Slashdot Mirror


Islamic Hacker Group Resumes Attacks On Banks

tsamsoniw writes "PNC, Bank of America, SunTrust, and other major financial institutions have experienced a wave of DDoS attacks and site outages over the past couple of days, and Islamic extremist hacker group Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Cyber Fighters is claiming responsibility. The group, which launched similar attacks earlier this year, reiterated its demands: that a controversial YouTube video mocking the prophet Mohammed "be eliminated from the Internet.""

181 of 306 comments (clear)

  1. Its becoming clear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Religion is a disease of the mind, its victims need treatment, not mocking or pity or hate

    1. Re:Its becoming clear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Religion is a disease of the mind, its victims need treatment, not mocking or pity or hate

      But the mocking is so much fun!

    2. Re:Its becoming clear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > Religion is a disease of the mind, its victims need treatment

      It is not just religion, it is any kind of "us vs them" tribalism.

    3. Re:Its becoming clear by fustakrakich · · Score: 3

      It's not about 'religion'. It's about how easy it is to incite people into doing whatever you want them to. I present to you the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I mean, all this is bullshit when you have Americans debating the merits of torture.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    4. Re:Its becoming clear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not the GP, but what I see is Scientology suing anybody who disagrees with them, Christians who believe in biblical inerrancy and seeking to eliminate anyone they disagrees with (there are cries of "kill all the Muslims" in these comments already), the Sikhs still carrying a grudge against General Brar and trying to kill him, Protestants still killing people in Ireland, and so on.

      Muslims are the only ones you see because they're the rockstars of the religious nutjob world right now.

    5. Re:Its becoming clear by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is not just religion, it is any kind of "us vs them" tribalism.

      Just remember the "us vs them" is not always the result of tribalism. In this case the "them" are muslim political fundamentalists that will accept no other system in the globe except the Caliphate and Sharia. If you would rather keep your freedoms and the principles of the Englightenment then you fall into the "us" group. These are not "tribes" in the nationalistic sense (which perhaps was what you meant) - it is a fundamental battle of civilizations between those that seek to embrace all cultures, or those that believe that God commands that impose a particular political system be imposed around the globe (and which cannot be questioned). Islam is not alone in this singular view, it just happens to be the most active in it at the moment and is growing more and more active.

    6. Re:Its becoming clear by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 3, Informative

      Lots of folks have diseases of the mind, but somehow manage to be only a minor annoyance or slight nuisance to others. Like the crazy lady who hurls cats at me.

      Others seem Hell-bent on trying to make their sickness impact my personal freedom and values of liberal democracy as greatly as possible on my front lawn.

      The Founding Fathers spoke of "Freedom of Religion," but they really meant "Freedom from Religion", of others, as well.

      Democracy, not Theocracy.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    7. Re:Its becoming clear by JDAustin · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Crusades.....you mean a defensive war waged against muslims by christians? Palastine was settled by christians and muslims came and took it over (ie, the muslims invaded).

    8. Re:Its becoming clear by milkmage · · Score: 3, Insightful

      religion is something people came up with to explain the unexplained. once we can explain stuff we're much better off (or at least feel more comfortable about it). think about the weird shit that's happened in the past.. all because we just "didn't know"

      we don't have witch hunts any more - because we can explain a lot of things which were construed as witchcraft at one time.
      we don't sacrifice humans anymore because that's not really going to appease the gods and grant us a bountiful harvest the next season.
      we don't name constellations anymore because we figured out.. they're just stars. ...discovering things using science is awesome, but as you said, religion will always be around because science can't explain things what really happens to our consciousness after we die.

    9. Re:Its becoming clear by steelfood · · Score: 1

      It's not tribalism, or even "us vs. them". It's absolutism. Absolutism is the shortened form of absolute extremism. The real world is full of grays. The only thing absolute is mathematics, which is a different domain than the real world.

      Fortunately, mathematicians know that they're dealing in the abstract world and not in the real world (whether they're interested in the real world is a different matter). But other people, such as engineers, seem to have trouble comprehending this.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    10. Re:Its becoming clear by EuclideanSilence · · Score: 1

      So first you say that there are absolutely no absolutes except mathematics.

      Then you say that mathematics doesn't apply to the real world.

      Then you say that engineers can't comprehend this lack of relation between mathematics and the real world.

      Personally, I'm on the engineers' side of this. I think it isn't the engineers who lack comprehension.

    11. Re:Its becoming clear by JohnnyComeLately · · Score: 1

      Actually there is a level of mathematics that isn't absolute. You have to hit higher levels of calculus college classes to be exposed to it, but it does exist. I spent about 5 minutes with Google trying to remember the name, but couldn't find it. I'll keep looking though and post if I find it.

    12. Re:Its becoming clear by JohnnyComeLately · · Score: 2

      I have no mod points, but I would use all of them for +1 "Funny" for the last sentence, "Muslims are the only ones you see because they're the rockstars of the religious nutjob world right now." Just goes to with the Inglorious Bastards quote, "You know how you get to Carnegie Hall? Practice!" Islam has had centuries of practice and have permanent "Pro Cards," in the Super Bowl of crazies.

    13. Re:Its becoming clear by bennyp · · Score: 1

      It's not religion - it's ISLAM!

      --
      could it be?
    14. Re:Its becoming clear by flyneye · · Score: 2

      This includes the religion of atheism.
      Religion can be anything from mild interest to obsession with any dogma right up to the Rocky Horror Picture Show or NASCAR.
      Money worship is the most popular religion in the world.
      Of course my tagline gives away my personal favorite. But where else can you get eternal salvation or triple your money back?
      Mocking? We are the pros!

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    15. Re:Its becoming clear by benjfowler · · Score: 1

      THIS is the root of Islamic hatred of America.

      Because the US had the temerity to fight back against the Barbary pirates. The Muslims of North Africa have been the scourge of Europe for milennia. Islam is an evil, violent pirate culture which conquers, raped and enslaved countless white people over the centuries. Islam gets butthurt that people get angry and fight back.

    16. Re:Its becoming clear by flyneye · · Score: 1

      religion is something people came up with to explain the unexplained. BZZZZZZT!!

                Sorry our Judges would like to point out Archaeological evidence of ancestor worship predating the fertility god phase, in which protection and guidance were the focus long before the question of why am I/this here and what in the world for? phase of development. Even modern religions like the Subgenius foundation are here to sell you what you already know and give insight to the things beneath,rather than inside.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    17. Re:Its becoming clear by Guido+von+Guido+II · · Score: 2

      The Crusades.....you mean a defensive war waged against muslims by christians? Palastine was settled by christians and muslims came and took it over (ie, the muslims invaded).

      Seriously? The Muslim conquest was over three hundred years before the Crusades. And any military activity involving an invading army which is fought entirely outside of the countries where the invading armies came from is *clearly* defensive.

    18. Re:Its becoming clear by RaceProUK · · Score: 1

      Then you say that mathematics doesn't apply to the real world.

      To be fair, he actually said maths is in the abstract world. And as any physicist will tell you, all our understanding of the real world is rooted in the abstract models we create all the time, even if we're not aware we're doing it.

      --
      No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
    19. Re:Its becoming clear by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      Science can explain what happens. The electrical impulses we call consciousness stop. Our wetware decomposes. We, as we know ourselves, blink out of existence. People simply refuse to believe it because the implications are so horrific to so many. It means that life is ultimately meaningless and no matter what we do in life, we all end the same way and are neither punished nor rewarded for our deeds. Until we figure out a way to scientifically preserve consciousness, it will always be that way and there will always be people who refuse to face reality.

    20. Re:Its becoming clear by Psyborgue · · Score: 2

      Democracy can mean theocracy. Look at Egypt. The majority of the people want islam? What then, do you do in such a situation? Is democracy the ultimate ideal? I think not. It's fucking dangerous if the majority wishes to oppress the minority.

    21. Re:Its becoming clear by superwiz · · Score: 1

      Nah, only religions which have not gone through a reformation causing an introspection and self moderation. Islam is one of them. Christianity, for example, doesn't cause irrational behavior in otherwise rational people. Nor does Judaism or Buddhism. Islam does.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    22. Re:Its becoming clear by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      How do you treat 1.5 billion people. And that's just one religion. It's like a zombie outbreak. You can't save them all.

    23. Re:Its becoming clear by Sprouticus · · Score: 1

      If belittling others is fun to you, you need to reevaluate your priorities.

      The religious need our help, they were raised with a handicap which they need to overcome. Alternately we can leave them alone with this limitation as long as it doesn't affect us personally. Honestly I see both sides of the argument and respect the points both sides have.

      The issue is not whether religion needs treatment, but whether we have the right to force that treatment on others.

    24. Re:Its becoming clear by Cali+Thalen · · Score: 1

      Mock all you want (and sorry to derail this rant), but if these people are internet-savvy enough to google a script to do a simple DDoS, they should be able to understand that none of the people they're attacking, or their bosses or politically-connected friends, can do anything about this. Even more so if they're more sophisticated than I'm giving them credit for...

      Best thing to do about the 'movie' would have been to ignore it. It would have died the horrible, lonely death it deserved if people had simply not made a fuss about it. Maybe that is beyond their reasoning, but the idea that you can't make something disappear from the internet shouldn't be.

      No, I think they're using the movie as an excuse to deflect from the real reason they're doing this. Honestly, what that would be is beyond me, but maybe the tin foil hat crowd here can come up with a more plausible end game. There has to be a small group of people that are trying to profit or get something more concrete out of this than making a horrible, horrible movie disappear.

      --
      Chaos, panic, disorder...my work here is done.
    25. Re:Its becoming clear by Golddess · · Score: 1

      The issue is not whether religion needs treatment, but whether we have the right to force that treatment on others.

      Depends. Are they forcing their religion on others? The answer to that question is the answer to yours.

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    26. Re:Its becoming clear by cavebison · · Score: 1

      Religion is a disease of the mind

      Hate to break it to you, but religion, commercialism, democracy, armies, volunteer groups - all social systems - are simply the result of built-in human behaviours. Face it, we're wired that way. Religion, like all the rest, arose out of who we are as human beings.

      We're also very good at moderating our own behaviours, so the sooner people stop speaking in absolutes, as you just did, the better for everyone.

    27. Re:Its becoming clear by Divebus · · Score: 1

      The Christians had their Crusades, alright, but it wasn't just "hey, let's go kick some Muslim ass". The Muslim invasions which were sweeping through the Mediterranean and lower Europe for about five hundred years, spreading Islam by the sword, triggered the Crusades to beat them back. They got as far as [what is now] Spain before any significant counter force was applied. So, they started it.

      --

      Most of the stuff on /. won't survive first contact with facts.
    28. Re:Its becoming clear by Divebus · · Score: 1

      Ummm... the Muslims were swinging their swords all through the Med and got halfway across Spain, which is what triggered the Crusades. The Crusades had a stated goal of restoring Christian access to Holy sites shut down by Muslims all the way back to Jerusalem. All these sites were Holy for Christians, Muslims and Jews since they all come from the same Abrahamic religious roots.

      --

      Most of the stuff on /. won't survive first contact with facts.
    29. Re:Its becoming clear by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      The Crusades.....you mean a defensive war waged against muslims by christians?

      By burning and sacking the Christian city of Constantinople?

      Palastine was settled by christians and muslims came and took it over (ie, the muslims invaded).

      Hundreds of years beforehand. So does mean you'd support a Chinese invasion of the U.S. in order to return it's land and wealth to the Native Americans, since they cover similar amounts of time?

  2. Someone tell me by kc67 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why can't these financial institutions stop a DDOS? I am being serious. Why can't these be mitigated at a data center?

    1. Re:Someone tell me by Baloroth · · Score: 3

      You can (some sites have before), but doing so takes up resources and won't necessarily stop all the different attack vectors. DDoS can use multiple approaches aside from just flooding the server with requests. You can, in theory, protect against all the known attacks, but that requires time and money before the attack starts, which might be wasted if you never get attacked (you don't typically want 10x your expected maximum load worth of bandwidth just sitting around unless you absolutely need it, for example).

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    2. Re:Someone tell me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why can't these financial institutions stop a DDOS? I am being serious. Why can't these be mitigated at a data center?

      Why can we not just disconnet the countrys that are habouring this group even if it means removing a few miles of cable and killing the odd satelite ..

    3. Re:Someone tell me by thoughtlover · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The real question is, why do these hackers think the banks are responsible for this video or have any way to even take it down --from the internet, much less. Yeah, good luck with that --right, reputation.com? And why does everyone call this a 'YouTube video', as if Google had something to do with funding its production? Does YouTube have a DDoS problem from this group, too?

      --
      No sig for you! Come back one year!
    4. Re:Someone tell me by DigiShaman · · Score: 1, Informative

      DDOS = Distributed Denial Of Service.

      Laws of physics. Even if you have hundreds of thousands of of zombie infected machines blowing UPD packets towards your public gateway IPs, nothing you can do to stop it from taking up bandwidth. That's why it's a DDOS. It's a digital siege attack!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    5. Re:Someone tell me by operagost · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because these terrorists are ignoramuses from countries where control of everything is centralized in a dictator or a theocracy, so naturally they can't comprehend of a liberal democracy where this might not be the case.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    6. Re:Someone tell me by Ubi_NL · · Score: 1

      Well stated (sorry i dont have modpoints today)

      --

      If an experiment works, something has gone wrong.
    7. Re:Someone tell me by sjames · · Score: 1

      A bunch of connections coming in from a large group of IP addresses with random timing. Each made to look like it could be a legitimate customer looking at the site. What is your suggestion?

    8. Re:Someone tell me by Trepidity · · Score: 1

      That's also a question, but I'm not sure that's "the real question". To me, why a giant corporation with business-critical e-commerce systems can't withstand a DDoS is a more puzzling question than why there exists, somewhere in the world, someone with stupid opinions.

    9. Re:Someone tell me by high_rolla · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My guess is that they feel if they can disrupt the services of banks it will in turn disrupt the functioning of many organisations that rely on those banks for financial services. This would have a negative effect on the economy as a whole (which is already in bad shape) and possibly get the attention of the government to do something to stop it.

      Now, I don't feel this is actually going to work like that but that is my best guess at what they were attempting.

      Or maybe they figured a lot of banks higher ups are friends with politicians whom they could go crying to to make it stop.

      --
      Ryans Tutorials - A collection of technology tutorials.
    10. Re:Someone tell me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "that a controversial YouTube video mocking the prophet Mohammed "be eliminated from the Internet.""
      I don't think these idiots understand how the internet works. I know of at least a few dozen people with backup copies. Take one down, another will pop up. Ban from an entire website, it will be posted to another website. You can't eliminate popular information from the internet. The best thing you can do is just not let it get to you.

    11. Re:Someone tell me by peragrin · · Score: 1

      forget even being a liberal democracy.

      This is the Internet. the only thing that get's lost on the Net are morals. And even that depends on the person.

      Sure things come and go. but I googled a website I created 15 years ago. The severs and pages long ago stopped working, but I found it in 4 different caches.

      Once it is on the NET it never goes away. Now think about that while posting that picture on Facebook

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    12. Re:Someone tell me by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · · Score: 1

      I've had good results with piping to /dev/null

      --
      "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
    13. Re:Someone tell me by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      The real question is, why do these hackers think the banks are responsible for this video or have any way to even take it down --from the internet, much less.

      When the banks refused to process donations they very nearly destroyed wikileaks.
      Maybe their reasoning isn't quite so far-fetched after all.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    14. Re:Someone tell me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Because the DDOS isn't coming from those say... 10 computers. It's coming from god knows how many computers in a botnet made up of computers from probably every country that has computers connected to the internet.

    15. Re:Someone tell me by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      A bunch of connections coming in from a large group of IP addresses with random timing. Each made to look like it could be a legitimate customer looking at the site. What is your suggestion?

      Compared to the bandwidth available at their data centers a bazillion connections attempts ain't nothing at all. The problem is typically with the processing overhead to handle the connection attempts and the bandwidth consumed in giving them a fuill-blown response. All that can be mitigated with a front-end box whose job is simply to handle the 3-way tcp handshake and transmit a very light-weight page with some javascript on it that must run in order to get to the real processing heavy main page.

      You risk an escalation where the DDOSers figure out how to execute the javascript and also load the real page, but the general idea is to make each DDOS zombie do orders of magnitude more work than the target's computers have to. If they are running a point-n-click DDOSer chances are that any changes in complexity will stymie them for weeks if not months as those types of script-kiddies general lack the expertise to make significant changes on the fly.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    16. Re:Someone tell me by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      you stop it before it crosses YOUR wan (or lan) link.

      ie, push filters outward to your cooperative isp's so that its stopped there.

      (no idea if anyone does that, but its how it should be done)

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    17. Re:Someone tell me by SecurityTheatre · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I worked to help a company under DDOS attack mitigate the threat.

      Their normal bandwidth usage was on the order of 400Mbps, they has about 1Gbps of capacity. They were peered to several regional NOCs that maintained about 50Gbps of connectivity, I believe. Keep in mind that 50Gbps with multiple peers costs on the order of $400,000 per year, if my math is correct.

      Well, regardless, the DDoS attacks from a single individual (who was later identified) were pushing about 60Gbps (!?!) of attack bandwidth. They not only overwhelmed the provider and their small datacenter, but the upstream NOC as well. The other issue is that the DDoS attacks were coming from a huge number of endpoints, sometimes 100,000 or more, so it was not practical to simply blacklist all of their networks, especially since many were on cable modems, or other servers in major companies that had been infected with some botnet, or otherwise.

      On the whole, a major financial institution CAN mitigate these attacks. You should note that the Bank of America website is still up.

      However, I estimate it costs them in excess of $100,000 per month to do so.

    18. Re:Someone tell me by thoughtlover · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sorry bud, they know exactly what they want to destroy. Freedom. Because they don't have it. I still don't understand that tack, but they aren't 'ignoramuses'. How are they suddenly put down when they are 'fighting the power' when they DDoS a Western bank, yet vaulted to glory when they are savvy users of social media to coordinate the Arab Spring --or when they make a homemade tank that's controlled with a Playstation controller? Really, you frighten me with that blanket-statement regarding Arabs' mentality who reside in countries with a dictator or theocratic state. Most of them are still not free. The fact you're modded 4, Insightful makes me wary of the lot who gave you such a score, too. Especially when today's headlines on Slashdot read as such.

      --
      No sig for you! Come back one year!
    19. Re:Someone tell me by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      Because these terrorists are ignoramuses from countries where control of everything is centralized in a dictator or a theocracy, so naturally they can't comprehend of a liberal democracy where this might not be the case.

      Ah, but they can comprehend a liberal democracy. Anything which challenges the fixed set of beliefs their cowardly windbag guides brainwash them into accepting without question is the enemy, particularly a place in this world where they could actually think for themselves, which is particularly cold and lonely if you've never never thought for yourself.

      I once was astounded people chose to be prisoners of thought, until I began to understand the Stockholm Syndrom

      These people will do great harm to themselves, innocents and even their own family at a word. It's not all about some promise of a happy afterlife.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    20. Re:Someone tell me by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      It's quite obvious-- the decadence of the west, and the unwillingness of its peoples to embrace the joy that is to found in submission to a particular brand of monotheism, can only be properly understood by blaming the Jews, who through the banks and Hollywood, control the world. This also explains why an ordinary office tower bearing the name "World Trade Center" became a target. To truly understand, you must leave rationality behind, and embrace the conspiracy.

    21. Re:Someone tell me by sjames · · Score: 1

      Based on what criteria? If everything, you're down anyway.

    22. Re:Someone tell me by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

      Wag the dog. They've got us all shooting at each other.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    23. Re:Someone tell me by molecular · · Score: 1

      I've had good results with piping to /dev/null

      lol. disconnecting from the network usually brings system load back to 0.01, too.

    24. Re:Someone tell me by ultranova · · Score: 2

      ie, push filters outward to your cooperative isp's so that its stopped there.

      Filtering takes more resources than just blindly passing everything on. Why would an ISP accept filters from non-customers? Especially a bank?

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    25. Re:Someone tell me by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 3, Insightful

      so naturally they can't comprehend of a liberal democracy where this might not be the case.

      Wrong. They understand what liberal democracy it. It is just they reject it utterly because they believe they are commanded by God to do so (according to their teachings). Similarly, parts of the political classes in the West are starting to utterly reject the notions of the political Islamists, since it seeks to eventually replace all other systems. Please don't confuse each 'side' with not comprehending each other's point of view. Both positions are pretty well understood. It is just that each side rejects the other. Note, however, that liberal democracy can tolerate aspects of the religious myths of Islam (eg. Muslim Israelis are tolerated, even in the IDF, for example). What liberal democracy rejects is the political system of Islam and the tyrrany of some parts of the religion [eg. poor treatment of women, the non-egalitarian concept of dhimmitude, the inability to question the clerics etc]).

    26. Re:Someone tell me by nasalicio · · Score: 1

      This. Exactly this.

    27. Re:Someone tell me by SteveFoerster · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if it's that, exactly, of if it's simply that they believe that financial institutions are the cornerstone of the Western system of global control and that by fighting banks they are striking the root of evil rather than wasting energy hacking away at its branches.

      --
      Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
    28. Re:Someone tell me by cavreader · · Score: 1

      The online services did a risk assessment and decided the risk was to great to continue accepting funds related to Wikileaks. At the time there were serious concerns about the legality of releasing some of the information. If the services had continued to accept funds they could have been charged as being complicit in distributing information protected under certain laws and regulations. Just being charged can require spending large amounts of money to defend a company even if the charges are bullshit. The legal issues are much clearer today and the lack of criminal charges proves it. If there was even a chance something was illegal some government nimrod would have tried to prosecute those involved by now. The only person being charged is Manning and he is charged with violating military law. The most that Wikileaks could have ever been charged with would have been receiving stolen property and even that charge has been a non-starter. I have not heard of anyone petitioning the online services to reverse their decision since the legal issues have been examined and the risk to the online services has been eliminated.

    29. Re:Someone tell me by sjames · · Score: 1

      That certainly does help, but javascript engines and browser libraries are widely available these days. If the javascript is TOO non-trivial, real customers with old PCs will start complaining.

    30. Re:Someone tell me by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Yep, as are most things in life, it is a trade-off. In the case of a DDOS the goal is only to weather the storm, and then go back to a less intrusive set up once the DDOSers give up.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    31. Re:Someone tell me by dissy · · Score: 2

      How does that get good results?

      If you do nothing about the attack, your site is down.
      If you pipe all traffic to /dev/null, your site is still down.

      Being down is not better than being down, those two things are the same thing.

    32. Re:Someone tell me by dissy · · Score: 1

      I don't see why you would think Internet Explorer, all jokes about the browser aside, couldn't run some javascript.

      Tens of millions of infected PCs are performing the attack, and the infection is using the same rendering engine as any other of the banks customers would.
      The infected PCs are no different than the PCs their real customers use (outside of being infected), there is nothing what so ever about the two that looks any different.

      Anything they add to prevent an infected computer from doing, they will also be preventing their real customers from doing as well.

      Consumer PCs today are so powerful, with so much ram and so many cores, that there is next to nothing you could require them to do computationally that wouldn't block over 99% of your legit customers (who have exactly as powerful of computers available to them)

    33. Re:Someone tell me by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Why do you think IE is even involved?

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    34. Re:Someone tell me by dissy · · Score: 1

      Because that's what all the cool kids do in their malware these days, specifically to avoid getting filtered out. Sadly, the spam kids learned this long ago, and the crimeware kids picked up from there more recently and had a running start

      Once some websites actually did start implementing javascript tests to filter spam bots, even the last of the latest to the party malware writers started using the standard render engine already present on the infected machine.

      Better question, why would you think IE is NOT involved? Why create your own render engine, when one is on the system for use already? It would only make the malware larger, easier to signature match, be needless duplication of work that takes time, and provide an opportunity to do something differently enough to be detected on the webserver side and get filtered.

      At best, you waste time writing code into your malware, that the malware can't spend stealing money from people. At worse, you get filtered out and are able to steal less money.

      The massive botnets these days are pretty complex pieces of software, available to anyone out there with cash, and sad to say are pretty top of the line little bundles of code.
      They are more of a pain to clean off a system and more of a pain to block anything coming from them, be it spam, capcha breaking, password stealing, or (d)dos attacks.

      The attacks seen here combined not just massive amount of raw packets being sent, but application layer attacks aimed at overloading the web servers and load balancers specifically.
      It only makes sense they are using the current generation botnet software that have all of these capabilities.

    35. Re:Someone tell me by Stolpskott · · Score: 1

      The real question is, why do these hackers think the banks are responsible for this video or have any way to even take it down --from the internet, much less. Yeah, good luck with that --right, reputation.com? And why does everyone call this a 'YouTube video', as if Google had something to do with funding its production? Does YouTube have a DDoS problem from this group, too?

      The attackers (probably) know that the banks are not responsible for the video. But they also know that the banks are a backbone of Western society, that Western society is responsible for the video, that Western society has uploaded the video, and that Western society therefore needs to take down the video. Oh, and you also need to start worshipping the Prophet Mohammed and convert to Islam. Oh, and because Islamic Sharia law states that banks are not allowed to charge interest on financial deposits, Western banks are inherently evil and must be punished for not being compliant with Sharia law. Oh, and as we are Islamic fundamentalists, we just do this shit because we can.

    36. Re:Someone tell me by xenobyte · · Score: 2

      ... Does YouTube have a DDoS problem from this group, too?

      DDoS probably but problem? No.

      YouTube is a massively distributed service, like Google, Twitter, Facebook etc. and it is close to impossible to take out the entire distributed service. They may take out some parts if they're really good, but most of the service will remain. DDoS is only really efficient on sites hosted on single servers or small clusters with single points of failures.

      The best DDoS looks exactly like regular traffic, but most tools do quantity, not quality. Duplicated packages, invalid checksums etc. makes detection and blocking fairly easy for a good network administrator. The painfully simple LOIC from Anonymous is better but requires a lot of people that all will be revealing their IP unless they use tor or similar. Traffic from LOIC can only be distinguished from normal traffic due to repetition (it performs a real query (full tcp dialog) again and again, several times a second). and it pretty hard to block automatically. Scripts can be written that extracts repeating IPs and blocks them in the firewall but it's a slow process that takes hours given a non-changing group of attackers, and days to be complete if new people join the attacks along the way.

      The brute force DDoS is harder to beat - It simply saturates the full bandwidth with traffic, often bogus replies from various amplification attacks. If the attacker can generate enough traffic, it works. If not, it's hardly noticeable. To beat such an attack you need upstream help.

      --
      "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
    37. Re:Someone tell me by xenobyte · · Score: 1

      Sure things come and go. but I googled a website I created 15 years ago. The severs and pages long ago stopped working, but I found it in 4 different caches.

      It's a variation of the Streisand Effect. The real version was very much intentional as Streisand tried to have something obviously public removed (a wide shot of her house) and people started copying the picture and placing it everywhere, ensuring that it could never be removed completely. But automated caches and archives also make sure that a copy is kept... somewhere. And sometimes such dead stuff comes to life again if someone stumbles across it and reposts it on a blog or similar, making it live again.

      So basically - on the Internet you can live forever, whatever you like it or not.

      --
      "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
    38. Re:Someone tell me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      How are they suddenly put down when they are 'fighting the power' when they DDoS a Western bank, yet vaulted to glory when they are savvy users of social media to coordinate the Arab Spring --or when they make a homemade tank that's controlled with a Playstation controller?

      "They" aren't the same fucking people, that's how.

      Really, you frighten me with that blanket-statement regarding Arabs' mentality who reside in countries with a dictator or theocratic state.

      You're grouping all "Arabs" into one single, focused, coordinated crowd of people with the same skills, goals, and motivations. The parent is referring specifically to the people running these hacking attempts, and to a certain degree he is correct. They are a product of a misinformation society and biased educational systems, and so they choose what they think are good targets, and in their society those would be good targets.
      You also seem to be confusing the word "ignorant" with the word "stupid".

    39. Re:Someone tell me by Whiteox · · Score: 1

      Well said. However once the foundations of muhammedism are examined closely, devoid of Zoaroster and the sufi, then it becomes empty. Upon this emptiness, the islamic religion was built - more for power and politics than anything else. Now it's out of control and lost. This behemoth is not only dangerous but all convincing, built up into some sort of stairwell to their paradise where they can do things that are banned from them on Earth. It's embarassingly simplistic and I would liken it to Scientology, except there is no god in that. So Sharia law was constructed on this, carpeting over their original vibrant culture for what?

      You need a certain level of skill and intelligence to sustain DDOS attacks. Yet these people still don't realise that the preview they are so upset about has no real significance and their quest should be abandoned. Sounds like they are a bunch of kids whose got dad's car keys, but sadly they're probably not.
      Islam has turned many away from all religion.

      --
      Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
    40. Re:Someone tell me by superwiz · · Score: 1

      You can't stop it. But you can withstand it. I find it amusing that they would do it to Bank of America, to be honest. Their service was always spotty without any outside "assistance".

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    41. Re:Someone tell me by thejynxed · · Score: 1

      The BoA websites are under general DDoS/hacking attempts 24/7. I would assume this probably also applies to many other banks, government agencies, Hollywood agencies, and so forth.

      Not shocking at all that their web services would seem to be spotty, when they are under constant attack.

      --
      @Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
    42. Re:Someone tell me by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      The real question is, why do these hackers think the banks are responsible for this video or have any way to even take it down --from the internet, much less. Yeah, good luck with that --right, reputation.com? And why does everyone call this a 'YouTube video', as if Google had something to do with funding its production? Does YouTube have a DDoS problem from this group, too?

      PNC and especially BoA's business practices alone qualify them as targets.

    43. Re:Someone tell me by captthud · · Score: 1
      Are the extremists really so ignorant? So far, the attack is successful:
      • We know the group's name
      • We know what the group wants
      • The attack is very expensive to mitigate and powerful people/corporations are footing the bill

      Peragrin's comment about "forgetting a liberal democracy" might be true. It seems like I read a story about our government selling out to the highest bidder every day. If something can't be scrubbed from the Internet without superhuman effort and/or government intervention, why not attack the people with money until they ask the government to solve the problem?

      I'm probably stretching this comparison too far, but look at the 9/11 attacks by Al Qaeda for a moment. Did the victims of the attack have significant ability to change our country's foreign policy? I would say they didn't. We could argue about the United States being a democracy versus a republic and throw in some talk about our two party system, but that's not my point. One thing is certain - the attack acquired the attention of the party with the ability to enact some kind of change.

      The changes resulting from the 9/11 attacks have been discussed here before, I won't try to enumerate them. What are the possible outcomes for this DDOS attack? Will the banks just eat the bill and wait for the world to change? What if the banks cut services to ISPs that don't require all customers to use trusted/secure hardware? Will our government change its policies with respect to free speech on the Internet? Will the attack dissolve before it costs anyone enough money to make a difference? How many times can things like this happen before "real change" is enacted?

      The world is a big place with lots of people and ideas, the Internet may be bringing us together faster than we can handle. I hope the extremists are proven to be the ignorant party and that the world will learn to get along in the future. Then again, I'm probably very ignorant myself.

    44. Re:Someone tell me by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Once it is on the NET it never goes away.

      Yeah? Then find "Yello There" for me, I really miss that site. AFAIK there's only one page from it still existing, and it's in the internet archive cache of my old site*, the "Springfield Fragfest", and much of the Fragfest is missing as well (except on some CDs I kept). You'd probably have a hard time finding any trace of Bob Waring's "Sgt Hulka's Boot Camp," too, since his host's servers were in the Twin Towers on 911.

      * Kneel and I were fans of each other's sites and often collaborated.

    45. Re:Someone tell me by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      The other possibility is that they tried to DDOS youtube and failed, so this was the best they could come up with.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
  3. Hacker group name stands for what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The hacker group name must translate to myg0t...

  4. Flawless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This strategy should work.

    1. Re:Flawless by bioneuralnet · · Score: 2

      Yes, it's obvious that Bank of America produced that video. Now excuse me while I go throw pinecones at the moon in support of the Kyoto treaty.

    2. Re:Flawless by the_other_one · · Score: 1

      Better yet:
          Throw pine cones at 24 Sussex Dr. in Ottawa.

      --
      134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
  5. That's a long name by thoughtlover · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...and Islamic extremist hacker group Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Cyber Fighters is claiming responsibility

    Man, they really need a simpler name. A catchy logo would help, too.

    --
    No sig for you! Come back one year!
    1. Re:That's a long name by Fluffeh · · Score: 2, Funny

      Man, they really need a simpler name. A catchy logo would help, too.

      Who cares what their name is. Clearly they are doing this to get their 72 Interest Free Credit Cards on the other side... Wait, wut?

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    2. Re:That's a long name by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

      Man, they really need a simpler name. A catchy logo would help, too.

      I propose calling them Muhhackers and the logo could be Muhammad with a logic bomb in his turban.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:That's a long name by NeoMorphy · · Score: 1

      Simple:

      A cool turban logo with the words "I hack you!"

      Do they make turbans in the shape of a dunce cap?

      Maybe we should make dunce caps in the shape of turbans?

    4. Re:That's a long name by Saija · · Score: 1

      +1 Funny

      --
      Slashdot ya no es que lo era! ;)
    5. Re:That's a long name by molecular · · Score: 1

      Mujahackeen!

    6. Re:That's a long name by Zaiff+Urgulbunger · · Score: 1

      Simple: A cool turban logo with the words "I hack you!"

      Duuuurrrrrr...... 'cos the ones with the turbans are the musilimsms riiight?! durrr..

    7. Re:That's a long name by Sardaukar86 · · Score: 1

      +1 Funny

      -1 I'll moderate how I damn well please.

      It's not an instruction, jackass. What's more, it's definitely not an instruction to you, Mr.13yo ego-centric pimple-factory.

      It is an expression of approval from a person without the modpoints to make a tangible contribution.

      --
      ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
    8. Re:That's a long name by Hognoxious · · Score: 1
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    9. Re:That's a long name by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      The Mujahackeen are the moral equivalent of the Founding Fathers of alt.2600.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  6. Misdirected anger? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The group ... reiterated its demands: that a controversial YouTube video mocking the prophet Mohammed "be eliminated from the Internet."

    And these idiots think the banks are responsible and/or control the Internet and its content? - sigh

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Misdirected anger? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Are you sure these idiots are not psyop officers doing things in their enemy name so that people get angry with them. Googling their name at once results to the conflict area Israel/Palestine. And currently the Israel is getting very negative feedback while the palestinians are getting positive. If palestinians would also get some negative feedback it would even out the odds a little.

      Take everything with a big spoon of salt when it concerns this region and everything that comes from there. Israel has even special forces that look, act, and speak like palestinians and can not be differentiated. So it isnt such a far fetched idea that they would target the rest of the world with psyops I cant think of any country that doesnt have psyops or use it.

    2. Re:Misdirected anger? by sribe · · Score: 1

      And these idiots think the banks are responsible and/or control the Internet and its content? - sigh

      Remember that some of these people live under regimes where no media is ever created without government involvement, or at least complicity.

    3. Re:Misdirected anger? by kaatochacha · · Score: 1

      Wait, you're suggesting this is psyops by Israel, and getting a +5 insightful?
      that makes as much sense as your post being psyops.....wait, nevermind.

    4. Re:Misdirected anger? by thoughtlover · · Score: 1

      Best post, ever! Usually I don't reply to AC, but I can see why you may feel the need to shelter your ID. Shoot, our own military was found to have used psyops against our own government's representatives! Nothing, today, is too far-fetched. Especially with how easy it is to alter evidence that was once considered bedrock, e.g. photo, video, audio.

      --
      No sig for you! Come back one year!
    5. Re:Misdirected anger? by thoughtlover · · Score: 1

      More likely they think the general public care what happens to big banks. Which is almost true kinda...

      Well, I like to know my money is safe, so I think most people do care about the safety of banks, even if they don't trust those who run their banking system. Now that's a conundrum! Alas, if this group wanted to really make Americans upset, they would have targeted Netflix or Twitter ... or Facebook. Any service that people use a lot and find rather indispensable. Instagram??

      --
      No sig for you! Come back one year!
    6. Re:Misdirected anger? by molecular · · Score: 1

      The group ... reiterated its demands: that a controversial YouTube video mocking the prophet Mohammed "be eliminated from the Internet."

      And these idiots think the banks are responsible and/or control the Internet and its content? - sigh

      Maybe that's not as far from the truth as you think.

    7. Re:Misdirected anger? by poity · · Score: 1

      He does make some sense if we think according to these protesters calling for the Mohammad movie producers to be punished. The protesters' reasoning is that if person A embarks on a provocative act, and person B escalates by responding violently, then person A is responsible for the consequences. Responsibility is placed on the source of the provocation rather than the source of the escalation. That logic tends to backfire.

      --
      your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
    8. Re:Misdirected anger? by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Remember that these are the same kinds of people that caused tens of thousands of Muslims to be killed in Iraq and Afghanistan by triggering "The War on Terror" by killing three thousand civilians.

      No they aren't. They've yet to kill a single person with this attack, nor is there any reasonable scenario where they possibly could. Don't libel.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    9. Re:Misdirected anger? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Um, the "Innocence of Muslims" video was created by a Coptic (Egyptian Christian) to point out bad aspects of Mohammed (eg. marrying a 6 year old and ) and Islam. The video has terrible production values and is completely insensitive, but I think the core concepts actually come from the Qur'an itself.

      The video was intended to show hypocracy, highlight the nastier aspects of the Qur'an, and show inflame Muslims (who are insensitive and increasingly violent to Copts). The real problem is not the video, it is: the oversensitivity of Muslims to any criticism, eg. they immediately turn to violence; and the craven cowardice of supposedly free societies who do not stand up for free speech and instead appease the violent who are clearly breaking local laws. This may sound harsh, but free speech requires the right to offend, even with a dumb and insulting (but scripturally accurate, AFAIK) video. Ignoring violent acts because of a video is not what the police should be doing - but they are currently cowed. How is this healthy in the long term?

    10. Re:Misdirected anger? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 1

      and here I was thinking it was all those WASP dudes in the country clubs. I've got the wrong racist meme going.

    11. Re:Misdirected anger? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 1

      "thoughlover", lol. How ironic. Perhaps apply Occam's Razor next time before you support a possible but very improbably scenario.

    12. Re:Misdirected anger? by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      He does make some sense if we think according to these protesters calling for the Mohammad movie producers to be punished. The protesters' reasoning is that if person A embarks on a provocative act, and person B escalates by responding violently, then person A is responsible for the consequences. Responsibility is placed on the source of the provocation rather than the source of the escalation. That logic tends to backfire.

      Wow... So if you kill the citizens of a nation that can kick your ass back into the Stone Age it's THEIR fault when they retaliate?

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    13. Re:Misdirected anger? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      The stupidity of this comment belies your lack of logic and clear thinking

      That word does not mean what you think it does.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    14. Re:Misdirected anger? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Everyone knows that 9-11 was a joint operation betw/een the CIA and Mos@
      & ./.
      no carrier

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    15. Re:Misdirected anger? by buchner.johannes · · Score: 1

      The video was intended to show hypocracy, highlight the nastier aspects of the Qur'an, and show inflame Muslims (who are insensitive and increasingly violent to Copts). The real problem is not the video, it is: the oversensitivity of Muslims to any criticism, eg. they immediately turn to violence; and the craven cowardice of supposedly free societies who do not stand up for free speech and instead appease the violent who are clearly breaking local laws. This may sound harsh, but free speech requires the right to offend, even with a dumb and insulting (but scripturally accurate, AFAIK) video. Ignoring violent acts because of a video is not what the police should be doing - but they are currently cowed. How is this healthy in the long term?

      You are showing plenty of ignorance yourself. There is a small minority doing the protests that occasionally turn violent, yet take up 100% of the TV images, and you say "all Muslims are like this". Second, it always depends on the interpretation of the scripture. Find a Muslim who believes the aspects you want to criticize, but don't criticize all Muslims from outside for something they might not believe in.
      Free speech has a limited right to offend, and defamation and hate speech are such limitations.

      --
      NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
    16. Re:Misdirected anger? by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      The content primarily comes from the hadith and the Qur'an from what I can tell. I'm sure the director made mistakes and even some embellishments, but it is interesting that to my knowledge, nobody has even attempted to critique the accuracy of the video.

    17. Re:Misdirected anger? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 1

      Define, "what is a Muslim"? there are so many problems with this. If we consider Muslims to be those that make the required statement then sure, most Muslims are awesome (despite Islam itself being bad - because we can make that distinction). However, if we narrow our definition and say that a Muslim is one who follows the teachings in the Qur'an and hadiths (ya know, the definition that a Salafi might use) then we end up with a bunch of people who most definitely advocate, implement or support violence in the name of their teachings. It is those motherfuckers that we ought to be worried about - not the huge numbers who profess to be Muslim (or Christian etc) but actually ignore the teachings when it contradicts their innate (superior) sense of morality - and apart from a few mystical mumblings would be hard to distinguish from a non-religious rationalist in their day-to-day practices.

      So if your post was meant to mean, "Most Muslims are actually ok" then I agree with you. Just don't forget about the Muslims (and Christians etc etc) that are not ok because their religion commands them to do evil. To paraphrase Sam Harris, "How often do you lie awake at night worrying about the Amish?", and "The problem with Islamic Fundamentalists is the Fundamentals of Islam; if the fundamental of Islam were not violent then we wouldn't have to worry about the fundamentalists, would we?". The same goes for Christian or Jewish fundamentalists - as the fundamental of those religious are also barbaric, with a sprinkling of some nicer rainbow stuff on top. So I don't hate the playa, I hate the game. The Muslims are ok, but political Islam is not. However we can't give Islam a free pass to do its evil just because we like a large fraction of those who profess to be Muslims (but actually don't practice Islam as it is laid out in the Qur'an).

      As the physicist Steven Weinberg said, "With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.". So yeah, most Muslims are good people (but bad Muslims), the good Muslims are bad people (according to Enlightenment values).

      Free speech has a limited right to offend, and defamation and hate speech are such limitations.

      I agree, there are limits to free speech. Those limitations are not relevant to the discussion of the video at hand. I'm glad you agree that Free Speech has the right to offend. That is the right that is actually in play.

      and you say "all Muslims are like this"

      Did I? Could you please re-read my post and find where I said this. You won't find it. You simply have made stuff up and are projecting your hyper-sensitivity on to my post. This is typical of those desperately trying to be politically correct at the expense of simply applying impartial reasoning and seeing where that will take you. Then you have the gall to insult me as "ignorant" after you have just fabricated a quotation against me. Who is the ignoramus here?

      You'll find I said no such thing. I very well understand the proportions between actively violent Muslims, passive Muslims who agree with the violence (which is a very significant proportion of the 1.6 billion Muslims on the planet, which I lump in as supporting the troublemakers - so the total is not just a small fringe as you suggest), and then the Muslims who only live in Muslim countries and don't actually practice the teachings at all (the good guys by Western standards). I didn't want to burden my initial post with this distinction, since it wasn't necessary - only the ones who inflict violence are of significance to non-Muslims, since they are the ones that affect us. So please stop projecting what appears to be an apologist agenda, thanks.

      You are showing plenty of ignorance yourself.

      Nope. It is you that is ignorant of my position. I've already pointed out that you have projected incorrect assumptions (and

    18. Re:Misdirected anger? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 1

      but it is interesting that to my knowledge, nobody has even attempted to critique the accuracy of the video.

      Excellent point. One can understand that the Muslims would not criticize the video - they are not permitted to criticize aspects of their religion (once upon a time they could, but the Caliphs in Baghdad shut it all down as the questions got too uncomfortable to their political rule - and it has been zip lip enforced on pain of death ever since).

      It is interesting that Western academics haven't bothered to pull the video apart to check inaccuracies. Surely that is the job of intellectuals to understand something resulting in so much global turmoil. Or if they have then the media haven't bothered to publish any analyses - they cowed like good dhimmis, since they understand the threat of violence is real. The lack of spine is sickening (I may just have to critically watch the video and do the analysis myself!).

    19. Re:Misdirected anger? by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

      You may have difficulty unless you've actually read the entire of the Sunnah. There are a lot of hadiths out there saying muhamad did wacky stuff. Some are considered canonical. Some less such, and some not so much at all. It would be a lot of work. For example. I believe I recall a hadith where muhammad saw revelations of god underneath a woman's skirt, but I can't for the life of me remember where, or figure out good keywords to google. On the other hand, muhammad fucking a 9 year old is not so hard to find and Bukhari is considered canonical. If you decide to attempt the project. Shoot me an email and I might have time to help. I've been considered a similar project myself.

    20. Re:Misdirected anger? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 1

      Thanks. Of course, there is always the fallback excuse that unless I read it in Arabic then I'll never understand it properly (yeah, right!).

      There are excellent interpretations (humerous and very irreverent, u might get a great deal of amusement as well as insight) from an ex-Muslim at:
      http://kafirgirl.wordpress.com/archive/
      http://kafirgirl.wordpress.com/2008/07/18/chapter4part3/
      http://kafirgirl.wordpress.com/2008/08/03/wives-part-1/
      http://kafirgirl.wordpress.com/2008/08/05/wives-part-2/
      Pax.

    21. Re:Misdirected anger? by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      Yes, and it's not a good thing to do, whether they're Muslim or Christian, or Athiest! They've all got one thing in common -blind hate toward any group but theirs.

      I strongly disagree, I will continue to criticize the asshats who insist on fucking up my planet.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    22. Re:Misdirected anger? by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      Remember that these are the same kinds of people that caused tens of thousands of Muslims to be killed in Iraq and Afghanistan by triggering "The War on Terror" by killing three thousand civilians.

      No they aren't. They've yet to kill a single person with this attack, nor is there any reasonable scenario where they possibly could. Don't libel.

      Islamic extremist hacker group Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Cyber Fighters is claiming responsibility. The group, which launched similar attacks earlier this year, reiterated its demands: that a controversial YouTube video mocking the prophet Mohammed "be eliminated from the Internet."

      I'm losing track here... Are you suggesting that the Hamas and al-Qaeda are not islamic extremists?

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    23. Re:Misdirected anger? by Nathan.Freeman.94 · · Score: 1

      The group ... reiterated its demands: that a controversial YouTube video mocking the prophet Mohammed "be eliminated from the Internet."

      And these idiots think the banks are responsible and/or control the Internet and its content? - sigh

      Wouldn't you say that this entire 'hack attack' is just a cry out for attention? They see the Banks as a particularly useful asset so they intend to cripple it, thereby "us" so that "we" are forced into action? An action, they hope, that is the removal of said "controversial YouTube video mocking the prophet Mohammed".

  7. How stupid do they think we really are? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is retarded. Their demands are that a YouTube video mocking Mohammed "be eliminated from the Internet". Anyone intelligent enough do do these kinds of attacks would be smart enough to know that the internet is not very "censorable". Their demand is meaningless; they're just gonna keep doing it. Period. Why even bother making a demand in the first place? Somehow these terrorists have convinced themselves that they are superior in intelligence and that the rest of us are gullible. That in and of itself is funny as hell.

    1. Re:How stupid do they think we really are? by HexaByte · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How about we just eliminate all of the Prophet Mohammed's followers from the face of the earth?

      Maybe the banks should tell them if they don't stop the they'll retaliate by bombing Mecca with pigs.

      I've really had enough of these shit-heads.

      --
      HexaByte - he's a square and a half!
    2. Re:How stupid do they think we really are? by Merk42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So... making ignorant threats against an entire culture is okay when you do it?

    3. Re:How stupid do they think we really are? by DaveAtFraud · · Score: 1

      How about we just eliminate all of the Prophet Mohammed's followers from the face of the earth?

      ...

      So, I guess that means you're part of a non-Prophet organization.

      (Nothing like a bad pun)

      Cheers,
      Dave

      --
      They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
      Ben
    4. Re:How stupid do they think we really are? by benjfowler · · Score: 1

      Every major religion has a version of the Golden Rule. "Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you".

      All religions except Islam, that is.

      They think they're Allah's chosen people, and can do no wrong when they're dishonest, lecherous and violent; but kaffir governments and people need to accomodate their constant demands for free stuff, lebensraun and political concessions.

      Muslims are hated the world over for a reason.

    5. Re:How stupid do they think we really are? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Every major religion has a version of the Golden Rule. "Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you".

      All religions except Islam, that is.

      Really? Who told you that?
      You seem to be the type who worships their own ignorance.

      Golden Rule in Islam

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  8. Fuck them by Kergan · · Score: 1

    'nuff said

    1. Re:Fuck them by ultranova · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The muslims or the banks?

      Snark aside, I think we should encourage the transition from real to this kind of financial cyber-terrorism - not only does it not get anyone killed, but the targets have almost certainly deserved it many times over. Heck, harassing the banks could well end up helping the economy by hindering their ability to parasite off it.

      Two evils duking it out is great for the rest of us, who get a break from both, and some free entertainment on top of it. Make some popcorn, pop a few beers, and watch the fireworks.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    2. Re:Fuck them by WGFCrafty · · Score: 1

      The muslims or the banks?

      Snark aside, I think we should encourage the transition from real to this kind of financial cyber-terrorism - not only does it not get anyone killed, but the targets have almost certainly deserved it many times over. Heck, harassing the banks could well end up helping the economy by hindering their ability to parasite off it.

      Two evils duking it out is great for the rest of us, who get a break from both, and some free entertainment on top of it. Make some popcorn, pop a few beers, and watch the fireworks.

      Since the last part of your is ubiquitous here, I'm starting to wonder if people really are eating popcorn while reading articles.

  9. Not that I'm into Islamist hackers or anything by arcite · · Score: 1

    But think about it, here we are in the second decade of the 21st century, and we have notorious cyber terrorists hacking banking systems, wrecking havoc! It's like, the future man! Johnny Mnemonic here we come! Hack the planet!

    1. Re:Not that I'm into Islamist hackers or anything by Ambiguous+Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      wrecking havoc

      Oh, no! Our precious havoc!

      --
      Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.
  10. "Hackers" who don't understand the Internet by MaxToTheMax · · Score: 2

    This story just goes to show, anyone can install and use Low-Orbit Ion Cannon, even if he or she doesn't understand how the Internet works. No matter where you fall on the "hacker" definition debate, it's pretty clear that these people aren't hackers.

  11. A short sharp shock needed by Animats · · Score: 2

    If Islam is that threatened by a badly produced video from a religious group, maybe it just needs a bigger push to bring it down.

    1. Re:A short sharp shock needed by Nerdfest · · Score: 2

      Perhaps a demonstration of Islam and Rule 34 is in order. (Actually, it most likely already exists and many of these people know of it. The hypocrisy of many religious folks is pretty spectacular at times)

  12. Extremist group? by timeOday · · Score: 2

    If all they're doing is DDOS'ing websites they disagree with, they're exactly as extremist as Anonymous.

    1. Re:Extremist group? by EdIII · · Score: 1

      Not really. Anonymous either does it for the laughs, the "prestige", or just to release records that will increase government transparency or reveal corporate corruption.

      Anonymous does not hack McDonald's and then demand that Toys R Us reduce the retail price of Barbie toys by 50%.

    2. Re:Extremist group? by kaatochacha · · Score: 1

      Yet

    3. Re:Extremist group? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      the banks doesn't have anything to do with the video [...] It would probably be easier to take them seriously, if they wrote proper English.

      Talk about moist with your own pomade...

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  13. Retaliate! by kawabago · · Score: 4, Funny

    At 8pm EST Dec. 13 let's all DDOS God! Repeat Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah ...

    1. Re:Retaliate! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Mushroom, mushroom!

    2. Re:Retaliate! by HexaByte · · Score: 2

      At 8pm EST Dec. 13 let's all DDOS God! Repeat Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah Allah ...

      Heaven.com replies: "I'm sorry but there is no one here by that name."

      --
      HexaByte - he's a square and a half!
    3. Re:Retaliate! by molecular · · Score: 1

      lol! someone upvote parent.

    4. Re:Retaliate! by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Don't give the Iranians ideas.

      Oh, wait...

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  14. the only sensible thing... by VMaN · · Score: 1

    The only sensible thing is to give the video more exposure.. Anyone got a link?

  15. They want WHAT now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The group, which launched similar attacks earlier this year, reiterated its demands: "be eliminated from the Internet."

    Really? That's all? Yeah, good luck with that...

    Seriously, you assclowns need to loosen the towels on your heads and stop taking advice from Barbara Streisand. There is no "Delete From Internet" button. Not gonna happen. It's completely, undeniably, 100% impossible no matter how much you want it done. Stop fucking your camels for five seconds and read up on what the Internet actually is. Hint: It's not some giant repository somewhere that holds all these files (and no, Mr. Stevens, it's not a series of tubes, either).

    While you're at it, you may as well just own up to the fact that some people disagree with your religion, some people are dickheads, and some people fall into both categories at the same time. Instead of condemning them, why not show them kindness and tolerance so they might come to agree with you? Islam is a religion of peace, is it not?

    Nevermind. What was I thinking? This was never about some low-budget backyard video. This was just another excuse for you to cause violence or vandalism in the name of Allah. Actually, it's not even that. It's the whims of some self-aggrandising imam who has the audacity to think he speaks for the creator of the universe (whether your name for this being is God, Allah, FSM, or whatever). Stop being an ignorant puppet to some bearded clown's private dictatorial masturbation fantasies!

    1. Re:They want WHAT now? by cpghost · · Score: 1

      There is no "Delete From Internet" button.

      Exactly. But there is a delete button on the big video bandwidth providers like YouTube, etc. As long as a video remains on some obscure channel/websites only, it is as good as "deleted" for the general populace.

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
  16. they put the wacky in the www by swschrad · · Score: 1

    one of these days, somebody is going to say fuck it, and once they find country of origin, are going to organize a targeted DDOS back to them that wipes their TLDs off the web for weeks, months, or years. maybe then we can get some international leadership to put these nitwits in a can with Prince Albert and lock them in the fridge to see how fast it's running.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  17. Clear solution by bambewn · · Score: 1

    I think that if we shut down all the interenets to every snackbar, the attacks would stop.
    Coming to this conclusion was very logical as they clearly state that they operate and worship the ground of said snackbars in every video ever posted.
    So there you go! Problem solved. No snacks, no problems.

  18. Re:Islamism is the Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When the Christians come up with government support to kill you for being an atheist I'll start to consider them a bigger threat. Until then you're neglecting the bigger picture. Most likely because you have a chip on your shoulder and haven't seriously considered how much your life would be totally fucked in a Muslim nation. And so it goes.
     
    Why is it that every article about Islam brings out the Christian bashers in droves? I guess these kinds of people have no perspective. In some countries your post would get you jailed (and worse) for admitting to be an atheist. Tell me how the Christians are doing this to you again? Show me the great Christian theocracy is that you guys claim is just as bad as nations that openly support Sharia law.

  19. Power Rangers by Das+Auge · · Score: 1

    I like their name. They should all wear primary colored outfits and strike cool poses.

  20. Re:Islamism is the Problem by Nyder · · Score: 2

    These Islamists want to control you and your life. Convert or suffer. Yes, they are weak now, but that may not always be the case. All you pricks that crap on Israel need to know that millions of Muslims, perhaps not a majority, but millions of Muslims hate you.

    Well, this is a good example of why religions are stupid and harmful. Hate? Is that what religions teach? Hate me because I'm different? Because I'm a white American? Or is it because I don't believe in religions? I don't hate you, I don't hate anyone. If being religious means I need to hate, I DO NOT WANT!

    I don't care what you believe, but if you hate me because of your beliefs, then you have some serious problems.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  21. Giddy Up! by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

    I do a lot of business with Wells Fargo and Company. I don't see a problem here; yawn.

    1. Re:Giddy Up! by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      Likewise my use of PNC has not been affected.

  22. Streisand Effect? by chill · · Score: 1

    Explain to them the Streisand Effect. Then explain Babs is a Jew, and they are using Jewish tactics on the banks. Sit back and watch the circular hate shut them down.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  23. Cloud computing is the easy way by elucido · · Score: 1

    Why can't these financial institutions stop a DDOS? I am being serious. Why can't these be mitigated at a data center?

    DDOS isn't hard to stop. Cloud computing at a datacenter would stop it just fine. When one server goes down if the cloud is based on virtualization such as with VMWare then another instance of the OS would replace it instantly. It would make the DDOS attempts completely ineffective.

    Of course there are more details in implementing this but this problem has been solved.

    1. Re:Cloud computing is the easy way by Discopete · · Score: 1

      It's not a question of systems of servers going down, it's a question of overloading the targets data transmission capability. If the attacker can push move data down the line than the target can handle, then even if none of the targets systems go down, you've still disrupted their ability to do business. Even if they only are able to send 50% to 75% of a targets capacity, they have still reduced the overall effectiveness of the target and have disrupted their ability to conduct business as usual.

    2. Re:Cloud computing is the easy way by Rogerborg · · Score: 2

      Just so we're all clear, if your answer involves "the cloud" then you didn't understand the question.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  24. No it's not wasted. by elucido · · Score: 2

    You can (some sites have before), but doing so takes up resources and won't necessarily stop all the different attack vectors. DDoS can use multiple approaches aside from just flooding the server with requests. You can, in theory, protect against all the known attacks, but that requires time and money before the attack starts, which might be wasted if you never get attacked (you don't typically want 10x your expected maximum load worth of bandwidth just sitting around unless you absolutely need it, for example).

    What you need is enough redundancy so that DDOS is worthless. You also need near instantaneous recovery time. A cloud network could provide redundancy and virtualization could decrease recovery time. The attack vectors also aren't unlimited so unless it's some sort of zero-day it's going to be known.

  25. Re:Islamism is the Problem by TheMiddleRoad · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well, yes. The Islamists are actively trying to kill the Israelis, and more specifically the Jews. That justifies self-defense, does it not? Truth be told, the Palestinians in Israel get better treatment than most Arabs in other countries. They only complain because of the Jews.

  26. Re:the goal... by Sperbels · · Score: 1

    Hackers sell services like this...it could be just one guy with enough cash to pay for a DDOS attack.

  27. How can you know enough to mount a DDOS attack... by AmazingRuss · · Score: 1

    ...and not know how impossible it is to remove that video from the internet?

  28. Re:the goal... by molecular · · Score: 1

    Someone should tell them the "whole internet" has a secret broadcast IP address and if you want to DDOS the whole fucking internet, you just enter "127.0.0.1" into "IP to DDOS" field and click "start attack".

  29. Re:Its becoming clear, insightful my ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because Islam extremists represent all religious minded folks.

    What's that nerds are usually so adamant about? Something about not painting everyone with one brush?

  30. Different level of severity by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

    Religion is a disease of the mind,

    Diseases came in many forms and severity
     
    Similar to diseases, religions came in many forms and have different levels of severity
     
    That hacker group happened to be from one with the terminal effects - suicide bomber is but one of the many examples
     

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  31. Re:Its becoming clear, insightful my ass by t3h+Odd+one · · Score: 1

    Mod this up! This is insightful, whereas "Religion is a disease of the mind, its victims need treatment, not mocking or pity or hate" is just Trolling

  32. Re:Islamism is the Problem by TheMiddleRoad · · Score: 2

    Last I checked, Israelis weren't trying to kill all the Palestinians. Last I checked, most Palestinians were pretty keen on killing all the Jews. No matter what Israel does, from leaving Gaza to providing free hospital care, the Palestinians insist on trying to kidnap and kill Jews. Fuck them.

    You're probably one of the idiots with his own personal definition of antisemitism.

  33. Re:Islamism is the Problem by TheMiddleRoad · · Score: 2

    Currently, there is an insignificant number of Christians who will try to kill you for your beliefs. There is, in contrast, a rather significant number of Muslims who would love to string our atheist asses up. Well, they'd probably stone us to death.

  34. Most cyber attacks are simple to stop by sunking2 · · Score: 1

    As soon as governments, or those with their own means, start to kill a few of these attackers they will quickly lose much of their support. As it is now it's seen as a fairly safe way to cause some harm and feel like you are doing something on a boring Saturday night. Let a few of them be found in dumpsters and the majority of them will waste their time else where. Sure you'll always have the government sponsored professional programs going on, but say good byte to the majority of Anonymous, etc.

  35. Re:Its becoming clear, insightful my ass by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1, Insightful

    They do represent all fundamentalist religious minded folks.

  36. Re:Islamism is the Problem by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    do they have any right to self-defense and regain their human rights

    If they were willing to regain human rights, then yes. Right now, though, being openly gay would get you lynched in Gaza - likely stoned to death - and converting from Islam to another religion would result in your head being cut off. For as long as this kind of thing persists, I would very much rather have Israeli in control. At least they don't kill people for following the wrong religion.

  37. Re:Its becoming clear, insightful my ass by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

    Trolling, but arguably with some truth. The only difference between religion and delusion is in the number of followers.

  38. Re:How can you know enough to mount a DDOS attack. by jopsen · · Score: 1

    If only they had filed a DMCA take-down notice :)

  39. Blah! by Evtim · · Score: 2

    There are about a million good reasons why the banks should be attacked if not completely destroyed. That blasted movie is NOT one of them.
    I wonder if the attackers are aware that their actions in this case work exactly against their interests.

  40. Re:Islamism is the Problem by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Who flies airliners into buildings?

    And before you start, anyone who mentions the crusades or the Spanish inquisition is a moron.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  41. Re:the goal... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    They probably paid some Russians to do it.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  42. Re:Islamism is the Problem by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Not saying you should write more sentences, but shorter ones would definitely be an improvement.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  43. Re:Read op the paradox of tolerance by flyneye · · Score: 2

    The prophet David Byrne once said " In the future it will be a relief to find a place with no culture".
    This was corroborated by the prophet Jagger who said " You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometime, you'll find, you get what you need."

    --
    *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
  44. Re:How can you know enough to mount a DDOS attack. by Giftmacher · · Score: 1

    My thoughts exactly, the attackers can't realistically expect to achieve their goals. I can only assume this is primarily for publicity, possibly recruiting purposes?

  45. Re:Its becoming clear, insightful my ass by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

    You're right, some diseases are worse than others. Some are terminal. Some are not. They're still diseases and all of them, without exception, eat away at rational thought.

  46. Re:the goal... by clintp · · Score: 1

    If this hacker group is "sophisticated" enough to DDOS banks... wouldn't they realize that "eliminating" ANYTHING from the Internet is impossible?

    The stated goal is for shit. This has nothing to do with some video insulting the prophet Mohamed. That was simply the next excuse that came up when the Mohammedans shook the Magic 8-Ball of Islamic Gripes. The next will be Israel's existence, infidels in Afghanistan, pornographic magazines like "Time" and "National Geographic" with immodest women, or some other perceived insult that demands some kind of retribution.

    --
    Get off my lawn.
  47. Hold their pr0n hostage! by ka9cql · · Score: 1

    I know how to get the so-called "cyber jihadists" to halt their DoS attacks on U.S. banks - hold all their Interner pr0n hostage! Block all Muslim countries' access to Internet smutt and pornography until those behind the DoS campaign cease their script kiddie attacks. I bet the outcry from followers of al Qaida would be so ferocious that the attacks would halt almost immediately!

  48. Who are they attacking? by godatum · · Score: 1

    Is it possible that the group could be hurting their own financial asylum? I am assume somewhere down the line funding for such attacks or attacks alike can be traced back to one of these mentioned banks. Just speculating and spreading humors during my lunch hour.

  49. Money by phorm · · Score: 1

    Or maybe they recognise that money has influence, and banks have lots of money, and possibly they're an easier target than some others.

  50. Re:Islamism is the Problem by Psyborgue · · Score: 1

    You must have missed the memo. It's perfectly OK to be anti-Semitic nowadays as long as you replace the word "Jew" with "Zionist". As long as you dress your prejudice up in some thin socio-political bullshit veneer, it's all good.

  51. Re:Islamism is the Problem by TheMiddleRoad · · Score: 1

    It's called code words.

  52. Isn't US dollar pegged to OPEC oil by NewYork · · Score: 1

    why do these hackers think the banks are responsible for this video

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_Shock

  53. Expiry date by NewYork · · Score: 1

    I propose every religion should have an expiry date.