Slashdot Mirror
Lizard Squad: Xbox Live, PSN Attacks Were a 'Marketing Scheme' For DDoS Service
blottsie writes The devastating Christmas Day attacks against the gaming networks of Sony and Microsoft were a marketing scheme for a commercial cyberattack service, according to the hackers claiming responsibility for the attacks. Known as Lizard Squad, the hacker collective says it shut down the PlayStation Network (PSN) and Xbox Live network on Dec. 25 using a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack, a common technique that overloads servers with data requests. The powerful attacks rendered the networks unusable for days, infuriating gamers around the world and causing yet-untold losses of revenue. Now, members of Lizard Squad say the group is selling the DDoS service they used against Sony and Microsoft to anyone willing to pay.
"anyone willing to pay" -- you mean like an FBI agent with a credit card?
Old age and treachery almost always overcome youth and skill.
Sounds like an awesome way to get caught and shutdown. Keep at it boys.
X
devastating
No, there are lots of things that have happened in the past week that qualify as devastating, but these were not on that list. A major annoyance? Sure. Devastating? Not so much. Just because some people who paid too much for a gaming system weren't able to use it the first day after they got it; and the companies who sold it to them had to wait a little longer to get credit card numbers to charge monthly fees for these people, doesn't make it devastating.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
1) Yes, DDoSing someone is illegal
2) In order to carry out the DDoS they very likely have millions of PCs in a botnet. Every single one of those is a count of unauthorised use of a computer system.
"Just send us your address, so we can mail you the check."
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
It comes under the CFAA.- http://www.law.cornell.edu/usc...
"knowingly causes the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer;"
a DoS is transmitting information at some point.
Damage is broadly defined: "the term “damage” means any impairment to the integrity or availability of data, a program, a system, or information"
Protected computer is broadly defined to include: "which is used in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce or communication"
"without authorization" might be an issue, but I can't see courts not deciding that the DoS wasn't authorized even if one a "public" channel is being used (say slamming the authentication servers).
Oh get off your high horse. You've got kids opening consoles on Xmas day and unable to play, you've got adults with a rare few days off work unable to play, this has basically ruined Xmas for a shit ton of people. You think whatever you do on Xmas day is more "important" or more "worthwhile"? You're arguing with kids on Slashdot, clearly your life isn't all that.
Meanwhile you seem to think that someone saying "they should stone them" on the internet carries similar weight to an actual stoning, so maybe you also need to "do something with your life".