct angle and velocity by interpolation.

      A quick search turns up this website that has a flash implementation of the game (covered with a skippable ad) that you may use to refine your "BASIC Gorilla" skills.

    4. Re:They'll be back... by Stormy+Dragon · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, that's gorilla STRATEGY. Gorilla tactics is deciding who to fling poo at.

    5. Re:They'll be back... by anagama · · Score: 1
      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    6. Re:They'll be back... by igreaterthanu · · Score: 1

      Heard of recursion?

      --
      I dream of a nation where a man is not judged by his skin color but by an number assigned by a credit rating agency.
    7. Re:They'll be back... by NCG_Mike · · Score: 2

      No, that's gorilla STRATEGY. Gorilla tactics is deciding who to fling poo at.

      I thought it was barrels?

    8. Re:They'll be back... by mr_lizard13 · · Score: 1

      You've been lambasted for your "Gorilla" cock-up, so I'll help you out :^)

      A Gorilla is an animal. The word you're looking for is "Guerilla".

      Easy mistake...

      --
      "We live in a global world" - Harvey Pitt, former Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman
    9. Re:They'll be back... by JohnnyBGod · · Score: 1

      I used to play this when I was a kid! You either just made my day, or destroyed my good memories of it. I'm still deciding. :p

    10. Re:They'll be back... by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      It's not programming at all to strut about making pronouncements about this programming language or that....

    11. Re:They'll be back... by shumacher · · Score: 2

      You, my friend, have clearly never played that game.

      BASIC Gorilla tactics 101

      The tactics are to look at the wind-speed meter, consider elevation, and then try an angle and velocity that will strike the opponent with your explodo-banana. Refine your velocity and angle per the rules of "playing the odds" guess too much one way, and too little the other, then extrapolate the correct angle and velocity by interpolation.

      A quick search turns up this website that has a flash implementation of the game (covered with a skippable ad) that you may use to refine your "BASIC Gorilla" skills.

      No, that's QBASIC Gorilla tactics 101.

    12. Re:They'll be back... by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Gorillas.bas is the ancestor of Angry Birds

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    13. Re:They'll be back... by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      You've been lambasted for your "Gorilla" cock-up, so I'll help you out :^) A Gorilla is an animal. The word you're looking for is "Guerilla". Easy mistake...

      It's only an easy mistake if English isn't your first language and/or you are a fucking retard.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    14. Re:They'll be back... by mr_lizard13 · · Score: 1

      ...or a gorilla.

      --
      "We live in a global world" - Harvey Pitt, former Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman
    15. Re:They'll be back... by ImprovOmega · · Score: 1

      If you're programming in BASIC already, how much worse could it be?

  21. These are not the droids... by Sfing_ter · · Score: 1

    These are not the droids you are looking for...
    just sayin'...

    --
    A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
  22. What, the script-kiddies have enought? by gweihir · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Pathetic really. The only thing different is that these idiots have big mouths. Which, I bet, will be their downfalls. Nothing they did on the hacking side is impressive at all. Competent black-hats know that one of the most dangerous things you can do is public bragging. Having an information-channel back is beyond stupid.

    Fortunately, law-enforcement has very long memories and a lot of patience. It is just relatively slow. I predict that we will see them all begging for mercy. Might take months or years, but they were far to careless not to get caught.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:What, the script-kiddies have enought? by Dan541 · · Score: 2

      They even set up a telephone hotline.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    2. Re:What, the script-kiddies have enought? by Joush_mark · · Score: 2

      The objective was to draw attention to causes that interested a loose collection of impassioned individuals with a little knowledge, a little access, and an internet connection. What was accomplished was more then many civil disobedience campaigns that last for years can do, and most of the people involved are going to get away with it. The scary part isn't the script kiddies, it's that they got vaguely organized and directed in a way that would be nearly imposable to direct and stop before they hit. If a collective like this can last a few months and pull off several eye-catching acts before dissolving it's worrying to people likely to be targeted because their is absolutely no limit to the number of people that could do something like this with the will and direction to do so.

    3. Re:What, the script-kiddies have enought? by gweihir · · Score: 1

      The problem here is the "little knowledge". That is what will prevent them from getting away. They left so many possible traces, I am convinced, law enforcement is currently just checking whether they have identified everybody and have enough evidence. As these LulzIdiots will not all be able to let go of their newfound "power", more evidence will become available shortly. And, no, they do not even have a snowballs chance in hell.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    4. Re:What, the script-kiddies have enought? by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      No, law enforcement is demonstrably incompetent in computer crime. Between the turf wars among agencies, the terrible morass of existing law, the foolish concept that they can defeat computer crime by finding "ringleaders". Ringleaders are very transitory, and easily replaced by bored fools with slight technical knowledge who enjoy a challenge.. A few of these fools will have actually learned some tools, and pass them on, and the rest will be ignored as "small fish". You can see examples of this sort of legal mishandling with the Operation Sun Devil raids against Steve Jackson Games, the David LaMacchia wares siite lawsuit, the Kevin Mitnick and Emmanual Goldstein cases, and most of the computer cracking cases that ever see a courtroom.

      While the traces may be in the hands of technologically capable like the NSA, I believe that I can safely state there will not be one day in prison for any of these crackers.

    5. Re:What, the script-kiddies have enought? by beckett · · Score: 1

      Operation Sun Devil...David LaMacchia...Kevin Mitnick and Emmanual Goldstein...

      Why not look at cases that took place this Century? I'm sure there are people in law enforcement now that weren't even alive during Operation Sun Devil.

    6. Re:What, the script-kiddies have enought? by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      Except that civil disobedience is not ever anonymous. It means standing up for your rights and taking the consequences. Take that "white people only" seat, chain yourself to that military installation gate. See also civil courage. A bunch of script kiddies operating out of anonymity are something completely different. Anonymous cowards.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    7. Re:What, the script-kiddies have enought? by ron_ivi · · Score: 1

      Except that civil disobedience is not ever anonymous.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Sense_(pamphlet)

      Common Sense is a pamphlet written by Thomas Paine. It was first published anonymously on January 10, 1776,

    8. Re:What, the script-kiddies have enought? by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      It's a difficult line to draw, but generally, I would not consider publishing anything "civil disobedience". It's another category than the disruptive acts by the skript kiddies in question. Apart from that, I don't consider Thomas Paine the measure for everything.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    9. Re:What, the script-kiddies have enought? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      What was accomplished was more then many civil disobedience campaigns that last for years can do

      Nothing was achieved, and people engaging in genuine civil disobedience have the guts to do so under their own names, not skulking ianonymously n their bedrooms.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    10. Re:What, the script-kiddies have enought? by Omnifarious · · Score: 1

      So, you're basically saying that it's not civil disobedience until someone is caught and charged. I find that logic to be rather strange.

    11. Re:What, the script-kiddies have enought? by RyuhoKudo · · Score: 1

      I think you missed the whole point...

  23. Re:Cowards by carlzum · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Excellent analogy, wrong conclusion. Know your objective, how what you're willing to invest to achieve it, and exit when you've reached your goal or exceeded your costs. LulzSec made some headlines and embarrassed a few major organizations. Going to jail isn't worth a few more headlines.

  24. Re:Interesting, not ironic by arth1 · · Score: 1

    It's called cold feet. Too bad it's likely too late.

  25. Twice as much fun as... by BodeNGE · · Score: 1

    an advent calendar.

  26. Re:Cowards by HuckleCom · · Score: 2

    He who runs away today can run away another day - Brett Maverick (Or his 'pappy')

  27. Done? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1, Funny

    What's the deal here - is it past their bedtime?

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Done? by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Nobody expects a Spanish Inquisition.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    2. Re:Done? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      What's the deal here - is it past their bedtime?

      One of their moms found their stash of gay porn and banned them from any more sleepovers for a month.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  28. Re:Cowards by HuckleCom · · Score: 1

    I have a hunch going to jail isn't even the worse threat they've encountered ...

  29. Re:Cowards by Cylix · · Score: 1

    Pound me in the ass prison?

    That comes to mind to me.

    --
    "You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
  30. I heard LuLzSec was going to rig the elections... by jftitan · · Score: 1

    Of course, if they are disbanding, then how can we know the elections will / wont be rigged?

      I mean, the electronic ballot systems are totally secure right? We absolutely got those things top notch secure, and protected from insider rigging right? I mean, we won't have any of that 2004, 2000 DIEBOLD election scandal happening again. At least we can rest assured that since LuLzSec is disbanding, their rumor of rigging the elections with the most obvious method to show corruption in the election polls that it could never happen. again... right?

      We all learned from the past right?

    (hint hint... 2012 Elections are going to be rigged)

    --
    "Don't Forget to Salt the Fries"
  31. Re:Cowards by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    Really though, would you do anything different? I can think of lots of worse things than being a 'coward'

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  32. Re:Cowards by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2

    Worked well for the Communists, not so well for the South Vietnamese who weren't communist.

    Also look at what happened during Tet '68 to non-communists in Communist controlled provinces.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_at_Hu%E1%BA%BF.

  33. Re:Cowards by carlzum · · Score: 1

    On June 21st a suspected member is arrested in the UK, on June 25th they call it quits. The prospect of life in a British arse pounding prison was certainly a factor.

  34. An anonomous group disbands.. and? by Joush_mark · · Score: 1

    Other then a momentary loss of coordination and direction, the people that were doing this will, for the most part, be right back to doing this. LulzSec was an ad-hoc collection of individuals, and it will cost nothing for the people that were organizing and directing it to do the same thing again.

  35. Re: Vietnam by mevets · · Score: 2

    For gods sake, let it heal.

    There is a history lesson alright: it was an idiotic fight picked by a bunch of paranoid lunatics. It killed, maimed and harmed a huge number of people for no reason at all.

    Don't try to paint war-success stories from what is, at best, a cluster fuck of people that should know so much better.

    At best, it is yet another lesson in how using weapons solves nothing. If I count correctly, the "using weapons group" is losing 30 to 1. When Afghanistan is over, it will be 31 to 1.

  36. Telstra Filter by ian_from_brisbane · · Score: 1

    Does this mean Telstra can now fearlessly implement their internet filter?

  37. Probably a fake - Doesn't anyone read Twitter? by MoronGames · · Score: 1

    A recent LulzSec post on twitter reads: "Oh, oh, finally! Media, please be sure to report on the actual files we leaked, not just our silly press statement. Much love. 3 Ciao. 3" As Rambo said, "Nothing is over!" At least, that's how I read it.

    --
    hey!
  38. nothing wrong quitting wile your ahed by luther349 · · Score: 1

    i mean that they managed to wreak havic on the net owing big fat companys in the face and even makeing the fbi look like a bunck of fuckwits in a span of nearly 3 months. but with that brings alot of fame and media attetion. at some point you knoe its time to stop before you get cought. most groups dont and well they get cought.

  39. Re:I heard LuLzSec was going to rig the elections. by luther349 · · Score: 1

    they dont need to rig them they aruldy are. bush getting voted in not once but twice proved that. untill the corprations lose controle of are goverment the elctions will never mean a thing.

  40. What if...? by Announcer · · Score: 1

    ...they got a note from Anonymous, and they realized they'd best go away... NOW!

    --
    Willie...
  41. Re:Cowards by scubamage · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Agreed. Right now everyone who is anywhere in security is most likely hyperaware. I know at my company (a large carrier) we've done security audits across the spectrum to ensure customer data was well protected, along with proprietary info. It makes sense if they let the waters die down a bit, and then hit when people are soft and inevitably get lazy again.

  42. Re:Cowards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If it was an actual member, you'd think more would have fallen like dominos afterward - the only guy they got was the guy who hosted the chatroom they used, probably not anyone actually important due to the lack of mass-arrests.

  43. Re:Cowards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    On June 21st a suspected member is arrested in the UK, on June 25th they call it quits. The prospect of life in a British arse pounding prison was certainly a factor.

    The culture of institutionalised rape and its tacit endorsement as part of the punishment (*) is far more closely associated with the American prison system. I'm not saying it doesn't happen here, but it doesn't seem to be a factor to the same extent.

    (*) Obviously unless you're the prison rapist, in which case it's more "get to pound some kid locked up for marijuana possession in the ass prison", but let's not think about the logic of it too much.

  44. Re:Cowards by HJED · · Score: 1

    Perhaps there is a jurisdiction problem?

    --
    null
  45. Re:Cowards by Sinthet · · Score: 2

    I highly doubt they're quitting. Regardless of whether or not they call themselves Lulzsec, I'm sure they'll continue trying to leak information and hack/deface websites. Breaking up Lulzsec may or may not be just an attempt to throw the Police off whatever trail they might have. Maybe this has to do with the direction of political hacking they started to adopt, I mean, continuing as Lulzsec while trying to release anything halfway serious just screams contradiction. There's plenty of things going on, but I don't think they're quitting totally. At most, the people behind the handles will create new handles and continue on their merry way.

  46. Re:Cowards by JonySuede · · Score: 1

    sorry for the bad modernization

    --
    Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
  47. Win like Korea and Vietnam by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

    Wreak havoc, fail to achieve any of your stated political goals, declare victory, and run away because it's too risky to stay. It's not only crackers who are this wasteful and destructive to innocent people's property: take a look at the mess in Iraq, Afghanistan, Panama, Vietnam and Korea for examples in the last 60 years.

  48. Re:Cowards by bmo · · Score: 1

    >Win the war, not the battle.
    >Live to fight another day.

    How about...

    "I'm not like other people. Pain hurts me!" - Daffy Duck

    --
    BMO

  49. Re:Cowards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Win what? They weren't doing anything other than running tools other people wrote against pretty much random targets. They see that mr. cleary is about to start getting his shit pushed in for life and are hoping to avoid the same fate. Probably the smartest thing they've done in a while, really.

  50. They're toast... by blahblahwoofwoof · · Score: 1

    ..set the oven to "Carbonize". The cost of hubris is always unaffordable.

  51. Re:Cowards by LordLimecat · · Score: 3, Funny

    Win the war, not the battle.

    Would that be the war against nintendo, minecraft, sega, or Eve Online?

  52. Re:Cowards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I thought I read they were asked by another organization to back off, so the new group could have a run at a few remaining easy targets. Whether or not each group has common membership, is more information than most are privy to, I suspect.
    Maybe this is like corporate paper shuffling; knock down one organization ans start a new one, in order to start a new paper trail, and leave nothing worth sifting from the ashes of the previous?

  53. Re:Cowards by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan too. I mean why just single out Vietnam.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  54. Re:I heard LuLzSec was going to rig the elections. by graveyhead · · Score: 1

    We're getting offtopic here, but Bush wining the second time does NOT Prove that elections are rigged. What it actually caused Bush to get re-elected was a swift-boat campaign http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiftboating on John Kerry right before the election.

    I'm replying not to just be pedantic and correct you, I just want to raise awareness of the power of lying TV advertisements - if you know what swiftboating is, you will have the mental tools to recognise it when it happens and respond accordingly.

    Do democracy a favor and forward that Wiki article around ;-)

    --
    std::disclaimer<std::legalese> sig=new std::disclaimer; sig->dump(); delete sig;
  55. Re:Cowards by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    Yeah, Americans are always so proud of their prison system.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  56. Re:Cowards by The+Infamous+Grimace · · Score: 1

    So far. You talk as if no more arrests could be forthcoming.

    --
    Ignorance and prejudice and fear
    Walk hand in hand
  57. Re:Cowards by dasherjan · · Score: 1

    Disbanding not quitting.

  58. Chaos and Order by James+McGuigan · · Score: 1

    Chaos and Order... Chaos contains the seeds of infinite possibility yet Order only contains the seeds of incremental change... It is through Chaos that we are forced to evolve but it through evolution that we have establish Order... it is the Tao of Order and Chaos defines our reality...

  59. Ferengi rules of acquisition by deimios666 · · Score: 2

    Every once in a while, declare peace. It confuses the hell out of your enemies.

    --
    I think, therefore you are.
  60. They really quitting? by simpleguy · · Score: 1

    So, does it mean they're done hacking high-profile sites or they're done publicly releasing the fruits of their hacks?

    1. Re:They really quitting? by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      The BBC report about LulzSec quitting mentioned that the group also indicated they had some 5 GB of information on hand from the hacked sites, that would be released over the upcoming three weeks.

      So much for quitting. It seems that only accounts for the hacking attacks.

  61. Re:So many spineless pussies here at /. by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

    Appeal to hypocrisy is great!

    --
    Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  62. Re:I heard LuLzSec was going to rig the elections. by luther349 · · Score: 1

    well no matter how you see it your vote doesent mean crap you are voteing for 2 copys of the same problem.

  63. not what I read by deathguppie · · Score: 1

    Interesting.. but I had just read this after seeing this article and had to wonder.

    --
    once more into the breach
  64. Covert Ops by wirelesslayers · · Score: 1

    My 2 opnions 1 - lulzsec is a covert ops... from US gov. Bringing chaos to approve censorship in the internet. 2.1 - People that find out a way to exploit a big botnet network and taking advantage of the "heat of revolution" made a lot more people to "donate" their machines to a botnet, exploits, previous hacked documents. 2.2 - People that worked in a way to spread malware for a couple of months or years and built their own botnet network and taking advantage of the "heat of revolution" made a lot more people to "donate" their machines to a botnet, exploits, previous hacked documents. I strongly believe in the number 1.

    1. Re:Covert Ops by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you believe that because you are a paranoid dumbass.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  65. Yawn. by scottbomb · · Score: 1

    Out of curiosity, I downloaded the "50 days of lulz" torrent from their website. There really isn't much to see, except about 100,000 email addresses with passwords (which would make a good lesson for non-tech folk about how weak most passwords are).

    Whoop-de-doo.

    Whoever these clowns are, they don't seem to be half of what they're cracked up to be.

    1. Re:Yawn. by Georules · · Score: 1

      What more did you expect? Also, many of those user/pass combos are likely the same for other accounts, where the real damage to someone's identity could be done.

  66. Re:English Fail by Macthorpe · · Score: 1

    You have trouble with synonyms, don't you?

    You mean homonyms. For more information about the parent post, please see Muphry's Law.

    --
    "It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him." - Tolkien
  67. Ego doesn't pass as security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If Lulzsec's break-in methods were amateur, then what do you call the defences that were broken into?

  68. MOD THIS UP by GauteL · · Score: 2

    Prison rape is not considered acceptable in the UK (or most of western Europe) and so the authorities actually try to stamp it out if it happens. As a consequence it is not a major problem.

    Prisons in Europe are thus not "Pound me in the arse prisons".

    I wonder if judges in the US ever factor this in when they decide upon a sentence.

    1. Re:MOD THIS UP by rhook · · Score: 1

      Speak to anyone who has ever done any real time in a US prison and they will tell you that prison rape is not a common occurrence. In fact prison is not a very nice place to be if you were convicted of rape.

  69. Re:Cowards by caerwyn · · Score: 1

    Not all of us, let me assure you.

    --
    The ringing of the division bell has begun... -PF
  70. Re:Cowards by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

    LulzSec made some headlines and embarrassed a few major organizations. Going to jail isn't worth a few more headlines.

    "LulzSec" already earned waiting spots in prison with what they've already done. Not doing anymore doesn't constitute "take back".

    Know your objective, how what you're willing to invest to achieve it, and exit when you've reached your goal or exceeded your costs.

    That sort of rationality doesn't really fit with doing it for the "lulz", does it? If so, things will become much more boring at MIT. If you are suggesting cold blooded calculation on their part, then that will only add to their misfortunes when they are prosecuted.

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  71. Re:Cowards by flux · · Score: 1

    "LulzSec" already earned waiting spots in prison with what they've already done. Not doing anymore doesn't constitute "take back".

    Sure, but stopping the attacks is a good way to reduce the risk of getting caught in the future, if they aren't caught yet.

  72. Re:Cowards by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    It's not like South Vietnamese didn't execute suspected Viet Kong sympathizers, either. Remember, South Vietnam at the time was a dictatorship, with all that entails. And it didn't exactly have much popular support among its own people, either.

  73. Too bad! by crhylove · · Score: 1

    Too bad if it's true. I wish somebody would actually PHYSICALLY take down Goldman Sachs, Chase Manhattan, et al.

    --
    I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
  74. Re:lulzsec stopping by synaptic · · Score: 1

    What does it say about the state of security that a bunch of basement-dwelling, misguided teenage morons are able to do so much?

    If you're going to arrest Mom and Dad, be sure to arrest all of the programmers and sysadmins who also made it possible. ;)

  75. It's an old story by chriz74 · · Score: 1

    "Crack number 50 is the end of Unit A and our last one!" -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJjQM982S6s

  76. Re:Cowards by sosume · · Score: 1

    Oh that totally makes it right. Thanks for the explanation, I think I can sleep well now.

  77. Re:I heard LuLzSec was going to rig the elections. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

    The problem with the example you gave is that Kerry swiftboated himself in Vietnam. All his political opponents in 2004 did was draw attention to it.

  78. Re:Cowards by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

    Too late. They are going to be hunted down regardless of whether they quit or not.

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  79. Re:Cowards by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

    Except from what we have seen their "attacks" were basic script kiddie bullshit and as we've seen time and time again script kiddies really aren't that good at covering their tracks.My guess is they realized they are looking at a good 20 years plus and are right now hiding under their beds hoping not to hear a knock on the door but it is probably too late for that now and the feds are just lining up the warrants before their doors come a crashing down.

    After 9/11 the feds pretty much look at everyone as a potential terrorist and the fact that they cost corps money means the feds will get really nasty on them. Sorry Lulzsec but your days of freedom are numbered. Might as well go smoke some weed and get some hookers so you'll have some nice memories to look back on in PMITA prison.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  80. Re:So many spineless pussies here at /. by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

    Choosing not to be a cowardly, criminal, internet tough guy asshole doesn't make me a pussy. It makes me an adult. Now, shut the fuck up and try acting like an adult instead of the cowardly, criminal, internet tough guy asshole you are.

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  81. Re:Cowards by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    Vietnam was actually a good example of what he said. We won the battles but lost the war (and I need no history books, I know men who fought there, and I hauled aerospace ground equipment to the B-52a in Thailand toward the end of the war).

    I'd be willing to bet that they'll regroup under another name.

    LulzSeX: Laughing at your virginity! =)

  82. Re:Cowards by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    The "Lulz" part is in their motto: laughing at your security.

  83. Re: Vietnam by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    At best, it is yet another lesson in how using weapons solves nothing.

    As Salvor Hardin (Foundation, Asimov) said, "violence is the last refuge of the incompetent". But that could read that it's the first refuge of the competent; it's a poor atom blaster that won't point both ways.

    That said, Vietnam was indeed a clusterfuck we should not have been involved in. Afghanistan was only a clusterfuck when we kept fighting after we'd defeated the enemy.

  84. Re:Cowards by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    The saying is a lot older than that, I remember hearing it in grade school, and I'm 59. Also, you misquoted the saying (which is probably older than I am): "he who fights and runs away lives to fight another day".

    But there's an even older saying: He who lives by the sword dies by the sword.

  85. Re:Cowards by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    We must be, since we have more prisoners per capita than any other country in the world (*hangs head in shame*)

  86. Only one to think it? by Stizark · · Score: 1

    Maybe they're not afraid, or changing tactics, or gonna lay low for a while then rise up again. Maybe, if they are leaving, they just got bored? Trolling is only fun for a small while, and, then, only when you're the one doing the trolling. Once people bigger and stronger than you start to push their weight, it quickly becomes tedious and boring. They had their 15 minutes. They were, at their pinnacle, one of the most popular "organizations" in the world-- for months. Now they're bored. Their need for popularity has been satiated. Time to go. They'll still be there. They'll still hack. I doubt this is the end. In a year they'll start remembering all the shit they caused and get to wondering if they could do it again. It's possible that some of them won't want to come back cause they'll have moved on, and that's probably when they'll turn the others in. Boredom is a powerful motivator.

  87. Re:Cowards by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    You betcha! Dump a handful of inmates from an American supermax into any prison in western Europe and they will be running the place in a week.

    Dead in a week, you mean. You have a lot to learn about Eastern European values, apparently.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  88. Re:Cowards by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

    you don't know who Brett Maverick is, do you?

    look up movie quotes, it was a comedic interpretation of the saying when the character was trying to avoid fights while beating people at poker.

  89. Re:Cowards by TheLink · · Score: 1

    Do note that _western_ Europe was specified.

    --
  90. Re:Cowards by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

    wow, he is so much less violent than the leaders of the Aryan Brotherhood (who kill prison guards to prove the point that they can't be controlled) it's not even a reasonable comparison. Proof that the most violent of UK prisoners doesn't have anything on the modestly "uppity" prisoners in the US.

  91. Re:Cowards by yahwotqa · · Score: 1

    Wait, wasn't it Brad? Or perhaps Burt?

  92. Re:Cowards by dasherjan · · Score: 1

    That should go without saying. I'm guessing that this is a way for the members that don't think it's worth the risk to bow out and the rest to regroup.

  93. irrelevant to FBI and Interpol by peter303 · · Score: 1

    The acts have been done. These script kiddies will have the police forces breathing down their necks for a while.

  94. Doing bad is a piss poor way of doing good. by GarryFre · · Score: 1

    They said they were just pointing out security flaws but It was just an excuse for getting notoriety and getting their jollies at the same time. We know security sucks, we know a LOT of things suck in this world. We don't need to have it pointed out. I have a doubt security can really ward of a near infinite number of determined hackers anyway. Its little more than protection against folks that have better stuff to do. The one good thing for me, was listening to the reports at least provided a welcome relief from the mind numbing boring rehash about what some world leader or political party is doing. After the hearing about the same dead horse over and over on PBS I had to turn it off, lest I die of over exposure to politics. I thought it was pretty cool to turn down that 10k, but they could have just said send it to some charity.

    --
    www.Migrainesoft.com - Computer giving you a headache? We can fix that!
  95. Re:So many spineless pussies here at /. by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

    It makes me an adult.

    Well, I guess that would depend on your definition of "adult." And "cowardly," as well. As for "criminal," well, I'd say that that hardly matters.

    --
    Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  96. Re:Cowards by HuckleCom · · Score: 1

    For OCD purposes the quote from the movie is "My old pappy used to say 'He who fights and runs away can live to run away another day'" . It was "Bret Maverick". And in the end they had a line talking about how he always misquotes his dad.

  97. Re: Vietnam by TheCarp · · Score: 1

    The revolutiion? For some definition of worked. Ask the blacks and the indians how well it "worked".

    Hard to say even the poor white folk really even benefited so much from the revolution

    And we are still taxed without any representation in sight.

    --
    "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  98. Re:Cowards by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    Did I say anything about making it right?

  99. Re:Cowards by rocca · · Score: 1

    It's still British food.

  100. Mission Accomplished by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

    If LulzSec hacking the Arizona State Police and posting SB1070 isn't enough to show that they are actually working for(or are) the Feds then I don't know where critical thought is. I am prepared to share! They aren't heroes. They are liberal jobby chasers and this leak must be like a nocturnal emission cum true.

    --
    The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
  101. Re:Cowards by Patch86 · · Score: 1

    Just because they're quitting, it doesn't mean the FBI (et al) will. The police could come knocking at their door any day from now to a decade from now.

  102. Re:Cowards by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    You're referring to the old TV show, right?

  103. Fake out... by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

    I am sure that with last weeks post of certain claims of possible arrests made against the group, and that law enforcement are knowingly trying to attack a type of organization set up almost like cells, and that they are not going to stop individually, but would need some sort of trigger to force the end of all activity, this could be it.
    You put on the web that certain members have been apprehended, and that they may have info on the rest of the group, which in turn would lower hacking activity as a safe guard, and then turn around and announce (falsely) that the group has announced they are disbanding, in an attempt to disorganize the group as they await orders from all the c.c. s....brilliant, too bad i posted this response, and now the cat is out of the bag....

    or i could just have watched too many movies, one of the 2

  104. They were anonymous first by Sedated2000 · · Score: 1

    There are already logs on pastebin that show that nearly all of the people from the leaked irc logs were also the big ringleaders in the anonymous attacks. They simply started working under the name LulzSec.

    My biggest issue with all of this is that they inspired kids who think they're cool, to try to break in to servers and other people's computers. Even on something silly like Minecraft, kids are trying to "d0x" other users when they're mad. I don't believe these kids did any service to anyone but themselves. You can't even use the argument that "they were only showing it was too easy to get in, what if someone more malicious had done it?". How does that justify anything? They gave the accounts out to people who were then encouraged to get in to mischief themselves. They were encouraging other kids to become criminals just to have "fun".

    If people behaved like this in real life, we would either be living in a society where vigilantism is the norm, or we'd be living in a police state within a decade. They did absolutely no good to anyone. Their intention was never to be good, it was to make names for themselves and feel powerful.

  105. Good riddance to bad rubbish. by L1B3R4710N · · Score: 1

    I really hope I'm not the only person who's sick of seeing Lulzsec on every single tech news site available. Maybe now I don't have to hear about their "escapades" everywhere I turn.

    --
    "...the number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected..." - Dennis Ritchie/Ken Thompson, 1972