Lulzsec, Anonymous and other hacker woes Page 4

  • Page

    of 25 First / Last

  • JesseDeya 6 Jun 2011 10:56:12 3 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Dirtbox wrote:
    So... Why aren't any of these hackers in jail, then?

    Edit: And why the fuck are you talking about stuff used to intercept radio signals?

    Just like I said, blissful ignorance. Enjoy it, it's nice.

    While you're there, google humint.
  • silentbob 6 Jun 2011 10:57:41 28,956 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    MetalDog wrote:
    Liar =)
    Loon!

    I find the lack of faith in fellow man irritating in those sorts of statement is all. It's not as if we don't have recent evidence that the ease at which any government can implement such Orwellian measures wouldn't be as pronounced as you claim. Look at the ID card fiasco for example.

    And I don't subscribe to the believe that surveillance automatically infringes liberties either.

    Furthermore, believing that such restrictions could be enforced on something as nebulous as the World Wide Web shows technical naivety in the extreme IMO.

    Anyway, I have more important things to worry about in my life. Like whether they'll ever bring Pacers back and if my Son will ever stop drinking his bathwater.

    VR News: www.roadtovr.com -- Follow us on Twitter.

  • RunningMan 6 Jun 2011 10:58:24 2,396 posts
    Seen 10 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Dirtbox wrote:
    I've already answered both questions earlier in the thread.
    sorry late in, I'll catch up
  • Dirtbox 6 Jun 2011 11:00:17 77,687 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    JesseDeya wrote:
    Dirtbox wrote:
    So... Why aren't any of these hackers in jail, then?

    Edit: And why the fuck are you talking about stuff used to intercept radio signals?

    Just like I said, blissful ignorance. Enjoy it, it's nice.

    While you're there, google humint.
    Google bellend.

    So, Mr "Expert", what, in your wealth of knowledge about wikipedia, do you suggest?

    Also riddle me this - why are they letting China hack the balls off them if they have numerous counter measures at their fingertips as you keep suggesting.

    +1 / Like / Tweet this post

  • Chopsen 6 Jun 2011 11:00:52 15,859 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    silentbob wrote:
    MetalDog wrote:
    Liar =)
    Loon!

    I find the lack of faith in fellow man irritating in those sorts of statement is all. It's not as if we don't have recent evidence that the ease at which any government can implement such Orwellian measures wouldn't be as pronounced as you claim. Look at the ID card fiasco for example.

    And I don't subscribe to the believe that surveillance automatically infringes liberties either.

    Furthermore, believing that such restrictions could be enforced on something as nebulous as the World Wide Web shows technical naivety in the extreme IMO.

    Anyway, I have more important things to worry about in my life. Like whether they'll ever bring Pacers back and if my Son will ever stop drinking his bathwater.

    Just because you're not worried about something doesn't mean it's not important. I'm not worried about your son drinking bath water, doesn't mean it's not important.
  • SYS64738 6 Jun 2011 11:04:03 1,654 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Just imagining a world comprising only of Google, Facebook, itunes and GFWL. Shudder.

    Doubt it'll ever come to that but IMAGINE....

    PSN: SYS64738_UK

  • silentbob 6 Jun 2011 11:05:06 28,956 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    @Chopson

    Um, wut?

    My point was that the actual likelihood of such events are occurring are incredibly unlikely for technical and social reasons stated.

    Which means, at this time, it is not more important than whether they'll bring back Pacers.

    As much as I'd like the luxury to fritter hours away worrying about the slim chance draconian restrictions are slapped on the Internet, I do sometime need to prioritise reality over fantasy.

    VR News: www.roadtovr.com -- Follow us on Twitter.

  • Lexx87 6 Jun 2011 11:08:20 20,869 posts
    Seen 9 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    JesseDeya wrote:
    Dirtbox wrote:
    So... Why aren't any of these hackers in jail, then?

    Edit: And why the fuck are you talking about stuff used to intercept radio signals?

    Just like I said, blissful ignorance. Enjoy it, it's nice.

    While you're there, google humint.

    What on earth does HUMINT have to do with anything?

    Speak the truth hussy!

  • Dirtbox 6 Jun 2011 11:09:34 77,687 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Because in his eyes, decanting acronyms makes him look like he knows what he's talking about.

    I don't know much, but I do know the gov won't catch shit.

    +1 / Like / Tweet this post

  • Lexx87 6 Jun 2011 11:10:34 20,869 posts
    Seen 9 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Well it only takes me to follow his instructions of Googling it to point out the total bollocks he's talking.

    Speak the truth hussy!

  • MetalDog 6 Jun 2011 11:14:50 23,697 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    We'll see how it turns out bob. I actually hope you're right, I just don't believe you're going to be on this one. My misanthropy does tend to get turned up to 11 by the commute though, so let's hope, eh?

    -- boobs do nothing for me, I want moustaches and chest hair.

  • SYS64738 6 Jun 2011 11:14:53 1,654 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    So DB, you reckon that if the hackers do their best to hide their tracks, there's absolutely no technical possibility to catch them, ever? I'm just thinking, if the reverse is true (as in hackers always finding a way to find a gap in a program/system) then could you not expect the same happen the other way around, i.e. government or private companies finding a way, given the time to put into research etc., to track them down eventually?

    Honest question - I have no clue about hacking/network tech whatsoever apart from connecting to a network drive:)

    PSN: SYS64738_UK

  • Dirtbox 6 Jun 2011 11:16:19 77,687 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I wouldn't say never, but with current tools it's nigh on impossible unless they don't obfuscate themselves well enough.

    I don't know all that much myself aside from a bit about botnets and proxies, but the evidence speaks for itself.

    +1 / Like / Tweet this post

  • silentbob 6 Jun 2011 11:16:26 28,956 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    MetalDog wrote:
    We'll see how it turns out bob. I actually hope you're right, I just don't believe you're going to be on this one. My misanthropy does tend to get turned up to 11 by the commute though, so let's hope, eh?
    OK, we'll reconvene in a year and see what the state of play is.

    VR News: www.roadtovr.com -- Follow us on Twitter.

  • sport 6 Jun 2011 11:17:03 12,690 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Jesse knows something guys, and silentbob is keen to downplay the whole thing. Something's fishy...
  • silentbob 6 Jun 2011 11:18:11 28,956 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    That's just MD's hession pants.

    VR News: www.roadtovr.com -- Follow us on Twitter.

  • SYS64738 6 Jun 2011 11:18:21 1,654 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    MetalDog wrote:
    We'll see how it turns out bob. I actually hope you're right, I just don't believe you're going to be on this one. My misanthropy does tend to get turned up to 11 by the commute though, so let's hope, eh?

    Some sort of driving licence that is required by your ISP when you hook up to the internet, connecting you to say a credit card? Not that it would make a difference as stated in previous comments (I'm sure there's a way around it one way or another), but it would impact all the people that have nothing to hide in the first place? I could quite imagine that unfortunately.

    PSN: SYS64738_UK

  • silentbob 6 Jun 2011 11:19:09 28,956 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I think you're missing a step there ..

    VR News: www.roadtovr.com -- Follow us on Twitter.

  • MetalDog 6 Jun 2011 11:23:11 23,697 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    @bob
    I'd say five years minimum for that sort of thing. Ten more likely. I'm not suggesting this is going to be tomorrow =)

    -- boobs do nothing for me, I want moustaches and chest hair.

  • silentbob 6 Jun 2011 11:25:34 28,956 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    No, but if it is to be a knee-jerk response (to which you're alluding) we'll hear rumblings well before then.

    Still not clear what is supposed to be coming TBH. ;)

    VR News: www.roadtovr.com -- Follow us on Twitter.

  • Carlo 6 Jun 2011 11:28:00 17,996 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    silentbob wrote:
    I think you're missing a step there ..

    1. Something
    2. THE MISSING STEP
    3. Profit

    PSN ID: Djini

  • SYS64738 6 Jun 2011 11:32:15 1,654 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Carlo wrote:
    silentbob wrote:
    I think you're missing a step there ..

    1. Something
    2. THE MISSING STEP
    3. Profit

    OMG the solution was there all along!

    PSN: SYS64738_UK

  • Chopsen 6 Jun 2011 11:47:45 15,859 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    silentbob wrote:
    @Chopson

    Um, wut?

    My point was that the actual likelihood of such events are occurring are incredibly unlikely for technical and social reasons stated.

    Which means, at this time, it is not more important than whether they'll bring back Pacers.

    As much as I'd like the luxury to fritter hours away worrying about the slim chance draconian restrictions are slapped on the Internet, I do sometime need to prioritise reality over fantasy.

    As I've said before, what's I can see happening is there will be a clampdown on internet "freedom" for Joe Bloggs by the Govt because of stuff like this and good old political process of "something must be done, this is something, lets do it." It would be a piece of piss to legislate that domestic and commercial ISPs have to run off a white list and cripple internet access, they just need to introduce licensing and put a govt body in place to regulate it. Monitoring is something they've been threatening for ages and the only reason is hasn't happened is because the ISPs have said it's too much hassle. Circumstances can change.

    Sure, it will not actually prevent hackers from operating, but that is not the point. It's a more restrictive experience for the rest of us.

    Of course, if you have other things to occupy your mind then obviously it won't happen :)
  • Dirtbox 6 Jun 2011 11:49:27 77,687 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I'm still unsure if the entire thing isn't a government operation to bring internet freedom to an end.

    I need foil goggles to match my splendid hat.

    +1 / Like / Tweet this post

  • sport 6 Jun 2011 11:51:41 12,690 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Bottom line, will streaming porn be effected?
  • Chopsen 6 Jun 2011 11:51:44 15,859 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Yeah, I do rather like that idea. Bit too tinfoil for me to genuinely believe it because it's just far too clever.
  • Dirtbox 6 Jun 2011 11:56:11 77,687 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    It's funny how everyone can discount possible propaganda efforts on the grounds of it being too clever. Especially considering how widespread successful propaganda is.

    +1 / Like / Tweet this post

  • silentbob 6 Jun 2011 11:58:09 28,956 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I am in the privileged position of working for an ISP, so please forgive me for chuckling lightly when I hear the terms "Piece of piss to implement" bandied around. Which is ultimately my position, it is far from easy to "implement a whitelist" to prevent these sorts of attacks. Any advisory body with an ounce of technical ability would conclude so too.

    Which is why I again question the automatic assumption that those in power are really so inept and so committed to political suicide that they'd even try this on. Apart from not actually tackling the case in question (or anything vaguely related) it then places the UK in a backwards / regressive position and at a disadvantage in social and economic terms.

    The underlying protocols that the Internet run over do not allow the kind of expansive whitelist to which you refer. It's not just that it would be 'restrictive' it would break the web. So when you say ISPs claim "It's too much hassle to implement", they are acutely correct.

    I've seen no technical evidence that this has changed in recent times or that implementations of things such as IPV6 will do anything to enable such practices.

    Now, for fuck sake, will someone tell me when Pacers are coming back!?

    VR News: www.roadtovr.com -- Follow us on Twitter.

  • Dirtbox 6 Jun 2011 12:02:45 77,687 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I have a hard enough time balancing my peerblock whitelist so it doesn't fuck my browsing habits up. Fuck trying to filter the entire internet.

    +1 / Like / Tweet this post

  • Chopsen 6 Jun 2011 12:09:41 15,859 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    I know you work in telecommunications. I'm not saying it's "easy to "implement a whitelist" to prevent these sorts of attacks." I'm saying it's an easy thing for the government to legislate.

    Political changes are poorly thought out non-solutions to problems to which they have absolutely no idea of the complications involved. Classic examples like the dangerous dogs act, endless public sector reforms, various half-arsed obscenity laws. You are in a privileged position if you work in an industry that you haven't had to put up with this kind of bullshit. I've had years of it and trust me, this is exactly how these idiots think.

    Chopsen wrote:
    Sure, it will not actually prevent hackers from operating, but that is not the point. It's a more restrictive experience for the rest of us.

    So just to be clear, are you telling me it's impossible to prevent access to the end-user if the IP address is not on a white-list held by the service administrators? If that is the case, how do I get Steam to work at work?
  • Page

    of 25 First / Last

Log in or register to reply