Ok, so I’m not going to go on and on about the background, but in short, Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks, has been arrested as he is being accused of sex crimes. A lot of people think it’s a conspiracy and perfect timing and the whole Wikileaks saga suggests that a large document exposing the US and Russia is going to be released, and this (arrested for sex crimes) is an easy way to keep him locked down. Lots is happening, it turns out one of the woman saying she was raped is linked to a CIA operative.. and so it goes on.
He’s in court now, there’s a live video broadcast here or for a textual update on everything here.
Now, I was invited into a fairly underground IRC location to see what’s going on and basically hundreds of people are standing together to launch an attack on various websites. PayPal, MasterCard and Visa were all ways that Wikileaks was raising funds , but over the past while, the service providers have blocked the ability for people to send donations/funds to Wikileaks. What this has done is made a number of people annoyed and they’re launching attacks on the various sites.
http://www.postfinance.ch/ has been attacked for the last few hours and it’s been down a huge amount of the time. This is all taking place whilst the team users DDoS (what is DDoS) the various servers. The users have created software and made it readily available for download, downloading the software requires a few inputs and you can start DDoS’ing with them. The IRC channel and radio station is keeping everyone updated with instructions so things are co-ordinated quite well. Perhaps you’ve seen LOIC being thrown around, this is a Low Orbit Ion Canon, basically another catch phrase used for a DDoS attack. You can read more about the LOIC here.
The users have announced that they’re almost ready to take on PayPal, to which thousands of people will bomb PayPal and the chances are that the site will go down and millions of users won’t be able to send or receive funds via the service. Obviously this means that PayPal will lose out on a huge amount of money and that’s why this whole operation is called Operation PayBack.
It’s incredibly interesting to watch, some of these users are highly intelligent and they’re programming all sorts of proxy sniffers and tools on the fly as and when users have problems.
Fox News has already written reports on Cyber Warfare – read here.
I have decided to reserve my opinion on this whole matter for a number of reasons, but if you want to share your opinion on this, then please feel free!
UPDATE: 08/12/2010 – click here.
Would you elaborate on your reasons not to comment, or not? Now I’m intrigued :)
Well, the main reason is that I’ve read a number of sides to what’s going on and I can’t quite decide what the right move is. All governments have a right to keep things private as a lot of their decisions revolve around choosing the best out of two bads, which is often seen as a fail, but that’s hot it is. Also, I think a lot of information should be kept private so as to protect the world. On the other hand, I don’t think, as the public, that would should always be in the dark and have one power making all the decisions, we vote for a president because it’s what’s done, but necessarily because we want one power in charge – if that makes sense.
With that in mind, it’s hard to decide which side I stand with and thus won’t comment as of yet..
I think governments are between a rock and a hard place and they know it. Do they stand by the constitutional rights of free-speech, or do they cover their asses.
Unfortunately, they’ll no doubt do the latter in the short term, and then apologize later.
Ye, I think that’s what makes this whole situation so interesting, it’s incredibly hard to decide which side to stand on and who to support. In one hand I feel sorry for Assange, especially if he’s being falsely accused, but on the other hand I worry that leaking confidential material might be silly. Imagine the material is released, then what, Russia sends over a nuke at the US and then the US go back at them – World War 3.
I must admit, the thought of a WW3 powered by the Internet would be well fitting if you think about it.
I don’t know though, I think it’ll blow over, Anonymous isn’t the biggest group, despite them growing rapidly and I’m not sure they could make a sufficient dent in the big players, like PayPal to get people worried. However, throughout the day they’ve released interesting documents and code snippets to assist people in supporting their actions, which makes it easier to “recruite” members..
Gosh, This is no means at all to gain respect. Revenge attacks have the maturity of George Bush in a candy store.
Supporting Assange and pledging allegiance is required here, but this needs to be done legally in order to prove and justify the very reason why WikiLeaks exist.
Transparency, fairness and civil exposure of government antics is at the very core of Assange’s mission and now the world reacts to his arrest by DDos attacks?
All this does is continue to cement the image to the 55yr old congressmen and idiots that anyone with a computer and an IQ above that of a water bottle (or an average American) is considered a threat. This also further drives the scandalous decisions made by governments that result in “sudden sexual charges”.
Lest I remind you that this is not Hollywood.
With Chris on this in the regards that confidential documentation should remain just that: confidential. True, underhand dealings need to be brought forward so that the public and constitutional institutions can make a decision about a person(s)/group(s) future with respects to his/her stance in government. But, we have to take into account that we as the people nominated our governments, and voted them into power. And we have to remember they are people as well, with the exact same shortcomings as we have.
Now for my true stance: leaking all this information is all good-and-well if it was just showing corruption and getting people to pay for these crimes. But leaking information that would compromise delicate balances that exist between super-powers in the world would have drastic consequences on everyone. I say good on Assange for getting the information and wanting to share it, but you have to take into account what you actions will do to others and how big of a circle of impact it would have. It is basically the whole butterfly effect: if 200 million years ago a butterfly would have died, a whole species would not have existed in our time. Might not show effects immediately, but in the long run all actions have reactions.
I think it has come to the point where there is good reason to believe that governments have been abusing their privilege to keep secrets. Governments need to be held more responsible for their actions, but I am not yet certain if this is the best way (though I struggle to think of other ways in which it could be accomplished.)
@DChetty – Ye, these online attacks are the same as people running down the road breaking car windows and so forth. So, I don’t disagree on that at all. But then on the flipside you could argue that how else can the public really have a say? It’s a tricky situation. I would love to know what people who aren’t involved in the cyber side are thinking and doing – how do they express their opinions, how do the powers above hear about their thoughts. The part about the DDoS attacks is that taking down PayPal doesn’t only inconvenience PayPal, but all the people who use it, the very people who might actually be on the sides of those doing the attacks – so from that angle, I don’t think it’s the best way to act. Cool points, definitely opens up some interesting debate topics!
@John – I’m no politician, in fact, I normally stay away from politics, but when it comes to the US, don’t they normally try and act all democratic? If I’m correct, then a certain level of information being shared would be constituted as fair to the public, so that opinions can be expressed and not only the powers up top get to choose what’s right or wrong. Then I guess, how do you decide what amount of information to share, etc, etc. Absolutely agree with you about the butterfly effect and that’s the part that gets me rather worried about this whole thing. I haven’t read anything really pressing today about the whole situation, but I must check in with my sources to see if there’s anything new worth discussing.
@Ross – That’s exactly it, such a tough call. Calling them out is a good thing, but calling them out too much could lead to huge problems between the top powers around the world, as @John rightfully said.
All in all, I think it’s one of the most interesting things that has taken place in a long time, it’s evolving at an incredible rate and it’s one of those things that might go down in history and never gets forgotten. Ok, perhaps that’s a little dramatic, but it certainly seems to be heading that direction, and fast!
I agree with DChetty. I am not sure that there is a helluva lot of maturity in attacking organisations who are exercising their own business rights. Building on this…
As with any commercial relationship a company must be allowed to serve the interests of it’s share holders. Customers can exercise their own rights by voting with their own dollars / rands etc. If you do not agree with Amazon Paypal or whoever then withdraw your support.
By attacking their systems and ultimately the rest of their paying clients you are acting illegally.
Why not spend the efforts in creating an alternate payment gateway for Wikileaks so that they can still derive the income they need to survive?
@Mike I really like what you say about putting effort into creating an alternative payment gateway for Wikileaks, that’s a really great suggestion and I’m wondering why they haven’t done that – some of the guys I know are highly intelligent and aren’t 16yr old pimple faced guys. I must pop them a line and ask them for their opinion on this, because it’s a grand suggestion! Thanks for popping in Mike :)
I see they are able to use Flattr though but I wonder how long that would last.
The world has really become a no secret place…..how can a country…superpower be so vulnarable enough to allow over 200,000 docs available to Assange that is considered classified…
Seriously chaps, you’re very naive to say “vote with your wallet”. Would take forever and it is very near impossible to rally significant support.
As someone said “you can donate money to the KKK but not to wikileaks”. You call that “fair business practice”?
Stii,
So is your argument that the attack on sites of businesses is a fair business practice?
Closing your Paypal account takes mere minutes. Rallying support should not be difficult if people truly believe in the courage of their convictions. Heaven knows there has been sufficient press about the closing of the funding channels.
I think that you will find that majority of the the people who are supporting these illegal actions are happily transacting using their paypal accounts / visa cards etc. This is the sad truth.
People who want to donate will find alternative means and building payment gateway to facilitate this, for the proverbial brains trust, cannot be that difficult.
I fundamentally cannot see how attacking these corporates will do anything to alter their course of action. It will be a matter of time before the people committing these acts are stopped. There will be scenes of defiant hackers being thrown into the back of police vehicles and they will be shouting “free press” and the likes and they will have effected little change.
My point was to create the gateway, thereby providing an alternative funding source, which would ensure the survival of Wikileaks. All that will potentially happen now is that the funding dries up and the organisation closes and then we will all be worse off.
Mike,
I never said that attacking these business’ sites are fair business practice. You said “organisations who are exercising their own business rights”. Now while you’re not wrong, I (and clearly Anon as well) feel that it is very unfair to target one specific organization while other illegal organizations are left alone. Let us not beat around the bush as you and I both know that these businesses succumbed to political pressure. Business practice my ass.
Secondly, I think you’re overestimating the power to rally support. Ask any person who’ve tried to raise funds on the internet. It is MUCH more difficult than what you might think. Yes, while it may take me mere minutes to close my account; it takes Anon mere minutes to close everybody’s account. Which is more effective?
I’m not supporting them, I’m just arguing against your (and other’s) idealistic solutions and which are more effective.
Let us not forget that the ANC is not in power today because they followed legal routes. Lives were lost. Yes, it is two very different things, but fundamentally they’re the same. People who are willing to break the law to protect their rights. In this case people believe it is their right to know the secrets that one of the most powerful governments tries to hide. While we might see this as insignificant, they clearly don’t.
“I fundamentally cannot see how attacking these corporates will do anything to alter their course of action.” These attacks are damaging their reputations as secure financial institutions. While it is still mild, the seriousness will escalate if they continue to be rendered useless for the next couple of days. That and the fact that the whole world is writing “Anon is bringing down Paypal, Mastercard, etc. for bullying Wikileaks”. Who is perceived as the victim? Tell the story to anybody not knowing what is going on and see the reaction.
Howzit Stii,
I did not say you supported them, I asked a question at the begining of my comment. It was a genuine question.
To your first para: Is it not fair for these corporates to “bow to poltical pressure” Is it your and Anon contention that they should ignore the democratically elected government of the day?
To the 2nd Para: I may have not made the point clearly in my first response. But let me be clear the point I was really making is that the majority of the people actually don’t give a stuff about Wikileaks. I tested this amongst 8 people today (a small group I concede) but all I consider to be fairly opionated. Most new of Wikileaks and most could say that JA was being arrested for rape. They could quote very little else. All of them felt that Wikileaks should continue, but when pressed for why couldn’t answer.
I am really intrigued that you would compare the ANC freedom struggle to this attack. The ANC, of old, were representing an opppressed majority. They had a vested interest in this country and were serving their supporters. The legality of their methods are only in doubt as they pertain to the criminal elements. Had they not been illegally oppressed then they would not have had to resort to the tactics that were employed.
This is a group of intellectuals trying to say their right to read secrets; classified for whatever reasons, outweighs the safety of confidential informants for example.
I hate having these debates via email as both parties are left not being able to see the others reactions etc. When the dust has settled and time delivers a result, it may be good to get some people together to discuss / debate this. I see you are based in Cape Town, as am I, if you are up for it so am I.
You’re right, text are too emotionless and too slow. Much better to discuss face to face.
Re the ANC struggle compared to this: The point I was trying to make is that sometimes extreme methods are very necessary to obtain desired results. I know the two situations are worlds apart, but I doubt a rally to boycott Paypal and Mastercard would have nearly the same desired effect than bringing down their sites. In fact, there has been such campaigns against Paypal since the news broke. It didn’t make news headlines. Not even almost. Take down their sites and it is all you read about concerning Wikileaks.
This has been incredibly interesting Mike and Stii, I’m sorry I wasn’t here to jump into the middle of this as I think you both raise incredibly important points. I must agree, when it comes to intense debates, text is not ideal and often points aren’t put across correctly because of the lack of emotion and body language. The reason I find this all so fascinating is because it’s aiming in the direction of one of the biggest Internet blowouts that we’ve experienced – Yes, the dust might suddenly settle and a lot of it will be forgotten, but the direction it’s going in certainly doesn’t show evidence of that just yet.
I also find this interesting because it’s all via online, which means things happen incredibly fast, we all know how quickly information can travel between people online. Because of this speed, I get the feeling things like this are either “make or break” scenarios, because before we know it, the next thing will roll in and everyone will be talking about that.
The group is about to switch over to Visa’s servers any minute now, I wonder if they’ll have a big impact on Visa, or if Visa will be geared up to protect their servers because there’s no way that they don’t know what’s coming! Would be really hectic to be involved in the IT/security team at Visa or MasterCard, etc.