
Visa.com Now Also Down Under DDoS - thecoffman
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/12/08/visa-website-down-after-threat-from-wikileaks-supporters/
======
tc
I'm reminded of the country song whose chorus goes:

"I've got friends in low places."

\--

[1] I agree, as noted by Nathan below, that this isn't helping Wikileaks'
reputation any (despite, of course, WL having nothing to do with this). That's
the problem with (and sometimes, benefit of) friends in low places -- no one
ever accused them of being sophisticated.

[2] A related thought.... The system consisting of [ Person who leaks info +
Wikileaks ] seems to be a modern instance of the Robin Hood archetype. Instead
of "robbing from the rich to give to the poor," this system takes information
from the powerful and gives it to the (relatively) powerless. Just as with
Robin Hood, there's room for debate about the moral characteristics of this
approach (particularly on the taking side). And just as with every Robin Hood
reincarnation, this system is despised by modern aristocrats.

As I believe pg noted in an essay, during the time-setting of Robin Hood,
wealth was nearly a zero-sum game. Today, wealth is not zero-sum, but _power_
still is -- making this archetype all the more fitting.

~~~
NathanKP
Sadly those friends aren't helping the reputation of Wikileaks. I definitely
support freedom and information and the press, but organizing a DDOS doesn't
help Wikileaks, it just associates Wikileaks even more with illegal activity.

~~~
michaelchisari
I think you make the mistake of thinking that all protest activity should be
about making friends or increasing your reputation and good standing.

Often it's just as much about hitting back as hard as you can. Now you can
argue the merits of that, but we have crossed a major threshold here: The
internet has taken down the websites of two of the largest credit providers in
the world, two weeks before Christmas.

If that isn't an exertion of grassroots power in the internet age, I don't
know what is. The implications are boundless. Visa, and Mastercard probably
didn't think twice about canceling Wikileak's payments. I doubt their risk
assessment would have been the same if they had known this would result.

~~~
gwright
Internet? Grassroots?

The Internet hasn't taken down anything. A small group of geeks have taken
upon themselves to take down a few targeted websites. No due process, no rule
book, no accountability, just naked use of force.

If I'm following correctly, I'm supposed to believe that a staff member of an
elected official asking about the activities of a private company is an abuse
of power but a small group of unelected geeks representing no one but
themselves are to be commended for actively disrupting the activities of a
private business.

~~~
makmanalp
I'm hesitant to liken Anonymous to revolutionaries but to be honest, almost
all revolutions were started in a "small group" that was relatively
insignificant (that was unelected), and then grew in size and gathered
acceptance.

Again with the due process and rules: do you think when the French people
stormed the Bastille during the French Revolution, there was any semblance of
rules or accountability? Hell no. It was the "naked use of force". Did it have
bad consequences? Some. Did it have good consequences? I think you know the
answer.

~~~
gwright
You've stripped away all the particulars in order to equate the overthrow of a
multi-century monarchy with disruption of a few websites.

Yes, we've got two examples of 'disputes'. But that doesn't get us very far.
Can you finish the analogy for me?

You are suggesting that the DDOS activities are indicative of an attempt to
overthrow what in favor of what?

~~~
makmanalp
My point was that the properties of this small scale protest (or tantrum
depending on however you look at it) that you deride are actually pretty
similar to most other protests.

~~~
gwright
You suggested that it was similar to the French Revolution. In what way is it
similar other than they both involved 'protest'? And if that is the similarity
you were trying to make, then why confuse the issue by bringing in the concept
of revolutionary war?

Is there a French Revolution version of Godwin's Law?

~~~
kj12345
This is the third time in a short period I've seen Godwin's Law used as a way
to discount serious discussion online. Are we really so uncomfortable with the
concept of metaphor or the importance of remembering and analyzing serious
events? We're discussing censorship, freedom, etc and 20th-century history is
off limits?

~~~
gwright
I'm not trying to 'discount' serious discussion, I'm suggesting that comparing
DDOS attacks on commercial websites to the French Revolution is _not_ serious
discussion.

Reaching for a Nazi analogy or a French Revolution analogy should be done
sparingly and with careful consideration.

Now you are suggesting that I'm arguing that 20th-century history is off
limits. This sort of wild over-generalization is the antithesis of 'serious
discussion'.

~~~
wtallis
Perhaps you think comparisons to something like the French Revolution are
unjustified merely because the scope of the current turmoil is nowhere near as
wide (yet), but all revolutions have to start somewhere. If the US goes for
another two or three presidential elections without significantly affecting
the patterns of increasing corporate control over politics and the post-9/11
erosion of civil liberties, we may find it easier to draw such comparisons.

One thing I think we can all agree on: if the next revolution comes any time
soon (ie. next few decades), it will start online.

~~~
gwright
There seems to be a lot of confusion between the Wilkileaks disclosure and the
DDOS attacks.

The disclosures can be debated within the terms of government transparency and
public policy, but the DDOS attacks were all about a small group of private
individuals attacking private companies because they disagreed with how they
ran their business.

The two issues are related by a common party, Wikileaks, but other than that
they aren't even in the same ballpark. My comments were about the DDOS attacks
and not the Wikileaks disclosures. You seem to be talking about the
disclosures.

~~~
wtallis
What Wikileaks is doing is called journalism. I wouldn't compare that to
revolution, even if they are both rare these days.

What Anonymous is doing _is_ an attack, and its only justification so far is
the attempted suppression of Wikileaks' journalism. Suppression of rights like
the freedom of the press are among the best justifications for revolution. So,
while the current DDOS probably isn't the start of a revolution, it is the
kind of thing you would expect to see in the opening stages of a modern revolt
in an industrialized society, before things get to the physical violence.

~~~
gwright
Freedom of the press is about protecting the press from the government. It is
_not_ about forcing private companies to run their businesses according to the
diktats of small group of anonymous geeks.

~~~
wtallis
Visa and MasterCard cannot act in isolation from the government: They form a
duopoly that requires regulation, and they are subject to quite a bit of it.
As felixmar pointed out elsewhere in the thread [1], they have gotten favors
from the government that have been exposed by the very leaks at issue. It
doesn't take actual evidence of a specific request from the government to
establish that the government influenced their decision to change their minds
about doing business with Wikileaks.

[1] <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1985128>

------
geuis
Is it wrong to think of this at a very high level, where basically the
internet as an system that relies on information to function properly has
turned on its immune system?

I know this is a very meta idea, and its extremely easy to break this down to
the component entities (Visa corporation, thousands of individuals, etc). But
under the meta concept, wouldn't that be like individual t-cells talking to
each other?

~~~
ra
Interesting. And, like skynet, you can't switch it off.

~~~
sorbus
Until we're hit with a coronal mass ejection; that would do a pretty good job
of killing pretty much all advanced technology.

------
DanielBMarkham
So I'm some average merchant, anywhere in the world.

Because of this action, Now I can't make money and support my family.

Aside from your personal feelings, what are the odds I blame Visa, and what
are the odds I blame Wikileaks? All of a sudden Visa doesn't work, MasterCard
doesn't work, some sites can't be accessed, sometimes the net is slower than
it should, etc.

Maybe I'm smoking crack, but from where I sit, the more hackers thrash out
over WL, the more ticked millions of people are going to become at both
Wikileaks and the hackers involved.

This is a very sad development. People of all opinions need to take an active
hand in trying to settle this down as quickly as possible. This is no good for
anybody. No good can come from this.

EDIT: If you want to support the idea of leaking to fix governments (and not
the massive attack of government nodes through information overload), which I
do, then WL needs a standard of conduct: what it will and will not publish. It
needs a standard of acceptable behavior: what cyber protests are in line with
it's mission and what protests are not.

Without these things, I can't support WL, they're going to lose track of their
message and the larger media narrative, and they are going spectacularly shoot
themselves and the rest of us in the foot. This is becoming dangerously
nihilistic.

~~~
kbatten
As an average merchant you wouldn't have any reason to care about the ethical
actions of large companies like VISA unless you were affected. These types of
actions (right or wrong) force you to care.

In fact, this is one of the core principles that America was founded on
through the symbolic Boston Tea Party and beyond.

I think the real point of these things, though its likely that the intentions
of many participants differ, is to simply bring these issues to light to the
common person.

~~~
techiferous
> force you to care

I prefer to live in a world where people don't _force_ me to care about things
but persuade me through reasoned discourse.

~~~
Daishiman
Won't happen. Even if you don't like it when groups such as Anonymous force it
on you, the State has mechanisms for you to care as well, many of them highly
undemocratic.

I'm thankful that there's a balancing agent on the other end of the spectrum.
Even if I disagree with it, it helps to distribute power.

~~~
techiferous
> Won't happen.

I don't assume a paradigm of force. Sure it exists, but I don't assume it
_has_ to be that way. I'm not naive but I also know that people and
organizations often do have the capacity to interact on a higher level; but it
takes a lot of insight to see how. I don't assume the low road is the only one
available.

~~~
Daishiman
I don't assume it _has_ to be, but that's the way it's been through all of
human history, and I'm guessing we're several thousands of years away from
that changing.

------
netcan
What this whole wikileaks payment processing issue has made me aware of is how
bottle-necked this whole area is.

A client of mine a couple of years ago selling personal protection equipment
(smoke & hazmat masks, mostly). They were based out of Australia and selling
globally. Apparently they breached some US advertising restriction with one of
their products (disposable hygienic suit) by having the words bird flu in the
description.

Simultaneously to contacting (apparently they tried to contact earlier during
US work hours), they contacted paypal and had the account shut down entirely.
The US was never a major market so they put a big red sign on the product
page: "Not for Sale in the USA." Getting paypal back online took weeks.
Whatever department shut them down was not concerned with reversing the damage
and paypal seemed like they knew which side to stay on.

Basically, paypal (and apparently visa & mastercard) is the on/off switch that
various players within the US government can use. It does not take a high
level one off phone call. This is an issue.

------
pointillistic
Considering that the Jesus was the original revolutionary and one of his major
acts was throwing the money changers out of the Temple, I am stunned about the
internalized commercialization of Christmas and the comments that put into
question the current protest.

And I am saying this even though I hate DDos viscerally, my business was a
victim of such an attack. But I have to say, as long as no one gets killed or
injured this is a legitimate form of protest.

~~~
astine
DDOS attempts that utillize illegal botnets are, well, illegal. As such, they
are by definition not a legitimate form of protest.

~~~
siculars
That may be true, but is THIS an illegal botnet? What makes LOIC illegal? What
makes a determined, coordinated request from thousands of volunteer computers
illegal? I liken this to a civil disobedience sit in.

~~~
russellallen
Without commenting on the morality of LOIC, what makes its current use illegal
are laws, passed by legislatures.

Pick a jurisdiction and you'll find some law forbidding DDOS attacks. Here for
example:

[http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ca190082/s...](http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ca190082/s308e.html)

That section would cover anyone from NSW participating in this botnet and
could be used to prosecute this guy if they find him:

[http://www.smh.com.au/technology/security/the-aussie-who-
bli...](http://www.smh.com.au/technology/security/the-aussie-who-blitzed-visa-
mastercard-and-paypal-with-the-low-orbit-ion-cannon-20101209-18qr1.html)

------
joshfraser
I wonder how much money Visa and Mastercard have to lose before they regret
their decision.

For the attackers, instead of positioning the DDOS attack as revenge, you
should give them as an easy-out. Stop blocking wikileaks and we'll stop the
DDOS. Since Visa/Mastercard are loosing millions of dollars for each hour they
are down, it would turn the issue into a simple business decision and they
could change their position without losing face.

~~~
xentronium
There's another point of view on this story, which is, shortly put, "we don't
negotiate with terrorists".

~~~
geuis
Who's the terrorist in this situation? Its wrong to immediately put Visa,
Mastercard, Paypal, and other related parties into the "right" side and to put
the people behind the DDoS attacks into the "wrong" side. They are not
victims, but instead are attacking Wikileaks by cutting off their ability to
get funds. Who's right in this situation?

~~~
xenophanes
Visa is a private company. If they are wrong, it's wrong in the same way as
Apple's app store policies -- you can object to them, compete with them,
complain about them, even jailbreak your phone, but you'd definitely be wrong
to DDoS the app store website b/c your app was rejected.

Visa isn't attacking anyone when they reject customers for any reason, just
like Apple isn't attacking anyone when they reject apps. Attacking is the
wrong word. It's refusing to cooperate with, even "discriminating against"
(but not the various illegal types like racism or sexism), being unfriendly
to, maybe "being a jerk", whatever, but there is no _attacking_ when a
business makes legal business decisions, especially one that they think lots
of their customers would prefer (Why else would they do it? I'm guessing Visa
is run by soulless bureaucrats just trying to make money and keep their jobs
and they don't care about having a political agenda).

~~~
sirrocco
You said : Why else would they do it ? And someone above posted this link :
[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/08/wikileaks-us-
rus...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/08/wikileaks-us-russia-visa-
mastercard)

Visa and Mastercard are different from Apple because they did what they did
when the government stepped in.

------
12341sa
I find outrageous that compagnies like VISA or MASTERCARD take the right to
forbid people to do what _THEY_ want with _THEIR OWN_ money.

Please continue the DDOS until they bankrupt.

~~~
brass_cannon
But you're missing a huge point here. Visa and MasterCard don't have a
responsibility to allow you access to their networks.

This is akin to arguing that your free speech rights are infringed upon when a
moderator removes your comment on their board.

~~~
trevelyan
I think your analogy is flawed in this case. Government-enforced monopolies
have an implicit social responsibility to abide by social norms when
conducting business. This is more akin to a subway refusing to carry a
newspaper publisher because of something they published.

To the extent that a refusal of service violates social norms this creates a
legitimate grievance in the absence of reasonable alternatives because of
public policy.

~~~
brass_cannon
To me, the fact that Visa / MasterCard are in a heavily regulated (and to some
extent, subsidized) industry is a separate issue. Perhaps the government
should have less influence on these card associations, but the fact remains
that they are still private entities.

Perhaps my analogy was not quite accurate, but I think your analogy goes too
far on the other side. A subway is wholly owned by, and operated under, the
budget of a government.

I understand, and sympathize with 12341sa's outrage, but his comment implies I
have a _right_ to purchase goods using a Visa or MasterCard.

~~~
trevelyan
I'm not arguing that you have the right to a credit card. But you should not
be discriminated against on grounds that violate the social compact.
Otherwise, your argument suggests it would be legitimate for Visa and
Mastercard to refuse to process donations for specific political parties or
politicians. Or for Paypal to close the accounts of people who vote.

I think most people would accept that there is a fundamental right to engage
in peaceful trade. And just thinking of the issue practically, there are far
more ways for someone denied access to the subway to get to their destination
than there are ways for people to collect money remotely without access to the
banking infrastructure and credit transfer services.

------
nod
Is this really an attempt to support free speech with a DDOS? Or is there some
sort of meta/irony motivation here?

~~~
Vivtek
I think MasterCard/Visa is just a nail to 4chan's hammer, is all. DDoSing is
all they know how to do (except exposure of personal details for public
harrassment).

That said, I'm sitting back with my popcorn here. I just imagine guys in some
boardroom saying, "4 _what_ now?" Heh.

~~~
jeromec
Damn, it's usually safe to read HN with something in your mouth... [gets
napkin]

~~~
alphabeat
Okay, you know what you do? You buy yourself a tape recorder, you just record
yourself for a whole day. I think you’re going to be surprised at some of your
phrasing.

~~~
anigbrowl
He means the grandparent made him laugh so hard, he spit out the food he was
eating. It's a compliment, not a criticism.

~~~
jmtulloss
It's a quote from Arrested Development. You should check it out if you haven't
seen it, it's on netflix and hulu.

~~~
anigbrowl
Thanks for the reminder! I was just saying the other day how I still missed it
so long after its TV run, I had quite forgotten that one.

------
cosgroveb
The attack on MC supposedly took down SecureCode affecting those payments...
Seems like Visa's equivalent, Verified by Visa is still up:

[https://verified.visa.com/aam/data/default/landing.aam?partn...](https://verified.visa.com/aam/data/default/landing.aam?partner=default&resize=yes)

~~~
thecoffman
I just tried that link and it timed out. Perhaps its intermittent?

------
morganpyne
Does anybody have any details on the the technical side of these attacks and
what happens when anon decides to fire all phasers at a target? My impression
is of a loose group of individuals herding a diverse range of botnets and
attacks which they bring to force on command from an agreed upon leadership
(or a target consensus is reached)?

Are they using the latest bunch of 'best-practices' to take down a site? (e.g.
slowloris, UDP flooding, DNS or TCP amplification, TCP SYN attacks, whatever
is flavour of the month)

With all the fluff and the bluster being written about them I haven't seen a
good technical analysis so I'd love to hear any info you might have.

------
hammock
It's not surprising to me why the shutdown of Wikileaks donation channels, as
opposed to TSA or any of the other civil liberties breaches, triggered such
rage.

The answer is simple: People get fucking pissed when they can't spend their
money where they want to.

And it holds throughout history.

~~~
wtallis
Retaliation over the internet is easier and safer, and the credit card
companies were one of the few targets that is vulnerable to attack over the
web.

(Here's to hoping somebody develops a virus to brick backscatter x-ray
machines.)

------
jonknee
Rumor has it the next target is Authorize.net (I assume not because anything
they did but because that's how you actually take down the ability for Visa
and MC to function). That would be quite dramatic to say the least.

~~~
storborg
Can you substantiate that rumor? Taking down Visa.com isn't really a huge
deal, but taking down Authorize.net would actually affect a lot of merchants.

~~~
vukk
I wonder why they don't get payment gateway IP's from shops, surely some of
them work in them, and DDOS those. Maybe too much heat because Visa and
MasterCard would lose millions per day and people would lose the ability to
pay with their cards?

------
araneae
I should point out that Visa itself hasn't actually decided to stop payments
to WikiLeak- only Visa Europe, its subsidiary. The people that run Visa.com
are only responsible for selling Visa Europe the rights to use the name.

------
sukuriant
There are so many active topics on the DDoS's happening today. I now wonder.
What happens if Anonymous wins? If, under the pressure, Visa gives and
succumbs to their wishes? What happens then?

~~~
AndyKelley
Then we can use visa.com to donate to wikileaks, and it establishes a
precedent that it is okay for private companies to never censor their
customers, even if the government thinks the customer is dubious.

------
sdizdar
Both Visa and MasterCard are down. This just shows how fragile the internet is
and how 'easy' is to shut down the entire economy and system.

The point is that coordinated attack by terrorists or plain old criminals can
cripple the entire world's economy and there is no easy and effective way to
prevent it.

We do need to think about how internet can be re-organized to be 100%
distributed system to prevent this of happening again.

~~~
utoku
You almost identified the problem correctly.

Internet is already distributed. The attacks against Visa and MC are also
distributed. But Visa and MC are not. They are single points of trust for our
financial transactions.

A more distributed system, where a web of trust and transaction system exists,
could be used. But such a thing hasn't been invented yet.

I thought about it some last year, but such a system is hard to design. I did
design several prototypes, but they had lots of problems. It also involved
changing the structures of presumed governmental financial structures
("central" bank for example, is also a single point of trust).

So I think, the rephrasing of the problem should be: We do need to think about
how our financial systems can be reorganized to be 100% distributed systems to
prevent future abuses by anyone, including governments.

------
keiferski
Looks like they're redirecting it to USA.visa.com

------
FirstHopSystems
Looks like Paypal is down too. Well only the server that redirects you to the
secure page.

Just use the full path "<http://www.paypal.com> or "<https://www.paypal.com>

We took down Chevron by spray painting over one of the signs at a gas Station.
CHEVRON IS DOWN!!!!!

~~~
cosmicray
About the same time you posted, I was using PayPal. It was working, but I did
notice signs of slow response. I was able to do everything I needed. My
impression is that the PayPal engineers are dealing with the issue.

------
tkahnoski
DDoS strikes me as a violent form of protest.

Has anyone started a non-violent protest (offline or digitally) for WikiLeaks?

EDIT: Rethinking my statement on DDoS as violent. I am still interested in
knowing if there are other non-DDoS protests surrounding WikiLeaks.

~~~
natnat
I don't think DDoS is violent at all. It doesn't physically hurt anyone, and
it doesn't damage the property of people who aren't involved in censoring
Wikileaks.

Nonviolent protest doesn't need to just be complaining. Everyone does that,
and it doesn't get anything done unless you're a millionaire. Passive
resistance is generally economically disruptive to whoever it's targeted at.

DDoS attacks are not all that different, conceptually, from sit-ins. You're
not destroying their server or deleting their code. You are simply putting
yourself in the way so that no one else can use their website. It's not a nice
thing to do, it interferes with their ability to do business, and it's
illegal, but it's not violent.

~~~
tkahnoski
The comparison to sit-ins is an interesting case I hadn't considered until
reading further comments.

On a technical level DDoS certainly seems equivalent to a sit-in. I will have
to think on this a bit more.

------
futuremint
I pity the poor sys-admins whose pagers are interrupting their late-night
hacking. Visa & MC probably don't care at all (they're swimming in plastic
money!), its the front-line guys that are feeling this the most!

------
tocomment
Does this actually hurt visa? Wouldn't visa.com just Be a showcase type
website eg "hey here's what visa is, here are some ringtones you candownload"

I'd imagine all their transaction processing happens elsewhere.

~~~
cryptoz
> I'd imagine all their transaction processing happens elsewhere.

Yes, a good portion happens through <https://verified.visa.com>

Which, you'll note, is also down. This is real.

~~~
pyre
Really though? Wouldn't that be the Verified by Visa program, which not all
online commerce sites use? Or do they process _all_ transactions through that
site?

------
frisco
CapitalOne account center is down for me; I was trying to log in to access a
Visa card. Coincidence? I have no idea why they'd be synchronously connected,
but odd timing.

------
balac
You have to think that paypal is also being attacked, in that case I am pretty
impressed that they are managing to stay up while mastercard and visa get
sunk.

------
b1tr0t
And I haven't even seen any comments on the possibility of this being a smear
campaign to tarnish Wikileaks further in the media?

I'm just saying, if you wanted to completely discredit an organization what's
the fastest way to go about doing so?

Step 1: Manufacture accusations against it's founder for which there is no
defence, where the individual is guilty before a trial even begins. Oh, I
don't know, how about accusing a man of a sex crime? (Especially a funny
looking foreign one!)

Step 2: Manufacture scary "hackers" who do scary "hacker" things. Hide your
children!

Step 3: Let CNN and Fox do what they're paid to do. Spin and spin and spin.

~~~
socksy
A smear campaign seeding 4chan with fake posts, and orchestrating a LOIC
attack?

------
llimllib
They had _all day_ to prepare for this and they failed?

edit: up for me, at least.

------
itsnotvalid
Unless someone reputable stands out and make a statement, no one could be sure
if this act is associated with WikiLeaks. Period.

------
InclinedPlane
I'm sure it's the US government! Or... not.

Turns out that DDoS is a dime a dozen today, they don't necessarily mean
anything.

------
faragon
Better attack: reduce the credit card usage, and try to pay more with cash.
Spread the word.

------
chailatte
Finally something has pissed off enough geeks. I thought the government's lack
of respect towards due-process, the systematic breakdown of basic freedom or
the massive wealth transfer to the rich via dollar printing/bailout would've
done it.

V for Vendetta.

~~~
russellallen
V for Vendetta starred Natalie Portman, Hugo Weaving, and Steven Fry. It was a
mainstream Hollywood movie which took over $132 million at the box office. It
was a Warner Bros film, a subsidiary of Times Warner which is "the world's
second largest entertainment conglomerate in terms of revenue (behind Disney
and ahead of News Corporation and Viacom), as well as the world's largest
media conglomerate".

Your dreams of anarchism were manufactured in a bottle and sold to you on a
silver screen.

Grow up.

(Edit: as acknowledged below, the final 'grow up' is a bit snarky. Sorry,
that's withdrawn)

~~~
andrewljohnson
Down-voted, not because I disagree with you (though I do), but rather down-
voted for being both snarky and cliched. Your comment would have sat better
without the "grow up" there at the end.

~~~
russellallen
Fair enough. It was a bit snarky. I withdraw it.

------
chailatte
There are of course those who do not want us to speak. I suspect even now,
orders are being shouted into telephones, and men with guns will soon be on
their way. Why? Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of
conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to
meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the
truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there?
Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the
freedom to object, think, and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and
systems of surveillence coercing your conformity and soliciting your
submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well, certainly there are
those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but
again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into
a mirror.

------
goldenthunder
A co-worker Engineer just went down to get frozen yogurt. They couldn't
process his card. Apparently they route transactions through their domain DNS?

Suddenly corporate powers don't seem as strong. It's amazing how vulnerable
something man made is.

~~~
thecoffman
I'm assuming thats a coincidence. I cannot imagine Visa's payment processing
infrastructure is coupled to its web infrastructure in any way. That would be
monumentally bone headed.

~~~
goldenthunder
Indeed, as I remember setting some payment stuff up at my parents business a
while back-- you can get a gateway setup that uses their web interface to
process transactions.

That was a while back, but maybe they have legacy systems.

Either way, they are loosing money one way or another =/

------
goldenthunder
This is a weird subject because it is totally dual sided.

1) It promotes freedom of speech and taking action as a community to promote
change.

2) It is completely illegal which goes against the laws and freedoms they are
trying to promote.

 __Right Idea - Wrong Method __

~~~
melpo
It's the same as with any uprising really. You can't expect people to follow
laws when they are made by the "enemy".

That so many people are willing to break the law when taking action shows how
important the issue is to them. It also suggests that there is no other
effective way to take action.

~~~
rimantas
I have a problem there with "so many people" and "no other effective way".
Blocking my payments is very effective way to piss me off indeed, not sure
what good it brings otherwise.

I am still amused how quickly critical thinking switches off in many people.
After initial categorization "wikileaks is good, government is bad" not much
effort goes into actual considerations, how is it good, what good did it
bring, etc.

Governments suck, uh oh, what a news. Maybe it will be a news to some, but
_we_ do _elect_ governments. I guess it is easier to enjoy some braindead DDoS
than go to elections, put some more thought whom to elect and make sure those
elected are responsible for their work as officials.

Now it looks like governments were brought by some aliens and just forced on
us. Demanding responsibility from the government is very good, how about
taking some responsibility of the governments we have?

And that's where I have a problem with wikileaks: at least I can imagine that
I had some say in what people do rule my country, so I can claim a bit
responsibility for the power they have.

Wikileaks on the other hand is self-proclaimed savior, responsible to whom?

~~~
chc
> we do elect governments

This is just not accurate in any meaningful way. I don't elect my government,
and neither does anyone else here. I vote, but my vote's effect on what
actually happens is so small it's not even measurable. Elections are not
decided by thoughtful voters; they're decided by propagandists who control the
majority of thoughtless voters.

~~~
zaphar
Laying aside the propagandist argument for a bit I'd argue that the really
hard part is finding someone to actually vote for. The last three elections I
haven't seen any candidate I felt was worthy of my vote. What does one do
then? I could run for office I suppose but that doesn't really solve the
problem either since I wouldn't consider myself vote worthy either. (wrong
skill sets)

------
binaryfinery
Akamai's stock should be going up.

------
toephu
its up now

~~~
goldenthunder
no it's not.

~~~
toephu
oh its down again hah

