Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Security

Submission + - LulzSec Carries The Deceptive Duo Torch (techzwn.com)

jjp9999 writes: The campaign of cyberattacks launched by hacker group LulzSec is accomplishing what The Deceptive Duo was trying to do. The group was wreaking havoc on government websites in 2002, defacing and stealing vital information from critical sources including the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command and the Office of Secretary Defense. Their goal, however, was to force the government to close vulnerabilities before a malicious hacker got to them. In their statement today, LulzSec noted a similar effect to their attacks, pointing out that while they are making a lot of enemies, they are simply doing what countless hackers have already done, but making it public. In the process, they are exposing a system riddled with vulnerabilities.
Canada

Submission + - US Copyright Infringement Lawsuit Crosses Border (torrentfreak.com)

davegravy writes: "While many Canadians believe themselves to be insulated from copyright infringement lawsuits originating in the US, a recent ruling made by a U.S District Court asserts otherwise.

Alan Phillips of Calgary, Alberta, upon defaulting due to absence at the trial, was ordered to pay $63,867 for uploading several adult films to BitTorrent tracker GayTorrent, according to the Torrentfreak article."

Comment Re:Obvious (Score 2) 462

"One of the most controversial events in Australian political history was the dismissal of the Whitlam Labor Government by Australia's Governor-General, Sir John Kerr, in November 1975" - http://whitlamdismissal.com/issues/out-of-empire.shtml As far as I know this was the last time a GG of a commonwealth country actually used their power.

Submission + - WSJ and Al-Jazeera Lure Whistleblowers (eff.org)

jjoelc writes: The success of Wikileaks in obtaining and releasing information has inspired mainstream media outlets to develop proprietary copycat sites. Al-Jazeera got into the act first, launching the Al-Jazeera Transparency Unit (AJTU), and On May 5, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), a subsidiary of Dow Jones & Co., Inc., launched its own site, SafeHouse. According to the EFF though, both sites offer "false Promises" of anonymity.

Comment Just a minute.... (Score 1) 1

I thought that the media was on the side of the protests in Egypt and Tunisia and Libya. It's OK if it's somewhere else, but lets not have activists at home? Seems a little bit two faced, doesn't it? and from TFA; "As well as attacking sites that it perceives as not supporting WikiLeaks" - uhmmm, not quite. They attacked sites that used rubbish excuses to bow to political powers-that-be to remove key financial underpinnings from WikiLeaks in an attempt to break them. I am not saying I support LOIC and DOS attacks - to paraphrase Cory Doctorow - they are like gluing the lock of a furrier, an anonymous act of protest that is an annoyance, but does not have the moral integrity of a sit-in.
Government

Submission + - Spain arrests Anonymous suspects (bbc.co.uk) 1

arisvega writes: Three suspected members of the Anonymous hacking group have been arrested in Spain, said to have been involved in co-ordinating the group's activity in that country.
Anonymous has claimed responsibility for attacks on Sony, Spanish banks and co-ordinated action in defence of whistle-blowing site Wikileaks.

A statement from the Spanish national police force said that a computer seized in the home of one person it arrested was used in the hacks, and it involved Spanish cyber police combing through millions of lines of chat logs to identify who was behind the group's activities.

Some of the attacks made by Anonymous members used a web-based tool called Loic to bombard target sites with data. The websites of PayPal, Mastercard and Amazon were all targeted using this tool.

It seems that Loic did a poor job of hiding the identity of the people using it. It is believed that some police forces have already moved against the group based on this information.

Spam

Submission + - 3 banks process 95% of spam transactions (arstechnica.com)

schwit1 writes: A group of researchers from the University of California-San Diego, the University of California-Berkeley, and the Budapest University of Technology and Economics sifted through over one billion spam URLs, and continued clicking on each page until they were prompted to buy a product. Their findings? Only 45 advertising affiliates were responsible for all the trash. They then made 120 purchases; the credit companies OK'd 76 transactions. The spammers then processed 56 of the orders and sent out products for 49 of them. Approximately 14 percent of spam transactions result in paying money for nothing? One very interesting tidbit; just three banks were responsible for 95 percent of all the authorized transactions. Azerigazbank in Azerbaijan, St Kitts & Nevis Anguilla National Bank in St Kitts &Nevis, and DnB Nord in Latvia were revealed as the primary money-men behind the spam scene.

Slashdot Top Deals

Always draw your curves, then plot your reading.

Working...