

LulzSec opens hack request line - whiskers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13777129

======
bbcperson
Hi. It's Iain from the BBC here. I wrote the piece. I took your comments on
board and changed the line about DDoS leaving sites more open to attack.

The story now states that we don't know if Lulz went beyond a DDoS and took
other info from the servers.

Cheers

~~~
petewailes
Kudos for reaching out here.

Would you be up for doing a Q&A sometime about how you guys go about business?

~~~
bbcperson
Of course. If anyone wants to get in contact, share thoughts, feedback on
stories, I'm on iain.mackenzie@bbc.co.uk Just like Points of View, I can't
promise to reply to everything... but I'll always take a look and happy to do
Q&A.

~~~
Zakuzaa
How about <http://www.reddit.com/r/iama> ?

~~~
JoachimSchipper
Are we now directing people towards reddit? HN works fine, methinks.

~~~
Zakuzaa
What's wrong with that? Reddit provides better platform for QA.

~~~
petewailes
HN has better signal to noise, and the guy's already here

------
katovatzschyn
The set up seems sort of similar to how a mind reading magician might do his
work- take thousands of phone call requests, do as you please, and claim to
have responded to requests and not just whatever you're able to break into.
This might make it seem as if you're able to break into anything at whim and
not select, relatively unsecure networks.

------
metronome
"When a site is brought down, it is often vulnerable to further security
breaches."

what? I'd say it's just the other way around

~~~
JoachimSchipper
Slowing things down can really help if you're trying to exploit a race
condition. But yes, usually not.

------
Revisor
EVE Online, Minecraft, Escapist magazine ... what was the point again? I
thought at first they had a moral motive.

Anyway, DDOSing is not hacking and at least with these harmless kiddie attacks
the defense mechanisms will be more readily available and cheaper (due to
higher demand).

~~~
Wickk
>I thought at first they had a moral motive.

They never had a moral motive. When they targeted Sony, everyone was singing
praise, but they have never claimed to be doing this for anything other than
"lulz".

Someone made a great comment on a previous Lulzsec headline: When they're
attacking Sony it's "righteous" and "good", when they're attacking companies
we like they're "bad" and "immature".

~~~
checker
Whenever they're hacking anyone and making headlines, they're increasing
political pressures to create a "civilized" internet in the name of safety and
security.

~~~
Wickk
This keeps getting regurgitated on a daily basis, and I don't think the people
saying it are even aware of the disruption on a person's daily life that
results from this.

I'll agree that as a whole security on the net is lousy, but drastic measures
like this are an equally lousy method of dealing with it. No one should be
surprised when laws get passed that limit freedoms on the internet in response
to these actions. Cause and effect.

~~~
checker
I agree with you that any security implementation will hurt the web and can be
a very dangerous thing that will likely fail.

My statement is a fact. Politicians and large corporations WILL use incidents
like these to push their legislation forward.

~~~
Wickk
I just realized that I'm agreeing with you and COMPLETELY misread your comment
earlier. I apologize

------
CHsurfer
Can we request that they attack the Chinese who are are systematically
attacking US 'digital assets'?

