PayPal blog hit with DDOS from Anonymous

[Sentient Void]

Meh, it looks like you guys didn't read the entire dialectic between myself and hazek.

I conceded that the DDOS attacks are legitimate and libertarian after finding out new information I didn't know before.

 

[One Last Battle!]

Pretty cool idea. Some of you might not support DDoSing, but this is more/less done with volunteers rather than zombies and against corrupt puppets of the US Gov. rather than innocent people.

 

[crazyfacedjenkins]

Meh, it looks like you guys didn't read the entire dialectic between myself and hazek.

I conceded that the DDOS attacks are legitimate and libertarian after finding out new information I didn't know before.

That corporate America owns the politicians and not the other way around?

 

[raiha]

They do with a pen or mouse click What I was sentenced to 25 years for.

And I got much less money.

You are very honest telling us that. Sounds like an interesting story.

 

[Agorism]

What's the legality of DDOS attacks?

Is it legal. Anyone ever been prosecuted. Anyway to enforce it.

 

[One Last Battle!]

Anon is now, I kid you not, DDoSing the US Senate. Seriously.

It is actually working, too. The site has been flickering.

 

[PlzPeopleWakeUp]

I love Big Brother.

 

[hazek]

Anon is now, I kid you not, DDoSing the US Senate. Seriously.

It is actually working, too. The site has been flickering.

Can it actually have an effect tho?

 

[cswake]

Anon is now, I kid you not, DDoSing the US Senate. Seriously.

It is actually working, too. The site has been flickering.

Can't get through to senate.gov from here...

 

[JVParkour]

Holy Cow. I got on the Senate site to check about 2 minutes ago, and it worked fine. I just tried again and it is down... wow, this is crazy.

One Last Battle, how did you know they were trying to DDoS the Senate?

 

[Kludge]

Weren't a few House sites taken down in '08?

 

[JVParkour]

I dunno, but they took down www.lieberman.senate.gov also. hah, check out these two twitters for their updates.

http://twitter.com/AnonyWatcher
http://twitter.com/Anon_Operation

 

[Kludge]

I can still get to Lieberman's site.


.... over, and over, and over, and over...................

 

[JVParkour]

Haha, I tried and it didn't work the first time, but then I got in, over, and over, and over!

 

[idirtify]

I see.

On with the DDOS attacks, then! Completely justified.

Fuck the fascist pigs. +1776 to anon.

A couple points about that.

What if Paypal’s contract contained the clause informing that accounts can be frozen if terms are violated, and Wikileaks voluntarily signed it? Then the frozen money does not constitute an attack. Right?

But wait…

Probably what happened (if my past experience means anything) was that Paypal falsely claimed one of their terms was violated as an excuse to terminate/freeze. And if questioned about the termination, paypal would have pointed to the “illegal activity” clause. But if questioned any further about what actions were illegal and how, Paypal would simply ignore.

 

[JVParkour]

Next target is supposedly Paypal...

 

[Sentient Void]

I can get into all the government sites fine...

 

[reagle]

From the dark side comes an ominous new botnet called Darkness that researchers say is quite impressive and is targeting a wide variety of websites. In the last month, Darkness has become a very active DDoS network being controlled by several domains hosted in Russia. Darkness operators are boasting that it can take down larges sites with only 1,000 bots and for as little as $50 a day.
http://blogs.computerworld.com/17489/evil_new_ddos_botnet_lurking_in_the_darkness


According to Shadowserver Foundation analysis, the botnet "Destination Darkness Outlaw System"(D.D.O.S), aka "Darkness" is said to have superior performance to BlackEnergy and Illusion botnets.

BlackEnergy competitor – The 'Darkness' DDoS Bot.
http://www.shadowserver.org/wiki/pmwiki.php/Calendar/20101205

 

[Sentient Void]

A couple points about that.

What if Paypal’s contract contained the clause informing that accounts can be frozen if terms are violated, and Wikileaks voluntarily signed it? Then the frozen money does not constitute an attack. Right?

But wait…

Probably what happened (if my past experience means anything) was that Paypal falsely claimed one of their terms was violated as an excuse to terminate/freeze. And if questioned about the termination, paypal would have pointed to the “illegal activity” clause. But if questioned any further about what actions were illegal and how, Paypal would simply ignore.

I highly doubt that freezing someone's account also means freezing access to their property and money, though. PayPal may own the rights to their service, but they don't own the rights to his money/assets in his account, and I doubt that any contract terms would state anything of the sort.

Can't say for sure though.

 

[DAFTEK]

..