Slashdot Mirror
Vatican Attack Provides Insight Into Anonymous
Hugh Pickens writes "John Markoff writes that an unsuccessful campaign against the Vatican by Anonymous, which did not receive wide attention at the time, provides a rare glimpse into the recruiting, reconnaissance, and warfare tactics used by the shadowy hacking collective and may be the first end-to-end record of a full Anonymous attack. The attack, called Operation Pharisee in a reference to the sect that Jesus called hypocrites, was initially organized by hackers in South America and Mexico and was designed to disrupt Pope Benedict XVI's visit to Madrid in August 2011 for World Youth Day and draw attention to child sexual abuse by priests. First the hackers spent weeks spreading their message through their own website and social sites like Twitter and Flickr calling on volunteers to download free attack software and imploring them to 'stop child abuse' by joining the cause. It took the hackers 18 days to recruit enough people, then a core group of roughly a dozen skilled hackers spent three days poking around the church's World Youth Day site looking for common security holes that could let them inside. In this case, the scanning software failed to turn up any gaps so the hackers turned to a brute-force approach of a distributed denial-of-service, On the first day, the denial-of-service attack resulted in 28 times the normal traffic to the church site, rising to 34 times the next day but did not crash the site. 'Anonymous is a handful of geniuses surrounded by a legion of idiots,' says Cole Stryker, an author who has researched the movement. 'You have four or five guys who really know what they're doing and are able to pull off some of the more serious hacks, and then thousands of people spreading the word, or turning their computers over to participate in a DDoS attack.'"
A new inquisition to capture and torture these basement dwelling monsters
The organization they were attacking.
Cue as well a number of people deriding the "a handful of geniuses surrounded by a legion of idiots" idea.
A protest is a protest. You're not an "idiot" just because you're not an organizer.
I originally read it as "Vulcan Attack" which perked me up for a moment. Those guys wouldn't just go after anybody.
Then my eyes focused better. Damned presbyopia.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
I think they are trying to debunk the idea that Anonymous is a legion of hackers. Instead Anonymous is a handful of hackers surrounded by a bunch of people with computers.
In Spain? I wasn't expecting that.
Speaking of digital Kool-Aid, that kind of balderdash is probably why they're a handful of genii surrounded by a legion of idiots. That's the demographic it appeals to.
That being said, it's charming the way they always say, "Expect us." In this day and age, it's very civilized to find anyone who RSVPs anymore, let alone a hacking group.
The Wolfpack Project: BitCoin + Crowdfunding = Political Accountability
Calling the core trolls geniuses is an overstatement. Most of them are just scriptkiddies whose most sophisticated attacks are correctly guessing when the password is 12345. The strategy of Anonymous is to try hacking against easy targets and DDoS against well-secured ones. And while DDoS is relatively easy to implement, the LOIC those "geniuses" came up with is a crappy tool.
No one was.
"Anonymous is a handful of geniuses surrounded by a legion of idiots,"
You can probably say this about most organizations in the world.
The Zeitgeist Movement
Victims? They don't get tricked into installing a botnet client. They install, configure and run a DDoS tool, voluntarily. Although botnet herders might participate sometimes, I don't think any infected computers count as Anonymous members...
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I didn't realize anyone thought that Anonymous was a legion of hackers. It's been previously reported that being part of Anonymous meant downloading DOS tools, so it should've already been clear that Anonymous wasn't a bunch of hackers. It seems to me that "legion of idiots" was just a gratuitous insult.
The article also raised two other points I thought were highly relevant:
First, the Vatican investigated in security and network infrastructure in a way designed to absorb attacks.
Second, they made the conscious decision that they weren't going to get into a PR battle with Anonymous (the Vatican official's quote about not commenting on real or potential threats.) A cynic might suggest that the Vatican is good at not commenting, but my takeaway is that this decision was mostly a "we're not going to give Anonymous the satisfaction of any sort of formal response." In a real sense, it's the same basic response that some of the most effective opposition to Westboro Baptist has given. The last thing Anonymous wants is to be ignored.
----------
Something cleverAttacking the Catholic Church in 2012 over the priest abuse scandal is like attacking Britain over John Major's policies.
The abuse scandal was a pattern of abuse and cover-up that exploded into the media spotlight in the late 80s/early 90s. The Church did wrong, but since then, they've done a lot of right - there's a zero-tolerance policies, lots of priests have been defrocked, billions in settlements have been paid, hundreds were jailed, etc. There will always be sexual abuse in any large organization with access to children - schools, Boy/Girl scouts, the YMCA, the Mendocino Physics Club, Gencon, whatever. So yes, there may be some that goes on today on a small scale...but what has changed is the organizational response. In 1970, a Bishop might have shuffled a pedophile priest to a different parish. Today, there's zero tolerance, formal processes, and a much greater awareness.
So...why attack in 2012? What is the point? If this was 1990, it'd be more understandable.
I think "anonymous" (aka a half-dozen bored kids) is just desperate to remain in the spotlight. The attention-getting is more important than any "cause". In fact, attention-getting is the cause.
Advice: on VPS providers
If it's age-related you can get glasses for ten bucks. Or a CrystaLens implant for $15,000.
back on topic... from TFS -- designed to disrupt Pope Benedict XVI's visit to Madrid in August 2011 for World Youth Day and draw attention to child sexual abuse by priests.
As if everybody and his dog didn't already know about the pedophlia. I never could understand the Catholic's refusal to let priests marry, considering that one of the Apostles (Peter maybe? I'd have to look it up) said that men should marry to avoid being tempted into sinful sex, and there's surely not much that's more sinful than raping children.
Free Martian Whores!
grammar: the difference between knowing your shit and knowing you're shit.
(blatantly ripped from a picture I saw on a social network)
An organisation doesn't survive a couple of millennia without being very good at PR...
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
I believe I heard that churches are statisically safer than schools or sports programs
No, churches are no less safe. It's just statistically more likely that they'll consider themselves above the law, and shuffle the pedophile priest over to the next parish, shred the memo, and move on.
The current pope was the man put in charge of shuffling the pedophiles around and keeping it out of the press. It is highly unlikely that things have grown safer for children under his watch. After all, if it had, why did the church need to get the republicans under Bush to pass a law disallowing lawsuits and legal actions? Because what we know is only the tip of the iceberg, and the idea that the pedophile priests have all been caught, or all magically stopped doing what gets them off, is laughable.
This isn't hacking, there's no skill, it is just having more bandwidth available than your target and being a dick. Of course that only works if you actually can have more bandwidth. As they found out Amazon didn't even blink, Amazon has WAY more resources than some dumbass script kiddies.
I never could understand the Catholic's refusal to let priests marry, considering that one of the Apostles (Peter maybe? I'd have to look it up) said that men should marry to avoid being tempted into sinful sex, and there's surely not much that's more sinful than raping children.
I get a lot of history across my plate sideways as it were, since my wife is a history and English teacher. It's kinda fun actually -- she's already mostly vetted the books by the time they make it to the house, so I don't have to slog through lots of BS to find the good reads. :)
On-topic here, the reason the Church (big-C Catholic Church) explicitly outlawed the clergy marrying was because of clergy folks setting themselves up as little hereditary fiefdoms, complete with lines of succession and all the fun politicking and internecine warfare that usually accompanies such an arrangement. Disallowing marriage meant breaking that line of power, and is not too dissimilar from policies at the State Department that forcibly rotate diplomats -- this prevents anyone from getting too cozy (at least in theory).
In more detail, celibacy was general Church policy possibly as far back as AD 300 and is certainly mentioned in the mid-400s. This policy was often overlooked though in the hurly burly of northern European politics, and it wasn't explicitly decreed against until the mid-1000s with the Gregorian reforms. Suffice it to say that it's complicated, but the crux of the issue was inheritance and power struggles related to it.
There's plenty more online via Google, or starting from this Wikipedia article.
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
You'd be surprised. And I'm saying that as a loyal Catholic.
As a loyal Catholic, I believe the Holy Spirit guides the Church, otherwise I wouldn't bet on it lasting 2000 days leave alone 2000 years. Although I support Pope Benedict and think he's done a lot of good, I believe the Church survives despite its leadership, not because of it... at least these days. And like all Catholics who have not turned away from the Church, there's a reason I remain loyal to Church despite all the nonsense and corruption that goes on, because it's a loyalty to Someone much more important than the people running it.
Having said that though, not giving Anonymous the satisfaction is absolutely the best thing to do.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
It was a typo. The decree originally said "celebrate", but the scribe was having an off day.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
I never could understand the Catholic's refusal to let priests marry, considering that one of the Apostles (Peter maybe? I'd have to look it up) said that men should marry to avoid being tempted into sinful sex, and there's surely not much that's more sinful than raping children.
Pedophile priests are not raping children because they can't marry. They're raping children because they are sick men who should never have been allowed to wear a collar in the first place.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
I believe I heard that churches are statisically safer than schools or sports programs
No, churches are no less safe. It's just statistically more likely that they'll consider themselves above the law, and shuffle the pedophile priest over to the next parish, shred the memo, and move on.
The current pope was the man put in charge of shuffling the pedophiles around and keeping it out of the press. It is highly unlikely that things have grown safer for children under his watch. After all, if it had, why did the church need to get the republicans under Bush to pass a law disallowing lawsuits and legal actions? Because what we know is only the tip of the iceberg, and the idea that the pedophile priests have all been caught, or all magically stopped doing what gets them off, is laughable.
Actually, according the Pew Foundation, which actually studies things like this, churches are statistically safer than public schools and sports programs. The difference is that by law, you cannot sue the government run schools and entities when this occurs, so you don't hear about it.
There is a significant amount of data available now, particularly because of the Survivor's Network for those Abused by Priests (SNAP) and it shows that the movement of pedophiles was not as wide spread through the US church as people think. It most definitely occurred in certain dioceses, but not everywhere.
I think your information about the Bush administration passing laws to prevent lawsuits on behalf of the church is also wrong. Those cases occurred in civil courts under state jurisdiction. Federal law didn't come into play. As a matter of fact, many states extended the statute of limitations on the cases, but only for those abused in a church setting, not a public school or any other setting.
The Pew Foundation studies also show that most of the abuse in the US was from men ordained to the priesthood in the sixties and early seventies. As such, most of them are no longer active in ministry, even if they were never caught do to age restrictions.
Just thought slashdot readers should have some accurate and verifiable information.
but wasn't Paul (or one of the anonymous authors writing under the Paul psuedonym) responsible for the decree that priests of the Catholic Church be celibate in order to focus their energies on God?
In the context of the rest of the epistle (i.e. letter), the advice is being given to missionaries, basically. I.e. when you are out travelling and spreading the word, don't also be running around trying to hook up with the locals -- it kind of messes with the message you are trying to teach. Do that before or after, not during.
It's generally thought that Paul himself was a widower when he left on his travels, as marriage was a prerequisite for his pre-conversion status as a Pharisee.
>> Standing on head makes smile of frown, but rest of face also upside down.
Centuries of burning people to death for attempting to translate the Bible into English should be enough of a clue by itself.
Wikipedia describes the many English translations of scripture, starting long, long before the Reformation (the first translator they mention is St. Bede), with the Douay-Rheims version (from around 1600, preceding the KJV by a few years) as the "first complete English Catholic Bible."
Not to say there weren't people burned to death. I'd add that exaggeration doesn't help your case, but then I look at Fox News.
You save only 59 seconds over 8 miles by going 75 instead of 65. Do you really have to pass that guy? Do the Math!
This, exactly this.
The article (that I didn't read) exposes how it's just a group that works the exact same way as usual social dissidents. The authors don't realize that the idiots could very well be leaders in another action, and how stupidly fast and easy it is to become a leader. Anonymous is a brand name for dissidence, not an organized criminal network.
That's what it means, "we are legion". It means everyone can be replaced as long as anyone has the motivation to rally enough people to Get Shit Done.
Making laws based on opinions that stem up from false informations leads to witch hunts.
Sounds like little more than a language exercise. If you're volunteering yourself to be unobscured fodder, I guess you might be both a volunteer and a victim.
Same could be said of belonging to the Catholic church then.
seems to me that "legion of idiots" was just a gratuitous insult
It probably was just that...a sound bite for the mass media to be able to report on Anonymous as a bunch of idiots, rather than the slowly growing collective of like-minded individuals hell bent on keeping the power & freedom of the Internet/world in the hands of the people, not those in power. This way, the sheeple think of them as criminals, but revere the government as their protector (from what, only those idiots can tell you).
It's all spin, baby!
Will draft for food...
I thought "genius" was the gratuitous part. I would go more with "A handful of moderately competent hackers surrounded by a legion of fucking morons".
Moderately competent hackers perhaps, but they seem to be very good with PR and group psychology. Channeling all the petty acts of vandalism and bending them to your purposes ... #include "godwin.h".
The Church has always lived within the rush of humanity. That it is affiliated with child rape says much more about western culture than it does about the church, if one looks at teachers, coaches, youth leaders and of course priests you will see that they all fall percentage wise into similar numbers of child predators.
In other words it's a lot like saying Democrats are criminals, because more blacks vote Democrat, and blacks have the highest incarceration rate. There's a HELL of a lot of "ism", assumption and ignorance in that statement - similar to your own comments.
I said no... but I missed and it came out yes.
Lets start off with a real world correction, "Anonymous" has a whole history of legal public protest prior https://whyweprotest.net/anonymous-scientology/ , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Chanology prior to any yarns about 4chan, global conspiracies, organised crime RICO distortions, handful of geniuses and legion of idiots or any other ludicrous mass media distortions.
Where it has gone since those days has never been challenged by those that worked to initiate the idea, as it is and always will be the individuals own choice and responsibility for what they choose to do in the name of "Anonymous",up to and including false flag events, (stupid enough to do it to yourself why would anyone protest).
Just another lame arsed "please buy my book" sensationalist. Whether it's a dead tree work by a short run minor publisher and a desperate author or a web site eventually you just start to ignore them as pointless.
The only thing that should ever be challenged is, government investigative agents seeking to gain promotion by destroying the lives of unskilled teenagers with claims of terrorism and threats to vital infrastructure with the hoodoo of "Anonymous". When government agencies started testing recruits with lie detectors completely forgetting psychopaths are born capable of passing any lie detector test, what other result could be expected.
Lazy sensationalist journalism of course does it's bit to promote readership over the truth and the harm it's lies of omission and distortion will cause it's victims.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Our chief weapon is LOIC... LOIC and HOIC...HOIC and LOIC.... Our two weapons are HOIC and LOIC...and ruthless legion of idiots.... Our *three* weapons are HOIC, LOIC, and ruthless legion of idiots... and an almost fanatical devotion to the Anonymous... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as HOIC, LOIC.... I'll come in again.
Sometimes religion leads to attacking people. And not only to attacking computers.
"we are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further."
You're right about that, but you imply that there is no causal link between the pedophilia in Catholic priests and celibacy, and I'll argue that there is a causal link.
I'd argue that the causation is in the selection bias that the celibacy requirement creates. By saying that priests must be celibate, the Catholic church eliminates a huge chunk of good, non-pedophile men who might consider the priesthood if they could have sex.
The pedophiles are going to try to become priests no matter what - the celibacy requirement doesn't deter them. The celibacy requirement does deter non-pedophiles. And so with many fewer non-pedophile applicants, that skews the percentages towards pedophiles.
If my government is currently attacking Iran. That means my nation is at war with Iran and everything that entails. You're damn straight I want to know about that.
If you think these are the first info management steps to WW3, what the hell is an IN PROGRESS attack on Iran going to lead to?
Members of the Catholic church doesn't involve attacking people? Thats a good one. Haven't heard a joke that good in a while. They've toned down on the physical attacks on non-believers the last few centuries, but I assure you they attack people with the power of their words and influence on politics. At least as effective as any attacks Anonymous does.
They don't have any history prior to 4chan. Their hacking activities predate their meatspace protests.
I don't really get your rambling about false flag RICO conspiracies, since I didn't mention any of that, but sure, whatever.
What you call the Holy Spirit, I call a viable systems model. It only requires an executor branch (Systems 1-2), a managerial layer (Systems 3-4) with self-regulating oversight, and a central core (System 5) responsible to keep the organization's identity steering it to adapt to changes in the environment. A viable system may very well last for centuries or millenia if its parts are kept under control with, say, a really strict ideollogy that punish getting out of the orthodoxy.
Guess what? The Catholic church has all these, and are all human (you may even recognize System 5 as a Very Important figure).
Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
So anyone who is recruited into or joins a protest is a socially-engineered victim?
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
"Oh, and the fact that it's a verbatim quote from the Gospels. Pure coincidence."
Yep. Take just about ANY three words that make sense together, and they have been used millions of times over the years. And because the phrases "we are legion" and even "I am legion" have been used in many places and many contexts that are NOT even remotely related to the bible, I would say that indeed, it is much more likely than not that they had no intention of referring to scriptures when they made it part of their motto. It isn't even a direct quote. They did not say "I am Legion", they say "we are legion".
If that passage had said instead, "I am Many" (which is all it means) or "I am Multitude" would you call out anybody who says "we are many" too? Ridiculous.
Repeat: "legion" is not a name, even as used in the bible. It is simply a noun ("a legion of soldiers") meaning "many", or an adjective ("the rocks on the hillside were legion"), again meaning "many".
You sound to me like the kind of person who sees images of Jesus on burnt toast.
I'm guessing the John Markoff who wrote the first article is the guy who wrote to the world about the dangers of Kevin Mitnick. It's a good thing Kevin was stopped before launching those nukes. Thank god for responsible journalism and best selling books.
A steaming cup of soykaf would be real wiz right now.
In the UK, but here ya go... eat a british keyboard.
Teachers union official says teachers who have consensual sex with pupils should not face prosecution
http://www.pctattletale.com/blog/133/teachers-union-official-supports-sex-offenders/
Here's some state schools that had abused children for decades...
In Seattle, state school for the deaf had decades of abuse:
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Decades-of-sex-abuse-plague-deaf-school-1053009.php#page-2
Canadian state school, 40 years of reported abuse:
http://www.survivingthepast.ca/gillsterinc/schools/4-1_History.htm
New York state school, another 40 years of abuse:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willowbrook_State_School#More_scandals_and_abuses
Recent scandal in LA, confirmed 175 kids abused for years, more expected
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/02/09/l-a-s-school-sex-abuse-scandal-widens.html
Check google for teacher abuse and you'll find about hundreds of active cases being reported in the news. According to the best statistics we have, about 10% of children are sexually abused at schools.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/02/is_sexual_abuse_in_schools_very_common_.html
I said no... but I missed and it came out yes.