25 Alleged Anonymous Hackers Arrested By Interpol

PatPending sends this quote from an AFP report: "Interpol has arrested 25 suspected members of the Anonymous hackers group in a swoop covering more than a dozen cities in Europe and Latin America, the global police body said Tuesday. Operation Unmask was launched in mid-February following a series of coordinated cyber-attacks originating from Argentina, Chile, Colombia and Spain,' Interpol said. The statement cited attacks on the websites of the Colombian Ministry of Defense and the presidency, as well as on Chile's Endesa electricity company and its National Library, among others. The operation was carried out by police from Argentina, Chile, Colombia and Spain, the statement said, with 250 items of computer equipment and cell phones seized in raids on 40 premises in 15 cities. Police also seized credit cards and cash from the suspects, aged 17 to 40."

Comments

Interpol

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought we established in the previous Slashdot post about the 'won't pray to Mohammed' guy that Interpol itself couldn't arrest anyone.

Re:Interpol

[zippo01]

"The operation was carried out by police from Argentina, Chile, Colombia and Spain, the statement said, with 250 items of computer equipment and cell phones seized in raids on 40 premises in 15 cities. Police also seized credit cards and cash from the suspects, aged 17 to 40." The way I read it is Interpol Interpol coordinated everything, and physical arrest was made by locals.

Re:Interpol

[Tar-Alcarin]

Except, of course, the headline states: "Interpol Arrests 25 Suspected Anonymous Hackers"

I know that headlines need to be short, to the point etc, but they could have rephrased it with "Interpol has 25 Suspected Anonymous Hackers Arrested", and it would be accurate.

Re:Interpol

[Anonymous Coward]

"Interpol differs from most law-enforcement agencies -- agents do not make arrests themselves, and there is no single Interpol jail where criminals are taken. The agency functions as an administrative liaison between the law-enforcement agencies of the member countries, providing communications and database assistance."

Re:Interpol

[Tar-Alcarin]

Yes, I too have RTFA, and I know they explain things in there.

The problem is that it's the headlines that get republished and read everywhere, thus reiterating the fallacy that Interpol makes arrests.
This /. story is just one example of how people rewrite the heading and get the wrong idea.

Re:Interpol

[flyneye]

Let us further put this in perspective.
Interpol finds 25 drones,who, while a microscopic part of a greater good, were too dumb to cover their tracks. Interpol pats itself on the back for generating headlines cheaply through ineffective, but showy action.

We should also consider that Anonymous exists for the purpose of Meta-vigilance in a world of unwatched watchmen and corrupt governments. Participants who stray to unofficial actions like " C.C.Fraud" have no business claiming the Anonymous banner as theirs.(obviously not too anonymous if they got caught, duh)
Let's call a spade, a spade and a club, a club.

Re:Interpol

[Antique Geekmeister]

Hardly. Interpol helps arrest 25 drones who participate in semi-organized cyber-guerrilla warfare against political targets. The idea that Anonymous is serving the "greater good" is not implied by their targets or by their results. Anonymous is not _coherent_ enough to have a well defined purpose. They consistently mistake what is effectively electronic graffiti for meaningful protest, and fail to convey or enunciate what they actually want. Anonymous may well have a few technically competent core hackers, but they rely heavily on their much larger community of script kiddies and poorly skilled hangers on to form the necessary crowds.

Like the fools at political rallies who throw bottles at police and overturn cars, they actively _discredit_ the political causes they occasionally espouse. They encourage police and voters to think of the genuine political movements as similar vandals. And they're not _competent_ enough to be genuine threats to those they claim to battle: they've demonstrated that again and again. If they were competent enough to actually raid corporate email or financial records and get them to Wikileaks, then I'd take them far more seriously.

Re:Interpol

[webheaded]

Wow I have been on the internet too much lately. I read that last part as "arrested by lolcats."

Re:Interpol

[DrXym]

Interpol finds 25 drones,who, while a microscopic part of a greater good, were too dumb to cover their tracks. Interpol pats itself on the back for generating headlines cheaply through ineffective, but showy action.

I expect most countries have laws at this stage to cover denial of service attacks and if they were part of it they can be done for it. Whether they were ringleaders or pawns they are still alleged to have participated in organised attacks. If their machines show evidence of participation (e.g. LOIC tools or whatever), or they confess then you can bet they'll have the book thrown at them.

Perhaps it might even dissuade other people from participating in future attacks. It amazes me that anyone is stupid enough to install tools to participate but clearly many do. If message sinks in that there are consequences and they can be caught, they might think twice.

Re:Interpol

[DanTheStone]

Let us further put this in perspective. Interpol finds 25 drones,who, while a microscopic part of a greater good, were too dumb to cover their tracks. Interpol pats itself on the back for generating headlines cheaply through ineffective, but showy action.

Oh, of course. Kind of like
FBI arrests Homegrown Terrorist who tentatively decided to blow stuff up because the FBI contacted him, convinced him it was a good idea, provided him with fake explosives, and came up with the plan.

Re:Interpol

[noh8rz2]

in a world of un-watched watchmen and corrupt governments.

zOMG who's watching the meta-watchmen! Put down your comic books and get a grip. I don't need to reiterate the points made in other replies, but suffish to say, the justice league they are not.

Re:Interpol

[noh8rz2]

It was the guy who dissed Muhammad over twitter, then fled from a Muslim country to Nother Muslim country, and was subsequently deported to the original Muslim country.

Re:Interpol

[Tom]

Like the fools at political rallies who throw bottles at police and overturn cars, they actively _discredit_ the political causes they occasionally espouse.

Life rarely is that simple.

They have also given a face (literally) to the protest that could not express itself so far, because it is general unhappiness with a lot of things that are going wrong. And the only people who have been doing that kind of protest so far were the punks and anarchists that most people, even young adults, don't want to be associated with.

Anonymous gives this a much cooler and more respectable image. Yes, I said "respectable" there - look at the surface. Compare the character from V with a random street punk. Neither are exactly the good guy in the white vest, but V is a lot more likeable.

So while there is some discrediting involved, there is also a lot of mobilizing. Many people are now protesting, who would not have protested at all otherwise.

If they were competent enough to actually raid corporate email or financial records and get them to Wikileaks, then I'd take them far more seriously.

Stratfor

Re:Interpol

[Isaac Remuant]

How about "Interpol coordinates arrests of 25 Suspected Anonymous Hackers".

I'm aware that the way in which english media words their titles might be different though. It might be too long and the use of the word "of" might be unnecessary.

Re:Interpol

[Anonymous Coward]

"Like the fools at political rallies who throw bottles at police and overturn cars, they actively _discredit_ the political causes they occasionally espouse."

Those aren't fools - they're agents provocateurs: either undercover police themselves, hired, or turned from the ranks of convicted criminals to reduce sentences.

Where've you been for the past 50 years?

You're certainly correct about Anonymous though - a rag-tag band of disorganization, if ever there was one. Familiar description though, isn't it?

Re:Interpol

[Kagato]

Interpol is just an administrative organization. They run the databases that alert other nations of warrants. They really have no standards for what they allow. For instance just last month Interpol allowed a warrant from Saudai Arabia for a Saudai social media blogger who was critical of the muslin faith and saudai government. He was detained in Malaysia on his way to New Zealand from the Interpol warrant and put on the first plane back to Saudai Arabia. He will most likely be executed (typically by beheading).

Re:Interpol

[g0bshiTe]

+1 if I had it.

Re:Interpol

[g0bshiTe]

I supposed he is more likeable because he has better manners than a random street punk. He also is for the little guy, whereas the street punk is out for himself. That's a really bad analogy.

Re:Interpol

[Chakra5]

problems seemingly inherent in vigilantism. Also, anarchy makes for a nice T-shirt, but in reality it ends up with bullies, thieves and fools loose in the works. ....of course that also seems to be the result of organized politics, so not sure what that adds up to in the end. People are often borked and the collective efforts of said people reflects that. the antidote mostly seems to be education and inclusion in the uber-system dejour

Re:Interpol

[xevioso]

No, they are fools. The idiots who do this in the streets in Oakland, CA, for example, when there are Occupy protests, are not "agent provacateurs". They are thugs who come in from suburban areas to cause trouble. They want to make a point against capitalism and banks and they think that by bashing cops (who struggle to protect citizens in Oakland) and throwing bricks through mom and pop Subway franchises they are making some point.

Re:Interpol

[thereitis]

I also find headlines that say " arrests criminal" somewhat annoying. Could they be a bit more specific?

Re:Interpol

[thereitis]

(let's try square brackets) I also find headlines that say "[country] arrests criminal" somewhat annoying. Could they be a bit more specific?

Re:Interpol

[Chakra5]

Compare the character from V with a random street punk. Neither are exactly the good guy in the white vest, but V is a lot more likeable.

Perhaps to you. Also you might wish to investigate who Guy Faulks actually was, who he associated with, what his "ideals" where and what theat whole plan would have resulted in.

So while there is some discrediting involved, there is also a lot of mobilizing. Many people are now protesting, who would not have protested at all otherwise.

The people I saw on the street in occupy had little interest in anon. And there are a hell of a lot more people on the internet working toward change that have absolutely no interest in the methods of anon let alone participate or support them than are just being connected via the web. There's a crapload of revisionism that seems to go on from people who think the point is to rebel and be and look counter-culture rather than to actually work toward real and productive change.

Re:Interpol

[tqk]

If their machines show evidence of participation (e.g. LOIC tools ...

A bit more thought on your part would be appreciated. I have nmap on all of my boxes. That doesn't mean I'm attacking other people's networks.

Re:Interpol

[theNAM666]

>If they were competent enough to actually raid corporate email or financial records and get them to Wikileaks, then I'd take them far more seriously.

You HAVE heard of Stratfor, haven't you ;P ?

Re:Interpol

[DrXym]

No it doesn't but LOIC is not nmap. Unless you were an actual bonafide security researcher, your reasons for having LOIC installed is not likely to be very plausible, especially if your IP address was logged in an attack. And even if we were talking of a tool like nmap which has legit uses, that is not going to save you if you and a bunch of likeminded people had pointed it at some site in an attempt to DDOS it. You're still committing a crime leaving IP addresses on the remote end for the cops to follow up.

I assume fairly simple to gather up the IPs most prominent in the attack, find out which country they belong to, establish what laws they've broken and then have the probable cause for local police beat their doors down and seize their kit. It may transpire that some of these people were innocent, running Tor exit nodes or whatever but I suspect most of them are just idiots who decided to run LOIC and didn't have the sense to realise they're committing an easily traceable crime.

Re:Interpol

[radtea]

Like the fools at political rallies who throw bottles at police and overturn cars, they actively _discredit_ the political causes they occasionally espouse.

Those people are all professional provocateurs. I mean, what else could they be? No one who uses violence in the nominal pursuit of a political cause could possibly be an actual supporter of that cause because the data shows conclusively that violence does nothing but move the cause backward.

So if you see anyone using violence of any kind at any political demonstration they MUST be being paid by groups opposed to the cause to smear it. The only alternative explanation is that there are people out there so brain-dead stupid that they think using violence somehow increases the odds that their cause will be achieved, and I mean really, how plausible is that?

Re:Interpol

[flyneye]

Yeah, what Tom said.
"

Re:Interpol

[flyneye]

Yeah like laws dissuade drugs , murder and jaywalking. I think you got no point there.
Laws don't protect anything, they only make criminals of everyone.

Re:Interpol

[flyneye]

Well, Mr.zOMG, in the absence of your superfriends and the lack of any other recourse, men bigger than yourself anonymously fight the good fight while you "get a grip" on your little unit.

Re:Interpol

[phantomfive]

We should also consider that Anonymous exists for the purpose of Meta-vigilance in a world of unwatched watchmen and corrupt governments.

What? They exist for the LULZ. If you think anything more, you've been duped.

Re:Interpol

[Antique Geekmeister]

> So if you see anyone using violence of any kind at any political demonstration they MUST be being paid by groups opposed to the cause to smear it

Oh, no! Armed revolt was written into US Declaration of Indepencence, and certainly has historical uses. Even political graffiti has its uses. But badly spelled, misaimed, and inconsistent "graffiti" such as the Anonymous pranks lacks any intelligible message and discredits itself as a political factor with its incompetence.

For examples of effective non-violent social protest look at the history of Martin King and the Women's Suffrage movement in the US. For effective violent uprising, look at some of the Middle East protests over the last 2 years or the history of Ireland or even Afghanistan.

Re:Interpol

[Tom]

It doesn't matter where the inspiration comes from, if it inspires.

The V character is secondary. What works is the Anonymous image/mask, because the movie (and probably comic, didn't read that) got one thing right: Masks still serve the same purpose they always have, and we had only forgotten about it except during carnival.

The principle of Anonymous is to hide the people behind the purpose and focus on the purpose. That there are no leaders in Anonymous is more than just a strategy to avoid arrest. It also makes the movement immune to attacks on its leadership, because anyone can replace it. The persons don't matter as much as the purpose.

And that is a lesson it has in common with the Arab Spring. There were no leaders there. A couple people got quoted or gave speeches more often than others, but the movement could not be stopped because it had not head to cut off - a strategy that tyrants employ regularily against uprisings.

Re:Interpol

[Tom]

Perhaps to you. Also you might wish to investigate who Guy Faulks actually was, who he associated with, what his "ideals" where and what theat whole plan would have resulted in.

I have. But at this point, it doesn't matter. He has become a symbol and his original message has long since become irrelevant.

And there are a hell of a lot more people on the internet working toward change that have absolutely no interest in the methods of anon let alone participate or support them than are just being connected via the web.

Again, you are right but real life is bigger and more complicated.

For the past 20 years or so, those of us who had an interest in civil rights in the Internet sphere had been doing much fighting against windmills. I used to work with the EFF, tried to found a EFF Europe, got into a few lawsuits, even gained a little bit of publicity. I also watched how the lobbyists and corrupt politicians steamrolled over us without a second thought because we were few and couldn't compete in the bribery. I've heard the tales from the other folks about how the EFF once tried to enter the lobby circus in Washington DC and the only thing it got them was burning out their own people.

You can't say I didn't try. And I still believe in the EFF et al. - but I also think they don't have the resources nor abilities to mobilize masses of people and on their own they wouldn't have been able to put a stop on ACTA.

Anonymous - for whatever reasons of coolness and movie cliches - reach people and get newspaper and TV news coverage. When's the last time you've seen the EFF mentioned in the evening news?

We definitely need both. Someone who can mobilize people to go on the street and give the TV news the footage they want to put your issue into the evening news, and someone who fights in the courtrooms and can provide expert talks to the news.

Re:Interpol

[Chakra5]

Perhaps to you. Also you might wish to investigate who Guy Faulks actually was, who he associated with, what his "ideals" where and what theat whole plan would have resulted in.

I have. But at this point, it doesn't matter. He has become a symbol and his original message has long since become irrelevant.

While I get your point, I would say a symbol based on a very deep fallacy...that's not a good way to start, and I would say that's not at all irrelevant. It might be to the people who worship the caricature (which in and of itself is half the point I'm making), but to me it also shows how myopic and infused with 'form over substance' that particular movement can mostly be.

And there are a hell of a lot more people on the internet working toward change that have absolutely no interest in the methods of anon let alone participate or support them than are just being connected via the web.

Again, you are right but real life is bigger and more complicated.

For the past 20 years or so, those of us who had an interest in civil rights in the Internet sphere had been doing much fighting against windmills. I used to work with the EFF, tried to found a EFF Europe, got into a few lawsuits, even gained a little bit of publicity. I also watched how the lobbyists and corrupt politicians steamrolled over us without a second thought because we were few and couldn't compete in the bribery. I've heard the tales from the other folks about how the EFF once tried to enter the lobby circus in Washington DC and the only thing it got them was burning out their own people.

You can't say I didn't try. And I still believe in the EFF et al. - but I also think they don't have the resources nor abilities to mobilize masses of people and on their own they wouldn't have been able to put a stop on ACTA.

Anonymous - for whatever reasons of coolness and movie cliches - reach people and get newspaper and TV news coverage. When's the last time you've seen the EFF mentioned in the evening news?

We definitely need both. Someone who can mobilize people to go on the street and give the TV news the footage they want to put your issue into the evening news, and someone who fights in the courtrooms and can provide expert talks to the news.

Good for you (heartfelt). Bob knows we need activism and folks working to change the system and try to make this a better place for all concerned.

That said, Paris Hilton got a lot of media coverage too. not sure that's worth anything on it's face without substance. And King got covered by the media plenty. Principled effective action can take place in the public eye, but takes talent and sacrifice most often. Above all it benefits from being couched in authenticity. Not only in the symbology, but in the motivation for the actions. People smell the bullshit. You may be running in circles where anon cache is high, but i can assure you that is limited and I work in deep nerdom.

The vein these guys tweak is mostly an immature one by my way of thinking. I'd prefer a less self centered and self aggrandizing hypocritical vigilante process, sexy or not.

Many actions limit the freedoms of legally operating web presences. Yet they espouse freedom of speech. That's hypocrisy to my mind.

And I can't tell you how often I've read someone claiming that anon gets the credit for the occupy movement. How many ways is a statement like that telling?

I have no doubt there are good people involved but they sure must be the minority, because the actions and statements are often more akin to a child with a gun, or action bend on proving they have an enormous e-penis than mature action to make a better world. The later seems more like cover to fuck with people who have offended them or behaved contrary to their dictates or to moon authority (not that mooning authority every now and again isn't a good move mind you, just don't sell it to me as mythica

Re:Interpol

[Tom]

I'm with you that there are a lot of kids involved who don't really care for anything beyond an option to show off.

But sometimes that's what you need. Young, angry men are what has driven pretty much every revolution in the history of man. Not all of them were too political.

And yes, many of the actions are juvenile. Hitting the CIA website with a DDOS attack does absolutely nothing to disrupt their operations. And for VISA, etc. it's an inconvenience. Hit their payment servers and you really hurt them.

But then again, this largely inconsequential actions is exactly what makes Anon activities more similar to civil disobedience than actual attacks, and in the long run that may yet prove to be an important difference.

Re:Interpol

[Chakra5]

Could be Tom, could be.

I have always felt that we're going to get a bit dirty here. Certainly the 60's the tail end of which I had a ringside seat was anything but pure in the methods that rolled into the great inertia. The Weather underground. The Pathers. Malcom. Hell, I was at Altamont and I can assure you it was one sorry mess. and Kennedy and King where not perfect human beings. It's just that their actions and ideals where far more important than any human flaws.

that's not the case with Anon for me. They are in it for the wrong reasons as a very general statement.

I think where we may differ, at least by degree is with regard to how much of the warts get a free pass and a hearty pat on the back. No myths. No false prophets. And BS gets called out. No free pass on fundamental flaws in motivation and execution just because feathers get ruffled on a bureaucratic/system in disparate need of overhaul. We need change of a higher order....but I won't pass on change of an incremental nature in the right direction, I just won't call it holy and righteous.

Appreciate the good discussion brother!

Re:Interpol

[Tom]

No free pass on fundamental flaws in motivation and execution just because feathers get ruffled on a bureaucratic/system in disparate need of overhaul. We need change of a higher order....but I won't pass on change of an incremental nature in the right direction, I just won't call it holy and righteous.

That sums it up nicely.

Anonymous has picked its image well. The character V is deeply flawed and his motivations and methods doubtful. But in the end, he's doing the right thing. Love him or hate him, but he gets the job done.

And I think that is exactly what many people hope Anon will do. Their methods are juvenile, their motivation is more ego-driven than visionary, but they are drawing away some of the curtains, and getting attention to something that has been hidden for too long.

I remember a good Zen story about a peasant talking to a monk, asking for advise, because he lost his temper with a guy at the market and hit him over the head with his umbrella. And since Buddhism tells you to be peaceful, he now regrets it, but he says the guy was acting really terrible, and has been doing it all the time, and he just couldn't help it. And hitting him did make him stop. But still, he feels horrible.
The monk says: "You are rightly upset that you could not stay calm. It is important to not lose ones temper and stay in the moment, and hatred is a bad motivation. So next time, if he acts up again, remain calm and maintain your inner peace. And hit him over the head again, as apparently that is the language he understands."

Re:Interpol

[Chakra5]

The monk says: "You are rightly upset that you could not stay calm. It is important to not lose ones temper and stay in the moment, and hatred is a bad motivation. So next time, if he acts up again, remain calm and maintain your inner peace. And hit him over the head again, as apparently that is the language he understands."

Love it! Thanks. Great way to start the day.

Re:Interpol

[kefkahax]

You *STILL* think that there's some organization there? The fact is, they are you and you are them. You don't have to sit on their server to join any particular action. And, you can actively fight against them using their logos and name. I use "their/them/etc.." poorly. It should really be "ours".

Fail

[xenobyte]

What does credit cards and cash have to do with DoS and Anonymous?!

Do they really think that Anonymous pays people for performing attacks or what? - They seriously need to look up what Anonymous is.

Re:Fail

[SuricouRaven]

It's standard procedure in policing to sieze anything and everything for which even the slightest excuse exists. There are three reasons:
- Because it's easier to take the lot at arrest and work out later what is actually relivant rather than get that done beforehand.
- Intimidation value. The most miserable the suspect, and the more their life is ruined, the more other potential offenders will fear the police.
- Profit! Much of the equipment is never returned even if the suspect is later found innocent, or even released without charge, and eventually gets sold at police auction.

Re:Fail

[gl4ss]

It's standard procedure in policing to sieze anything and everything for which even the slightest excuse exists. There are three reasons:
- Because it's easier to take the lot at arrest and work out later what is actually relivant rather than get that done beforehand.
- Intimidation value. The most miserable the suspect, and the more their life is ruined, the more other potential offenders will fear the police.
- Profit! Much of the equipment is never returned even if the suspect is later found innocent, or even released without charge, and eventually gets sold at police auction.

this is especially true in countries not so well off. like all the countries mentioned.

also the intimidation value is for the suspect in the case.. so that he'll fess up and confess. because the chances are the cops questioning the suspects have no fucking idea what they're trying to get the guy to confess to!

Re:Fail

[gmack]

Anon/lolsec made it much easier for the police to do this by bragging that they engaged in credit card fraud(used stolen card numbers for charitable donations).

Re:Fail

[Anonymous Coward]

And often because their instructions are something like, "Take all the computers and anything that looks like you can connect it to a computer."

Re:Fail

[L4t3r4lu5]

LulzSec is to Anon as Westboro' Baptist is to Christianity; Similar ideas, taken too far.

Re:Fail

[PhilHibbs]

How hard would it be to hide a USB storage device in a joystick, in the hope that the police will think "This is just a joystick, we don't need to take it"?

Re:Fail

[Pax681]

What does credit cards and cash have to do with DoS and Anonymous?!

Do they really think that Anonymous pays people for performing attacks or what? - They seriously need to look up what Anonymous is.

i know what you mean but it happens here in Scotland and, i suppose, in England,Wales and Northern Ireland and in the US too!
the credit card, bank details and,in Scotland, items of value bought within the last twelve years. If it is proven that you are guilty then the resultant items can be sold as "proceeds of crime".
i would however contest that there were no "proceeds of crime" in these cases as it wasn't some tax evasion, drug dealing, gun running or other profitable criminal activity
it may however be just part of standard procedure or just an extra "fuck you" as a warning shot to other Anons.
In Scotland the items ARE RETURNED is a verdict of NIT GUILTY is arrived at or if there is no case to answer or no charges brought
i know this as a buddy of mine had this happen to him recently. the charges were dropped and his lawyer made damned sure he got his stuff back
The credit card may well have been used to pay for domain names/hosting or some-such. and thus easily linking the people to the actions they are accused of.

Re:Fail

[Pax681]

argh.. damn my craptastic typage! a verdict of "NOT" guilty.....
NIT GUILTY.. the fleas did it sir!" :P

Re:Fail

[Anonymous Coward]

The police will seize it, but they probably won't actually analyse it. You can get USB flash drives which look like a USB cable. OTOH, micro-SD cards are so small that they're highly unlikely to be found if hidden.

Re:Fail

[realityimpaired]

If I was trying to hide a USB storage device, I wouldn't hide it in a joystick, or in anything else you could connect to a computer.

Actually, I wouldn't even hide it in a USB stick. I'd copy the data to a MicroSD card, and put it somewhere hard to find, like taped to the back of a painting, or taped to the underside of a drawer in the kitchen. Some kitchen knives have removable handles so you can clean them, and there's usually plenty of space in one of those to hide a MicroSD card.

That being said, I have no reason to bother with any of that. I'm not involved in anything criminal, and have other ways to secure stuff like my banking data. (incognito window, on a computer that doesn't have Flash installed?). I don't really care if the police find a copy of my monthly budget or my professional resume, as it's all information they could find quite easily by either googling me, or subpoenaing my bank records.

Re:Fail

[__aaltlg1547]

Because there's usually a financial angle to fraud networks. They probably suspect them of using computers for.more than vandalism.

Re:Fail

[MountainLogic]

Dear Mr. realityimpaired (1668397),

Thanks you for bringing this to our attention. We will now make a detailed search of the cyber criminal's knives.

Further, can you expand on your feelings regarding knives and banking data? Do you feel your banking data is really a weapon? How does having your financial data inside a knife make you feel? Do you have violent feeling towards banks and people who work at banks? Perhaps you would like to chat with my coworkers about these feelings. I'll have them drop by real soon. No trouble at all, we'll let ourselves in.

Warmest Regards,

You buddies in blue at Interpol, pre-crimes division

Re:Fail

[stephanruby]

What does credit cards and cash have to do with DoS and Anonymous?!

I have no idea.

Also, shouldn't they be called El Anonimoto (or something), since this group only seems to be limiting itself to Spanish-speaking countries and Spanish-related current events?

Re:Fail

[SuricouRaven]

Which raises the question of just how far a search team might go, if they believe the suspect has deliberatly hidden things. A really through search, including things like 'dropped down the U-bend in the bath so it can only be retrieved with a magnet on a stick' wouldn't leave very much of the building intact.

Re:Fail

[Tom]

The problem with all of this is that it's a hassle to keep that data updated.

For most of us, the most valuable data we have - our personal records, source code, etc. - is constantly changing.

If anyone here knows of a small, battery-powered, wireless (i.e. WLAN) device that can be used as a hidden data container, please post a link and I'll very likely buy one today. My personal threat model is more burglars than police, but from a risk perspective there's little difference between the two.

Yes, I know off-site storage to a server would work. But here's the thing: Hassle. My iMac can do fully-automated backups using Time Machine to any local or remote drive, but not over the Internet.

Re:Fail

[gambino21]

LulzSec is to Anon as Westboro' Baptist is to Christianity; Similar ideas, taken too far.

LulzSec is to Anon as Westboro' Baptist is to Christianity; A bunch of trolls that don't believe their own message.

I thought the message of LulzSec was "We're in it for the Lulz". I don't see any reason to doubt that they believe their own message.

Re:Fail

[gsslay]

What does credit cards and cash have to do with DoS and Anonymous?!

What does DoS and Anonymous have to do with the arrests? Anonymous is not an illegal organisation.

These people were not arrested because they are allegedly members of Anonymous (membership in this case being a vague concept), but because they were allegedly involved in crime involving computers and communications. Therefore it is not unreasonable to investigate whether they were involved in computer crime involving bank account, cash and credit cards. The police would be foolish not to take what may be important evidence.

Re:Fail

[lpq]

"this is especially true in countries not so well off. like all the countries mentioned."

This is especially true in the _US_...

Getting back property is an uphill battle -- the constitution doesn't apply to "things", the courts have decided -- meaning the government doesn't have to prove guilt, they can require you (the defendant) prove your property is "innocent" of all crimes or involvement in crimes,

It has been this way since the "anti-drug-king-pin" laws were signed into law under "Bush, the first" in the late 80's. The laws were supposed to allow freezing assets so drug-king pins couldn't flee the country (also prevented them from accessing expensive lawyers and allowed them access only to government owned (public)
"defenders", who's fiduciary duty is to the prosecutors (the government).

 

Re:Fail

[robsku]

+1 to parent and grandparent =)

Wrong wording.

[bejiitas_wrath]

sed s/hackers/crackers/gi;

A hacker is a person that is modifying something to change it, like hacking on source code to improve it.

A cracker is a person who is trying to break into computer systems.

Re:Wrong wording.

[rikkards]

Wording is what society makes it. Sorry hacking is now associated as much with the latter definition as the former and posting that is not going to change anything.

Re:Wrong wording.

[SuricouRaven]

Words change. What was originally a misuse of the word 'hacker' has since become dominant over the earlier meaning.

Re:Wrong wording.

[JockTroll]

And that's why we can still say "nigger".

Re:Wrong wording.

[tao]

A cracker is a person who's modifying software to remove the copy protections, adding missing functionality (for games this would be cheat modes), shortening things, etc., to improve it.

Re:Wrong wording.

[f3rret]

Words do this thing where they change meaning through regular use.

It's interesting, if you're a language nerd, you're obviously not one.

Re:Wrong wording.

[msobkow]

Damn Angelina Jolie for showing her tits and making that lame movie memorable!

Re:Wrong wording.

[Anonymous Coward]

Educated people tend to place importance upon using words correctly so that complex communication remains possible. They will often note that the common use of a word has shifted, yet still promote its intended use.

Giving control of your language to people who can't (or simply won't) communicate correctly is a bad idea.

Re:Wrong wording.

[Anonymous Coward]

I routinely use "gay" in that sense and have gone to gay parades because they're just cheerful. They're not about buttfucking other men, but about celebrating who you are as long as you're not harming anyone else.

Re:Wrong wording.

[SuricouRaven]

Even his correction is wrong, as 'cracker' is also commonly a term for someone who specialises in breaking software copy-prevention measures.

Re:Wrong wording.

[MORB]

And a sperg (an offensive diminutive for "aspergers") is someone who cares way too much about minutiae that nobody else cares about. Hackers are people breaking into computer systems. It's what everyone calls them, it's how everyone understands the word.

Language evolves. Get over it.

Re:Wrong wording.

[Ravon Rodriguez]

The thing is, it's not your language, my language, or any other one person's language. English is constantly evolving, and insisting on using outdated definitions of words limits your potential audience. In order to efficiently convey ideas, it's important to use words that everyone understands; this is the information age, and scientific, political, and social debate isn't limited to the elite anymore.

Re:Wrong wording.

[HopefulIntern]

I was called a cracker once, on the subway in New York. I don't think the intended meaning was the same.

Re:Wrong wording.

[Alex Belits]

The thing is, it's not your language, my language, or any other one person's language. English is constantly evolving, and insisting on using outdated definitions of words limits your potential audience. In order to efficiently convey ideas, it's important to use words that everyone understands; this is the information age, and scientific, political, and social debate isn't limited to the elite anymore.

u nggaz shd bettr be rdy4 txt msg spk in ur books

Re:Wrong wording.

[El Torico]

u nggaz shd bettr be rdy4 txt msg spk in ur books

Thank you for a concise, graphic example of what awaits us at the bottom of a slippery slope. That, ladies and gentlemen, is why we need to maintain high standards.

Re:Wrong wording.

[poity]

I thought a cracker is a white southern gentleman who is fond of using the whip on his African servants. Or is it a thin salted biscuit? In any case, it sure isn't a person who is trying to break into computer systems. Modifying source code to change and improve it? Isn't that just tinkering ("tinkerer"?), or more colloquially, "fucking around"? So maybe "fuckarounder" is more appropriate. On second thought, "hacker" might be a good alternative since it's not already populated with a bunch of other definitions.

Re:Wrong wording.

[noh8rz2]

Fairs enough. I thought google hacked my safari to violate my privacy, but in fact they cracked my safari. Sure, I can run with that.

Re:Wrong wording.

[noh8rz2]

Yo Dawg, I heard you like words,, so I put some words inn your words so you can speak while you speak.

Re:Wrong wording.

[steelfood]

You met Chris Rock on the subway?

Re:Wrong wording.

[celle]

"Damn Angelina Jolie for showing her tits and making that lame movie memorable!"

    What?!! She had tits back then? I'll have to review my copy but I don't remember seeing any tits in it especially hers.

    Besides if you want to blame someone, blame that jackass president of ours Ronald Reagan for misusing it to sell some computer crime law. I remember a lot of the propaganda used to sell that laws' passage to the public in the 1980's including fake computer crimes. No "b" movie could do the damage that a sitting "b" president and a corrupt administration could do.

    Man, the younger set and history.

Re:Wrong wording.

[El Torico]

qq moar n00b

More of what passes for discourse in today's society. Apparently what's at the bottom of the slippery slope is the gutter.

Re:Wrong wording.

[robsku]

The original definition of the word 'hacker' is still in use by many people, your claim is simply false. That there are people using other definitions does not change this fact, the word 'hacker' is clearly still used for it's original, and for me, real meaning.

Re:Wrong wording.

[robsku]

+1 parent please

It won't help.

[Anonymous Coward]

Legio mihi nomen est, quia multi sumus.

Re:It won't help.

[robably]

"Lego is available to all men, and what a multitude of things you can do with it."

Those Latins, they knew a thing or two.

Re:It won't help.

[jonamous]

Could not stop laughing - awesome. :)

They're defeated now!

[GmExtremacy]

Surely they've been completely defeated. What a good use of time and resources.

Anonymous is a national security threat.

Re:They're defeated now!

[Corbets]

Surely they've been completely defeated. What a good use of time and resources.

Anonymous is a national security threat.

Well, that really depends. Most of Anonyomous, according to your various news sources, consists of script kiddies willing to "bot" their PC out to a couple folks with actual hacking expertise. Despite the "we're all equal, there are no leaders here" mantra, it appears that these efforts are coordinated from a reasonable discrete number of sources.

If they've got those sources, then the capabilities of Anonymous will indeed go down.

As for them being a national security threat, no more so than your average vandal or thief - but we toss them in jail, too.

Re:They're defeated now!

[Hentes]

When the risk of participating becomes too high, most members will abandon Anonymous.

Re:They're defeated now!

[durrr]

Obviously the coordinators need some IT security (breaching) experience. There is likely quite a few more than 25 of those however.

Re:They're defeated now!

[durrr]

Anonymous is more like a publishing and public rage outlet. There's hardly a member card required for it either, if I went to some random secret document repository, tossed everything in a photocopyer, escaped and then published it as "Anonymous", all on my own, it's quite unlikely that someone would pop up to claim "Oh he's not Anonymous, we are!".

The standard meaning of the word still applies even though there's a lot of internet and 4chan memes associated to it also nowdays.

Re:They're defeated now!

[GmExtremacy]

I don't think that'll ever happen. There are simply too many of them, and I simply don't think they're worth the time and effort it would take to pay too much attention to them to try to send a message.

It'll get even worse if they learn what anonymity actually is.

Re:They're defeated now!

[Ihmhi]

Anonymous is a national security threat.

They are, but not in the way you or I would think.

Are they a threat in the sense of "getting control of nuclear missiles by whistling over Skype?" Absolutely not.

Are they a threat in the sense of making our government look as corrupt and incompetent as it really is? Absolutely, and that's why Interpol and the like are so hardcore about stopping them.

Re:They're defeated now!

[GmExtremacy]

As for them being a national security threat, no more so than your average vandal or thief - but we toss them in jail, too.

It all depends on how much effort and resources we're putting into it. Spending billions of taxpayer dollars to catch jaywalkers would be a complete waste of time.

Of course, I don't think this situation is as bad as it is with piracy (so much time, effort, and draconian laws over people copying data).

Re:They're defeated now!

[Anonymous Coward]

Are they a threat in the sense of "getting control of nuclear missiles by whistling over Skype?" Absolutely not.

I did that last night. But encoding the coordinates in the waveform is a bitch so I ended up nuking sealand.

Re:They're defeated now!

[ElusiveJoe]

Are they a threat in the sense of "getting control of nuclear missiles by whistling over Skype?" Absolutely not.

Oh don't be so sure, mister president...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=fnd0qg4I_MM#t=113s

Re:They're defeated now!

[GameboyRMH]

Those ad-hoc leaders are transient though, so they'll have to lock up every skilled hacker in existence to take down Anonymous.

Re:They're defeated now!

[sociocapitalist]

Also, it's easier to capture a bunch of script kiddie front line 'cyber-solders' (I doubt they caught anyone of significance but maybe, who knows) than to stop the real threats like those coming from certain other countries that have organized crime funded teams or who have no boundary between commercial and government applications and thus use military tech to industrially invade the rest of the world.

The real problem, of course, being that the western agencies are neither competent enough to go after the real threats nor would our lame ass governments do anything about it if they did actually track anything significant back to said countries.

Re:They're defeated now!

[nhat11]

Yea just like the fight against killers and druggies, they're all defeated now!

Re:They're defeated now!

[biodata]

Anonymous is an adjective describing the 99%. Lots of people try very hard to leave anon and never succeed.

Re:They're defeated now!

[Hentes]

Which is why I capitalized it to mean the group and not the adjective, yet many are still keen to misunderstand it, preventing meaningful conversation.

Re:They're defeated now!

[ultranova]

Which is why I capitalized it to mean the group and not the adjective, yet many are still keen to misunderstand it, preventing meaningful conversation.

Seeing how both membership and identity of the group Anonymous is defined through the concept of anonymity, it is probably impossible to meaningfully separate them.

Re:They're defeated now!

[tqk]

When the risk of participating becomes too high, most members will abandon Anonymous.

Cf. Islamic extremist suicide bombers. :-|

Re:They're defeated now!

[biodata]

I see what you mean, but I think that Anonymous refers to the 99%, rather to an individual group of people. When it is said that Anonymous attacked a website, I think what is meant is that the attack originates as an expression of the frustration often felt by the 99%, the people who are anonymous and so generally irrelevant to those in power. I haven't seen any evidence that there is a group 'Anonymous' which organises these things.

Re:They're defeated now!

[Hentes]

Not really. They have their own websites, they communicate on the same irc channels, they use the same software and they launch coordinated DoS attacks. They are a well-defined group.

Re:They're defeated now!

[KingBenny]

to be honest, if you think about it, if they're really as smart as they pretend to be, the coördinators themselves will never engage in actual 'hacking', but i don't think i said this, it might give ideas to the wrong people about the wrong people can i still un-post this now?

Darn

[Trunksword]

Sad to hear, I'm not a big fan of the ideal of hacking but I did appreciate their personal sacrifice to get back at people for violating peoples rights.

Sad for the naive

[igb]

There is something slightly sad about kids being convinced that their elite skills mean they are undetectable finding that actually national agencies are not totally ineffective. It's a sort of hacker Dunning-Kreuger effect: people who might be able to convincingly shield their identity on-line aren't confident about it and therefore take additional precautions, while those who are confident may find their confidence is misplaced.

Re:Sad for the naive

[msobkow]

No, it's not "slightly sad". It's seriously disgusting that anyone claiming to be technically literate at all about the internet doesn't understand how easy it is to be traced by three-letter agencies who have the connections and resources.

The people who got caught were egotistical fools, not "elite hackers."

Hell, they aren't even "hackers" or "crackers" -- the vast majority of them are uneducated script kiddies and fools turning their machines over as bots to be run by someone else.

Re:Sad for the naive

[igb]

I presume I needed tags around "elite".

Re:Sad for the naive

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, no. They were probably back hacked by security personnel working in the private sector who then provided the information to law enforcement (interpol) to verify and arrest (through local agencies.)

Re:Sad for the naive

[PhilHibbs]

There was a biology professor on the radio the other day, saying that in 15-20 years time it will be possible to buy and assemble all the equimpent and knowledge necessary to build a 100% fatal, 100% transmissible pathogen. Mail-order genetic engineering is already available, all we need are the recipes, and then any whacko can end the human race. So, enjoy it while it lasts, we're in the end-game now. Maybe. Or, maybe that guy on the radio was just being a little bit melodramatic.

Re:Sad for the naive

[Hentes]

What's really disgusting are not the misguided kids but the core that promised them anonymity, while knowing very well that it was a lie which have landed many of their members in jail.

Re:Sad for the naive

[ArsonSmith]

It's very likely that they're introverted egotists. They feed their own ego to their own ends. They get the satisfaction from seeing what they do in the news even if their actual identity isn't attached to it.

Re:Sad for the naive

[jjp9999]

Feds categorize anyone who leaks info under M.I.C.E. (money, ideology, compromise, ego) - although these days, I think "lulz" belongs in there somewhere. They catch Anons sometimes because they go around bragging about it. They talk about it in the FBI phone call Anonymous leaked.

Missed the point

[gmuslera]

Once identified them, they weren't Anonymous anymore. They arrested just hackers.

Re:Missed the point

[PhilHibbs]

They weren't anonymous any more, but they were still Anonymous. You capitalise it, it becomes a proper noun.

What asshole modded this down?

[pecosdave]

Looks like he answered the question well to me.

That explains

[Gonoff]

I have seen stuff recently asking people to let Anonymous use their computers for a DDOS on Interpol. In the past I have seen similar notices to DDOS other targets and have commented that it was a really stupid idea. This time, I never got round to saying how bad an idea it was.

hah

[Anonymous Coward]

The thing is that Anonymous is really just an idea. and as we all know, you can't just arrest an idea and throw it in jail.

Yeah. Next, let's arrest a revolution, or a book and other stuff like that. Congrats for wasting taxpayers money!

Re:hah

[Anonymous Coward]

Ideas can be killed too, but not in the common sense. Eliminate the important people that are promoting the idea and the idea will slowly disappear, or at least loose it's importance. Another option is to change the meaning of an idea, just like it happened with "anarchy" which now is mostly understood as a synonym for chaos, complete disorder, violence, molotov cocktails, people breaking things etc. Anarchy means much more then that.

You can kill a revolution by arresting the entire leadership too. Depending on how important the idea behind the revolution is and how broad the support is, new leaders may emerge or not. Sometimes the population is so displeased that leadership is not even necessary and the masses will simply rise. This is the worst kind of revolution as far as the people in power are concerned because it's the hardest to kill. That's why they work so hard to make us think we are pleased and to break us apart. It's a matter of keeping control over us.

Re:hah

[__aaltlg1547]

You can't arrest the idea of driving too fast either. The arrests are for deterrence.

Hoe is it that slashdot is populated with so many people who think messing with somebody else's computer is acceptable and shouldn't be a crime?

Re:hah

[halivar]

They're not arresting an idea. They're arresting a bunch of script-kiddies who broke the law.

Re:hah

[Rakarra]

The thing is that Anonymous is really just an idea. and as we all know, you can't just arrest an idea and throw it in jail.

Yeah. Next, let's arrest a revolution, or a book and other stuff like that. Congrats for wasting taxpayers money!

Many countries, especially the United States, vigorously attack ides, philosophies, and methods all the time. You can't arrest drugs, it didn't stop us from declaring a useless War on Drugs. You can't arrest the idea of blowing yourself up in a crowded area, but the War on Terror has been in full swing for some time, and the latter has shown itself to be surprisingly effective. There's no reason why a War on Hacking couldn't be declared, and end up being effective either.

Interpol never arrests anybody

[Sqr(twg)]

While it would be cool if they were an international police force arresting cybercriminals, Interpol is really just an organisation for information exchange between national police forces. The arrests were made by the ordinary police in the respective countries and according to local laws.

Re:Interpol never arrests anybody

[GreatBunzinni]

I just logged on to say exactly that. Claiming that Interpol arrested anyone is like claiming that the local police administrative clerk who happened to send/receive cooperation requests from/to any other police force is the one responsible for doing any of the arrests.

So, the question which must be asked is who exactly is behind these arrest warrants? And why did anyone tried to pass the idea that there is an international police body with global jurisdiction that is dedicated to attacking this elusive anonymous group?

Re:Interpol never arrests anybody

[WrongSizeGlass]

And why did anyone tried to pass the idea that there is an international police body with global jurisdiction that is dedicated to attacking this elusive anonymous group?

Promoting the idea - or in this case fear - that there is an international anti-crime bogeyman who can come get you across borders? I guess it's the same as many other "for the good of the people" campaigns: If we help just one kid say "No" to Anonymous then it was worth it.

Fear of getting caught, and/or being punished, is a major deterrent to committing most types of crime. The more Anonymous related arrests the authorities claim to make the greater the deterrent to those who haven't decided to participate, or who are on the fence. Headlines are powerful (except, of course, most headlines on /.).

Re:Interpol never arrests anybody

[bgspence]

Interpol seems a bit like Anonymous, that "organization for information exchange" between hackers.

They should have waited .....

[WindBourne]

until they gave out information on the Mexican drug lords.

Re:Anonymous

[f3rret]

It happened somewhere around the 29th of Febuary though, which isn't quite as catchy.

Anonymous threatens to take action in new video

[arquebusierx]

Be afraid, people. On a side note, I spent a good chunk of my late teenage years on the various 'chans, it's weird seeing them get so much mainstream attention. People from my high school that barely knew how to use Youtube are now all gun-ho about memes, 4chan, etc on Facebook. 4Chan recently came up on a local radio station when a woman was talking about teenagers and hardcore pornography. Then you have the example above, where popular TV show (in Canada at least) skewers the whole movement. I dunno, maybe down the road it'll be remembered as the first internet counter-culture; something wicked cool that a bunch of kids born in the 1990s were a part of.

Re:Anonymous threatens to take action in new video

[Xest]

"Then you have the example above, where popular TV show (in Canada at least) skewers the whole movement. I dunno, maybe down the road it'll be remembered as the first internet counter-culture; something wicked cool that a bunch of kids born in the 1990s were a part of."

*facepalm*

I'm afraid generations in the decades before you beat you to it.

Whilst I'm happy to see it return to the internet, the culture of which you speak was thriving in the 80s and 90s. Look up the Chaos Computer Club, Cult of the Dead Cow, Legion of Doom, Masters of Deception, Phrack, 2600, Kevin Mitnick. Even these guys weren't the first but it was pretty prevalent before the kids of the 90s were even born, let alone walking and properly talking. It died off a little at the end of the 90s and early 00s, but now seems to be back.

A number of the older modern activists prominent right now didn't just pop up in recent years, people like Julian Assange for example were also there the first time around:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange#Hacking_and_conviction

All crimes are ideas too

[Viol8]

Or perhaps you thought kidnap, extortion etc were instinctive? Perhaps in your utopia we shouldn't arrest any criminals because you can't destroy their ideas?

Grow up.

good riddance

[Anonymous Coward]

filthy nosepicking miscreants

Stratfor Wikileaks Hack Paybaaack

[FriendlyLurker]

Payback for recent Anonymous hack of Stratfor. Corrupt global economic hitmen protecting themselves by going after the whistleblowers, yet again?

Re:We Are Anonymous

[Johann Lau]

Maybe they should do what the smart criminals are doing? Remember, "we hang the petty thieves, and appoint the murderers to high office" -- that's not just still true, that's even more true than ever before. So just become too big to fail or something, and instead of going to jail you'll get the big moneys.

At any rate, you simply gotta plunder from the poor and helpless and you'll be fine. And when you get "found out", you just grin and play for time.

Re:We Are Anonymous

[PhilHibbs]

We are all going to a pound-me-in-the-ass prison.

Why are USians so obsessed with gay rape? I never hear that kind of thing in British discourse.

probably just random people running HOIC

[sl4shd0rk]

or compromised PCs running HOIC. I would be surprised if the bagged anyone of importance but they sure make it sound good.

Re:probably just random people running HOIC

[tsotha]

I'd be surprised if the people they arrested here were small fish. If they were just interested in headlines for arresting fifteen year old script kiddies they could have netted hundreds. Anonymous is like any other criminal organization - the cops can get the ringleaders if they're patient.

hackers manifesto

[Anonymous Coward]

Another one got caught today, it's all over the papers. "Teenager Arrested in Computer Crime Scandal", "Hacker Arrested after Bank Tampering"...

Damn kids. They're all alike.

But did you, in your three-piece psychology and 1950's technobrain, ever take a look behind the eyes of the hacker? Did you ever wonder what made him tick, what forces shaped him, what may have molded him?

I am a hacker, enter my world...

Mine is a world that begins with school... I'm smarter than most of the other kids, this crap they teach us bores me...

Damn underachiever. They're all alike.

I'm in junior high or high school. I've listened to teachers explain for the fifteenth time how to reduce a fraction. I understand it. "No, Ms. Smith, I didn't show my work. I did it in my head..."

Damn kid. Probably copied it. They're all alike.

I made a discovery today. I found a computer. Wait a second, this is cool. It does what I want it to. If it makes a mistake, it's because I screwed it up. Not because it doesn't like me... Or feels threatened by me.. Or thinks I'm a smart ass.. Or doesn't like teaching and shouldn't be here...

Damn kid. All he does is play games. They're all alike.

And then it happened... a door opened to a world... rushing through the phone line like heroin through an addict's veins, an electronic pulse is sent out, a refuge from the day-to-day incompetencies is sought... a board is found. "This is it... this is where I belong..." I know everyone here... even if I've never met them, never talked to them, may never hear from them again... I know you all...

Damn kid. Tying up the phone line again. They're all alike...

You bet your ass we're all alike... we've been spoon-fed baby food at school when we hungered for steak... the bits of meat that you did let slip through were pre-chewed and tasteless. We've been dominated by sadists, or ignored by the apathetic. The few that had something to teach found us willing pupils, but those few are like drops of water in the desert.

This is our world now... the world of the electron and the switch, the beauty of the baud. We make use of a service already existing without paying for what could be dirt-cheap if it wasn't run by profiteering gluttons, and you call us criminals. We explore... and you call us criminals. We seek after knowledge... and you call us criminals. We exist without skin color, without nationality, without religious bias... and you call us criminals. You build atomic bombs, you wage wars, you murder, cheat, and lie to us and try to make us believe it's for our own good, yet we're the criminals.

Yes, I am a criminal. My crime is that of curiosity. My crime is that of judging people by what they say and think, not what they look like. My crime is that of outsmarting you, something that you will never forgive me for.

I am a hacker, and this is my manifesto. You may stop this individual, but you can't stop us all... after all, we're all alike.

Re:Arrests...

[biodata]

Approximately the same number of bankers have been arrested as media company directors who profited from bribery of public officials.

kids visit prison

[Max_W]

Here is a short video of a lesson in a German school: http://www.dw.de/dw/0,,12165,00.html "Schulbesuch im Knast" ("Visit of a prison").

The video is in German, but one can get the sense of it. Kids visit real prison, real cells, eat with real inmates. After that the romanticism of a crime diminishes significantly.

Crime is not a game. The law is slow, sometimes very slow, but it will get one sooner or later anyway.

Re:kids visit prison

[ultranova]

Crime is not a game. The law is slow, sometimes very slow, but it will get one sooner or later anyway.

The law catches the dumb and desperate ones, who commit crimes either due to mental problems or because they can't rise money any other way or both. Contrast this with drug lords and the Mafia, who commit crimes with a long-term business plan and tend to be very succesful. Or, for that matter, the banks, who are constantly in the headlines due to breaking various laws yet continue business as usual.

So yes, crime is a game. And like with most games, making moves "for the lulz" means you'll lose.

Re:kids visit prison

[Requiem18th]

It is not romanticism fucking dumbass. These kids did what had to be done. It's a bloddy tragedy that after unerthing evidence of massive fraud and corruption the reaction of the police is to persecute the whistleblowers. As much as you call then thugs and criminals what they did was heroic.

Re:kids visit prison

[Max_W]

Law is always a little behind real life. Law is waiting for life to innovate and settle a bit. So, certainly, there are always grey areas.

But breaking an existing clearly set law, when one can avoid it, is asking for trouble.

You are in wrong if you think that people who have to live by committing crime are happy and successful.

Re:kids visit prison

[Max_W]

Certainly in some cases yes. But why attacking the Chile's National Library?

What corruption could be in a library? The librarians are saint people, neither rich, nor corrupted.

If there is a corruption in the world, one still cannot attack anyone at will. Otherwise there will be a total chaos. That is why there is this mechanism in existence: the law. It is not perfect, but how otherwise to protect libraries and the likes?

Re:Amazing how efficient they are ...

[__aaltlg1547]

when it comes to this sort of thing, yet financial terrorists are allowed to roam and loot without the slightest problem.

The people you call financial terrorists are only 100x as smart and they don't make the mistake of taunting law enforcement and government.

Re:Amazing how efficient they are ...

[biodata]

and corrupt public officials can get away with taking bribes from the media for years http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17173438

Re:We Are Anonymous

[Anonymous Coward]

"Why are USians so obsessed with gay rape? I never hear that kind of thing in British discourse."

Because homosexual rape is routine practice in US prisons. Approximately 40% of males sent to a US prison will either rape or be raped before release. Americans who think it is a joke do so because they never think that they might one day go to prison, they don't care about what happens to prisoners, and they don't think through that allowing that culture to exist in prisons will mean the same rape culture is brought outside prison walls after prisoners are released.

Re:We Are Anonymous

[Nidi62]

We are all going to a pound-me-in-the-ass prison.

Why are USians so obsessed with gay rape? I never hear that kind of thing in British discourse.

It is both a reference to the movie Office Space and as slang to differentiate between county/city jail ('easy time") where you have low-level convicts such as DUI, B&E, etc and state/federal prisons where you are more likely to find gang members, murderers, rapists, etc. Time there is usually much harder, with inmate on inmate violence very likely, coupled with long-term sentences where sexual offenses against inmates become more likely, either as power plays or simply due to lack of options. There are of course fairly easy time federal prisons as well, which get your more white collar crimes (think Martha Stewart). For some examples, just see "the Sisters" in Shawshank Redemption or the Aryan Brotherhood guys from American History X, and you get an idea of where "pound me in the ass prison" comes from.

Re:We Are Anonymous

[nedlohs]

Beause Britain has slightly more civilized prisons, and because Office Space was a popular movie in the slashdot demographic.

Re:We Are Anonymous

[virgnarus]

Because in British prisons, the intercourse is consensual.

Re:We Are Anonymous

[PhilHibbs]

I've not seen Office Space, but I've seen the other two, and they're just examples of the same thing. I don't think that Shawshank started it.

Re:We Are Anonymous

[PhilHibbs]

Ha! I walked right into that one, didn't I?

Jesus is God

[pikine]

Choose your quote wisely.

Then Jesus asked him, "What is your name?" "My name is Legion," he replied, "for we are many."

And he begged Jesus again and again not to send them out of the area. A large herd of pigs was feeding on the nearby hillside. The demons begged Jesus, "Send us among the pigs; allow us to go into them." He gave them permission, and the evil spirits came out and went into the pigs. The herd, about two thousand in number, rushed down the steep bank into the lake and were drowned.

So you are saying the Anonymous should drown like the pigs?

So...

[J'raxis]

...is Interpol's website down yet?

waiting...

[Tom]

...for the next Anonymous statement.

Seriously, someone said it very well recently: He thinks Anonymous is a small group of really capable people, surrounded by lots of wanna-be-hackers and teenagers wanting to be cool, basically the script kiddies of today.

My guess is they've arrested a couple of the later. There are lots more where they came from, and we've been doing this dance with the police ever since the first (floppy-disc) copying parties.

Re:waiting...

[Nidi62]

Seriously, someone said it very well recently: He thinks Anonymous is a small group of really capable people, surrounded by lots of wanna-be-hackers and teenagers wanting to be cool, basically the script kiddies of today.

My guess is they've arrested a couple of the later. There are lots more where they came from, and we've been doing this dance with the police ever since the first (floppy-disc) copying parties.

People on slashdot will hate me for this comparison, but in effect Anonymous' structure is exactly that of your standard terrorist organization. Now, before anyone goes off on me, hear me out. In both cases you have a small, central core of motivated (ideology, power, ego, etc), persuasive leadership surrounded by a large, willing, ideologically motivated cadre and an even larger support base from which to recruit new cadre and derive support (PR, public opinion, money, etc). The leadership may identify the targets and plan the operations, but do little else. The mid-level people will recruit new members and probably lead the activities, and occasionally some of them will get caught. However, the majority of the people carrying out the activities and getting caught the most are the low-level cadre members. As I said earlier, they are ideologically motivated, frustrated/angry, usually young, and often times naive or outright misled (in the case of Anonymous, they are mislead in how anonymous they really are). They carry out most of the work, and bear the brunt of the repercussions. Of course, when it comes to identification, the leaders of Anonymous have an advantage over terror leaders because terror leaders have to put themselves out there and identify themselves/physically make contact with people, while Anonymous leaders can hide behind internet handles and have no real need for physical contact with other organization members.

Re:waiting...

[Tom]

Anonymous' structure is exactly that of your standard terrorist organization

Of course it is. Not because it is evil, but because that structure is effective.

However, there is one mistake in your analysis. It is not "exactly", it is like/ - there are differences. For example, the leadership issue is more tricky, there is likely not one central core, but several. And there is no authority, so the core could never prove that it really is the core.

Maybe a better comparison is not a terror network, but a resistance network. The French Résistance didn't need a central authority, but it certainly had its (local) leaders. Other resistance movements likewise. Very often, even when a public figure emerges, the actual power he has over the movement is exaggerated.

Re:waiting...

[tomhath]

but in effect Anonymous' structure is exactly that of your standard terrorist organization

Let's think this through, first does Anonymous engage in terrorism?

terrorism 1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.

Violence? Not physical violence that we know of. But certainly "threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes" is basically what they do. I doubt most of them are really "ideologically motivated", they have always seemed more like a bunch of attention whores. They use political or social issues to get sympathy/justify their actions.

Re:waiting...

[Nidi62]

Did I ever say they engaged in terrorism? No, I did not. All I said was that their organizational structure mirrors what you would expect to find in a terror organization. And the younger, lower-level ones are certainly motivated by ideology at that point. You can tell that simply by what targets they go after. Originally Anonymous was mostly about ego, but still slightly about ideology as well (remember all the Scientology protests?). But it is clear at this point that ideology is a motivating factor for a majority of participants. And for the record I am not a supporter of Anonymous. I was fine with them when they were going after Scientology, but no longer.

Re:waiting...

[riondluz]

Thank-you for pointing out the greater simularity of 'anon' to that of a resistance group; regardless of what they may be labeled by the prevailing establishment.

It irks me to no end to see how that word is painted on anything that represents a minority (usually oppressed) who finally decide to take a stand; using whatever pitiful means are at their disposal.

I find it ironic that in the 'freedom-fighter' vs. 'terrorist' meme that the former is usually better armed, funded, and more inclined to atrocity than the later.
  Despite the later fighting predators with bows-n-arrows (as it were) and suffering tens if not hundreds of times the greater causalties.

Re:We Are Anonymous

[Nidi62]

They didn't start it, I was just using them as popular examples of something that is a common occurrence in prison culture. Prison is about power and control, both from the view of the guard-inmate relationships and the inmate-inmate relationship. Rape is a way to exert and demonstrate that power. Any large prison has a power hierarchy, and this is one of the tools they use, along with such things as beat/stab/kill orders. The fact that some of the most violent gangs in the country rose in prisons(AB, La Eme, etc) and that the term "pound me in the ass" has become so popular and accurate says a lot about our prison system. Or rather, the type of people we have in our system. Personally, I don't see any rehabilatory value in prison except in very limited situations/circumstances.

No True Scotsman

[jvkjvk]

They weren't Anonymous!

It's obvious - if they were, they wouldn't have been arrested. You can't find someone who is actually anonymous! Duh.

Just how stupid are reporters these days?

Re:Yeah , ain't life tough if you're a crim

[19thNervousBreakdown]

SAY IT WITH YOUR CHEST

Re:Yeah , ain't life tough if you're a crim

[Viol8]

Well you'd know about being locked up being stuck down in your parents basement all day long.

Re:We Are Anonymous

[Garth Smith]

We put a higher percentage of our population in jail than any other country, it would make sense that we're more likely to find humor in prison jokes than other cultures.

Hackers pish

[g0bshiTe]

You would think these so called "Anonymous Hackers" would know how to really keep themselves anonymous if they were hackers.

not talking about "sit in the corner, junior"

[peter303]

Anonymous is bunch of semi-naive kids battling police, governments, and drug-cartels (last year in Mexico). Some of these are "shoot first, take no prisoners". Hope they have the fortitude to take the consequences for their actions.

declaring war on an abstraction...

[rocket rancher]

...is money in the bank for the people declaring the war. By treating an abstraction like "Anonymous" as if it were something fungible instead of the complex nexus of behaviors, motivations, and means that actually characterize the Anonymous collective, it allows them a lot of freedom to switch targets at will to demonize anything Anonymous does. It's worked wonders for the neocons with their "War on Terror" in the US. By declaring war on what amounts to a tactic, it allows the neocons to ignore the legitimate differences in methods and motivations between various anti-American groups, and lump them all together as "terrorists." To put not too fine a point on it, the "War on Terror" allowed the neocons to generate enough fear of being branded anti-American to get the heinous Patriot Act passed with just a single nay vote. Declaring wars on abstractions is turning out to be a very powerful political tool, and you can be certain that it will continue to be used by anybody who wants to accrue political power.

Re:We Are Anonymous

[Rakarra]

Remember, "we hang the petty thieves, and appoint the murderers to high office" -- that's not just still true, that's even more true than ever before.

Well, Sweden(?) has the Pirate Party..

Re:We Are Anonymous

[Rakarra]

Americans who think it is a joke do so because they never think that they might one day go to prison, they don't care about what happens to prisoners, and they don't think through that allowing that culture to exist in prisons will mean the same rape culture is brought outside prison walls after prisoners are released.

Americans in general feel that prison is a place for someone to be -punished-, and that sitting in a cell and reading, exercising in the yard, or working out is far too light a punishment. They are quite all right with the thought that there is a physical torture aspect involved, since prisoners deserve to really suffer for their crimes. I don't know if it's part of our Puritanical/Calvinist background that we still struggle with or if it's something more all-encompassing.

Re:We Are Anonymous

[robsku]

Is there any other context than "prison jokes" where an american would see jokes about rape appropriate?

I often see these jokes on TV when watching american TV series, and I always feel disgusted when people crack "funny" jokes about *raping* someone - and in the background you hear studio audience happily cheering and laughing... I mean, that's just extremely disgusting!