Panda Security Trash Talks Anonymous and LulzSec in Security Report



+ Add a Comment


The anti-Scientology rhetoric can be quite convincing, but I soon realized it's just another case of bigotry. After many problems with Norton and McAfee, I switched to Panda and it works nearly perfectly. Panda is run by a Scientologist, and some people are afraid to use it because it might further some mysterious agenda. Well, you're probably shocked that someone in the 21st century has the nerve to say this, but -- I don't give a darn. Panda works, I'm keeping it, and to hell with the bigots.

I wonder if this hatred of Scientology is at least partly due to these evil hackers being afraid that Panda might actually stop them.

Anonymous is the tiger that doesn't forgive or forget. The 99% is the crane that wants peace, justice, and security.

In the words of Robert Plant, "If we could just join hands, that's all it takes."

Shalom, aloha, namaste.



Isn't it obvious that Panda is desparately trying to be attacked by the famous hackers? Maybe they plan to outsmart hackers and catch them if they indeed attack! 

Or they simply want to resist to numbers of attacks to display (and sell) they tech.



Not to disagree with the vast majority of what they're saying here, but protestors have a long history of peacefully breaking the law and causing economic damage. Some of these people are celebrated, even in the US. It really comes down to how important you think their causes are, and how close you are to agreeing with them.

Does this still apply to Anonymous? I think maybe. I do have to say, their causes aren't nearly as noble as refusing to sit on the back of the bus because you're being racially segregated... but some of them are pretty important to me, none the less.



They're not protesting. They're just being assholes. They're the digital equivalent of kids throwing rocks through windows and running away before they're caught.

I hope they all find themselves in prisons around the world, were they can service the sexual needs of murderers and rapists for the rest of their natural lives.



"They're the digital equivalent of kids throwing rocks through windows and running away before they're caught."

...And then the next sentence...

"I hope they all find themselves in prisons around the world, were they can service the sexual needs of murderers and rapists for the rest of their natural lives."

You are a complete tool and probably a bit sick in the head.



Certainly that's what the majority of these recent hacking attacks have been, I agree. I was just responding to Panda Security's comments on protesting.

But while you're making the equivalency... do you also think that kids who throw rocks through windows and run away should be raped by violent offenders for the rest of their lives? That seems a bit harsh to me.

But hey, if you ever open a movie theater, I'll gladly visit knowing that no kids would dare start using their cellphone during the show... at least not for long.



I think the difference between peacefully protesting that casues economic damage and what they are doing is two fold:

1. Their goal is/was economic damage. They are intending to hurt the economy. Historically, when people have protested and hurt the ecnomy, it wasn't with the intent to cause harm (most of the time), and when it was so immoral, they were still supported by the following point.

2. What they are doing is inherently illegal, even under thier own definitions (that part's the kicker).


So, their "protesting" is unjust (point 2) and immoral (point 1), thus what they are lacking is a sound reason as to why to "protest" (not why to hold the opinion they hold but why to express how they do), which is why it is being considered unacceptable.


Protests can only work when you have either morality or justice on your side (or both justice and morality) and they have abandoned both.


I think it's wonderful that this shows people still actually care, I just wish they cared enough to do it right.



Yes, this is a good point.

I think it's hard when dealing with these leaderless collectives and anonymous memberships because you can't get a genuine feel for their motivations; there are many different motivations from various people, but no real set charter. Angry mobs are not known for their mercy or intelligence. To me, this is the biggest and scariest issue with these groups.

I don't think the DDOS attacks Annoymous has used in the past were grand attempts to cause finanical damage. They were just knocking down their webservers to show their frustration. I put them at about the same level as people who chain themselves to trees or have "sit-ins" to disrupt businesses. I don't consider these actions particuarly unjust or immoral, while at the same time don't really support them either. It's very hard to protest the actions of something like Visa and Mastercard because they are very powerful and entrenched into society, and I sympathize with that.

But once we move to things beyond DDOSing, I do lose that sympathy.




Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.