Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Crime The Courts United States Your Rights Online

Anonymous Warhead Targets US Sentencing Commission 252

Posted by timothy
from the they-hate-that dept.
theodp writes "Late Friday, Violet Blue reports, the U.S. Sentencing Commission website was hacked and government files distributed by Anonymous in 'Operation Last Resort.' The U.S. Sentencing Commission sets guidelines for sentencing in United States Federal courts, and on the defaced ussc.gov website Anonymous cited the recent suicide of Aaron Swartz as 'a line that has been crossed.' Calling the launch of its new campaign a "warhead," Anonymous vowed, 'This time there will be change, or there will be chaos.'" Adds reader emil: "Anonymous has not specified exactly what files they have obtained. The various files were named after Supreme Court judges. At a regular interval commencing today, Anonymous will choose one media outlet and supply them with heavily redacted partial contents."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Anonymous Warhead Targets US Sentencing Commission

Comments Filter:
  • by gl4ss (559668) on Saturday January 26, 2013 @05:25PM (#42703277) Homepage Journal

    ..to who actually makes the law as it is practiced in united states.

    you'd think that the sentencing guidelines would be written to the law, but no??

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      "heavily redacted partial content"? What is the point then. They go to the effort of doing this, naming their operation something quite aggressive ("warhead") and then pussyfoot around with the results? Are they hoping that they will be ignored or the response will be weaker?

      • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26, 2013 @06:08PM (#42703531)

        What I understood is that the redacted versions will be sent out piecemeal to news outlets, while the full reveal will happen later "if demands are not met."

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward
          What demands? Are they asking the government to pinkie swear that they'll stop doing all those naughty things? What a bunch of morons.
          • by lightknight (213164) on Saturday January 26, 2013 @11:18PM (#42705199) Homepage

            Indeed. The typical tactic is 'play for time, until the sniper gets into position.'

            Remember, the people they are playing against do not believe in any rules: they cheat, and will never stop; there is no reasoning with them, and every ploy is singularly meant to further their own ends. Or do we have some true believes in the crowd, who think that politicians & friends, against every shred of evidence, will not cheat given the opportunity?

            Remember, this is a government which was not afraid to set up its own version of concentration camps (the Japanese war camps), and is not afraid at all to experiment on its own people (the Syphilis and radiation experiments). It is also a government which employs the best of orators and spin-doctors to achieve its own ends. In short, if we judge it by its own laws, it's a maverick government; essentially a loose cannon.

            • by Clsid (564627)

              Plus I figure that all the government have to do is declare Anonymous a terrorist group, and lo and behold, end of discussion. I really hope they release info to completely derail the political career of the attorneys involved.

            • by Fished (574624)

              While I'm, no big fan of the US government, do bear in mind that there's a huge difference between "concentration camps" as Japanese detainment: with rare exceptions the victims survived. Moreover, most detainees were treated reasonably (but not very) well, so long as they kept the rules. I don't think the comparison is helpful. These were two very different things.

              • by jelizondo (183861) * <jerry DOT elizondo AT gmail DOT com> on Sunday January 27, 2013 @02:31AM (#42705839)

                We, the government, have decided to detain all Slashdot users with a uid greater than 500,000; please report to the nearest camp.

                The treatment they received is besides the point; the point being they were American citizens, whose only crime was to be of children or grandchildren of Japanese inmigrants.

                Yes, they were not exterminated but it was a racist action, and in that way, the two are comparable.

                Now, think how much worse the treatment could have gotten if the war was lost or if it looked that way to the powers that be...

                • by jafac (1449) on Sunday January 27, 2013 @03:16AM (#42705967) Homepage

                  I disagree with this. All with UID > 5000.
                  To the game-grid.
                  End of line_

                • by Ogive17 (691899)
                  By no means do I condone the internment (heck, my wife is Japanese, fwiw) but what I do understand is that Japan launched an attack on US soil at a location that had heavy Japanese influence. Sure, I bet there was a better way to handle the situation but what happened, happened. No one is proud of those camps.

                  What you should go look up is how many other Asians during that time were bullied because people assumed they were Japanese. That was all the citizens. Sadly, the gov't probably treated the Japan
                • by Fished (574624)

                  Hitler engaged in a decades long persecution of Jews, and the purpose of the concentration camps was to provide a "final solution" by exterminating them. Over 7 million were killed.

                  Roosevelt allowed the internment of Japanese Americans after the US was sneak-attacked by their home country without provocation. He and his military commanders felt that Japanese Americans with easy access to the cost might assist the Japanese government with an invasion, so they moved them away from the coast. The

                  I'm not den

                  • The Germans used concentration camps for a lot of people, not just the jews. In fact, later in the war they had two different classes of camps. Konzentrationslager and Vernichtungslager. The last can be translated as annihilation camp, and it was at these that the truly massive murders of jews occurred.
                    Many at regular concentration camps were political prisoners, homosexuals and so on.
                    I was taught about this from a teacher in my high school who was sent to German concentration camp for taking part in a s
            • by cshark (673578)

              Remember, the people they are playing against do not believe in any rules: they cheat, and will never stop; there is no reasoning with them, and every ploy is singularly meant to further their own ends. Or do we have some true believes in the crowd, who think that politicians & friends, against every shred of evidence, will not cheat given the opportunity?

              Well, they did say they don't want to be involved in any sort of negotiation. The demands are basically that the US suddenly undoes over a century of case law, re-legislates the entire criminal justice system at a time when Congress can't even agree on what time it is, and they want a return to partiality and common law. It's not going to happen. It's great that they're asking for it. It's great that they're leaving the time table for it open, but they might as well just release those files, and let everyon

    • by Shavano (2541114)
      If they were law they wouldn't call them guidelines. There is no secret in what the guidelines are though.
    • Laws are made by both the Federal Government and the States. The guidelines are in place so the punishment for a crime in one state is similar to the same crime in another state.
  • by DNS-and-BIND (461968) on Saturday January 26, 2013 @05:26PM (#42703287) Homepage
    Idea: let's give in to what they want. Bow deeply and honestly, and maybe they might forgive us our sins. What could possibly go wrong? After all, these attacks would certainly cease.
    • Re:Let's kowtow! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by sjames (1099) on Saturday January 26, 2013 @05:32PM (#42703325) Homepage

      How about doing it because it's the right thing to do?

      • Re:Let's kowtow! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by oodaloop (1229816) on Saturday January 26, 2013 @05:42PM (#42703393)
        If anyone were interested in doing the right thing, they would likely have done so before being threatened.
      • by Shavano (2541114)

        How about doing it because it's the right thing to do?

        Doing WHAT?

        • by sjames (1099)

          Follow the thread, RTFA and you shall see.

          • Re:Let's kowtow! (Score:4, Insightful)

            by Shavano (2541114) on Saturday January 26, 2013 @07:30PM (#42704077)

            yeah, did that. It's still not clear what the blackmailers want, exactly and therefore not clear whether it is "right." Is is "right" to comply with blackmailers in principle? I would say not, and I would say that such stunts have zero likelihood of getting sentencing guidelines made less strict for computer crime. If anything, it will make the people on the commission even more determined to deal with "these people" in a draconian manner.

            Seriously, isn't it written somewhere, "Never try to threaten the guy who's holding the big guns?" It's tactically a bad move.

            • Re:Let's kowtow! (Score:5, Insightful)

              by sjames (1099) on Saturday January 26, 2013 @07:41PM (#42704151) Homepage

              I didn't say I thought this was the right approach nor that I thought it would work, I just said I approve of the objective. We should revise the guidelines and reign in prosecutors in general. Not because anon demands it, but because it is the right thing for our society.

            • Re:Let's kowtow! (Score:5, Informative)

              by anagama (611277) <obamaisaneocon@nothingchanged.org> on Saturday January 26, 2013 @07:50PM (#42704197) Homepage

              Watch the video or read the text ... It is very easy to comprehend. Enact reforms that "respectable" people suggest. Anonymous does not expect nor wish to be part of the negotiations,

              However, in order for there to be a peaceful resolution to this crisis, certain things need to happen. There must be reform of outdated and poorly-envisioned legislation, written to be so broadly applied as to make a felony crime out of violation of terms of service, creating in effect vast swathes of crimes, and allowing for selective punishment. There must be reform of mandatory minimum sentencing. There must be a return to proportionality of punishment with respect to actual harm caused, and consideration of motive and mens rea. The inalienable right to a presumption of innocence and the recourse to trial and possibility of exoneration must be returned to its sacred status, and not gambled away by pre-trial bargaining in the face of overwhelming sentences, unaffordable justice and disfavourable odds. Laws must be upheld unselectively, and not used as a weapon of government to make examples of those it deems threatening to its power.

              For good reason the statue of lady justice is blindfolded. No more should her innocence be besmirked, her scales tipped, nor her swordhand guided. Furthermore there must be a solemn commitment to freedom of the internet, this last great common space of humanity, and to the common ownership of information to further the common good.

              We make this statement do not expect to be negotiated with; we do not desire to be negotiated with. We understand that due to the actions we take we exclude ourselves from the system within which solutions are found. There are others who serve that purpose, people far more respectable than us, people whose voices emerge from the light, and not the shadows. These voices are already making clear the reforms that have been necessary for some time, and are outright required now.

              It is these people that the justice system, the government, and law enforcement must engage with. Their voices are already ringing strong with a chorus of determined resolution. We demand only that this chorus is not ignored. We demand the government does not make the mistake of hoping that time will dampen its ringing, that they can ride out this wave of determination, that business as usual can continue after a sufficient period of lip-service and back-patting.

              Not this time. This time there will be change, or there will be chaos ...

            • Re:Let's kowtow! (Score:5, Insightful)

              by TapeCutter (624760) on Saturday January 26, 2013 @08:34PM (#42704493) Journal

              Seriously, isn't it written somewhere, "Never try to threaten the guy who's holding the big guns?" It's tactically a bad move.

              Indeed, they are shooting at a hippopotamus with a .22, at best they are just pissing it off. The intellectually curious are trapped in open ground between them and in grave danger of being trampled or shot.

            • Why wouldn't sentencing guidelines be public in the first place?

            • by anagama (611277)

              Seriously, isn't it written somewhere, "Never try to threaten the guy who's holding the big guns?" It's tactically a bad move.

              Actually no. Off the top of my head I can think of several examples and anyone even modestly well versed in history (I'm not) could likely come up with dozens more.

              13 colonies | Great Britain
              Mexico | Spain
              India | Great Britain
              East Germany | USSR

              Nothing every changes for the better by taking a defeatist attitude.

              • by s.petry (762400)

                Nothing every changes for the better by taking a defeatist attitude.

                ^^This!^^

                If enough people start to come out of their slumber, change can actually happen. We have too many complacent and ignorant Americans currently. They need to get shown what is happening and how it impacts them at every turn. If they get angry enough, change will be forced.

                It's incredible that there were no marches on DC for Fraud in 2008, and an outrage that OWS was infiltrated by the Government while being slandered and libeled into nonexistence by the Government controlled media (Fox/NBC/ABC/CNN

              • FYI: The East German revolutiuon in the 1950s was crushed by the Soviet army. In the 1980s East Germany still was holding on to "Socialism" and one-party-system when the SU already had thrown the old regime overboard.
            • by Clsid (564627)

              It's only fair that they get the same treatment. After all what options did Aaron have?

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by geek (5680)

        How about doing it because it's the right thing to do?

        Is it? Swartz broke the law, knowingly and willingly. The government didn't kill him. He killed himself. He was all set to have his day in court to fight the charges and bring about awareness to the issues. Instead, like the little coward he was, he killed himself.

        I feel bad for his family, but no one is responsible for his death but himself. I look at a coward like Swartz and I feel revulsion at his cowardice. I look at someone like Mandela (tho I disagree with his politics) and I see an extremely brave ma

        • Re:Let's kowtow! (Score:5, Insightful)

          by sjames (1099) on Saturday January 26, 2013 @07:59PM (#42704271) Homepage

          A speeder knowingly breaks the law as well, but I don't think multiple felony counts is the right answer. The suicide is irrelevant to that. Perhaps it put him over the edge, perhaps it didn't. Either way the prosecutor vastly overreached.

  • by eksith (2776419) on Saturday January 26, 2013 @05:35PM (#42703361) Homepage

    I'm not gonna go into whether or not this "warhead" business is a good idea. It's probably not, since it wouldn't be what Aaron Swartz himself would. He would have made a lot of noise and brought public attention had he been able to cope, but defacements were beneath him. Also, it's likely just dirt courtesy of WikiLeaks.

    But whatever hope anyone had about restoring that term to what it was just went up in a flame of digital smoke.

    • by Bob9113 (14996)

      But whatever hope anyone had about restoring [the term "Hacker"] to what it was just went up in a flame of digital smoke.

      The White House [slashdot.org], among others [slashdot.org], seems to already be aware that "Hacker" has more than one definition. The fight to protect the TMRC sense of "hacker" is over. We won.

    • by gl4ss (559668)

      crackers vs. hackers nitpicking on words was lost before word hackers was applied to it's current use.
      because crackers are things you eat with tea.

      So I've been curious when the fuck did hacker not include "crackers"? 1975? because up from 1980 it sure didn't in any written word.
      just face it, cracks only refers to sw someone has already altered.

      but here's the point: hacker includes people who do hacking - even if the hacking is of the black hat kind. just live with it.

  • Really Anonymous? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26, 2013 @05:38PM (#42703377)

    Methinks this is more hoax than serious threat. I checked Google's cache [googleusercontent.com] of the vandalized USSC site and found the instruction to create the "Warhead" file near the bottom of the page:

    $ cat Scalia* Kennedy* Thomas* Ginsburg* Breyer* Roberts* Alito* Sotomayor* Kagan* > Warhead-US-DOJ-LEA-2013.aes256 && rm -rf /

  • by PCM2 (4486) on Saturday January 26, 2013 @05:56PM (#42703475) Homepage

    Anonymous will choose one media outlet and supply them with heavily redacted partial contents.

    Well, that's one way to get the word out -- but word to the wise, going upstairs and showing your mom doesn't count as a "media outlet."

    • by Maow (620678)

      Anonymous will choose one media outlet and supply them with heavily redacted partial contents.

      Well, that's one way to get the word out -- but word to the wise, going upstairs and showing your mom doesn't count as a "media outlet."

      I'm curious; what if you as a writer for El Reg were to receive some of these documents - what would you do with them?

      Honestly, as a non-American, I haven't even looked into what it is they're taking although I expect the only impact will be for some of them to have their asses handed to them by the DoJ eventually.

      I'm more curious on your thoughts on receiving something like this or the infamous Wikileaks materiel.

      Cheers

  • The "We immediately convened an emergency council blah blah blah" thing just reeks of pre-teen chat rooms or IRC channels (back in the day).

    The video was pretty good quality, and I agree with the message. But *please*.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26, 2013 @06:14PM (#42703569)

    Here we go again. Stop posturing and just publish the documents. As appealing as fighting for justice and equality, this grand standing and attempt to use "secret" information to extract concession is at best juvenile, at worst a power game. Neither of which serves to advance justice and equality.

    If there is information pertinent to illegal or unethical government action. Just publish it and let the public judge for themselves. Otherwise, how is the blackmail strategy of Anonymous different from that of our governments.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Publishing means to put content into the public. It can only be public if people are aware that it exists. So some posturing is a necessary part of gaining media coverage, otherwise hardly anyone will bother even looking for the published material, let alone read it.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26, 2013 @06:57PM (#42703847)

      It's psychology directed at news outlets. Just releasing a big chunk of files containing some incriminating data might get a few people riled up for a while, but it's relatively uninteresting to the general public. Tease news outlets with hyperbolae and a stream of disparate partial data, and you can drum up enough interest in the general public that larger news outlets actually want to cover the juicier bits.

    • by gmuslera (3436)
      This. Unless is a bluff trying to make the government to reveal themselves trying to stop this, showing the info in plain form and without so much theater should not give them time to react. And if they can hide the evidence after being published, they could hide the decrypt key as well..
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Bob9113 (14996)

      Otherwise, how is the blackmail strategy of Anonymous different from that of our governments.

      Do you know why our government uses threats, horsetrading, grandstanding, and blackmail? Because they work.

      Personally, I use different tools to work for what I believe in. But if I see a guy using tools I don't like to achieve good, and he's competing with a guy who is using those same tools to achieve evil, I cheer for the guy who is working to achieve good. If the only difference between Anonymous and our governme

    • by Tom (822)

      this grand standing and attempt to use "secret" information to extract concession is at best juvenile, at worst a power game. Neither of which serves to advance justice and equality.

      The problem is that the other side in this conflict is equally juvenile and power-gamey, namely the government. The whole "War on Whatever We Dislike This Decade" is so pubescent, it makes sane people sick to watch. The executive's approach of making life hell for people they have an axe to grind with, instead of following justice is straight from the school yard.

      If they didn't have tanks, we'd be laughing at them.

  • Far fetched to be sure, but could one possible eventuality be the U.S. Gov't Beginning a War on Hacktivsm? Operation Hackysack could commence and all that's pure in the World would remain safe for another day.
    • An apache helicopter taking out a few homes in suburbia is not an overreaction. Obviously. Just a gentile reminder for the rest of you pimply faced nerds that not even your mothers basement can protect you.

  • Typical Anonymous (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Stormy Dragon (800799) on Saturday January 26, 2013 @06:29PM (#42703653) Homepage

    This is typical of Anonymous's "hacktivism". The problems with federal prosecutor over reach has been a problem for decades, but Anonymous didn't care at all about it until it impacted one of their own. And even now they're focussed purely on retaliating over someone who can't be helped rather than trying to get publicity for the thousands of other (mostly poor and minority) people out there right now being victimized just the same way.

    And to top it all off, the organization they decide to attack is the USSC, one of the few parts of the government that actually been an ally on this issue (for example, by criticizing the way drug sentencing is biased against minorities).

    • by Bob9113 (14996) on Saturday January 26, 2013 @08:19PM (#42704405) Homepage

      The problems with federal prosecutor over reach has been a problem for decades,

      So can you think of a better time than now to start fixing it? If you really believe this is a problem, don't attack your allies. Be thankful for their support, even though you saw the problem before they did.

    • by Fnord666 (889225)

      The problems with federal prosecutor over reach has been a problem for decades,

      Having dealt with prosecutors on many different levels over the years, I can assure you that this is by no means limited to the federal level.

    • by Tom (822)

      Is that typical of Anonymous, or of humans in general? Few people care about something until either someone convinces them or it affects them.

  • It's the result of fury.

  • Toxic government (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26, 2013 @06:43PM (#42703733)

    Everyone will argue whether this is a good idea, whether we should "work within the system", whether this is something that Aaron would have done, "ballot box, soapbox, ammo box", and so on. The arguments are patently obvious, and not particularly new or innovative. We've heard it all before, here and elsewhere.

    The federal government has always been toxic to the citizenry, and it seems like in recent years the level of malevolence and spite from the people in charge have reached critical levels. Like a pot of superheated water, a nucleating agent will make the whole thing flash to steam.

    Efforts to fix the problem from within have failed. The system is flexible enough that it will change to prevent any attempts to fix it. People have been trying for years, to no avail. (People have voted for smaller government, less war, and human rights for decades - how has that worked out?)

    Most of what we depend on for civilization does not come from the federal government. The protections of law, community services, even many entitlements are run at the state level. We could do away with the federal government almost entirely and everyday life would continue uninterrupted.

    (Would anyone notice if suddenly we no longer had a war on drugs, no searches at airports, no wars fought on foreign soil, no foreign military bases? Could we just dispense with all military and discretionary spending, leaving social security, medicare, and VA benefits intact? Who would attack us if we didn't have a military? How much would productivity increase if instead of paying to keep people in prison [wikipedia.org], we freed people to become taxpayers?)

    People are losing faith in the government. At some point, government is no longer an asset to the people, but a tumor which must be attacked and destroyed.

    If you dislike the tactics Anonymous are using, then by all means show us your alternative.

    Otherwise, outright hostility towards the federal government will increase and people will eventually realize that having no federal government is better than what we have now.

    At that point it will all come tumbling down - very quickly.

    All it takes is a spark, a nucleating incident, or a viral video.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by cdrguru (88047)

      (People have voted for smaller government, less war, and human rights for decades - how has that worked out?)

      Since 1980 people have pretty much consistently voted for more government benefits, bigger government programs and whatever else the government says it needs to increase payments to people. We have gotten ourselves into a financial mess with a president promoting lower taxes and a Congress that spends as much as possible to keep the gravy train going.

      Would anyone notice if suddenly we no longer had a war on drugs, no searches at airports, no wars fought on foreign soil, no foreign military bases?

      Sure you would. No more searches at airports would mean the instant revocation of insurance coverage for airlines - remember, they proved they can't handle t

      • by serviscope_minor (664417) on Saturday January 26, 2013 @11:03PM (#42705151) Journal

        Since 1980 people have pretty much consistently voted for more government benefits, bigger government programs and whatever else the government says it needs to increase payments to people.

        Yeah, instead of vodint Democrat (who support big goverenment) they should have voted Republican (who support big government). Or was it the other way around?

        Sure you would. No more searches at airports would mean the instant revocation of insurance coverage for airlines - remember, they proved they can't handle the security screening.

        Haha. You know, or airlines would do what is required, not the unnecessary crap which goes on now. I doubt any actuary believes a pair of tweasers or miniture swiss army knife could be used to hijack a plane. Even the UK (we grew the shoe-bomber, if you didn't know) has given up on the shoeless shuffle. Seriously, the TSA is nuts and out of hand.

        North Korea is just waiting for the US to give up on the South so they can walk in and take over

        So you have NK which has been an impoverished shit hole for the last 50 years and SK which has been prosperous and high tech. SK has a quite advanced and prosperous armaments industry. It wouldn't be a quick fight, but I don't expect SK would fall easily to NK. Also, if NK did use nukes, the rest of the world would probably pile in. The NK leadership may be nuts but not nuts enough to loose what power they have.

        You also ignored the large point about the massive, expensive and unjust war on drugs.

      • North Korea is just waiting for the US to give up on the South so they can walk in and take over.

        Wanted to chime in on this NK/SK comment, which is--the US has 28,500 soldiers in Korea. South Korea has 640,000 active personel, and 2,900,000 in reserve. South Korea also has plenty of other allies besides the US, should the US ever decide to go into isolationist mode.

        Don't fool yourself into thinking the US presence has anything to do with the stability of the Korean peninsula. I would say the impact of the United States Forces Korea is negligible, and in fact, may be contributing to hostilities rather

      • by Tom (822)

        Since 1980 people have pretty much consistently voted for more government benefits, bigger government programs and whatever else the government says it needs to increase payments to people. We have gotten ourselves into a financial mess with a president promoting lower taxes and a Congress that spends as much as possible to keep the gravy train going.

        What a surprise. Politicians all for making more things political, the government being pro big-government. Who'd have thought?

        The primary purpose of any administration is self-perpetuation. The government is no different. Their primary purpose is to pile up more stuff into their "mine" pile. After all, who would put themselves out of their job? These people are just humans, too. And not necessarily the best kind (because the good ones won't survive internal party politics).

        Today we are trying to follow a "You broke it, you own it" philosophy and it is taking time - because the countries are far less stable than either Germany or Japan were at the end of WWII where we had to follow a similar course.

        Nonsense. Stability has nothing t

  • Yeah, right (Score:3, Funny)

    by symbolset (646467) * on Saturday January 26, 2013 @06:53PM (#42703815) Homepage Journal
    You are faced with overwhelming public outcry about injustice. Daily press reveals ever more injustice, fanning flames. Whitehouse petition obligates response. Congressional investigations, laws proposed to rein you in. A martyr. What to do? "Hack" your own website and make threats against the Supremes so you can take the line "We do not negotiate with terrorists." Close book, no investigation needed. Brilliant!
  • by Deathlizard (115856) on Saturday January 26, 2013 @09:33PM (#42704809) Homepage Journal
  • Just wait until THESE guys get sentenced. The panel will probably write a special set of guidelines just for them.
  • If "anonymous" (or whoever calls itself like that right now) calls something "warheads" could we please distance our self at least in the title of the story by using apostrophs?

    There are several things which i hate about anonymous:

    a) Lack of proper hacker culture, These guys are deep within the blackhat zone. You dont use security breaches or DDOS to blackmail somebody. The only allowed thing which comes close to blackmail which may be allowed is "responsible disclosure" = we have documents or knowledge, w

It is contrary to reasoning to say that there is a vacuum or space in which there is absolutely nothing. -- Descartes

Working...