WikiLeaks attacks likely by 'state actor'

[maddezmom]

Source: AFP

WikiLeaks attacks likely by 'state actor'

LONDON - THE lawyer for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said on Friday that a 'state actor' is likely to blame for massive cyber attacks on the whistleblower website after it released secret US diplomatic cables.

`snip`

'Somebody, probably a state actor, has taken control of literally hundreds of thousands of vulnerable computers across the world and got them all to dial in to the WikiLeaks website simultaneously,' Mr Stephens told AFP.

'It's very sophisticated and we know that Julian has suffered a number of such attacks, we know there have also been some odd other things going on in Sweden,' added Mr Stephens, who is based in London.

The whistleblower site was back online with a new Swiss address on Friday, six hours after its previous domain name was shut down by a US system provider following a series of attacks over the past week.



Read more: http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/World/Story/STIStory_610065.html

[drm604]

1. They are up and running.

http://wikileaks.ch

If that address suffers from another DNS takedown, you can access it directly at http://213.251.145.96 .

[enuegii]

4. You can also access it at...

http://46.59.1.2">http://46.59.1.2.
For now, I guess.

[bemildred]

9. Well, let's see if they muck with the routing.

That's would be a real snipe hunt.

[boppers]

29. The game is on.

Ips are relative easy to change around, unless folks are willing to take out entire data centers, and all of their inbound routes....

[bemildred]

31. Yeah, you are going to have some "collateral damage".

Messy, too, there is a reason they came up with DNS.

[Iterate]

2. Yes, finally, that has been the unreported story.

So essentially, "our" government has infected your weakly protected Microsoft computer and has drafted it into an attack on WikiLeaks.

OK, that's oversimplifying, but it does get to the heart of the matter.

[Blue_Tires]

5. +1

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

19. What do you mean "your"?

</tonto>

[Iterate]

20. Somehow I knew I'd get that reply,

so ok, I baited a bit hoping someone would send me a penguin.

[Iowa]

21. Linux on this PC as well.

[boppers]

30. ...and another...

I dual boot, though.

For WoW.

[No Elephants]

3. State actor?

Oh, him again-the 'shocked" guy.

[AngryAmish]

6. Must be a state actor. An image sharing website would never be able to pull something like this off

If you want a DDos attack you can buy one. They are available on the intergoogles.

[Ruperto31]

16. Image-sharing and state actor are not the only possibilities.

Surely you know that.

[Posteritatis]

24. Most likely ones, anyway

Any site that's even vaguely controversial and winds up in the public spotlight is going to have a takedown attempt from /b/tards, no matter who else dislikes it, for instance.

[ixion]

7. The US is the largest state-sponsor of terrorism in the world

as they are proving right now.

[Zorro]

10. Where's your proof?

[ronnie624]

11. You already see it.

You just call it by a different name.

[Zorro]

13. Again, where's your proof?

Your vague response doesn't qualify; that's typically symptomatic of a response to an assertion that has no proof.

[Ruperto31]

17. What do you call enhanced pat-downs at the airport? Chopped liver?

Terrorism is the use of violence to cause fear. Sexual assault is violence. Airport searches are sexual assault designed to cause fear in the American people. Q.E.D.

[Zorro]

26. Airport security is an act of terrorism?

Yeah right.

Been through an airport security patdown yet? Did it cause you great fear?

If it did, then you're quite a coward.

Try again, logic boy.

[ronnie624]

18. My "proof" is the pattern established by a history of conduct.

You will have no problem locating such information on the internet. You won't even have to leave this site.

This will provide some needed guidance:

terrorism:

(1) the term “international terrorism” means activities that—
(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended—
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping

[Zorro]

27. Where's your "proof" the US is the "state actor"?

Still haven't seen it.

Try staying on-topic.

[Arctic Dave]

15. Are you serious? How about everything from IranContra to Blackwater.

But I would expect as much from you TG. Now go piss off.

[Zorro]

28. And you have no "proof" the US is the "state actor"

Back to your igloo, DA.

[sabrina 1]

33. What we have is probable cause to make the U.S. the #1 suspect

The hysterical screaming and wailing from everyone from the President to Hilary (caught using the State Dept. for espionage purposes along with Condi, most likely illegally) to every Republican moron in Congress and on the radio. The calls for assassination of a journalist among other things coming from this great arbiter of 'free speech', the U.S., is simply laughable.

The decades long rap sheet the U.S. government has racked up along with its temper tantrum over Julian Assange definitely provides enough probably cause to place them at the top of the list of likely suspects.

Aside from that, it is my personal opinion that the U.S. actually is the state actor.

However, since Wikileaks has also embarrassed Russia, China and a whole host of other countries, there are a few other suspects to check out, should we be wrong about the U.S.

[ixion]

22. My proof? Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Vietnam, Korea, Panama,

the list goes on and on. Just because you call it "liberation" doesn't mean that the people we're bombing agree with you.

[hatrack]

8. Yeah, no shit . . .

Gee, I wonder who?

:silly:

[Hissyspit]

12. Yeah, no shit...

[ellie]

14. Geez, isn't hacking illegal

or is it okay when the government does it? Bunch of fucking hypocrites.

[KamaAina]

23. Also, water likely 'wet'

:eyes:

[EFerrari]

25. Our tax dollars at work.

[BrightKnight]

32. I doubt it. Patriotism and a lot of people need or want to impress

the government. I am sure that a lot of people would act to protect State secrets if they could out of a sense of patriotism.

There are a lot of people and organizations that either want or need to impress the government. Most of them would not ask first.

It is possible that employees or subcontractors of an intelligence agency are doing it directly but I doubt that is the whole story.