Slashdot Mirror
Anonymous Warhead Targets US Sentencing Commission
theodp writes "Late Friday, Violet Blue reports, the U.S. Sentencing Commission website was hacked and government files distributed by Anonymous in 'Operation Last Resort.' The U.S. Sentencing Commission sets guidelines for sentencing in United States Federal courts, and on the defaced ussc.gov website Anonymous cited the recent suicide of Aaron Swartz as 'a line that has been crossed.' Calling the launch of its new campaign a "warhead," Anonymous vowed, 'This time there will be change, or there will be chaos.'"
Adds reader emil: "Anonymous has not specified exactly what files they have obtained. The various files were named after Supreme Court judges. At a regular interval commencing today, Anonymous will choose one media outlet and supply them with heavily redacted partial contents."
..to who actually makes the law as it is practiced in united states.
you'd think that the sentencing guidelines would be written to the law, but no??
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Idea: let's give in to what they want. Bow deeply and honestly, and maybe they might forgive us our sins. What could possibly go wrong? After all, these attacks would certainly cease.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
I'm not gonna go into whether or not this "warhead" business is a good idea. It's probably not, since it wouldn't be what Aaron Swartz himself would. He would have made a lot of noise and brought public attention had he been able to cope, but defacements were beneath him. Also, it's likely just dirt courtesy of WikiLeaks.
But whatever hope anyone had about restoring that term to what it was just went up in a flame of digital smoke.
If computers were people, I'd be a misanthrope.
Methinks this is more hoax than serious threat. I checked Google's cache of the vandalized USSC site and found the instruction to create the "Warhead" file near the bottom of the page:
$ cat Scalia* Kennedy* Thomas* Ginsburg* Breyer* Roberts* Alito* Sotomayor* Kagan* > Warhead-US-DOJ-LEA-2013.aes256 && rm -rf /
https://www.facebook.com/notes/usa-government-took-you-over/anonymous-releases-warhead-encryption-keys-warhead-us-doj-lea-2013aes256/202266033246726
Because somehow when anonymous is going to release partial redacted versions of "mind blowing" information(implying they are going to kee
more sensitive and damaging content for later), they release the encryption keys to the public.
Nothing in these "warheads" will be anything more damaging than what anonymous could find by /googling/ their targets.
Incompetent angsty teenagers.
You apparently don't get it at all, AC.
The "warhead" is the encrypted file that the defaced page served to distribute.
They took down the server not to cause a disruption as much as to advertise and draw awareness to their cause.
-- My Weblog.
Anonymous will choose one media outlet and supply them with heavily redacted partial contents.
Well, that's one way to get the word out -- but word to the wise, going upstairs and showing your mom doesn't count as a "media outlet."
Breakfast served all day!
At least somebody is standing up for our rights. Let's face it - most people just want to stuff their face with junk food and watch American Idol. They don't like to question authority because doing that makes them feel uncomfortable. Most people are sheep.
Yes, hear hear! They are liberating us. But there was something odd from the summary:
At a regular interval commencing today, we will choose one media outlet and supply them with heavily redacted partial contents of the file.
Ah, so the "information wants to be free" right up until it's you who has access to the information. We have been liberated from being manipulated "sheep" of the US government and are now part of a flock shepherded by anonymous individuals? And ... uh ... that has gained us what exactly? Out of the frying pan into the fire? If I can't trust the US Government and I can name their members, how can I trust Anonymous whom I cannot name?
My work here is dung.
Yawn. They need to get real. No one cares about their website, even themselves.
SJWs are the new boogeyman. -Me
The "We immediately convened an emergency council blah blah blah" thing just reeks of pre-teen chat rooms or IRC channels (back in the day).
The video was pretty good quality, and I agree with the message. But *please*.
Here we go again. Stop posturing and just publish the documents. As appealing as fighting for justice and equality, this grand standing and attempt to use "secret" information to extract concession is at best juvenile, at worst a power game. Neither of which serves to advance justice and equality.
If there is information pertinent to illegal or unethical government action. Just publish it and let the public judge for themselves. Otherwise, how is the blackmail strategy of Anonymous different from that of our governments.
Far fetched to be sure, but could one possible eventuality be the U.S. Gov't Beginning a War on Hacktivsm? Operation Hackysack could commence and all that's pure in the World would remain safe for another day.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Nobody knows when you just disappear.
But whatever hope anyone had about restoring [the term "Hacker"] to what it was just went up in a flame of digital smoke.
The White House, among others, seems to already be aware that "Hacker" has more than one definition. The fight to protect the TMRC sense of "hacker" is over. We won.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
This is typical of Anonymous's "hacktivism". The problems with federal prosecutor over reach has been a problem for decades, but Anonymous didn't care at all about it until it impacted one of their own. And even now they're focussed purely on retaliating over someone who can't be helped rather than trying to get publicity for the thousands of other (mostly poor and minority) people out there right now being victimized just the same way.
And to top it all off, the organization they decide to attack is the USSC, one of the few parts of the government that actually been an ally on this issue (for example, by criticizing the way drug sentencing is biased against minorities).
It's the result of fury.
What You Sow...
I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
Anonymous is in no way a "replacement government". They're a loosely confederated group of people who have a problem with the ways that many governments, and the moneyed corporate puppetmasters that control them, are treating their citizens and the world at large; especially, when it comes to privacy, free speech, and The Internet. They're acting in ways to reveal the corruption and give the people a fighting chance, through dissemination of information. That's it. They are not lobbying to be a replacement for the current government; it is up to the people to, when given a more even playing field, decide that for themselves. Hell, if anything this makes them MORE credible; especially when it comes to politics, the people who really are deserving of respect and would serve the people as intended, often do not want the job. Anonymous isn't "sheparding" you, simply making information available to put We The People on a slightly more even field with those that have done us harm by claiming equality when in truth "Some animals are more equal than others"; its up to all of us what to do with it.
In respect to the redaction and issue, I am gathering it is two-fold and in no way compromises their integrity. First, it shows restraint and that Anonymous is willing to work within the 'whistleblower' framework, not (as many opponents would have you believe) that this is the work of anarchists who just spew information about without a thought to the process or ramifications thereof. Many have forgotten how Wikileaks offered to work with the Pentagon and State department prior to their releases, asked for where to redact if there were some actual credible national security issues etc... and were met with a simple "Don't do it, we're not even going to talk to you". By redacting information where necessary and offering it through verifiable journalist sources, Anonymous counters the propaganda of the opponents in word and deed. Secondly, it provides some insurance against attempts to litigate, arrest, capture, or kill individuals involved. The insane Wikileaks debacle (along with other leaks from Stratfor, cables, FBI etc...) shows to what level the US government is willing to go to pretend malfeasance and embarrassment is to be cloaked as national security, up to and including ruining the lives of those who are doing nothing but showing the emperor is wearing no clothes. Showing a redacted form of a document can always be followed up by a further revealed one, especially if those involved are smart about distributing the files, encryption keys etc. Ultimately, Anonymous is doing the right thing by this process of events, assuming it comes to its logical conclusion.
Anonymous isn't asking for your trust, but simply putting data before you and asking for you to make your own damn mind.
Everyone will argue whether this is a good idea, whether we should "work within the system", whether this is something that Aaron would have done, "ballot box, soapbox, ammo box", and so on. The arguments are patently obvious, and not particularly new or innovative. We've heard it all before, here and elsewhere.
The federal government has always been toxic to the citizenry, and it seems like in recent years the level of malevolence and spite from the people in charge have reached critical levels. Like a pot of superheated water, a nucleating agent will make the whole thing flash to steam.
Efforts to fix the problem from within have failed. The system is flexible enough that it will change to prevent any attempts to fix it. People have been trying for years, to no avail. (People have voted for smaller government, less war, and human rights for decades - how has that worked out?)
Most of what we depend on for civilization does not come from the federal government. The protections of law, community services, even many entitlements are run at the state level. We could do away with the federal government almost entirely and everyday life would continue uninterrupted.
(Would anyone notice if suddenly we no longer had a war on drugs, no searches at airports, no wars fought on foreign soil, no foreign military bases? Could we just dispense with all military and discretionary spending, leaving social security, medicare, and VA benefits intact? Who would attack us if we didn't have a military? How much would productivity increase if instead of paying to keep people in prison, we freed people to become taxpayers?)
People are losing faith in the government. At some point, government is no longer an asset to the people, but a tumor which must be attacked and destroyed.
If you dislike the tactics Anonymous are using, then by all means show us your alternative.
Otherwise, outright hostility towards the federal government will increase and people will eventually realize that having no federal government is better than what we have now.
At that point it will all come tumbling down - very quickly.
All it takes is a spark, a nucleating incident, or a viral video.
You are faced with overwhelming public outcry about injustice. Daily press reveals ever more injustice, fanning flames. Whitehouse petition obligates response. Congressional investigations, laws proposed to rein you in. A martyr. What to do? "Hack" your own website and make threats against the Supremes so you can take the line "We do not negotiate with terrorists." Close book, no investigation needed. Brilliant!
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Going into != touching upon. Protection aside, I guess they don't really make that difference more clear in sex ed :/
If computers were people, I'd be a misanthrope.
This is a prime example of how idealistic ideology can get you in trouble. unbridled idealism that is not tempered in reality is exactly what happened to Aaron
crackers vs. hackers nitpicking on words was lost before word hackers was applied to it's current use.
because crackers are things you eat with tea.
So I've been curious when the fuck did hacker not include "crackers"? 1975? because up from 1980 it sure didn't in any written word.
just face it, cracks only refers to sw someone has already altered.
but here's the point: hacker includes people who do hacking - even if the hacking is of the black hat kind. just live with it.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
There is no "real" Anonymous, that's kinda the point..
"The true measure of a person is how they act when they know they won't get caught." - DSRilk
Law student here. The sentencing guidelines have been optional (they used to be mandatory) for awhile now, so it's a bit weird they attacked the commission. Still, judges make the final call these days, although they often rely on the guidelines. Some good background here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Federal_Sentencing_Guidelines
Hey Anonymous, in this age of cyberwarfare, do you really think that the governments and corporations don't know who you are? It would appear to me that they are just biding their time deciding which of you to "whack" next!!!
My karma is bad. Don't get too close!!!
It's been a few years, but the last I checked, the ones issuing these federal laws, piled on top of thousands of others that nobody can even count, were not in the judicial branch. These justices can only issue rulings on law brought to them, they can't create laws. The federal prosecutors are handed a stick through laws, and if they choose to intimidate with the stick, that's one thing, but the stick can be withered or removed entirely by the legislators. I'm not sure Anonymous could come up with a large enough check to get Congress to do their jobs though.
vi? Who's that?
only white hackers can be called "crackers"
that is our word, we can call each other "cracka", and "Cracka please" but only white hackers can use that word otherwise you are racist and prejudiced against white hackers
go join the nackers if you don't want to be around the crackers :P
Juvenile hackers with an overdeveloped sense of self-importance, holding people to ransom with the equivalence of IT terrorism.
http://xkcd.com/932/
In Soviet Russia, Trojan exploits YOU!
Just wait until THESE guys get sentenced. The panel will probably write a special set of guidelines just for them.
blackmailing the u.s. government is such a brilliant idea.. nothing could possibly go wrong.
I noticed that CNN and other major news outlets are quoting the 'fissile material' bit. The sustained reference to nuclear weapons and deploying a warhead was obviously, to all of us, a metaphor to the kind of damage the encrypted information would cause once released. What was celebrated on forums, reddits, chans, and gags as a clever use of language is being used by the mainstream media to mislead the public. (This isn't out of malevolence or cooperation with the government, it's just good copy.)
I noticed quite a few people were downloading the 'payload' over TOR. While TOR offers strong anonymity, it is vulnerable to timing attacks. The US government controls enough nodes on the network that by modulating the traffic leaving the servers hosting the 'justices', they could conceivably discover the entry and exit points. If any of the downloaders used a government controlled entrance node the government would be able to trace beyond the veil put in place by TOR.
The clever naming of the files, various included 'in jokes', discussions of the attack on anonymous associated boards, and re-use of twit-storming lend the attack credibility. Still, it all seems a bit neat. By inviting people to visit and spend time on the honey-pot and 'deface' the page the controllers of the server can locate people allied with and involved with anonymous. Some of these visits will be through sufficient proxy, others will be too direct. Following the obvious connections, the authorities could flag and tap these users, waiting for them to come directly into contact with suspected 'hackers'.
They're pulling out all the stops for this one. They have just about everything.
The botmasters are not with Anonymous on this one - they're whores who care only about the money - but their tools guys are all in with Saint Aaron and they didn't used to be in this fight. They've got the resources to take over just about every PC and server connected to the internet without user interaction now. Routers, firewalls and even network switches are vulnerable too. Particularly almost every consumer broadband router can be repurposed to do anything at all they desire - tens of millions of them - and they're using that for the "seven proxies" trope. The very machines that enterprises use to destroy privacy for their employees have been recruited for this cause: DPI and proxy gear from every major vendor. They almost certainly have your private encryption keys - in some cases got from they guy you trust to hold them.
They're doing physical penetration and plausibly deniable penetration. "I found this flash drive in the parking lot and looked in it to see if I could find the owner. I had no idea it was loaded with malware that could compromise our entire network that would autorun." "Of course I read that PowerPoint/spreadsheet/word document/pdf emailed from my boss's account." (Sheepish look).
Figuring out who is to blame and what their weaknesses are is a Big Data problem that demands considerable compute resources. That's why the fans and power consumption are running higher than usual in your datacenter - it's been retasked. It's why if you're a Person Of Interest your Internet is lagging a lot lately, why your smartphone battery doesn't last as long as it used to. It's dumping your data for analysis, recording your calls, reporting ambient noise and GPS coordinates for analysis whether or not the phone is even turned on.
They're spending money too. Big money. A number of centers in the third world have been spun up to do human analysis of the data.
2013 is going to be a very interesting year for IT security. SCADA systems are not off limits. Once they figure out how to do this for a Cause and done their bit, it's likely they'll sell the vestigal facility to the highest bidder on the international market. That's bad. Very, very bad.
I never thought before that the Justice department might be a key threat to national defense given its internal role, but that view is changing.
This story was put on /. by an AC within an hour of ussc being defaced but the story disappeared from the submission list not long after. I suppose /. isn't a place for news rather just a news aggregation website.
If "anonymous" (or whoever calls itself like that right now) calls something "warheads" could we please distance our self at least in the title of the story by using apostrophs?
There are several things which i hate about anonymous:
a) Lack of proper hacker culture, These guys are deep within the blackhat zone. You dont use security breaches or DDOS to blackmail somebody. The only allowed thing which comes close to blackmail which may be allowed is "responsible disclosure" = we have documents or knowledge, which will in the public at a certain time. You do it or we do it. To use publicaiton of documents as retaliation for other things is as evil as it can be.
b) A lack of reflection on the things they demand. By shouting "The evil system kill everybody and only helps the big companies and a big bad commander and clique of power-hungry evil persons in the capital and the stock exchange run the world by deals behind closed doors and the elections are a farce, so everybody step down and do what we want because we are 9000 (more likely much less)" they somehow discredit the idea. That they suggest is that a cat-porn "benevolent" (?) dictatorship is better than what we have now. I donâ(TM)t think so
c) Use of militarized language. Really? You want to change society into something where you give people the impression that whoever has the bigger stick is right? Honestly? If i look back at the past 30 years the successful revolutions in the world have not been achieved by having the stronger weapon but by millions of people being unhappy and going to the streets (East Europe, North Africa) or even by discussions and reforms inside the systems (China).
So anybody can adopt the non-de-plume "Anonymous" and tar themselves and any other "Anonymous" pretender with the same brush. Doesn't this in effect make "Anonymous" synonymous with the worst behavior any "Anonymous" adopts? And therefore "Anonymous" is ultimately doomed to total failure by being "Anonymous". What a pointless wank!
The worst bit about this is that their "good name" could easily be sullied by their enemies. I mean, I can see the logic in wanting to protest anonymously, but actually attacking anything using the name "anonymous" was always going to end in disaster as there's obviously no accountability (which they probably think is a virtue), and therefore a very very large chance* the name will be subverted.
* By very very large, I actually mean absolute certainty.
The funniest part is that you think the US government, armed with tanks, gunship helis, fighter jets, drones, and pretty soon power-armored supersoldiers, gives a shit about your cute little pea-shooters. That stuff is an annoyance on par with a persistent horsefly to them.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Particularly since the target of the hack was the the very commission in charge of determining the exact threats against those who might commit Federal crimes. High five, bro.
/. -- the Free Republic of technology.
Or intoxication? Some of the very technology that enthuses technology enthusiasts act not only as the bribes held out to discourage action against injustice, but as delivery mechanisms for tireless, persuasive, superficial (and well-paid) advocates for injustice.
/. -- the Free Republic of technology.
The worst bit about this is that their "good name"
um
What good name? Anonymous are already the Hells Angels/Crips/Bloods of the Internet. Now it's just quibbling over just how pointless and disruptive they are.
You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowling_v._United_States_(1985)
Majority opinion written by Justice Harry Blackmun.
"Holding - Copies of copyrighted works cannot be regarded as stolen property for the purposes of a prosecution under a statute criminalizing the interstate transportation of such property."
Also, for the record, none of the indictments had anything to do with "stealing", or even "copyright infringement". They were for, among other things, using a static IP address.
Whine all you like. Mr. Swartz didn't steal anything.
:(){
Can you point me at the federal law that makes going 25mph over the speed limit into a felony? And the red light one, too.
Because I've been charged with doing 80 in a 40 (wrongly, mind you; my car couldn't make those turns at 80, lol). All they did was suspend my license. Funny how the math with the VASCAR lines was accurate to infinite precision - almost as if the value of twice the speed limit was intentionally chosen, and VASCAR times were reverse engineered from the desired speed. When presented with this evidence, and some photos of the turns I was allegedly doing 80 through, the cop in question decided to work out a deal with me that didn't involve any points on my license.
I've also been pulled over for "running a red light". Was given a citation for "failure to obey a traffic signal". Small fine, didn't even affect my insurance.
So, forgive me for calling bullshit on your allegations that these two actions are felonies.
And, for the record, all of the plea deals offered to Mr. Swartz involved pleading guilty to all thirteen felonies and spending at least six months in prison. "ever hear of plea deals", indeed...maybe you should have looked into what deals were offered to him before running your mouth about "cowards".
I'd like to see you call Mr. Swartz a coward to his parents' faces. I'll bet you wouldn't have the guts. You're just full of Internet Bravado.
:(){