Slashdot Mirror
Anonymous Posts Audio of Intercepted FBI Conference Call
DrDevil writes "A member of the computer hacking group Anonymous has hacked into a telephone conference between the FBI and Scotland Yard (London Police) and posted it on the internet. The Daily Telegraph has a comprehensive article on the hack. The audio of the call can be heard here." Reader eldavojohn snips as well from the AP's story as carried by Google: "Those on the call talk about what legal strategy to pursue in the cases of Ryan Cleary and Jake Davis — two British suspects linked to Anonymous — and discuss details of the evidence gathered against other suspects."
If Anonymous can listen to FBI calls then they'll certainly know when the FBI will be coming to kick down their door.
This will really piss off the FBI and it will be the political motivation for the FBI to pull out all the stops to find members of Anonymous.
If the government can listen to our calls (without a warrant) then why can't we listen to theirs?
...as some idiot climbs the fence to the bear exhibit so they can cuddle with the huge teddy tear. You just know it's not going to end well.
Anon can't stay one step ahead forever.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
After all, if what amounts to a few script-kiddies can get this deep into confidential material, how much more material can a determined, knowledgeable, and well-funded adversary get?
And that's why I always insist that we use the cone of silence.
Based on the vague discussion details and how the FBI sent out an email with the conference call number and password, it sounds more likely to be a setup by the FBI to lure Anon into the call so they could glean more location data off of them.
Nah. Never expect cleverness where carelessness would as easily explain how it was achieved.
Some agent has been found and his mailbox is regularly visited for content of interest. Use some better security, send out a honeypot once in a while and see who connects, etc. This is a lesson for FBI and Scotland Yard not to take their security for granted. Could have been worse.
I'm certain anyone else who was privy to these conference calls is highly annoyed at the exposure, which will result in some changes.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
"Anonymous is a dangerous threat to national security. They can even listen in on phone calls on secure lines. We must have mandatory validated identification of all users of the Internet and an end to anonymity to protect our secret operations."
They're the worst type of vigilantes, who in their own minds are drunk with power. They're the internet equivalent of a mob of Molotov-cocktail tossing anarchists who burn things down because it's fun to do. They rationalize their behavior any way they can
The problem is this same statement pretty well applies to the FBI and CIA and insert Gov agency here since 9/11.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
I don't know....I have a Model M.
I mean this question in all seriousness: In this new information age in which we find ourselves, who ARE the heroes and who are the villains among these?
1. Wikileaks / Bradley Manning / Julian Assange
2. The justice department in conjunction with the overzealous copyright lobby and their partner brain slugs attached to the heads of the US executive branch
3. "Illegal" immigrants
4. The 1% that siphons wealth out of the country so they can get a generous cut along the way
5. The proletariat who are mostly content with the way things are, but would be fully content if there was just more of it.
6. Television news media
7. The US congress
8. The US military
9. Anonymous / Lulzsec / 2600
Here's my OPINION (for what it's worth, don't feel obligated to buy it)
Heroes: 1,3,8,9
Villains: 2,4,6,7
Undecided / Neutral: 5
What destruction has Anonymous caused that compares to suppression of the 1st amendment? They're effectively just calling shenanigans loud enough for everyone to hear, and I find it hilarious how much offense their opponents take in response.
If you can't make an argument without making some stupid stereotypical nazi comment, you probably shouldn't be making the argument.
It's not that it's wrong to watch the government, it's wrong how they do it.
Well, if the FBI and the Yard does not have anything to hide, then why are they so upset about being listened in on? They LOVE to live in a surveillance society so much that they're the primary force in bringing it to be!
You should ALWAYS listen to what the police say.
Belief is the currency of delusion.
Believe it or not, there are shades of grey between "I don't want 4chan dabbling in national security" and "I am a genocidal totalitarian".
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
>Anonymous aren't heroes. They're the worst type of vigilantes
Perspective, wherefore art thou? The worst type of vigilantes rip people apart, physically - body from limb, burn homes, kill families and innocent people; baying, pitch-fork-wielding, lynching, bloodthirsty mobs.
Personally, I see Anonymous as a cross between Robin Hood and Loki.
I'm not saying nobody's going to get hurt, but part of me really rather likes them.
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
Is Hooray. What a dump for the Hoover's and Peel's plonkers.
Secret policemen are the enemy of Democracy and Liberty. Freedom cannot be defended by means of surreptious authority.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
It's sure as hell not mightier than the public, though.
As long as double cheeseburgers are 99 cents, I don't think most of the public can be motivated to do much of anything.
They're apparently much smarter than you are.
The FBI is what it is because it outwardly appears to operate effectively. If you can demonstrate well enough that it is not effective it will be dismantled either through staffing changes or actual full-on dismantling.
You don't try to tie up the FBI's time, because it will just cost the tax payer more money. You throw egg in it's face as often as you possibly can until it's a laughing stock and must be replaced/removed in order to save face.
Again, clearly much smarter than you
It is poor tradecraft to reveal an adversary's weakness if you plan to continue to exploit it.
The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
Reminds me of Oliver Wendell Jones from Bloom County
Nah, I haven't been arrested yet.
Better anarchistic thugs than authoritarian thugs.
No, not really. That's a false choice. How about "Neither"?
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
Or, it's brilliant.
Let's say Anon managed to through some one-time gap (ie a sympathetic insider, perhaps) managed to get the login details to this one conference. It's meaningless, because they can't repeat the success.
However, if they leak it:
- heads roll at the FBI
- everyone's walking on eggshells because of management fury
- everyone's required to use full-secure protocols and resources for the stupidest trivial conversations
- FBI still doesn't know who leaked it, so begins witchhunt which consumes resources, and makes everyone nervous.
I think it's probably a one-off, parlayed into a fairly clever bit of system-attack.
You know, like a single coordinated unrepeatable multiplane hijacking could theoretically cause an entire country to be consumed by paroxysms of paranoia for more than a decade, leading to absurd legislation, efficiency costs for hundreds of millions of people, as well as actual TRILLIONS of dollars of waste.
Right?
-Styopa
That's a poor comparison. When Anonymous becomes a publicly traded company that poses as a legitimate media player, then it would make sense. No shit Anonymous is breaking the law, that's what they do and they're doing so for a cause (whether it's justified or not is irrelevant, they seem to believe in it).
News Corp. eavesdropped on conversations for personal gain, oftentimes exploiting grieving families.
Selective outrage is certainly useful for the logical thinker who doesn't compare apples and oranges.
"From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."