Hacking Group Retires: Were They Helping or Hurting?
Christine Lusey
2011/06/27 19:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
61 votes
|
|
40% | |||
|
62 votes
|
|
41% | |||
|
30 votes
|
|
20% | |||
It's over! The group of hackers calling themselves Lulzsec has disbanded after 50 days of defeating the security of some of the world's most high-profile companies and government agencies.
The group, whose members remain anonymous, released scores of files obtained from infiltrating Sony, Nintendo, the CIA and the FBI, among others.
In a press release, Lulzsec said 50 days was all they'd ever planned, and encouraged others to carry on the work of Operation Anti-Security, their campaign, along with another prolific hacker group, Anonymous, to attack banks, governments and law enforcement agencies, like the Arizona Department of Public Safety.
We'll probably never know if they're telling the truth, and they'd only planned a 50-day spree all along, or if they were worried about mounting scrutiny from the authorities and other hackers.
Was Lulzsec just a bunch of cyber-terrorists, or did they do some good by exposing security flaws and promoting the freedom of information?
Excerpts from the Lulzsec press release are below:
"We are Lulz Security, and this is our final release, as today marks something meaningful to us. 50 days ago, we set sail with our humble ship on an uneasy and brutal ocean: the Internet. The hate machine, the love machine, the machine powered by many machines. We are all part of it, helping it grow, and helping it grow on us.
"For the past 50 days we've been disrupting and exposing corporations, governments, often the general population itself, and quite possibly everything in between, just because we could. All to selflessly entertain others - vanity, fame, recognition, all of these things are shadowed by our desire for that which we all love. The raw, uninterrupted, chaotic thrill of entertainment and anarchy... "
The group, whose members remain anonymous, released scores of files obtained from infiltrating Sony, Nintendo, the CIA and the FBI, among others.
In a press release, Lulzsec said 50 days was all they'd ever planned, and encouraged others to carry on the work of Operation Anti-Security, their campaign, along with another prolific hacker group, Anonymous, to attack banks, governments and law enforcement agencies, like the Arizona Department of Public Safety.
We'll probably never know if they're telling the truth, and they'd only planned a 50-day spree all along, or if they were worried about mounting scrutiny from the authorities and other hackers.
Was Lulzsec just a bunch of cyber-terrorists, or did they do some good by exposing security flaws and promoting the freedom of information?
Excerpts from the Lulzsec press release are below:
"We are Lulz Security, and this is our final release, as today marks something meaningful to us. 50 days ago, we set sail with our humble ship on an uneasy and brutal ocean: the Internet. The hate machine, the love machine, the machine powered by many machines. We are all part of it, helping it grow, and helping it grow on us.
"For the past 50 days we've been disrupting and exposing corporations, governments, often the general population itself, and quite possibly everything in between, just because we could. All to selflessly entertain others - vanity, fame, recognition, all of these things are shadowed by our desire for that which we all love. The raw, uninterrupted, chaotic thrill of entertainment and anarchy... "
Read More: http://gawker.com/5815589/lulzsecs-brief-reign-of-...
Top Opinion
-
Moonage 2011/06/27 23:03:20What they did was illegal
+5Data is stuff. Stealing data is stealing stuff. It's a lot of fun to break security, I've done it a few times. But, it's not something I'd run around bragging about. People who don't like having their stuff stolen just don't laugh about it that much.
As for blame:
The NSA recently came out and stated that their basic security precautions include just assuming that their computers have already been compromised. They have to one of the most high profile targets on the planet.
I don't think it's fair to compare it to a mugging or rape. If your bank leaves the keys hanging next to the front door when they lock up at night, they shouldn't be able to get away with "Hey, that was against the law! We shouldn't have needed to worry about it" when they show up the next morning and find the vault empty.
That robbery would be totally the thieves' fault. But there should be something in place to protect the bank's customers from that sort of gross negligence.
If the "robbery" were just sneaking in, taking embarrassing photos, and then getting them published in the local paper...I'm sure *some* law covers that. Trespassing, maybe?
I'm not condoning the cracking or pretending they aren't guilty of *something.* Just that it doesn't sound to me as if they deserve criticism quite as harsh as everyone else seems to be ready to dish out.
I just wiki'd "self-ownership" and it seems to be a can of political
worms that doesn't fit in with this topic. Are you suggesting, to
some degree, that crimes against corporations are victimless,
to some extent?
I'm trying to avoid putting words in your mouth or carrying out
an idea to a ridiculous extreme. I always enjoy reading your
viewpoints on this forum-- I just honestly don't know what the
controversy is all about, here.
It doesn't have any real existence. It's only a concept. Talking about crimes against a corporation is like talking about crimes against the number 4. Or crimes against unicorns.
As far as it does exist (still a legal fiction), it's just a thing that's owned. So we might as well talk about crimes against my toaster, or against your computer.
This sort of viewpoint probably will seem ridiculously extreme to most. But only because our society has gotten so screwed up that we believe imaginary things are real.
I didn't think you were trying to put words in my mouth or be snarky :-). I've enjoyed reading your viewpoints as well, even when I've disagreed. You've always struck me as thoughtful and respectful.
I can totally see the confusion if this is the first time you've run across this particular opinion. It *is* pretty far outside the mainstream box. That doesn't change its truth.
I'll hit the library later this week and see what I can find. Thanks!
Comparing it to rape and/or murder is just ridiculous.
so they're effectively stealing our time, not to mention the food from our
tables.
The 'rape' analogy isn't quite so clear-cut, but it's not so far-fetched. either.
Some who have had their (often, VERY personal) data made public have
been violated in ways which ruin their lives.
Tell me this isn't a 'power' thing, given the hacker's notoriously maladjusted
personality. They resent people that they perceive to be powerful in some
way, and seek to "bring them down" in a righteous act of rape. Symbolic
or not, the effect is very similar.
Forcing companies (or the government) to fix broken security by exposing it isn't theft. It isn't what I'd call good, but it's a whole lot better than breaking in and quietly inflicting harm (like, say, stealing credit card numbers and then using them) without letting anyone know.
I can see the symbolic rape analogy from the cracker's point of view. But it really falls apart from the other side. I've known way too many rape victims to think the two are comparable.
to be "office supplies?"
As far as the release of logins...if a bank leaves your lockbox key sitting on the counter and someone steals it, it wasn't right and it sucks but the bank's still more at fault. It shouldn't take a theft to get people to start paying attention, and It shouldn't take a casual hacker group to get websites containing personal information to have decent security.
and banking data. Doesn't stretch the imagination too much to
think these crumbs might actually be unethical.
--In addition to the intrusion and theft issues, I mean.
but they hacked PSN, Minecraft, Elder Scrolls and much more! That cannot be good for the gaming economy.
Governments must be more accountable when they're at war. The alternative is an incentive to stay at war constantly. Which also seems to have become reality in the US.
The whitehats asked LulzSec to be on their side, even asked them to take down their competition.
All they have is accounts, I buy stuff with the $20 PSN card when im on my ps3. I know the internet very well, that youre going to get f*cked over.
They weren't doing much to help executives who would just as soon that their IT security experts would just shut up and go away.
Well fat slobs are terrorists I ain't a fat slob so I ain't a terroist.
Sounds like common criminals to me.