Slashdot Mirror
Sony Reportedly Is Using Cyber-Attacks To Keep Leaked Files From Spreading
HughPickens.com writes Lily Hay Newman reports at Slate that Sony is counterhacking to keep its leaked files from spreading across torrent sites. According to Recode, Sony is using hundreds of computers in Asia to execute a denial of service attack on sites where its pilfered data is available, according to two people with direct knowledge of the matter. Sony used a similar approach in the early 2000s working with an anti-piracy firm called MediaDefender, when illegal file sharing exploded. The firm populated file-sharing networks with decoy files labeled with the names of such popular movies as "Spider-Man," to entice users to spend hours downloading an empty file. "Using counterattacks to contain leaks and deal with malicious hackers has been gaining legitimacy," writes Newman. "Some cybersecurity experts even feel that the Second Amendment can be interpreted as applying to 'cyber arms'."
The rootkit was far worse than this. The only reason it wasn't a huge PR disaster is that most non-techies have no idea what it was.
That and the invidious notion that 'consumers' really don't need or deserve control over their devices is fairly alarmingly entrenched. Even when the system in question isn't one that you 'licensed and not sold' to the sucker, you can have your merry way with them in ways that you'd never get away with in the context of real property.
If infiltration and covert execution of a rootkit were treated even as seriously as, say, physical trespass, Sony would have had a problem. As it was, the response was along the lines of "Well, yes, you have a trespasser; but we can hardly make a case out of it unless you can prove that he is otherwise making a nuisance of himself or something."
the second amendment allows people to own firearms, but not to use firearms. so sony has it backwards. right now they are using firearms but don't own them. think much?
The interesting thing is that, if they are using outsourced servers strategically located in Asia to avoid the long arm of the law, that people should be able attack those same servers and do pretty much anything they want to them without fear of consequences. Being beyond the law is a double edged sword, and I personally would not bet against all the hackers on the Internet in that fight...
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
I hate Sony. I don't buy their products. I have a person vendetta against that company for reasons I'll not detail here because they're not relevant.
That said... I'm ok with this. Seems fair to me. Hack away Sony.
The law applies to all, big and small.
Which jurisdiction or period in time are you referring to? I can't think of a single example where this is true.
Pretending life is the same as fantasy is a sign of mental illness.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
It set a dangerous and horrible precedent. A company can remove features from a product that you already own on a whim. Some people managed to get refunds, but most were simply screwed.
If it becomes acceptable then you will find that things you own start to self destruct after a year or two. It already happens with some smart TVs, where the manufacturer drops support for certain apps on older models so you lose the ability to watch NetFlix or Amazon Instant. Your TV breaks because they couldn't be bothered to pay the license fee for another year, or because they feel that it's time you upgraded.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Speaking as a computer security professional the entire second amendment argument is juvenile and stupid, if not harmful. On top of this we continue as a society to tolerate an obviously corrupt system of double standards. I completely agree with you.
We have corporations that now seem to operate under an entirely different set of lows than the rest of use do. We have HS and College kids being aggressively prosecuted for acts that cause tiny amounts of harm if any. Sony deploys a root-kit that puts the security of the systems of millions of customers in danger, and impairs those systems in general and they get basically asked to apologize and replace the defective product, they are not asked to do anything about the real damage. I don't recall prosecutors asking Aaron if he would like kindly remove his machine from MIT's wiring closet, delete the copies of the journals he made, tidy up and than forget the whole thing; no he was threatened with prison and a ruinous legal process until he killed himself. Yet for some reason Sony gets off without even having to clean up the mess they made.
Meanwhile the security community continues to want play army. Weather its with red vs blue rhetoric, or bizarre and ill considered Second Amendment analogies. To anything thinking person software it self and digital communications are more closely tied to the First Amendment, in terms of speech and anything you might do with a computer or network is more relate-able to expression or assembly.
A computer is not a weapon, let me repeat that a computer is not a weapon. Now it might control a weapon, be a component in or of a weapon but a computer it self is not a weapon. We don't need to conflate these things. By the logic they are using anything that can be weaponized is an arm. Which would mean I have the right to keep and bare well anything. "Sorry mister DEA agent, that brick of cocaine isn't drugs, I use it throw at people I don't like. Its a great arm, if you get hit with the corners of the package it really hurts; yet at only one kilo its light enough to carry around throw easily!" To say nothing of the implications for cars, kitchen knives etc.
This is about impotent little pricks that want to feel powerful, without having to leave their desks. The CFAA is a terrible law that is vague and potentially criminalizes lots of very innocent activity. Still I hardly think given the number of shared resources out there we want go to a total free for all where anyone can do anything the like online with no real/physical world consequences either. I am not even necessarily against "attack back" if its allowed under a prescribe limited set of circumstances, just like castle doctrines or stand your ground laws. The important parts of that though are "limited" and "prescribed" none of which applies to what Sony is doing here.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html