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'."

Comments

Is SONY breaking the law with this "defense"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Then they are no better than those that hacked into their systems, and should be prosecuted like any criminal hacker
Those that have helped them in this, should be prosecuted as accessories.
Or, if what SONY is doing is acceptable, Than it was okay for those that hacked SONY to do what they did.

The law applies to all, big and small.

Re:Is SONY breaking the law with this "defense"?

[cheater512]

Of course it was ok for the guys to hack Sony.
Sony fired the first shots years ago.

If we are using second amendment as an analogy, then Sony has been breaking in to houses all around the world.
The hackers who screwed them up royally are just friendly neighbours helping defend the neighbourhood.

Re:Is SONY breaking the law with this "defense"?

[TechyImmigrant]

AC should have let his four year old daughter type it in.

Re:Is SONY breaking the law with this "defense"?

[sjames]

Try reading that without hearing it in the voice of a half-wit. It can't be done.

So you're saying you read that aloud and heard the voice of a half-wit? Imagine that!

Re:Is SONY breaking the law with this "defense"?

[Artifakt]

If there are any legitmate files hosted on those servers Sony's hired guns are DOSing, a "second amendment analogy" means Sony just fired back at both their opponents and some innocent bystanders. How about that, posters defending Sony's right to use such tactics - does that right include unlimited collateral damage to random bystanders? If sony isn't breaking the law, then does that make the law right even if innocents get caught in the 'crossfire'?

Re:Is SONY breaking the law with this "defense"?

[AntiSol]

the first paragraph of that wiki article was very damning! I thought wikis were supposed to be neutral.

I thought that wikis were supposed to be factual. Sometimes the facts are damning.

Re:Is SONY breaking the law with this "defense"?

[AmiMoJo]

I don't think they are actually DDOS'ing servers as TFS claims. They are using a "bad seed" attack on Bittorrent, which is where they run modified Bittorrent clients that claim to be seeding the stolen data but actually just return /dev/random. Of course the receiver notices that the checksum is wrong and discards the data, but if there are enough bad seeds in a swarm it can make getting a complete set of data quite difficult.

Some US anti-piracy companies used to do it a few years ago, but the trackers quickly banned all their IP addresses and they gave up.

Re:Is SONY breaking the law with this "defense"?

[AmiMoJo]

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.

Re:Is SONY breaking the law with this "defense"?

[DarkOx]

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.

 

Is anyone surprised?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sony doesn't just poke the hornets nest, they go balls deep and windmill

Re:Is anyone surprised?

[TuxWithoutPants]

Famous last words... We all know it can get a lot worse.

Re: The Internet Will Die

[Anonymous Coward]

The Internet died about 10 years ago. Just like everything else, the capitalists took something good and turned it into a giant cesspool of greed.

Really...

[the_skywise]

> Some cybersecurity experts even feel that the Second Amendment can be interpreted as applying to 'cyber arms'."

Uh huh... the 2nd amendment says I have the right to defend myself. That means I can own guns to defend myself when I'm being attacked... PHYSICALLY.

The proper analogy is that I have the right to secure my computer systems from being hacked by malcontents or governments (or both).

It does not give me the right to go over to the local printing press and blow them up if they're xeroxing my naked selfies. That's not defense, that's just vandalism.

Good lord can this world get any dumber...

Re:I didn't care before

[The Grim Reefer]

but where can I find this juicy info? What the the websites being attacked by Sony?

As competent as Sony has been with security lately, I'd guess they are using DDS attacks against The Pirate Bay.

Re:No real evidence...

[Khyber]

"No real evidence"

Anyone with half a brain can use map.ipviking.com and watch the shit happen. There's your evidence.

Mixed Feelings

[smashr]

So it's strange, I have completely mixed feelings about this. If Sony is using such borderline techniques to try and prevent people from downloading torrents of PII data pilfered from their servers such as SSNs, tax returns, W2s, celebrity phone numbers, etc, then I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. This may be slightly over the line, but if it is to protect the data belonging to outside people, then I am inclined to view it more favorably.

If, on the other hand, this is about preventing the latest ZOMG HD SCREENER TORRENT of their most popular film from being shared one more time, I view such activities much less favorably.

There is probably not a legal distinction between protecting future profits and protecting the private data of one's employees, but it certainly makes me struggle with how to view this..

Re:defense against bennett

[Noah Haders]

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?

SONY breaking the law (yet again)

[TiggertheMad]

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...

Is SONY breaking the law with this

[bill_mcgonigle]

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.