

Lulzsec Declares 'Operation Anti-Security' - itcmcgrath
http://pastebin.com/9KyA0E5v

======
itcmcgrath
The short and sweet:

Lulzsec is encouraging everyone to deface government websites with #AntiSec as
well as in physical graffiti.

'Top priority is to steal and leak any classified government information,
including email spools and documentation. Prime targets are banks and other
high-ranking establishments'.

Claims to have Anonymous on board.

Does anyone else smell a less free Internet approaching closer?

~~~
ggchappell
> Does anyone else smell a less free Internet approaching closer?

Hmmm ... any chance Lulzsec is really a false flag operation?

~~~
choko
I had a similar thought, but the less free internet has been in the works for
years before these guys came around. With or without groups like this, it is
inevitable. The powers in place fear what they can't control.

------
conspiringguy
Every time I hear about LulzSec, I say "Conspiracy Theory Time" before I read
the HN comments page. Finally I have some worthy conspiracy which I think no
one has posted before. It goes something like this.

 _Axioms:_

1\. Most of the geeks and internet privacy aware people in America hate the
American government. If not hate, they at least despise them for most of their
new internet policies.

2\. Out of these people there are a lot of smart teenagers and young
men/women. This is the age where most of the sociologists (I don't know if
that is the correct term, just read it as parents or people who have PhDs and
study this kind of things) believe that this is the age where they are most
impressionable. And more so if the idea is rebellious, that too at the highest
level.

3\. Terrorists are not a bunch of fools who don't know how to use a dvd
player. Most of the times they are capable of carrying out sophisticated
internet attacks. Also they have strategists competent enough to take on US
intelligence. (Not very sure of the last sentence but who am I to suck the fun
out of this).

4\. After 9/11 it has become increasingly hard for the terrorists to do bomb
blasts or other such activities. Also suicide bombers make recruiting a pain.

5\. Terrorists hate America.

 _Hypothesis:_

The chief aim of terrorists is to make you people's (read American's) life
miserable. They used to do it with short term impact plans like bombs. One
bomb and america is terrorised for around a year or max for two. Make them
hate their own government and they would be terrorised for life. Well
terrorised is not a very good word for it, but pedestrian word for massive
pain in the rear end of human body is not allowed on HN. So they devise a new
scheme. They start riding on the current AnonSec wave. While AnonSec did it
for a cause (the wikileaks thing) they would say they did it for the lulz. Now
the group is supposed to be an all american group but anyone can be anyone on
the internet. Also doing it for the lulz sounds more rebellious. So more and
more rebellious and smart to some level kids join lulzSec. In some time they
may have an army of them. Then they would really start acting up and randomly
deface the government site. The cyber crime department (whatever it is called
in US of A) is spread thin looking for these young brats who are doing all
this DDoS attacks. They may do a real attack on american security then or just
sit back and enjoy while americans fight each other in a kind of civil war. As
an added bonus here, the government, under the fear of such acts, will make
new laws restricting internet use. This will further annoy people and make new
LulzSec recruits. So the terrorists groups have their very own "Vicious
Cycle". At this point all the terrorists will go "Whoopie".

 _Refutations:_

1\. I don't know but I think the government sites are not hosted on the same
server as the other high security services. So DDoSing them will be just an
annoyance. But still people shiver at the headline "Hackers successfully take
down CIA website".

2\. Government cyber crime unit is not that small that they are spread thin
with just few DDoS attacks. Someone will have to help me out here as I have no
idea if this is right or wrong.

Please feel free to come up with more refutations.

~~~
jb55
Most of these arguments (and most other conspiracy theories) can be shot down
as just another instance of the Conjunction fallacy/Occam's Razor. The
probability of a single event is always greater or equal to the probability of
both events: P(A) >= P(A&B) where event A is 'Rebellious hacker teens' and
event A&B is 'Rebellious hacker teens recruited by terrorists'.

~~~
premchai21
While the latter is logically true, one has to be careful. It may be easy to
erroneously interpret that as comparing “rebellious hacker teens _not_
recruited by terrorists” and “rebellious hacker teens recruited by
terrorists”, which pair has no such guaranteed monotonicity.

~~~
conspiringguy
I didn't understand shit about all the high level math/CS stuff you two just
discussed. But what I do understand is this. Whenever there is a possibility
of government or terrorist organisations gaining immensely from something more
often than not one of them is involved. This can either be a false alarm
operation or something done by terrorists. But apart from that there are many
small ways they can be involved. Like the government will ignore such
activities (not investigate it fully to their power) then let it grow to such
large a proportion so that they can justify their new restrictive Internet
act.

OTOH, the terrorists may not be involved initially but they may send in some
of their cyber force to help organizations like LulzSec so that they can help
american people take down their own infrastructure. We should not forget that
AnonSec did take down many payment portals to some level.LulzSec took down
sony also. What is stopping LulzSec to go full blown DDoS on payment portals?
If Al-Quida or other cyber aware terrorist organisation gives them a botnet or
two god knows what they might do.

------
shii
Horey shiit, it's antisec tiem[1] kiddies! And it looks like I was right[2]
about there being a _strong_ correlation between Lulzsec gentlemen and
AnonOps. This should be fun.

Btw, what's it gonna take to raise zerofor0wned from slumber again? They
haven't published in awhile and I miss them. Surely Lulzsec kids are of the
age of majority now, let's get the soft gloves off and do some real doxing.

[1]: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisec_Movement>

[2]: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2631053>

~~~
jedbrown
I'm confused about the relationship between Anti-Sec (in the sense of the
wikipedia article) and Anonymous. Anti-Sec is "dedicated to eradicating full-
disclosure of vulnerabilities and exploits and free discussion on hacking
related topics" [1]. In contrast, Anonymous is a strong backer of Wikileaks
which would seem to be squarely behind the concept of full disclosure (except
insofar as it could undermine the process of full disclosure).

I wonder if LulzSec even intended to make this connection. This "call to
action" is quite different from the Anti-Sec mission statement, but I would
have a hard time believing they weren't aware of previous use of "Anti-Sec".

[1] <http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2009/Jul/164>

------
pspeter3
They don't really explain why we should be placing #AntiSec everywhere. This
document seems like a rabble rousing speech without any substance at all.

~~~
itcmcgrath
I'm guessing it is just an awareness ploy. If the news picks it up, it gives
all the stories something in common to mention. Likewise with any defacement
that happens, if someone sees a common word, they are more likely to search
for it and hence find more.

Where or not it works for them or turns in to a bit of an embarrassment for
them, is yet to be seen.

I'll keep an eye on google trends to see how it pans out:
[http://www.google.com/trends?q=antisec%2Clulzsec&ctab=0&...](http://www.google.com/trends?q=antisec%2Clulzsec&ctab=0&geo=all&date=mtd&sort=1)

~~~
shii
Lol, defacements happen everyday brah: <http://zone-h.org/archive>

And antisec, no-disclosure fundies have been around for a lot longer then
Lulzsec.

~~~
itcmcgrath
No argument there. I'm unsure what your point is though?

~~~
shii
It just seemed from your comment that you were implying any defacements in the
near future from here on out should be attributed to Lulzsec fools. Which is
nonsense.

~~~
itcmcgrath
I fear you have read words that don't exist.

------
moondistance
Why has <http://lulzsecurity.com> not been seized?

~~~
JonnieCache
That is a very good point. Given that the DHS does domain seizures, and luzsec
are explicitly attacking the USA, the non-seizure is very fishy.

~~~
jokermatt999
Not really. The previous seizures were over copyright infringement/IP issues,
rather than hacking. It's possible that the DHS (who were behind the seizures
before, as Customs is a part of them) is working on it, but they likely don't
have the necessary paperwork or process in place for "hacking sites" instead.

------
st3fan
No matter what you think about these folks, it is a very dangerous game they
are playing. It takes some balls to organize this and to act on it.

This can only result in more crazy laws unfortunately.

~~~
mentat
It's interesting that there's an overall theme here that the only action
government takes is more laws. This is recognized as an issue right? But
people just don't think there's anything to do about it? That scares the hell
out of me. If the people here have given up on having substantial control over
the legal context of their lives, something is very very wrong.

------
paulnelligan
I find this extremely worrying. Sure, I'm all for fighting the power, but a
campaign like this could do a lot to damage our online freedom, e.g. the
freedom to pay for things and conduct business online ... it would also result
in governments limiting the internet in a way that they haven't done before,
for a very long time ... that would really suck!

~~~
mvalle
If it will damage your freedom, then, by definition, you don't have freedom.

The effect this might have, if any, is to show who pretends to have/give
freedom and who really has/gives it.

~~~
mentat
This right on. Reading a lot of the comments here, I think people have already
given up that freedom and just hope that no one makes them see what they've
done. This discussion has certainly opened my eyes in regards to this. One
freedom is always to go to a country which has different laws. Another freedom
is to develop computers, OSes and networking protocols that better provide
freedom. It seems that many are so used to building on frameworks that have
inherent issues that they forget their are choices, basic choices, that still
have to be made every day.

------
itcmcgrath
Someone also wrote a rebuttal of sorts: <http://pastebin.com/DfuG9T1W>

~~~
drivebyacct2
Lulz are the children in their parents' basement. But Jester is the 40 year
old, slightly nuts, overly apologetic for the government, 40 year old dude
living in the basement falling for the trollish script kiddies.

------
dev1n
So, if lulzSec are a group of Americans, then couldn't they not only be
charged with breaking internet security laws and such but, also treason?

------
conspiringguy
Using pastebin as an anon blog is cool idea though. Anyone can tell how anon
it actually is?

~~~
Alg0r1thm
it all depends on how you get there...

------
JonnieCache
Interesting that they explicitly link the Hacker's Manifesto from '86 in there
this time.

------
scythe
Hey, it's the new pr0j3kt m4yh3m! I suspect it will be as successful as the
last one.

