Your textbook focuses on one kind of "ethical hacking," hacking for hire, with permission from the company or organization that commissioned the hack. But there's another possible kind of ethical hacking. As we discussed last Thursday, some hackers use their powers--they think--for good. They attack sites with purposes that they deem morally wrong, such as child pornography sites. The Jester and Anonymous both do this sort of hacking, as do many other hackers. These hacks are not morally neutral; they are possessed of moral intention.
Find a news article, blog post, or other indication of a SPECIFIC hack with a moral intention. Post a comment on this post:
-linking to the news article/blog post/tweet/whatever
-explaining the hack (what did they do? when?)
-introducing the target (who did they hack?)
-excavating the moral intention (why did they hack it? Try to find communication *from* the hacker or hacker group saying why they did it; if not, try to speculate about their motives and come up with an argument for why it was legitimate for the hacker to hack this site.)
Email me if you have questions-- profpoole at gmail dot com. Please post this by Thursday at 9:00 AM. Yes, THIS THURSDAY, 11/10.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/8876667/Anonymous-hacktivists-claim-attack-on-neo-Nazis.html
ReplyDeleteAnonymous hacked into a neo-Nazi group in Finland and revealing a parliamentary aide involved with the group. The date reads "Monday 31.10"
It targeted and revealed individuals within Finland who were associated with the despicable group.
Anonymous claims the reason for the hack is their ZERO tolerance for groups associated with racial, sexual, religion discrimination and for anyone belonging to or sharing their ideologies.
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/power-glory-fuel-hacktivism-companies/story?id=13816503
ReplyDeleteI hate to go to the DOS attack on Sony but you don't sue someone for modifying a Playstation. Anonymous took down the the Playstation network. Over 100 million Sony users were left wanting.
Sony was hacked, most noteably by Anonymous but Lulzsec also took down Sony properties in Greece, Turkey, Canada, Japan and Russia.
Moral intent, don't sue someone for modifying their own Playstation. I don't think Sony's gonna have the balls to do minor lawsuits for quite some time now.
http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?171936-Op.-Darknet-Anonymous-hacks-pedo-ring-and-publicly-releases-info-on-1-589-perverts
ReplyDeleteOperation Darknet took down a server(s), in the US, that held child porn. I posted this link, rather than a news story link, because it provides interesting reading...it is on a forum for Law Enforcement Officers (and admirers/those wishing to be/topic enthusiasts)!
I particularly find that of interest after having seen, first had, the very mixed response of an FBI agent who takes down pedophiles in his duty. His official words are as expected -"I cannot condone criminal, illegal activity, such as criminal hacking"...but he appeared conflicted and mentioned again how he always likes to see a pedo go down. This sentiment is mirrored in the forum content.
This operation took down the server and then published the personal information that was discovered on the individuals involved, specifically targeting the company that hosted these child porn sites, called Freedom Hosting.
The moral of the hack is easy to grok - pedos suck and need to be taken down and with luck, brought to justice. By putting them out in the open, the intent seems to be allowing the powers that be to take it and run with it. That COULD be official channels. OR, vigilante justice. A grey area, but one that most people I know would have trouble not justifying, even if it is only in the same manner as displayed by the FBI agent mentioned above.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/10/us-usa-protests-hacking-idUSTRE7A90J520111110
ReplyDeleteThe hacker, part of the Anonymous group, hacked the into mayor of St. Louis's website, posting the message "You can remove the movement from the city, but you cannot remove the movement from your systems!" onto it. This was done on Tuesday, November 8th. The hacker performed this hack in retaliation to the Mayor shutting down the Occupy St. Louis protesters. Both Anonymous and the Occupy protests have been actively protesting against corruption, inequality and corporate greed.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-20033942-501465.html
ReplyDeleteAnonymous hacked WBC...or did they? Anonymous allegedly took down the WBC website and sent them a letter claiming 'enough is enough'. WBC in response said 'bring it on'.
It later came to light that WBC themselves were possibly behind the original hack, a common tactic that they use is to sue anyone they dislike when they need cash. WBC was trying to gather IP addresses with a honeypot (of course, I wonder how many of those IPs they would actually be able to trace to a person).
I feel that if Anon was really behind the WBC website attacks, they would have stopped at simply defacing the site. Anon tends to target corporations and government; as repulsive as WBC is, Anon has said that they respect their right to free speech.
http://www.thetechherald.com/article.php/201108/6848/Anonymous-drags-Westboro-Baptist-Church-out-of-closet-for-trolling-attempt
These are GREAT!!! Great job to these 5 students! Hmmm....what about the other 4 in the class?
ReplyDelete@ General Angry Red:
ReplyDeleteWhat was the moral value or ideal that Anonymous and Lulzsec was espousing? Is it just don't mess with hackers or lawsuits are frivolous?
It really just came down to don't sue in a frivolous lawsuit, it was Sony flexing its muscle against people that hacked (more specifically Jailbreaked) their PS3s. Annoymous and lulzsec wanted Sony to stop pursuing lawsuits against people that Hack their own Playstations. And they wanted the freedom to be able to modify their own consoles and share their findings online. The moral intent isn't as clear as it could be but in short it really does come down to you don't sue someone for modifying their own playstation.
ReplyDeleteSomething I forgot to add; Anon was accused of attacks going beyond the website defacement, and WBC was almost too specific when they revealed what these alleged attacks were (knowledge that only the perpetrators would have).
ReplyDelete