Slashdot Mirror


New York Times and Twitter Attacked By Syrian Electronic Army

cold fjord writes with news that the NY Times website was disrupted by hackers Tuesday afternoon. "In an interview, Mr. Frons said the attack was carried out by a group known as 'the Syrian Electronic Army, or someone trying very hard to be them.' The group attacked the company’s domain name registrar, Melbourne IT. The Web site first went down after 3 p.m.; once service was restored, the hackers quickly disrupted the site again." The Times wasn't the only site to be attacked: "Earlier today, a Twitter account allegedly belonging to the Syrian Electronic Army, a pro-Syrian-regime hacker collective, claimed to have taken over The New York Times website, Huffington Post UK's website and Twitter.com, by hacking into each of the site's registry accounts." The group was definitely able to change contact info for Twitter's domain. The Wall Street Journal notes that this is the same group that targeted media organizations a few months back. "When the SEA hacked the Twitter account of the Associated Press earlier this year, it posted a false headline to the account that said the White House had been attacked. The hoax caused U.S. stock markets to briefly lose $200 billion in value."

169 comments

  1. NYT and Twitter attacked by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and nothing of value was lost...

    Seriously, there's something I've never understood about electronic "warfare": unless you attack real targets and do something useful, such as penetrating your enemy's command network to steal plans or cryptographic keys or something, what's the point?

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by ls671 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's psychological warfare, a variation of propaganda.

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

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    2. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by lennier · · Score: 1

      It's psychological warfare, a variation of propaganda.

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

      So... then this is probably someone from Assad's regime trying to make the Syrian rebels look like as much of a random force of brute pointless chaos as Anonymous?

      If this was the rebels, they need to hire a new PR agency.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    3. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Not likely. The SEA is likely a small but very smart group of american/europeans. The whole Syrian thing is just a cover story.

    4. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      The SEA are funded by Israel and the US.

    5. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      The SEA are funded by Israel and the US.

      And Israel is funded by the Illuminati!

      Who are funded by the Underpants Gnomes!

      Who don't need to be funded by anybody because

      ...

      Profit!

    6. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      and nothing of value was lost...

      You missed the part about making stock markets drop. Frankly, I think they most likely did it for the LULZ; but if you recall, there was an investigation into short-selling of reinsurance companies before 9/11. I don't know what actually came of that investigation. The Bin Laden family is probably more sophisticated than these SEA guys, but we shouldn't underestimate them. Once you figure out how to move markets with disinformation, you can plow more R&D back into moving markets, as well as funding actual acts of terror which also move markets... and... well, it's exponential until it hits some kind of natural hard limit. They can't drive the S&P to zero, but they don't have to in order to make a *lot* of money.

      We're being played by somebody, somewhere. Our fucking brilliant leaders won't figure it out until they've lost lives as well as $billions.

    7. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 3, Funny

      Drat. How due you realise this?

      We kept this perfectly secret apart from the clues we inexplicably planted in Denver Airport and the symbols we in included on banknotes.

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
    8. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who are funded by the Underpants Gnomes!

      Who don't need to be funded by anybody because

      ...

      Profit!

      Please use the correct name.

      They are called the Danish Underpants Brigade

    9. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by bluegutang · · Score: 4, Insightful
    10. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You missed the part about making stock markets drop.

      Maybe we shouldn't let those those people rule our world until they grow up and stop being such nervous nellies then.

    11. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      And Israel is funded by the Illuminati!

      Actually Israel appears to be funded by the US (taxpayer).

    12. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      unless you attack real targets and do something useful, such as penetrating your enemy's command network to steal plans or cryptographic keys or something, what's the point?

      Exactly, just like terrorists. They should target army bases and stuff, right? What's the point of bombing, for example, marathon run audiences? Surely nobody is going to react to that...or will they?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    13. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by MachineShedFred · · Score: 2

      Then this attack had exactly the wrong effect. Shutting off Twitter and the New York Times is going to put me in a better mood, and make me want the conflict to escalate into them attacking Facebook, Instagram, and Reddit.

      Have yourself a good time, Syrian Electronic Army! Take out the Internet's trash and do the rest of us a big favor.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    14. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So we're the Illuminati?

    15. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Floods from the SEA does rather sound like Americanized humour.

    16. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Israel is funded by the Illuminati!

      Actually Israel appears to be funded by the US (taxpayer).

      Actually, Israel only receives about $3 billion per year in grants (virtually all of the money is for the Israeli military) from the US, approximately 3/4th of which Israel is required to then spend on American military goods and services. Israel spent approximately $15 billion on its defense forces for fiscal year 2012.

      So, the U.S. aid to Israel is actually approximately $2.25 billion dollars in subsidies to the US arms industry and about $750 million in pure military aid.

      I think there was also hundred million or so dollars in aid for Israeli immigration services or some such for FY 2012.

      Israel's annual budget is very roughly about $100 billion per year. So, yeah, about 3% of Israel is funded by the US (most of which is spent on U.S. goods).

    17. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by krept · · Score: 1

      But then I'll actually have to work :(

      --
      None of us know everything. Therefore we're all naïve.
    18. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it made our stock markets drop. Which was corrected in less than 5 minutes. THe only people hurt were the auto traders from big wall street firms who had auto trading orders set up as stop-loss, and then the same firms made all the money back as the auto-traders went back to work and bought all the low priced stuff at a discount and brought the price right back up. It happened too fast for any individual traders or individual people to be affected.

      So net result:

      1) Some Wall Street firms lost a lot of money
      2) Some Wall Street firms (possibly the same ones) then gained a lot of money
      3) market was corrected
      4) no individual investors were harmed
      5) life proceeded as normal.

      Big deal.

    19. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      No worries. They haven't gotten Slashdot.

    20. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      I temporarily was unable to know what was going on with Miley Cyrus. I freaked out and lost consciousness. When I came to, I had already written a letter to Obama demanding we surrender to Assad.

    21. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      This is just speculation, but I think the boston bombers did it because they wanted to be famous. That and some religious bullshit.

      An actual country who has hired cyber-mercenaries on the other hand, it makes no sense. Unless you're suggesting Syria is doing this for attention?

      Now, if the "syrian electronic army" actually has nothing to do with Syria, then that's a reasonable explanation, but without something suggesting it's just a bunch of domestic suburban juveniles, I'm not sure it holds much water.

    22. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by ls671 · · Score: 1

      Look at other poster replies. We can't be sure on who the hackers work for. It could be "black propaganda".

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

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    23. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Maybe the SEA had issues w/ the Liberal bias of the NYT

    24. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by noh8rz10 · · Score: 1

      As a member of the Simian Election Army, I object to SEA encroaching on our trademakrs.

    25. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      read my mind... or did you hack my mind? ? (0)_o ???

    26. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think our leaders care about twitter and nytimes.com being hacked when there's innocent people dying to chemical weapons.

    27. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by oreiasecaman · · Score: 1

      As a member of the Simian Election Army, I object to SEA encroaching on our trademakrs.

      As a member of the Saurian Environment Agency, I object to both SEA and SEA encroaching on our trademarks.

      --
      This is a UDP joke, I don't care if you get it or not...
    28. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by oreiasecaman · · Score: 1

      USA, Illuminati, what's the difference?

      --
      This is a UDP joke, I don't care if you get it or not...
    29. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by kevinNCSU · · Score: 1

      That hacked twitter post cause a $200 billion temporary loss in the stock market. You could make some serious cash if you knew it was fake and bought low, or knew the hack was coming and shorted stock beforehand.

    30. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by DeVilla · · Score: 1

      Normally I would have ignored this as crazy tin foil hat talk. But given recent events I guess I have to consider that you might be correct and may even be a little optimistic in your assessment.

  2. Syrian Electronic Army.. by meglon · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is that like the Electric Moog Orchestra?

    --
    Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
    1. Re:Syrian Electronic Army.. by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      Actually, my guess is that it is a spoof on the Symbionese Liberation Army, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbionese_Liberation_Army , of "Bag-a-Patty-Hearst" infamy.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  3. What is your favorite superhero? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Whats your favorite color?

    Security questions are such a fucking joke.

    1. Re:What is your favorite superhero? by Cinder6 · · Score: 2

      Agreed. They all seem to want you to put in information that anyone could find by browsing your Facebook profile (assuming you have one, natch). It's better to answer them with random words (in case you have to answer them to a live rep) and use a password manager to keep track of them.

      Another option is to perform a simple substitution. Instead of answering "What was the name of your first pet?" correctly, put down your mother's maiden name. Your pet's real name will go under, say, a question asking where you were born. That would be an entertaining tech support call.

      --
      If you can't convince them, convict them.
    2. Re:What is your favorite superhero? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      What is your favorite superhero?

      Sounds like an occasion for a good Iron Man vs. Batman religious debate: Two billionerd techno-vigilantes, one with the cocky attitude of a cat that just got a jar of cream, the other with the surly attitude of a cat that just got a jar of cream stuffed up its ass.

      Who's your favorite? Who would win a match?

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    3. Re:What is your favorite superhero? by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 1

      What is the average airspeed of a swallow?

      This security type was already broken in Monty Python's Holy Grail.

      --
      Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    4. Re:What is your favorite superhero? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      where do you get cream in a jar?

    5. Re:What is your favorite superhero? by ryllharu · · Score: 1

      That's an excellent strategy...when the various websites use the same set of questions. In my experience, you're very lucky to get three consistent options for those kinds of substitutions.

    6. Re:What is your favorite superhero? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was a UK softcore porn star called Tina Cream. She often worked with Candy Hunt.

    7. Re:What is your favorite superhero? by oreiasecaman · · Score: 1

      Not sure... European or African swallow? Unladen or carrying a coconut?

      --
      This is a UDP joke, I don't care if you get it or not...
    8. Re:What is your favorite superhero? by Cinder6 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. That's why I use a password manager to keep track of it.

      --
      If you can't convince them, convict them.
  4. Suspiciously well timed... by gagol · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, first a story about the army being ready to raid the country, and just now a cyber-attack originating from syria happens... How do we know it's not US electronic warfare machine fabricating a bening attack to foster popular support for the coming war? After all, false flags before wars are the norm and not the exception.

    --
    Tomorrow is another day...
    1. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't doubt the us gov is capable of false flag. But if they were to make a false flag attempt, why something so lame?

      Joe Six-Pack didn't notice and wouldn't care even if he did.

    2. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what interest does the US possibly have to start a war in Syria??? do they even need a reason? or is wasn't this already foretold after Iraq?...gotta employ the people somehow, i suppose

    3. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by gagol · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because it is harmless, but can be pushed as a threat in the medias? I just dont see what strategic interest Syria would try to bring the US army to its civil war. Or maybe it is the russians looking for a good old proxy war with the US...

      --
      Tomorrow is another day...
    4. Re: Suspiciously well timed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know what to believe anymore: http://www.globalresearch.ca/deleted-daily-mail-online-article-us-backed-plan-for-chemical-weapon-attack-in-syria-to-be-blamed-on-assad/5339178

      The whole thing is fishy - why is it okay that the U.S. is supporting the jihadists in Syria anyways?

    5. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      the goal is iran.. it always has been... the syrian thing has been ongoing for a few years.. it takes a lot of money for food, logistics etc, and weapons to humans fighting a provisioned government.. saudi/us supported insurgency in the first place..

      since its hard to get world support for an iranian attack, it might be easier to do it using syria, iran's major ally in the region.. if they somehow lure iran in on it.

    6. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So your thinking is that it won't be the use of chemical weapons on a civilian population killing over a thousand people in violation of international treaties, and in the face of repeated warnings from the international community that have been openly stated that will rile people up?

      Yeah... you got any proof that the rebels or even a covert op didn't launch the alleged chemical weapons? Because Syria launching chemical weapons makes about as much sense as Obama nuking Texas.

      I know, I know, you were damn sure Iraq had chemical weapons too, right? And they were throwing babies around, right? And Iran will have a nuke... what... 3 years ago now?

      You're a fucking brain-dead fool who is the very target of the absurd propaganda the rest of us shake our head at. You're at the bottom of the intelligence scale, son.

    7. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by ToadProphet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It was on the front page of Fox News, so Joe Six-Pack likely noticed.

      --
      It's on America's tortured brow, That Mickey Mouse has grown up a cow
    8. Re: Suspiciously well timed... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      The whole thing is fishy - why is it okay that the U.S. is supporting the jihadists in Syria anyways?

      I know you've been taught that 'jihadist' means 'anti-American terrorist,' but it's really not true. Give up the conditioning. A jihadist can be good, or bad, or even non-violent.

      I'm not saying we should invade Syria, just that a jihadist isn't what you think it is.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    9. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I don't doubt the us gov is capable of false flag. But if they were to make a false flag attempt, why something so lame?

      So Twitter was rated #1 by the EFF on resisting government warrant(less) data grabs and the NYT has recently started tipping over to the side of working with Snowden and Greenwald.

      Other than that, I can't see any motivation to pick those two high-profile American targets.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    10. Re: Suspiciously well timed... by cold+fjord · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't know what to believe anymore: http://www.globalresearch.ca/deleted-daily-mail-online-article-us-backed-plan-for-chemical-weapon-attack-in-syria-to-be-blamed-on-assad/5339178

      The correct answer is that it is a forgery. So you shouldn't believe it at all.

      Britam Defence, David Goulding and Philip Doughty

      An article on 29 January reported allegations on the internet that the US Government had backed a plot to launch a chemicals weapons attack in Syria and blame it on the Assad regime. ... We now accept that email was fabricated and acknowledge there is no truth in any suggestion that Britam or its directors were willing to consider taking part in such a plot, which may have led to an atrocity.
      We apologise to each of them and have agreed to pay substantial damages.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    11. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't necessarily disagree with you that false flags are overused as an explanation, but they are also highly likely in situations like this. Which do you think is more likely to capture American attention: possible chemical attacks on their own populace or an interruption to the twitter service the average American uses? No, we aren't going to war over a twitter outage, but it does help frame them as "the new bad guys" for the sake of the proles.

      I'm assuming you've done more investingating into it than I have. So why did they choose these specific targets? What did they hope to achieve?

    12. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      Other than that, I can't see any motivation to pick those two high-profile American targets.

      If it is in fact Syrians, I don't know what they expect to accomplish for their cause.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    13. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 0

      what interest does the US possibly have to start a war in Syria???

      None whatsoever.

      Unless they want to inflict some collateral damage to keep people joining terrorist organizations.

      Let's sit this one out and let someone else put their foot in it.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    14. Re: Suspiciously well timed... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The whole thing is fishy - why is it okay that the U.S. is supporting the jihadists in Syria anyways?

      I know you've been taught that 'jihadist' means 'anti-American terrorist,' but it's really not true. Give up the conditioning. A jihadist can be good, or bad, or even non-violent.

      I'm not saying we should invade Syria, just that a jihadist isn't what you think it is.

      I don't think any of the terrorist organizations are jihadist. They appear to be people who are outraged at some real or perceived wrong, and have convinced themselves that killing innocent people is proper redress.

      Just like Timothy McVeigh.

      AFAICT the only way Islam enters into Middle Eastern sourced terrorism is as part of the definition of "us" vs. "them".

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    15. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 0

      As explanations on Slashdot I find that "false flags" are greatly overused.

      Yeah, Lizard Men don't use flags.

      If you don't want to turn in your Paranoid Conspiracy Theorist badge, you've got to look for the conspiracy behind the conspiracy.

      (But who's manipulating the Lizard Men?)

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    16. Re: Suspiciously well timed... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I don't think any of the terrorist organizations are jihadist.

      I wouldn't go that far. Think of christians in the middle ages, willing to kill for religion. In a lot of ways the middle east is stuck in the middle ages. So you'll have guys who think it's ok to kill people just because they are Sufis or 'wrong sect.' You'll find people believing this even when they are relatively well off.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    17. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by EzInKy · · Score: 1

      What you talking about AC? My retirement account lost money because of their actions, and it's been made clear on here that it will be made certain that none of us older age types can feel depend on social securityc! I say bomb them back to the stoneage!!

      --
      Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    18. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by artor3 · · Score: 2

      The NYT also published an Op-Ed today entitled Bomb Syria, Even if It Is Illegal. I think it's quite easy to imagine some nationalist Syrian hackers targeting the site. That seems far more likely than some dark government conspiracy. Many major international players are already signalling support for the US bombing Syria. Why would Obama fake a minor hack against some newspaper? What would he have to gain? The downside if caught seems much, much greater than the tiny potential upside.

    19. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      Joe Six-Pack

      Funny the two completely opposite and conflicting images that brought to mind when I read it.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    20. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Because the Government is the only organization besides the New York Times that seems to care about the New York Times. Oh, and Twitter isn't exactly hard to hit - they do it to themselves enough.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    21. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by XcepticZP · · Score: 3, Informative

      And who forced you to base your retirement on investments? Oh, that's right... Inflation and fear.

      Either way, you're a sick human being if you think innocent people should die because "your retirement account lost money" due to their supposed actions.

    22. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Or maybe it is the russians looking for a good old proxy war with the US...

      You really, honestly think that this would happen without an agreement? We have more to lose in any conflict with them, but they stand higher chances of losing, because they're already broke.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    23. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by jon3k · · Score: 1

      Because the US doesn't need hacking the NY Times as an excuse to invade Syria.

    24. Re: Suspiciously well timed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There's something interesting about that denial you posted, it states as fact that the source of the email's computer was indeed cracked.

      So who fabricated the email then, and why?

    25. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And who forced you to base your retirement on investments?

      Probably his employer.

      Either way, you're a sick human being if you think innocent people should die because "your retirement account lost money" due to their supposed actions.

      If what my daughter, who lives in Ohio and works in Kentucky says is any indication, look at the guy's user name -- Ez in KY. According to my daughter, all the folks going into her GameStop store are crackheads. And crackheads aren't known for being nice people.

    26. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean you didn't notice how Twitter has been used throughout the Arab world to organize protest and dissent? That the rebels in Syria are using it for communication (along with Skype)?

    27. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In that case joe would be happy that liberal socialist paper was taken down.

      Kinda the opposite effect a false-flag should have.

    28. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After all, false flags before wars are the norm and not the exception.

      So is conspiracy lunacy.

      It's not the US who did this as a false flag, because the US doesn't want to go to war. We're initiating a strike because Obama made a huge blunder: he said 1 year ago that the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian Government constituted a red line for the US in intervening in this war. Net translation to all parties: If you want the US to topple the Syrian regime, then either have the Syrian Government use chemical weapons or make it look like they did. So someone called his bluff. Now if we don't strike, then all future red lines are meaningless. It will embolden North Korea to keep pushing nuclear weapons, it will embolden Iran to keep pushing nuclear weapons, etc etc. Other countries who want to act badly and develop weapons of mass destruction always have to calculate the risk of a US Invasion in developing WMDs, so now that Obama claimed that that was the red line for using them means he has to follow through or look weak. At the same time, if he topples the Assad regime, then he risks a Sunni jihadist regime taking over, as the strongest rebel factions are islamist fundamentalists with Al Qaeda ties. What if they take over and turn to an ethnic cleansing of the minority Alawites and Shiites? That'll be laid at Obama's feet if he topples the regime. So basically he bluffed and someone called it: he now has to attack or hurt US diplomacy all over the world, he can't use overwhelming force or the spill over and fallout could be hugely disastrous, and he can't afford to lose or the US will look impotent. He politically can't afford a ground invasion, and he can't guarantee eliminating all of the Assad regime's chemical weapons stock piles with just air strikes, especially when Syria has one of the strongest air defense networks in the world with state of the art Russian technology. His chances of a good outcome from this are super slim.

      So yeah, bottom line, they don't want support, hell the administration doesn't even want a war. What you'll see is likely a cruise missile strike against command and control locations and that's about it; he doesn't need to false flag a bunch of propaganda to gain support for that.

    29. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      Who stands to benefit from such a physical war exactly? Another war with no exit strategy and no real allies. I don't think it's been long enough to where enough people have forgotten how bad that worked the previous two times.

      Now the cyber security industry wanting more money to be thrown their way, that sounds a lot more likely.

    30. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Weren't they the same people opposed to the war against Iraq?

    31. Re: Suspiciously well timed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know you've been taught that 'jihadist' means 'anti-American terrorist,' but it's really not true. Give up the conditioning. A jihadist can be good, or bad, or even non-violent.

      Says someone who's obviously bought into the Mohammedan propaganda about what Jihad is.

    32. Re: Suspiciously well timed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Jihadist" is a neologism which means exactly what you're saying it doesn't. The suffix -ist is not Arabic.

    33. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The NY Times is causing their own outage today. True that yesterday, the registrar was hacked to repoint the authoritative DNS nameservers to sea.sy, the Syrian Electronic Army's domain. However - as of today, the authoritative nameservers are the NYTimes' nameservers. Here is the proof that the Times is causing their own outage today:

      (1) The website itself is up, via its correct IP address 170.149.168.130... .

      (2) Checking the WHOIS database shows the correct Times nameservers DNS.EWR1.NYTIMES.COM and DNS.SEA1.NYTIMES.COM. (Granted, it's strange that 'sea' is referenced in the Times' actual nameservers.)

      (3) The Times' nameservers are not reachable by their fully-qualified domain name, but they are reachable by IP; they are working fine, not down or overloaded. "nslookup nytimes.com 170.149.168.134" - or in Linux, "dig nytimes.com @170.149.168.134" . This proves that the Times' nameservers are not undergoing a Denial of Service attack.

      The only thing causing the nytimes.com outage right now, is that the NYTimes' own nameservers are not resolving correctly *within their own network that they have full control over*.

      The Times is now causing their own outage. It seems reasonable to assume that their Admin was ordered to keep the site down, so the media can play up the outage on the newschannels as the US prepares to strike Syria.

    34. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by oreiasecaman · · Score: 1
      --
      This is a UDP joke, I don't care if you get it or not...
    35. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by gagol · · Score: 1

      Geopolitics. Russia is an ally if Syria, to the point they have a naval base there. Controlling the region would be good enough reason to fabricate a (pr) reason to go there. Rule #1 when you are about to enter a war is to demonixe your opponent. Here we are now...

      --
      Tomorrow is another day...
    36. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by gagol · · Score: 1

      So Obama made a mistake and somehow you think he will not try to justify the attack instead of simply say "I made a mistake?", you are cute.

      --
      Tomorrow is another day...
    37. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by gagol · · Score: 1

      Ok then, can you explain to me why would Syria would redirect nytimes domain to its own address? If I was to attack someone online, the last thing I would do is point my attacker back to me. This makes no sense at all. Have fun drinking your cool-aid.

      --
      Tomorrow is another day...
    38. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by jon3k · · Score: 1

      I don't have to. This is totally unnecessary. Your premise is that the US Govt hacked the NYT as an excuse to invade Syria. My point is: it doesn't matter who hacked the NYT, we're going to invade Syria anyway. So who cares?

      I think your tin foil hat might be on a little too tight today.

    39. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by sunsurfandsand · · Score: 1

      Syria launching chemical weapons makes about as much sense as Obama nuking Texas.

      All options are on the table.

    40. Re:Suspiciously well timed... by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Because Syria launching chemical weapons makes about as much sense as Obama nuking Texas.

      Do you have any "insightful" comments about Saddam's gassing of the Kurds? Interesting fact - Iraq was, and Syria is, ruled by the Ba'ath Party, and both have been bloodthirsty.

      By the way, the Syrian government has gassed people before: Hama 1982 – The Syrian massacre you never heard about

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  5. NSA up to its old tricks again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If I had to guess, someone (name rhymes with banana-rama-me-m-mobama) wants war.

  6. Twitter accounts compromised, too... by Cl1mh4224rd · · Score: 1

    I've heard several reports today of people receiving direct messages from apparently compromised accounts. The direct message apparently contains a link to a website asking the potential victim to confirm their password.

    --
    People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
    1. Re:Twitter accounts compromised, too... by gander666 · · Score: 1

      I got about 4 of them today. Didn't click on any of the links though.

      --
      Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress ... but I repeat myself. - Mark T
  7. Warfare? by edibobb · · Score: 0

    This sounds like a couple of teenagers having some fun. I'll bet they're thrilled at all the publicity its getting.

    1. Re:Warfare? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah I'm wondering what they call it when they go in with planes, bomb the shit out of every city with white phosphorous, murder civilians by the thousands, deploy killer robots that shoot anything that moves and torture any survivors in secret prisons, where they are kept eternally without trial or even informing them as to why they are arrested. Then put a phony puppet government and use the entire country for a money laundering operations while keeping it in a state of constant civil war so they can justify their presence there while selling weapons to both sides.

      Oh yeah... they call it "freedom" now.

      Silly me. Gotta update my dictionary.

    2. Re:Warfare? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem isn't your dictionary, it is your medication level. It appears to be too low to prevent psychotic episodes.

    3. Re:Warfare? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israel... duh that was easy!

  8. A Note to all you Captains of Industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This kind of shit is going to be commonplace. Get your heads screwed on straight will ya?

  9. I CALL BULLSHIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    False Flag

  10. Rob Malda did it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The famous Commander Taco ( well, famous around here anyway )
    now works for the NSA. His job at WaPo is merely a cover.

    You read it here first.

  11. AND FRANCE SURRENDERS !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    In anticipation of an attack, France has formally surrendered !!

    1. Re:AND FRANCE SURRENDERS !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The UN was going to roll over first, but the French beat them to it!

    2. Re:AND FRANCE SURRENDERS !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Less funny. More racist.

    3. Re:AND FRANCE SURRENDERS !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      France has been to Libya 2 years ago, and if you read newspapers, they are ready to engage military actions in Syria too.
      Stop the craptalk.

    4. Re:AND FRANCE SURRENDERS !! by jbeaupre · · Score: 2

      Don't forget Greenpeace. France totally kicked Greenpeace's ass.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    5. Re:AND FRANCE SURRENDERS !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Next you'll be talking about freedom fries.

    6. Re:AND FRANCE SURRENDERS !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      France is a race?

    7. Re:AND FRANCE SURRENDERS !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I took that as a request.

  12. Theatrics by jmd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I am putting money on a flase flag that FOIA will release in 20 years. Sad part is the story is always the same. Just different details.

    Remember in the Stratfor hack some of the documents detailed a consortium of people planning chemical attacks in such a way as to place blame on Assad.

    1. Re:Theatrics by cold+fjord · · Score: 0, Troll

      I believe you are referring to this. It was fabricated.

      Putting your money on a "false flag" for something this cheesy is, quite frankly, a stupid bet.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    2. Re:Theatrics by erikkemperman · · Score: 4, Informative

      Putting your money on a "false flag" for something this cheesy is, quite frankly, a stupid bet.

      I won't pretend to know if it is... But folks remember the last time the US presented "conclusive evidence" and it turned out to be fabrication. Why isn't this evidence presented? Why are others, such as SG Moon, reserving judgment for now?

      Much of these rebels are affiliated to AQ, why are you so sure supporting them is a good idea?

      Again I don't know either. I just think you're jumping to conclusions prematurely.

      --
      Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
    3. Re:Theatrics by mpe · · Score: 1

      I am putting money on a flase flag that FOIA will release in 20 years. Sad part is the story is always the same. Just different details.

      Unlikely to be that soon. 30-60 years appears to be the more usual timescale.

    4. Re:Theatrics by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      I just really wish that the US (and mostly the CIA) would learn from the foreign policy mistakes of the last 50 years. Every time we get involved in one of these middle-eastern sectarian wars, it just gets worse for the US.

      Iran in the 1950s
      Israel / Lebanon / Syria / Egypt in the 1960s
      Iran in the 1970s
      Iraq / Iran, Afghanistan, and Lebanon in the 1980s
      Iraq / Kuwait in the 1990s
      Iraq / Afghanistan in the 2000s
      Afghanistan in the 2010s...

      We should just GTFO and let them kill each other like they obviously want to. They don't need our help in that regard.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    5. Re:Theatrics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well actually, it's not a gurranteed jackpot, but given how stacked in favour of the person sueing british libel laws are, it'd probably be pretty fair odds.

      http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/email/will-net-free-speech-survive-british-libel-litigation

      Whatever else it's certainly a spectacle

  13. Site Up, Just Misdirected by guttentag · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Since the domain registrar is what was attacked, the site is still "up," just not reachable at the name nytimes.com. You can still access the site from its IP address: 170.149.168.130

    Note that many links on the site will not work because they point to the nytimes.com domain. To read articles you'll have to copy the link, paste it into the location field and change "www.nytimes.com" to "170.149.168.130"... for example:

    Clicking a link on their home page attempts to take you here:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/28/business/media/hacking-attack-is-suspected-on-times-web-site.html
    But that won't work, so you want to change it to:
    http://170.149.168.130/2013/08/28/business/media/hacking-attack-is-suspected-on-times-web-site.html

    The CSS is still pointing to nytimes.com, so the page will look funny, but at least you can read it.

    1. Re:Site Up, Just Misdirected by viperidaenz · · Score: 4, Informative

      or add nytimes.com to your host file with the correct IP address, browse as usual.

    2. Re:Site Up, Just Misdirected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This does not work well for me. Adding nytimes.com to my hosts file does not redirect www.nytimes.com (or the many other prefixes used by the nytimes web site). I would have thought the nameserver at nytimes.com (170.149.168.30) would resolve these subaddresses. Can some DNS expert explain what's going on here and what can be done on the client side to work around the issue?

    3. Re:Site Up, Just Misdirected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Adding nytimes.com to your hosts file is not pointing it to a new name server. It's just a manual resolution entry for that domain.

      Since www.nytimes.com is technically a different domain from nytimes.com you'd have to add an entry for that too.

      I'm not an expert.

    4. Re:Site Up, Just Misdirected by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      7:30 AM still can't get there via name. Interesting.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    5. Re:Site Up, Just Misdirected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correct.

      For each (and every) domain name that is not currently resolving correctly, you need to add an entry for it that points to the correct ip address.

      If you do that, the site (including its sub-domains) will work fine, for you.

      Then keep an eye on the official channels and when DNS order has been restored just remove your manually added entries, entirely or comment them out, in case. (This step is not strictly necessary, but it allows for valid DNS updates to work without your local changes overriding them when not needed.)

  14. Sorry, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but there's a real war going on there. If you think Syria (proper) is wasting time fucking with ridiculous (worthless) news sites, then you're barely thinking. Some very powerful "people" have serious hard-ons for Syria and they're gonna do whatever they can do to dick them vigorously. You dullards will watching recaps of this bullshit years from now and bitching, feeling stupid, just as you when you see Colin P talking of weapons of mass destruction.

    1. Re:Sorry, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Syrian government is "winning" the war. The only thing it has to fear right now is the possibility that Russia and China may not be able to keep outsiders from intervening. And the only way Russia and China won't be able to defend Assad is if it is shown that he's using chemical weapons on civilians. Obama doesn't want to go to war (it's expensive, financially and politically, Americans will die, and the U.S. will end up having to stick around for 20 years after the end of the war to prop up the country), but he put his foot in his mouth last year by drawing a "red line" Assad could not cross. So if the public is stirred up about news of chemical weapons attacks, he'll have to act. One way to stop that from happening is to silence major news outlets that are fanning the flames of public opinion with daily updates on the chemical weapons. Sometimes all it takes is a day without reading about something to make people lose interest. Or a day without the ability to publish news to make a news organization reconsider how hard it's pushing a story.

    2. Re:Sorry, by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      Obama doesn't want to go to war (it's expensive, financially and politically, Americans will die, and the U.S. will end up having to stick around for 20 years after the end of the war to prop up the country)

      OTOH, it may be in the national interest, because it would give the pundicks at FOX news something new to complain about. I'm tired of going into a place of business that has them on, and being treated to incessant Bengazi outrage and "Obamacare is making everyone's insurance rates go up".

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    3. Re:Sorry, by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Obama doesn't want to go to war (it's expensive, financially and politically, Americans will die, and the U.S. will end up having to stick around for 20 years after the end of the war to prop up the country)

      I'm missing which of these things is supposed to dissuade Obama from going to war. He's sanctioned actually killing American citizens without due process, let alone sending them to die. He's already in his second term, so he doesn't need to be politically popular. It's not his money. Meanwhile, his corporate masters profit if we go to war. People buy more shit they don't need, the government buys more war equipment from its carefully selected sole sources...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  15. Re:ELO by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

    It's a totally different and real thing, bub. Here's your ticket to the moon.

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  16. It's Iran you Idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Save your false flag discussions for a classroom.

    How did the civil war get this far along in Syria? American government is funding/supporting the revolutionaries.
    Plenty of despots in the world and the U.S. government is especially interested in this one. Look at all the relationships between Iran and Syria.

    At best, this is another nation-building exercise like Kuwait, or Iraq. Does anyone remember when there was Kuwaiti testimony in Congress about Iraq military destroying hospitals and taking babies from imagined incubators prior to re-taking of Kuwait under Bush 41. Here we are again, except this was real.

    The only thing we'll do is make Iran more nervous setting up shop in Syria. Which is likely the point of the anyway.

    1. Re:It's Iran you Idiot by cold+fjord · · Score: 0

      The Iraqi military was removed from Kuwait by military force because it had illegally occupied and annexed Kuwait, not because of rumors about incubators. It is a red herring.

      There is plenty of opposition to the Assad regime in the Arab and Muslim worlds to provide the funding for the opposition, along with plenty of volunteers to help in the fighting.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    2. Re:It's Iran you Idiot by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      So when its the good 'freedom fighters' they are just volunteers? Same flags, same funding, same tactics, same world views but in Syria they are just volunteers vs their actions in Iraq, Afghanistan, spreading into Africa and other regions?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:It's Iran you Idiot by Black+Parrot · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Iraqi military was removed from Kuwait by military force because it had illegally occupied and annexed Kuwait, not because of rumors about incubators. It is a red herring.

      There's a difference between reasons, real reasons, and stories you spread around to get the population riled up to support your actions.

      Like the Kuwaiti lady that testified to the US Congress about the atrocities, and forgot to mention that she was a Kuwaiti Princess.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    4. Re:It's Iran you Idiot by cold+fjord · · Score: 0

      Among the volunteers are al Qaida fighters. Happy? Not everyone volunteering to fight in Syria against the government is al Qaida ... which reminds me. The Taliban are becoming a global menace. So now both the Taliban and al Qaida are fighting in Syria.

      Pakistan Taliban arrive in Syria, and more are to come, CNN told

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    5. Re:It's Iran you Idiot by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      So the CIA can magically pick the good volunteering freedom fighters from the random evil doers who are also volunteering? That worked so well in Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iran, Libya, Iraq....and a US photo op in the region.
      All that cash and small arms just for the nice, US friendly freedom fighters ... so when the US backed volunteers win and Syria is free of minority groups all say Mission Accomplished again?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  17. Re:ELO by guttentag · · Score: 4, Funny
    Great. Now I've got this mental image of Bashar al-Assad with a bunch of kids with late 70s haircuts in a Damascus bunker rocking out to Don't Bring Me Down while they take down U.S. media sites.

    My site is running, serving The New York Times...
    You've got me thinking SEA's a waste of my time...
    Don't bring me down... no no no no no
    I'll tell you once more before I email Melbourne
    Don't bring me down...

  18. indeed by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    we must consider the false flag gambit

    but there's also the false false flag angle

    finally, there is the distinct possibility we could be dealing with a false false false flag attack!

    (twiddles fingers, eyes darting)

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  19. And the NSA couldn't stop this? by durin · · Score: 1

    Wasn't the NSA surveillance program supposed to put a stop to things like this?

    --
    Why, yes! I AM new here.
    1. Re:And the NSA couldn't stop this? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The NSA like role will be to help identify the private phones of the military leadership in Syria.
      The senior staff will get a few calls about standing down their better performing/more complex Russian weapons. The UK/CIA backed 'freedom' fighters can then advance and there will be a pure flowers and candy victory.
      After the US backed freedom fighters/mercs win if the staff did as they where told, clean identity papers/cash will be offered.
      If the defence networks light up or any real defensive role is taken, the senior staff will face cleansing during the fog of war/trials.
      ie the NSA is very busy :)

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    2. Re:And the NSA couldn't stop this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wasn't the NSA surveillance program supposed to put a stop to things like this?

      The NSA is hardly going to stop the very thing they are likely doing, i.e. pretending to be some obviously BS "Syrian Electronic Army". It's so fake, it's laughable. But in the Land of the Liar and the Greater Fool, it doesn't matter. Most Americans don't even know what a false flag operation is, they are so fucking stupid.

  20. I have a great idea by viperidaenz · · Score: 0

    1) Hack news paper, put up false headline
    2) Wait for stock market to drop, buy large
    3) Sell when stock market recovers

  21. Also... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot was attacked by idiot submitters and editors that believe twitter can
    have any impact on the market at all.

  22. Why Melbourne IT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems suspicious to me that twitter and nytimes would be using this dreadful (Known as expensive, but increasingly not very good) Australian registrar.

    I suspect the real chain of events is:
    1. Attacker creates Melbourne IT account.
    2. Either those sites weren't blocked from transferring registrars, or the attacker found a bug in Melbourne IT's systems that let them transfer the domains.
    3. Once the domains were transferred, it was easy to change the records using the normal DNS tools for that registrar.

    Melbourne IT needs to comment on what happened.
    Also keep an eye out for these domains to transition to another registrar ASAP.

    1. Re:Why Melbourne IT? by theskipper · · Score: 1

      Hard to believe but the domains were definitely registered at Melbourne IT. So this wasn't a typical hijack and transfer attack. Melbourne IT has always been absolute bottom-rung as far as service goes, why such large orgs use them remains a mystery. Their reputation for security is the only thing they had. Now that's been vaporized.

  23. I think it may have been a little more local. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I would not be surprised at all if this was a local attack, designed as a false provocation to build the case for invasion. It will be interesting to watch and see what other "attacks" happen. Though, if Syria is gassing it's own people, something should be done and the UN is too incompetent to fulfill it's charter. It seems the United States gets to re-evaluate it's position as world police every few years when some wack job government goes berserk on it's people and the UN is too busy being the UN to do anything about it. If the UN had been around during U.S. based slavery and the civil war, I don't see anything playing out differently than it did.

    1. Re:I think it may have been a little more local. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop using apostrophes.

    2. Re:I think it may have been a little more local. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Today, it was the NYTimes that took down their own site via DNS, not the "SEA". You appear to have a point.

  24. "Real Syrians..." by EzInKy · · Score: 1

    Real Syrians want the US gone. Now personally, I'm okay with Syrians just as long as they are willing to listen to non-Syrian views. I'm willing to listen to their viewpoints, why aren't they as open to mine? I'll even give a preview....free drugs, free sex, and free religion. I'm willing to listen to their views of freedom as well.

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    1. Re:"Real Syrians..." by globaljustin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      interesting comment...

      Now personally, I'm okay with Syrians just as long as they are willing to listen to non-Syrian views

      word me too...this whole mess started as an outgrowth of the Arab Spring.

      Egypt and Syria are getting the 'divide and conquer' treatment from the global Oil Oligarchs. It's just like Iran in '79.

      Here's what they do: Take the (IMHO inevitable) progressive democratic revolution in a country ruled by an aristocrat installed by foreign oligarchs...

      Now, find an extremist group that is local and non-progressive...

      Then, turn them against the progressive rebels, enflame, maybe hire some hacker/thugs to make up some 'internet army' to cause trouble and confusion...

      Bam...

      There's how the Iranian Revolution, the Arab Spring in Egypt and Syria now got turned into a conflict between "conservatives" and "liberals"...

      Status quo is maintained...which is all the Oil Oligarchs ever wanted in the first place...

      Syrians are our friends. They want to be humans and exist just like us. They want the freedom of self-determination w/o some asshole dictating shit and controlling society for personal gain. I think we should help them.

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    2. Re:"Real Syrians..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "
      Syrians are our friends. They want to be humans and exist just like us. They want the freedom of self-determination w/o some asshole dictating shit and controlling society for personal gain. I think we should help them.
      "

      I live in the U.S.A. I want those things too. Who can I get to help *me*?

    3. Re:"Real Syrians..." by globaljustin · · Score: 1

      I live in the U.S.A. I want those things too. Who can I get to help *me*?

      look man, i feel you...but even the most down and out American has opportunities for advancement that no Syrian has...

      the answer for who is going to help you is *yourself*...it's our burden for being so rich

      the thing to learn is, by helping Syrians have freedom of self determination we promote the same for ourselves

      we help ourselves by helping the Syrians

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
  25. Not impressed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work for a company that was "hacked" by SEA. They use phishing attacks to get passwords from company e-mail. The real message is that companies need to immediately stop putting important passwords in e-mail. Nobody talks about that aspect.

    These idiots had access to do much worse than they did (in terms of code injection), but I don't think they had the creativity to do it, fortunately.

  26. To be clear by EzInKy · · Score: 1

    Are you saying that Syrians are open to hearing arguments for free sex, drugs, and religion? If such is the case I'll be out protesting in the morning any interention in a country that guarantees such liberties!

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    1. Re:To be clear by globaljustin · · Score: 1

      free sex, drugs, and religion

      see, this is nice...i like it...it's a classic feedback loop of human society

      free sex = more humans

      free drugs = more sex

      free religion = more drugs

      lust->ecstasy->guilt

      why not...it's in all the religions of the region anyway

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    2. Re:To be clear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How on earth does lust + ecstasy = guilt? What're you, Catholic?

      The only thing on the list to feel guilty about is religion.

    3. Re:To be clear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      free sex = more humans

      Condoms?

  27. If you believe this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ... you'll believe anything.
    What utter nonsense. Syria are the victims in all of this, thanks to Zionists and Zionist symathisers in Congress.

    1. Re:If you believe this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Citation needed. Which side does Israel support in this conflict?

  28. Bad Move by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    the NYT has recently started tipping over to the side of working with Snowden and Greenwald.

    The same Gray Lady that jingoistically trumpeted for war against Iraq.

    I wouldn't trust anyone at the NYT farther than I could throw them.

  29. Re:Arabs don't the media by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Arabs don't the media? What the fuck does that mean?

  30. so far... by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

    >The hoax caused U.S. stock markets to briefly lose $200 billion in value
    You know when I found out they could hack the power grid, I thought, wow what damage could that cause!
    Then I heard they could hack into missal silos and probably decrypt the launch codes given enough time to brute force the sequence, I knew for sure how much damage that could cause....
    Now i see that they can hack media outlets where people get their information from and post hoax stories on almost any news paper or channel, getting access to internal account info on any of those accounts, I really think we are screwed.

    If the source of info we have to make daily decisions is compromised, this is worse then limiting our supply of power (we know how to set up solar panels to get some electricity and could somehow still survive the attack), or even damaging our population through nuclear attack (there are a limited of nuclear arms available and the distances of effect of nuclear fall out would not cover all of the US, therefor we could still survive). The source of information telling us the white house has passed a new law stating it is ok for people to go out and hoard water and food because there is a missal on its way from China...even being a hoax, would take a long time to recover from, and eventually no one would ever pay attention to media outlets, and be ignorant to many things happening every where.

    We communicate our daily lives through these mediums, and if these mediums are compromised, then we have no communication. News outlets has been around before electricity, and is one of the measurements of how civilized a country has become!

  31. It's funny to see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the USA defending the rebels in Syria, the ones who promoted de 11-S.

  32. Just what we need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A way to spin something for more reasons to get involved in somebody else's stupid inhumane mess...

  33. NYTimes is causing their own outage now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has anyone else noticed that nytimes.com is down today, but this time it's the Times' own nameservers causing the outage? Their own nameservers are now authoritative in WHOIS. Clearly the site is working via IP http://170.149.168.130 ; now it's the Times' own DNS servers (dns.ewr1.nytimes.com) whose IPs aren't resolving. However, doing an "nslookup nytimes.com 170.149.168.134" (or in Linux, "dig nytimes.com @170.149.168.134) still gives the right IP, the nameservers aren't overloaded or offline.

    The Times is now causing their own outage. Conclusion: their Admin was ordered to keep the site down, so the media can play up the outage on the newschannels as the US prepares to strike Syria.

  34. The real idiocy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The real idiotic thing is the White House attack article causing a $200 billion stock market drop. It doesn't make any sense. Even if you were fooled by the article, there was no indication in it that anything had happened that could cause American society as a whole to stop functioning. There was nothing there that would be indicative of anything happening to harm businesses. So why the stock market drop?

  35. Reaction by phorm · · Score: 1

    Actually, what *IS* the point, except to get attention?

    What did they expect to gain from this? What was the cause?
    If it's due to actions in a foreign country, then what does terrorism against the public accomplish? More militarization and privacy restrictions probably aren't going to help reduce US foreign influence (except in cases of perhaps spreading it a bit thin).

    I've never understood the logic in targeting civilians as opposed to those in power who actually make decisions or wield influence/money (not that I support either),

    1. Re:Reaction by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Actually, what *IS* the point, except to get attention?

      I guess it's just like with many other kinds of asymmetric warfare: if it's cheap for you but expensive for the defender, you win.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
  36. NYTimes took their own site down today (Proof) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has anyone else noticed that nytimes.com is down again today, but this time it's the Times' own nameservers causing the outage.
    (1) NYTimes site is accessible at http://170.149.168.130. Website up = check.
    (2) The authoritative nameservers for nytimes.com in the WHOis are dns.ewr1.nytimes.com and dns.sea1.nytimes.com. They're controlling their own DNS now, *not* the "SEA". (Although it's strange that "sea" is referenced in the nytimes.com nameserver) WHOIS points to correct DNS = check.
    (3) The Times' nameservers are returning the correct IP address for nytimes.com (170.149.168.130) when querying them via their IPs, 170.149.168.134 and 170.149.173.133. Doing an "nslookup nytimes.com 170.149.168.134", or "dig nytimes.com @170.149.168.134" in Linux, still gives the right IP from the authoritative nameserver. The nameservers are returning queries & not overloaded, but they're inaccessible via FQDN.

    The Times is now causing their own outage. Logical conclusion: their Admin was ordered to keep the site down, so the media can play up the outage on the newschannels as the US prepares to strike Syria.

  37. call it 'self reflection' by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    oh my goodness...guys...you *have* to look up 'pleasure delaying'

    seriously, how many times can you bust a nut or get high?

    without some sort of way to 'recharge' or have self-reflection the 'highs' of ecstasy actually are just a flat line

    call it 'self-reflection' or some other word of 'guilt' has too much baggage as a term for you

    the idea is it is part of a cycle in a feedback loop

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:call it 'self reflection' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree... About 15 mins between masturbation sessions usually does me. In the meantime I smoke a joint a play rfactor. A good cycle indeed ;)

  38. Re:ELO by guanxi · · Score: 1

    Awesome.

  39. Re:ELO by meglon · · Score: 1

    I'm guessing our AC there is probably a bit younger than us... or at least me. I'd hate to lump you in the "older" group without your consent.

    --
    Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
  40. Re:ELO by meglon · · Score: 1

    Now i have.. that... damn song.. in.. my head....

    --
    Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
  41. Re:ELO by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

    No, I'm in my mid-twenties; just of an historical bent. I was diagnosed with hipsterism as a child, but a shallow appreciation for the obscure and bygone was too mainstream. It's very satisfying to criticize other young people for getting their history wrong.

    ...that being said, it's a great way to burn bridges, so I don't actually recommend it.

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  42. A beer is worth more than the NYSE by bitterblackale · · Score: 1

    If a rumour can cause something to loose $200 thousand-million in value, it wasn't really worth that much in the first place. When are people going to get that stock values are IMAGINARY? Beer - there's something of real, intrinsic value!