Don't Even Think About It, Anonymous Warns NATO
Don't Even Think About It, Anonymous Warns NATO
Posted 06/09/2011 at 12:34pm
| by Brad Chacos
122
Comments
Print
Anybody who thinks that Anonymous is just a bunch of harmless script kiddies playing around on their mom's computer hasn't been following the news recently. The US recently said it would put a hurting on hackers that threatened the nation, and earlier this week, NATO published a special report on cybersecurity. A big chunk of it was spent describing the threat of everyone's favorite hacker collective. The longer Anonymous continues its hijinks, the more likely they'd be "infiltrated and perpetrators persecuted," the report warned. Anonymous' response showed its characteristic sense of style.
Calling itself "a threat to the established hierarchy," the legion spent several paragraphs outlining the supposed purity of its goals, saying that if governments have nothing to hide, governments have nothing to worry about from Anonymous and sites like Wikileaks. After the preamble, Anonymous got down to fighting words.
"Do not make the mistake of challenging Anonymous. Do not make the mistake of believing you can behead a headless snake. If you slice off one head of Hydra, ten more heads will grow in its place. If you cut down one Anon, ten more will join us purely out of anger at your trampling of dissent."
You can view the statement here, but it's getting hammered pretty hard. You might have better results checking out Google's cached version.
More like this
122
Comments
Comments are closed on this article
haileywilson
August 09, 2011 at 8:17pm
Those guys have pretty hard guts to face the authorities and say that. But then again, as long as they avoid messing up the morals and exposing the public's personal info, Im all for it!
overlandpark4me
July 31, 2011 at 12:49pm
so I guess if one of your family was killed by a security breach from the a holes, it would be ok too? We'll see how that works for you when it happens. God, why are 9 year olds allowed to post on this site? This guy needs his computer access removed.
Nimrod
August 05, 2011 at 7:24pm
From what? What the fuck are you even talking about? I bet you said the same stupid fucking thing when Wikilinks released Hillary Clintons text messages about partys and expensive wine.
Get a life. Your own government kills innocent people every day but you dont give a shit about them so fuck off really.
snjagor
June 29, 2011 at 10:29pm
I'm quite pleased to see 'someone' take stand and a say enough is enough to arrogant america and multicorps. this great corporate country which resembles a school-yard bully has needed this sort of wakeup call for a while now, anonymous makes it fun to watch :)
cownaetion
August 20, 2011 at 4:11pm
'Someone' to take stand? The only reason their even doing this is because the chances of getting caught are nil. If they revealed their identities and then made such bold statements, then you can give them credence. Otherwise there is nothing special about them and their 'web only' attacks.
Silencer
June 13, 2011 at 10:49am
Think this might be them?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13740591
Oh, and tell me what you think of these lawbreakers:
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2011/06/us-funds-secret-internet-dissidents-repressive-countries/38743/
Conal_keaney
June 12, 2011 at 4:14pm
I really don't understand the logic in "If the government is honest and has nothing to hide". Really? Really? Since when does anon made itself king to decide what the public should know. Do I like info being kept from our government. No. But if they have to they have a reason (they better have one). All in all, no government whether ours or any other is going to be perfect (or honest). It's run by humans, therefore it won't be perfect. We just have to have faith in our government. If we don't like something, we fix it with our method of representation (although it has become more like corp. rep IMO but I digress).
Anon, if you wanna make yourself useful, don't take credit for harmful hacks involving people. Nor should you perform any. Make the world better by actually informing ppl (in a production non destructive way).
P.S. your image you give off does sound like it's run by a bunch of kids. Step it up and act like Adults. You'll sound more professional.
Nimrod
August 05, 2011 at 7:51pm
You have no concept of how the US government was established nor what its Constitutional guidelines are.
"We just have to have faith in our government."
That would be an example of extreme fascism, the exact opposite of liberty.
I have no "faith" in my government nor am I as an American obligated to do so. In fact, it is incumbent upon me NOT to trust government per my founding fathers advise. If you disagree then may your shackles of bondage rest lightly up on you and leave from here.
stige
June 11, 2011 at 11:11am
that link is bogus. goes to a cataract website. piss off.
edit - this was meant to be a reply to the post below.
Zachary K.
June 10, 2011 at 11:15am
Go get em boys, and do release the videos of them shitting their pants when the swat swarms in. We need to document the fall off of their high horse so millions can view it on youtube.
xebikr
June 10, 2011 at 12:17pm
Yeah, I was trying to decided if he was talking to NATO or about it.
xebikr
June 10, 2011 at 9:10am
Most important part of the 'article':
The government makes the law. This does not give them the right to break it. If the government was doing nothing underhand or illegal, there would be nothing "embarassing" about Wikileaks revelations, nor would there have been any scandal emanating from HBGary. The resulting scandals were not a result of Anonymous' or Wikileaks' revelations, they were the result of the CONTENT of those revelations. And responsibility for that content can be laid solely at the doorstep of policymakers who, like any corrupt entity, naively believed that they were above the law and that they would not be caught.
I wish people would stop making excuses for a government or corporation that is breaking the law. I also wish that people would actually inform themselves before they comment so we don't get long diatribes about how it was Anonymous's fault that their ID was stolen. It isn't. That was a different group. It was also a different group that infiltrated Sony and made them take down their network. That was a Sony security failure that they want to pin on Anonymous. It was also a different group that stole Sony Entertainment user info and posted it. Anonymous pulls enough crap that you don't have to go making stuff up or misattributing it.
Hg Dragon
June 10, 2011 at 1:19pm
Anon didn't hack into Sony/PSN? Fine. It was a "plant" by Sony or some other group to throw people of the real trail? That's fine, too. They didn't steal anoyone's identity, this time? Maybe. At this point, it doesn't really matter.
The very real fact is that Anonymous has made their name synonymous with acts like these and has taken great pleasure in that fact. They use it as both a bragging point and a threat to others: "Look at what we've done in the past, we're more than capable of doing again! Don't make us angry. You won't like us when we're angry. We'll, like, do stuff to your servers and websites and make people all fearful and stuff!"
However, now they're learning that blade of fame cuts both ways. They've made themselves into Internet boogymen who are now going to get blamed for all of the bad behaviour out there. Just like some people blame being out of work on "the illegals," or getting searched at the airport is because of "Big Brother," or gas prices on "greedy Big Oil," or they can't mod their electronic gear (which if they bothered to read the EULA, they've only bought a license to use! and and not do-what-I-want-ownership, but that's another argument...) against "Evil Corporate Overlords!," every malfeacent act on the Internet is now "Anonymous's fault."
It doesn't matter if they did something or not, they're going to be the first people named as the cause, no matter how hard they deny it. And they have no one to blame for this. Except Anonymous, of course...
Ghok
June 10, 2011 at 7:06pm
I agree with xebikr on this. You are using some of the strangest logic I've seen in a while, and considering how much time I spend on the internet, that's some pretty strange logic.
I'm not a fan of Anonymous, but the shit you're spouting just doesn't make any sense.
xebikr
June 10, 2011 at 1:54pm
It doesn't matter if they did something or not, they're going to be the first people named as the cause, no matter how hard they deny it.
And so you perpetuate it. Great job.
They didn't steal anoyone's identity, this time? Maybe.
You didn't beat your wife, this time? Maybe. Yeah, I hope you recognize which logic fallacy you are guilty of there.
The very real fact is that Anonymous has made their name synonymous with acts like these and has taken great pleasure in that fact.
Acts like what? ID theft? No they haven't. Point me to where they bragged about identity theft. They do their best to harass and annoy governments and corporations and individuals that have attacked them or are guilty of what they percieve as acting in an unprincipled way.
All in all? Dude. Just stop making stuff up. The actual deeds of Anonymous are interesting enough to debate without your lies.
RUSENSITIVESWEETNESS
June 20, 2011 at 4:43pm
And here's to their members getting thrown into federal pens with murderers and rapists for the rest of their natural lives.
How do you think they'll hold up?
I think they'll never be able to shit straight again. But who knows. Maybe they can DDOS their way out of Bubba's loving embrace....
Hg Dragon
June 10, 2011 at 2:50pm
As for perpetuating their "bad name," that's the path they chose to walk. Who am I to get in their way or not help them along.
And crap! Glad someone told me I was married! I know there a re a few years I don't remember so well, but I would have thogh getting married would have been one I would remember. Hope she's cute...
Finally: *points to proof of identity theft* Forgot where they broke into HBGary Federal, compromised the company director's personal info and and posted it along with other customer's sensitive information earlier this year? I do believe that falls under identity theft and that took, what, a couple of seconds with Google.
Anonymous' activities are as interesting as watching a child pouting in the corner going, "You can't tell *me* what I can or can't do," after mommy and daddy told them they could have cookies for dinner.
They're not freedon fighters. They're not rebels. They're not liberators. They're not vindicators. They're practically the Internet version of the Mafia, complete with shake-downs and protection rackets. Instead of burning your restaraunt down or breaking your legs unless you appease them, they'll shut down your website and break into your servers which can cost as much if not more in loss of business and recovery costs.
Real God Damn heros, let me tell you...
AnglicDemon00
June 10, 2011 at 8:18am
June 09, 2011 at 7:28pm
This topic is highly controversial, and one can take either side.
For the government, and against Anon, we can say that, effectively, governmental institutions maintain stability amongst highly concentrated, large groups of humans. And humans, as any self-promoting organisms, are immensely selfish and thus prone to fighting amongst each other to be the most powerful. Obviously, as in historical periods, without an effective government, we have instability, high crime rates, many short wars, etc. An anonymous, distributed group of self-proclaimed "representatives of the people" which are actually, in general, sheep on the bandwagon (ex. DDOS participants) or tech-savvy hackers (ex. those who purposely invade business/govt. systems) are not just an unfair representation, but practically a mob trying to take down a govt. (irregardless of how corrupt or reasonable such actions may be).
For Anon, it is also true that governments that are corrupt might even be worse that a practically nonexistent one. Historically, this is also easy to view as true. And, of course, there can be no democracy without transparency, because a democracy requires that the people are not a mob, not biased, but logical and well-intentioned. Just because the majority wants to eliminate the minority does not make it morally correct. Democracy depends on the competency of the people, and one cannot make good decisions without the knowledge of what goes on, and if those in power deliberately deceive the people, then it is next to impossible to attain that knowledge (and, in turn, make good decisions).
Anon might be a horde of criminals, but their remarks are sensible, if not entirely feasible actions. A government that functions entirely honestly and transparently has nothing to fear from a group that claims it is righteous, considering that such a group must function based on public indignancy and an almost unanimous decision against said governement (in which case it is unlikely, though not impossible, that the govt. has done what is right).
bling581
June 10, 2011 at 10:13am
While I mostly agree with your statement, you forget that there are a lot of stupid people out there who couldn't handle the truth. Not that it gives them the right to hide it, but just sayin'...
wirehedd
June 22, 2011 at 9:46am
the ones you refer to are also the ones who spout off their hatred for Anon. If they were truly sincere in wanting the right things done they would be fully supportive of Anon and it's actions but fear and ignorance goa long way.
AnglicDemon00
June 10, 2011 at 8:20am
Copied this from Theta because he simply spoke the truth, without taking a side or being biased to one side or another. I felt that is needed to be reposted and is something that should be read.
Xodin
June 10, 2011 at 7:43am
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/3350-Anonymous
This a great video about Anonymous I think everone should watch it because some of you seem confused.
Kuvasza
June 09, 2011 at 10:24pm
The challenge for the professionals who hunt these people down will be to get them to *stop* talking. These are amateur terrorists who will be sniffling and crying cruel and unusual punishment when they discover prison cells don't come with Cheetos, Mountain Dew, or High-speed Internet.
And then of course there is the ultimate insult for the malignant narcissist: no one will think of them at all.
Ghok
June 09, 2011 at 11:41pm
Terrorists? some kids who DDoSed some credit card company websites?
A little perspective please...
kixofmyg0t
June 10, 2011 at 5:08am
Its not just some kids. They've hacked banks, Paypal, stolen countless credit card numbers(and therefor induced "terror" and "fear" in people. if someone had the kets to everything you had, you'd be pretty scared too) hacked Lockheed fricken Martin and now is making threats to NATO.
The perspective is right, there john. Terrorists.
Xodin
June 10, 2011 at 6:31am
They dont induce fear into peaople they induce fear into goverments and companys in order for complete transparency for the people. Lockheed Martin is dealer of arms and other military tech so I dont see why are you angry about that they are hacked. And their not theretening NATO their making it clear that they will not stand silent against agresion.
Hg Dragon
June 10, 2011 at 8:36am
Then I guess you've never had your identity stolen. I found out mine was taken about 15 yars ago when I was trying to buy freakin' groceries. I was barely making due as it was, just enough to get from paycheck to paycheck. I was checking out at the grocery store when my bank card wouldn't work. Not a big deal I thought at the time as the stripe on it was a little worn and wouldn't read sometimes so I pulled out my credit card only for it to get denied as well. Thinking it was a mistake, I went ahead and left the store massively embarrased, incredibly angry, and empty handed. A call to my bank the next morning revealed that my account was massively overdrawn. Funny, since the day before was payday and I should have had more then enough in my account. The same thing happened when I called my credit card company; enough big-ticket charges pending on it that it was unuseable.
So I began disputing charges, which at the time this was happening was an absolute beating to go through. Forms, letters, phone calls, emails...It took almost two months to get all of the fraudulent charges cleared up. That's when the notices started coming in about missed payments on loans and credit cards that I didn't take out. And then the harrassing phone calls started coming in. They all started out nice and would seem to be understanding that I had my identity stolen and was in the process of clearing it up. They would tell me that until it could be proven then they would still have to hold me accountable for the balances but they would note it in the account. Guess what? They never would. The phone calls would become more and more stern as time went on. Calls would start coming in to my work, my family, my friends. I'd get calls anywhere from 6:00 in the morning to 11:00 at night. Every time the phone would ring, my stomache would start to sour as, chances were, it was another a-hole bill collector calling me to collect on something I never did.
I eventually had to hire a lawyer to try and get all of this mess resolved (which wasn't cheap...). After months of plodding through the legal system, I finally got a ruling that held me not liable for the outstanding loans. They didn't care however. They kept calling and calling, even after receiving notices form my lawyer that continued ocntact would be grounds for a lawsuit. Even after that, I eventually had to file bankruptcy to simply make... everything... stop... I still feel neverous on occassion when I use my bank card at the store, hoping like Hell it doesn't fail, because "OMG, what if it's happened again?"
Yeah, they don't cause fear at all. The damned Sony breach sent me into a panic all over again. I'm checking my bank account daily, looking at my credit reports weekly, and my stomache is doing flip-flops again when my phone rings (and being an on-call IT tech, this really sucks...).
And as far as breaking into Lockheed-Martin, I;'m sure as a regulr person, it means little to you. But to the men and women who are in the services, it could potentialy mean life or death for them. Therefore, it should matter to you since they are the ones who help protect your freedom to be as obtuse and thick-headed as you are. And, in case of some crazy-assed "Red Dawn" style scenario where they're protecting us on our own lands, your life could be on the line as well. Think about how you would feel about someone who broke into a defense contractor and stole some plans that revealed some weakness in an armored vehicle that allowed an aggressor to take one out with a can of WD-40, a 3/8" socket and a steel-wool scouring pad. Now picture that crippled armored vehicle is the one that's parked down the block from where you live and is one of the few means of protection for you and your loved ones. It's now useless and all of the soldiers inside are dead because "just some arms and otehr military tech dealer got hacked..." Get the picture yet?
"Fighting for complete transparancy" is just a BS red herring. Anonymous uses it to distract people from the fact that what they're doing is against the law, all the while knowing full well that their "cause" is one they'll never, ever achieve. In other words: "LOL they r trolling u!"
kixofmyg0t
June 10, 2011 at 7:14am
Wait a second. Stealing credit card numbers is working for the people? So...what about Visa, Paypal, Citibank....that's working for the people? Wtf are you smoking?
Lockheed Martin is a defense contractor. Attacking them is attacking our means and supply of defense. What if they attacked BAE? The company that manufacters the MRAP's that protect me from IED's and other crap downrange. They're not simply a "dealer of arms" retard. You are so lost in ur little happy world of rainbows and unicorns that you don't see the big picture.
Xodin
June 10, 2011 at 7:26am
And it is the right of the people to see how safe their moneys is Anon only shows that it's not. You seem to be lost in the world of unicorns and rainbows not to mention the fruitless war. And those IDE's wouldnt be a problem if America would just leave Middle east. But they wont because thats not profitable. And the IDE detection tech is still military hardware. They are just dealers of arms and it's high time you'd beggin to see that.
"He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither"~Benjamin Franklin
jgottberg
June 10, 2011 at 6:39am
I don't know about you but I value the safety that my country provides me. If they have to be secretive about their means of doing so, so be it. If you want complete transparency, all that goes out the window. I don't even know why I'm bothering to respond to your posts. A waste of my time.
Xodin
June 10, 2011 at 7:18am
He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither.~Benjamin Franklin
xebikr
June 10, 2011 at 7:17am
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin
And they aren't keeping things secret to protect us, they are keeping things secret to protect themselves. As Anonomous said:
The government makes the law. This does not give them the right to break it. If the government was doing nothing underhand or illegal, there would be nothing "embarassing" about Wikileaks revelations
And you are complicit because of your support.
wirehedd
June 22, 2011 at 9:52am
In some ways yes, they do. Not in this sense though.
By your own statement there is absolutely no need for the continued existense of the second amendment is there? Or do you live in fear that the British will launch a full scale invasion at some point in the near future or that there may be a marauding band of wild Souix coming to burn, scalp and pillage?
You don't get it both ways.
ShadowGryphon
June 10, 2011 at 6:22pm
Sorry, not so much.
One should never give up liberty for security...... EVER.
bling581
June 10, 2011 at 10:10am
Fail. The meaning hasn't changed and will be the same hundreds of years from now. Once the government has their foot in the door it's going to be impossible to get it shut again. They're trying to regulate the internet, track people without warrants, and engage in many other questionable practices all for the so called best interest of the people. Where do you draw the line?
Xodin
June 10, 2011 at 7:31am
Yes things change the higher autorities are trying more and more people in the dark about what they are doing behind the scenes.
jgottberg
June 10, 2011 at 7:24am
what are you going to do, hack my crap then "for the good of the people" for being complicit?
Xodin
June 10, 2011 at 7:28am
That doesnt make sense. Anon dont hack idivduals they hack corporations.
kixofmyg0t
June 10, 2011 at 7:52am
Yes, they hack corperations. Steal credit card numbers and post them for everyone to see. Yep thats a good way to strike a blow to "the man".
Fruitless war...fine. We went to war because we were attacked, and the PEOPLE YOU ELECTED sent us over there. Fruitless, pointless w/e. I have my own opinion about that.
Thepoint is Anonymous ISN'T helping anyone. They are not making the world a better, safer place. Online or not.
Xodin
June 10, 2011 at 8:05am
At the very least their trying
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/3350-Anonymous
iceman08
June 10, 2011 at 7:43am
that affect individuals. Am I responsible for the hacking of citibank since I chose them for their rates?
Xodin
June 10, 2011 at 7:49am
To the first part:
The affected individual number is small comparing to the much bigger margin of people that will now know not to trust this bank with your money and thus preventing the hardships you may have endured.
The second part I just dont get.
hollanddjw
August 31, 2011 at 10:38pm
A) How does jeopardizing someone's private and financial information "protect" them from anything?
B) There's no reason why any kind of white-hats would attack a financial institution's customers. An act of terror was commited. If you're going to try refuting that, chew on this:
terrorism (ˈtɛrəˌrɪzəm) — n 1. systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve some goal 2. the act of terrorizing 3.
the state of being terrorized
iceman08
June 10, 2011 at 7:55am
the second part refers to your statement about Anonymous attacking only corporations, never individuals. A corporation would not exist without individuals. you say they only attack corporations. That statement cannot be true, unless it was run entirely by robots. I now experience more hardships from the attacks than if it weren't attacked. This include Paypal, Citibank and Playstation Network. That gets personal for me and really in my business.
Basically, I don't agree with Anon's attacks, be it the movement as a whole, the upper echelon, or rogue splinter groups under the name Anonymous. It causes undue panic amongst many people. Forget PSN attacks, why do they believe that they represent me? They claim to be the voice of the people, and this is not my voice.
Connect with MaximumPC
Featured Content
The gang discusses the GTX 690, Trinity, Ivy Bridge, Amazon, big-box stores, MMOs,...
This month's issue
Feature
Build a PC On Any Budget
Feature
Cloud Services Showdown
How-To
Encrypt Your External Drive
Build It
Upgrade an X58 Rig
Most Commented Articles
Latest Max PC Tweets
- maximumpc: Original RickRoll Video Returns to YouTube After 24-Hour Copyright Hiatus http://t.co/MaH9Sxyy1 day 3 hours ago
- maximumpc: Corsair has decided not to go forward with its $78 million IPO, citing weak equity market conditions http://t.co/A5a4DAzj1 day 3 hours ago
- maximumpc: Want to work at Maximum PC? Our Online Managing Editor, Alex, is moving away, so we need a new one. http://t.co/9Z7JCh0E3 days 1 hour ago
