Is Eccentric Sven Olaf Kamphius To Blame For Spamhaus DDoS?

RougeFemme writes "Sven Olaf Kamphius, self-described 'Internet freedom fighter,' is reportedly at the center of the investigation into this week's alleged cyber-attack against Spamhaus, a group that fights Internet spam. Mr. Kamphius became incensed when Spamhaus blacklisted two companies that he runs, including Cyberbunker, a company that, earlier this week, claimed be under attack from Dutch swat teams. Though he initially solicited support for a DDoS against Spamhaus, he now disavows any direct role in the cyberattack, which threatened to slow some web traffic to a crawl."

Comments

We blaclist him too...

[Delgul]

I heard an interview with this guy on the dutch radio and he is obviously a moron. He managed to contradict himself three times in as many sentences and obviously has no idea about how SH works. His servers are on our blacklists too and with good reason...

Re:We blaclist him too...

[Zan Zu from Eridu]

He's not a moron (in spite of his eyebrows), he just plays one. This guy earns a ton by providing services to well known spammers and other criminal organisations, but every time he makes the headlines and gets interviewed he either plays the naïve internet activist or the village idiot, depending on his public.

Re:We blaclist him too...

[Anonymous Coward]

The moment he's prosecuted, he'll become a hero around here.

What is it with Slashdot's (and other geek sites) support for criminals when they are geeks? Much of the vocal community supported Reiser very strongly when he was accused of killing his wife, interpreting and analyzing 'evidence' making the 'solid' case he was obviously set up - until he capitulated and showed the police where he had buried her. Same with Assange. Suddenly everybody here are experts in Swedish law, and know with certainty what did and did not happen, based on their expert analysis of select tidbits of information through secondary sources. At first a lot of people here claimed (with 'evidence') the women didn't even exist, while they were being interviewed by local media. As a Scandinavian following the US geek discussion of that case was part scary part funny. Our Kim Dotcom 'hero' has a long history of criminal activity (not the alleged copyright infringement, but real criminal credit card fraud, theft of calling cards, stock fraud, embezzlement, insider trading). Regardless of whether Kamphuis is behind the DDoS attack or not, his company has been proven repeatedly to host spammers. And still I can see the pattern repeating, just as you predict.

Re:We blaclist him too...

[alexgieg]

What is it with Slashdot's (and other geek sites) support for criminals when they are geeks?

Partly a bias the name of which I forgot, in which you require extraordinary amounts of proof against a member from your own group compared to what you'd require against someone from another group; partly the fact we like their tech and are worried further developments will be disrupted; and partly because technologists are usually on the anarchic side of things and don't see much (but not all) of what these people are accused of as morally wrong even if it's illegal (the "law isn't justice" dichotomy).

That said, there are certain technologies that are themselves disruptive to other technologies, spam being the prime example, and thus those who defend it are seen as doing something morally wrong, precisely the case here. But there's a nuance in there. Technologists, although mostly anarchic, are also meritocratic, valuing technological prowess. Thus, if a highly skilled hackers manages to invade a system managed by a low skilled system administrator, that isn't seen as a simple invasion, but as a master teaching an apprentice a hard lesson so that he can figure out his deficiencies and improve (that the apprentice's boss doesn't see things this way is of no consequence). In any case, brute force techniques such as spammer delivery systems, DDoS via botnets and the like aren't themselves displays of skill, they're just displays of brute force. Developing such a system sure, is a clear display of skill. Using it, not so much.

Re:We blaclist him too...

[Viol8]

"The Man is not me"

The Man is you if your internet access or activities have ever suffered because stupid little fuckwits on yet another cyber crusade for [insert cause of the week here] have screwed it up.

"and looting my pockets."

No one is looting your pockets. Learn some basic economics.

Cyberbunker lied about location

[mwvdlee]

For those who can't read Dutch, and thus rely on second hand sources:

http://www.automatiseringgids.nl/nieuws/2013/13/cyberbunker-niet-meer-in-bunker-kloetinge
Claims Cyberbunker hasn't used the bunker location since 2010. I guess that explains why the claimed SWAT thing wasn't reported in Dutch news (and also why they waited to pose so nicely on the picture). The bunker location is currently property of http://www.bunkerinfra.com/ which apparently has several such locations and has nothing to do with the old occupant.