Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New York Times and Twitter Attacked By Syrian Electronic Army

Posted by Soulskill on from the oh-no-not-the-twit-o-sphere dept.

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."

14 of 169 comments (clear)

  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 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.

    3. 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!

    4. 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.

    5. Re:NYT and Twitter attacked by bluegutang · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Obligatory XKCD...

    6. 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
  2. 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 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
    2. 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)
  3. 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.

  4. 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...

  5. 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)