Sophos Cloud Optix
A 22-year-old student has been charged by British police in connection with denial-of-service attacks carried out by the Anonymous hacktivist group.
Peter David Gibson, of Hartlepool, County Durham, was arrested on April 5th by the PCeU (Police Central e-Crime Unit) as part of a police investigation into a series of high profile DDoS attacks against various organisations.
According to a police statement Gibson has been charged with conspiracy to impair the operation of a computer or hinder access to a program or data.
In late 2010/early 2011, hackers were making the headlines recently for launching attacks against websites of organisations and governments who they felt were anti-WikiLeaks, or who they felt had tried to censor freedom of speech.
Corporate victims of the internet attacks have included eBay, Sony and Visa.
Online groups rallied supporters, encouraging them to play their part in the DDoS attacks by using a tool called LOIC.
Unfortunately for its users, LOIC wasn’t very good at covering its tracks – and it hasn’t been hard for the authorities to identify the IP addresses of computers which may have participated in the attacks.
We’ve warned on this site before that taking part in a denial-of-service attack is illegal in many countries. In the UK, for instance, the maximum sentence under the Computer Misuse Act is 10 years in jail.
My advice if you’re thinking of launching a DDoS attack is to get yourself some legal advice first – it could save you a lot of headaches in the future.
My advice if you're thinking of launching a DDoS attack is DON'T.
DDoS is not a good way to make a statement and does nothing more than temporarily render a server inactive. Whats the point?
My advice if you're thinking of launching a DDoS attack is GO TO A PUBLIC PLACE, eg CYBER CAFE
DDoS is a great way to make a statement because it does nothing more than temporarily render a server inactive. thats the point?
DDoS is nothing but cowardice and, while the perpetrator may consider themselves “clever” for having the skills to launch such an attack, it clearly shows they actually lack the intelligence to approach the situation head on through legitimate means. It’s really no different than the mentality of those that participate in mob violence. They claim to fight for what’s right but what they’re really saying is, “My right are more important than yours. “
"legitimate means" = no press attention, years of civil litigation, thousands of dollars wasted and counter-suits filed by the "target" for being a "vexatious litigant."
Maybe you'd like to try the electoral route instead: no press attention, years of pavement-pounding and glad-handing, thousands of dollars wasted and your ballot measure crushed after the corporation you're fighting against wins by simply out-spending you. By this point, what little media coverage you've garnered will paint you as a lone crank and your cause no more legitimate than people who want to ban women from voting.
There are no "legitimate means" left to the common person when rich corporations own the media, the courts and the electoral system. If you honestly believe there to be a "legitimate" way to fight back, you can go right ahead and file a civil suit against Mastercard for refusing to service donations to Wikileaks. I'll be right behind you with a dustpan and a broom– you'll need it after Mastercard's lawyers get done grinding you into a fine powder.
Of course, this begs the question– where were all of these people who were supposedly interested in "legitimate means" of redressing their grievances against these massive, faceless entities? The most that "legitimate means" ever produced was a handful of people holding signs outside of Quantico Marine Corps base, protesting Bradley Manning's inhumane treatment– and the profound respect people with differing opinions had for this "legitimate protest" was manifested in numerous Marines screaming insults and statements like "I HOPE THEY KILL HIM!"
Bruce, did the people of Tunisia use "legitimate means" when they overthrew their dictator? Was Anonymous just a mob when it prevented Tunisia's state security apparatus from communicating– thus saving the lives of untold numbers of Tunisians? What about the US Chamber of Commerce, which explicitly hired HBGary Federal to hack into the websites and emails of the AFL-CIO?
Oh, sure, the kids who pressed F5 a bunch of times are terrorists and should be locked up for a decade– but if you're a "legitimate business" who hires a government contractor to commit industrial espionage, you're a freedom-loving patriot, is that right?
1) Are you capable of performing a DDoS attack? If not you need to put a sock in it.
2)Then show Us the intelligent way through the bart situation oh great Messiah !!!!!
DDos is the digital equivalence of a sit down protest.
@ Graham Cluley:
I I have a problem with a paragraph in your article. I quote:
"Unfortunately, LOIC wasn't very good at covering its tracks – and it hasn't been hard for the authorities to identify the IP addresses of computers which may have participated in the attacks."
Perhaps a more balanced approach might have been:
"Unfortunately for it's users, LOIC wasn't very good at covering its tracks…….."
As it is, even if balanced by the subsequent paragraphs, the section implies something rather different.
You're quite right. Sloppy writing on my part. I will fix.
Thank you!
Perhaps instead of protesting we should meekly ask our rich puppetmasters to stop stealing from us. I'm sure they will concede to our demands as long as we are nice about it.
Jokes aside, Scotland Yard is a corrupt and compromised police force. Remember this was a bunch that collaborated with media magnate Rupert Murdoch to hack literally thousands of telephones in the UK and abroad, including movie stars, royalty, a murdered child, political enemies and members of parliament.
If only SY would work this hard at prosecuting financial and ethical corruption then the UK might have some actual integrity.