Slashdot Mirror
Anonymous Hacks UK Government Sites Over 'Draconian Surveillance'
Krystalo writes "The hacktivist group Anonymous today hacked multiple UK government websites over the country's 'draconian surveillance proposals' and 'derogation of civil rights.' At the time of writing, the following websites were taken down: homeoffice.gov.uk, number10.gov.uk, and justice.gov.uk. The group is not pleased with the UK government's plans to monitor Internet users."
Maybe their 2,000,000 cameras aren't helping as much as they thought they would?
"Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
Hacktivisim at it finest. The more governments restrict freedom the more "terrorist" there will be.
"UK government has released a report today, announcing that as their crucial websites were taken down, they can no longer ignore the attackers, and have reversed the planned draconian surveillance."
More like in six months, there will be more arrests.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Paying them to write laws in your favor like the large corporations do?
Kinda sad when the only people fighting for your rights are a bunch of script kiddies in their basements.
Some of the words, like "colour" "centre" and "organise" have been cannily vandalized.
It's quite a clevre plan.
Can we just $_ =~ s/Anonymous/someone/i please?
It would be far less confusing to those who don't realize it's just your average every-day folk behind these stunts. It's really just the common man turned vigilante... Either this, or label all vigilante acts with unknown perpetrators as the work of Anonymous -- Because that's what it's come to.
Here, I'll demonstrate:
Today, someone hacked multiple UK government websites over the country's 'draconian surveillance proposals' and 'derogation of civil rights.' At the time of writing, the following websites were taken down: homeoffice.gov.uk, number10.gov.uk, and justice.gov.uk. Someone is not pleased with the UK government's plans to monitor Internet users.
I say they discover a new land, live on this land for a few years whilst drawing monetary support from Britain, and then get all in a huff about tea time.
That will show em who is boss!
Revolution is only an option when democratic and legal institutions do not exist, or there is concrete evidence that they have failed. If you seek revolution when those institutions exist, you are basically saying that your opinions are more important than those of the majority and that the courts have failed to protect minority rights.
Any such arguments for the UK, US, Canada, etc. are dubious at best. Yes, our institutions have problems but fixing those problems involves reform rather than revolution.
Revolution should be an option, but it should always be the last option. The problem with responding drastically is that the people who are abusing the power to begin with will only abuse it more to counter what they see as a threat. The cycle feeds itself.
That's why violence is such a lousy idea. Sure, it may sound gratifying to give the bastards what they deserve, but the bastards will always come back with even more violence.
http://www.rootstrikers.org/
From the first line of the article "Summary: Anonymous has launched a Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) against multiple UK government websites."
Far less impressive than hacking the sites IMO. Then they could have left a message.
The defacing of Chinese government's websites were hacks. This is just a DDoS.
So-called "democracy" as it exists in countries like the US is a complete sham. The government can act against the public interest on literally every single issue and still stay in power: any individual is only going to be knowledgeable about a small fraction of what the government does, and a majority of people will just take the media's word for it that they're doing right on most everything else.
The only issues on which the public actually has any influence are those which our rulers recognize to be of relatively minor importance, so the parties can put on a show of virulently disagreeing on them, which makes people feel like they're actually making a difference when they throw out corporate-owned party A and put into power corporate-owned party B. On the most important issues, there's always bipartisan agreement on the wrong side.
Hack their Blackberries and they'll pay other geeks enough (or just allow them to keep their jobs) to fix the problems. Hack their family's accounts and they'll find a way to track you down and imprison you.
Their lives are not at the "mercy of the geeks", and it doesn't matter one little fuck that the "geeks are not pleased". People with technical skills are commodities to those in power; those whose primary skills are amassing fortunes through corruption, building high-level relationships and brokering power- things that 98% of geeks are unable to accomplish.
Geeks are like honeybees- You give them a nice little hive to buzz around in with Aeron chairs, free snacks, and maybe a few stock options, then point them to a pretty field of flowers in which to gather pollen and keep them focused and happy, then every once and a while you open the hive and take the honey that they bust their asses to make. Piss them off and you might get stung once and a while, but 99% of the time, you're going to get the honey. "But, but look at Google and Facebook and Amazon, and, and...." Yep- and look at who steers those corporate ships now, Sparky. In the majority of these types of successes, the geeks took their cash and split- Don't ask them to organize your little geek uprising.
"If the geeks would work together".... yep, If only they would. If I had wheels I'd be a fucking wagon. If only, for that matter, anyone that feels outrage against an unfair or oppressive system would actually "work together". You need a leader, and organization for that to happen, which involves actually finding someone who is a geek (or maybe just technically literate) AND a leader AND willing to put his or her neck on the line against existing power... good luck with that, pal.
Your post is so heart-breakingly naive and cliched that it's not even worth making fun of. What's really disturbing is that you have a low number next to your name- You're too damned old to be that damned naive.
The government of the U.S:
1. has suspended Habeas Corpus
2. has taken and imprisoned citizenry from the street without being charged with a crime or receiving due process
3. allows police to detain and strip search anyone for any accusation
4. has not followed it's own laws for electing a president (see bush vs gore)
I'd say it's safe to assume the rule of law in the U.S. is long gone. When you've discarded the highest law in the land (the constitution) so blatantly and completely what law exactly is there left to respect? These are not "problems with institutions" but rather a complete and intentional disregard for the law as stated. This is not to mention the unending general surveillance of it's people which is rather clearly protect by that same constitution. What exactly do you require to classify it as beyond the rule of law?
I can't speak to the case of the U.K. since I am ignorant of the specifics of the laws there but I suspect there is some basis for the protection of liberties and privacy of the people in the law there. How that reconciles with what seems to be the population under the greatest surveillance by their government is beyond me.