Member Claims Anonymous "Might Well Be the Most Powerful Organization On Earth" 241
wasimkadak writes in with an interview with Anonymous member "Commander X" in which he talks about how the hacktivists are the most powerful group on the planet. "Christopher Doyon, a.k.a. Commander X, sits atop a hillside in an undisclosed location in Canada, watching a reporter and photographer make their way along a narrow path to join him, away from the prying eyes of law enforcement. It's been a few weeks of encrypted emails back and forth, working out the security protocol to follow for interviewing Doyon, one of the brains behind Anonymous, now a fugitive from the FBI. Doyon, who readily admits taking part in some of the highest-profile hacktivist attacks on websites last year — from Tunisia to Orlando, Sony to PayPal — was arrested in September for a comparatively minor assault on the county website of Santa Cruz, Calif., where he was living, in retaliation for the town forcibly removing a homeless encampment on the courthouse steps. The 'virtual sit-in' lasted half an hour. For that, Doyon is facing 15 years in jail."
Most powerful? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Most powerful? (Score:5, Informative)
Also less powerful than Amazon's cloud hosting [informationweek.com] or Lolita City [arstechnica.com] which survived Anonymous' best efforts (sadly).
Re:Most powerful? (Score:5, Funny)
Lolita City? Who's the mayor, Pedobear?
Re:Most powerful? (Score:5, Funny)
Used to be. Princess Molestia took over in 2011.
Re:Most powerful? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Most powerful? (Score:5, Funny)
Well, not counting those guys, because getting beheaded is the ultimate DOS attack.
Re:Most powerful? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Of course they are powerful, look at all the laws Anonymous has passed.
Re:Most powerful? (Score:5, Informative)
I checked Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]: they were going to release information on Zeta only because they had kidnapped an anonymous member. Los Zetas actually released their member, that's why they rescinded on OpCartel:
On 6 October 2011 a man identified himself as a member of Anonymous posted a video on the Internet (YouTube) under the account MrAnonymousguyfawkes stating that Los Zetas had kidnapped one of their group members and demanded Los Zetas Cartel release the individual.
Re:Most powerful? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
In other news, in a Slashdot interview with Slashdot user "anonymous coward", "anonymous coward" claims to be the most powerful and intelligent user, in the world.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
However that's like calling socially active citizens the most powerful group in any given country, any group active enough to destabilize the status quo is broken up and a silent majority dislikes the chose
Re: (Score:3)
With 'Anonymous' it will always be bound to the cause and to the tactics employed. Obviously the Scientology protests had nothing at all to do with the various DDos attacks and in the whole people involved in one had nothing or very little to do with the other.
As an activism meme, it is purely people's individual choice when they wish to donate time and effort to a particular cause in the name of 'Anonymous' and what actions as individuals they decide to take. So a school of little fish that coalesce tog
Re:Most powerful? (Score:4, Insightful)
Generally speaking, the leaders of the most powerful organization in the world don't have to arrange interviews in remote locations in order to avoid being arrested and thrown into prison.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The most powerful organisation on Earth, has failed to make any significant difference.
The most powerful organisations in all of human history are the copyright groups. Never in history has anyone had such a vast global reach as do the copyright owners. Its to the point where you don't have to commit any crime in order to be locked up. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_O'Dwyer [wikipedia.org]
Anonymous has a long way to go. Becoming something more than petty thugs would be a good start.
Oh yea? (Score:3, Funny)
The new issue of Internet Tough Guy Magazine is out already?
Re:Oh yea? (Score:5, Funny)
That's right. In this month's issue:
Walking the Tightrope: How much physical threatening is too much?
Dealing with NDT "we're dealing with a badass" image macros
Metal album covers as avatars: the Internet equivalent of a Tapout shirt
Skill of 1000 hackers: Interview with Ichsun
So wait... (Score:5, Funny)
... Being able to interrupt poorly-secured websites for a matter of minutes makes you "the most powerful organization on earth"?
Re:So wait... (Score:5, Funny)
This is why, from 1996 to approximately 1999, Slashdot, with its feared cyberterror weapon "the Slashdotting", was widely considered the most powerful organization on earth.
Re:So wait... (Score:4, Funny)
It would be awesome if we could Slashdot this article, thus putting these n00bz in their place. Come on guys, just a few refreshes...
Re:So wait... (Score:5, Funny)
Don't try to frighten us with your nerd's ways. Your sad devotion to that ancient DDOS has not helped you conjure up the censored pr0n, or given you clairvoyance enough to find Cmdr Taco's hidden fortressNO CARRIER
Re: (Score:3)
This is why, from 1996 to approximately 1999, Slashdot, with its feared cyberterror weapon "the Slashdotting", was widely considered the most powerful organization on earth.
"RELEASE THE SLASHDOT!!"
Re:So wait... (Score:5, Funny)
According to Barnes & Noble, if you can use basic script kiddie tools you're basically the bad guy from Die Hard 4.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll have a reply to that in a minute, but right now I'm busy downloading the entire US financial system into my laptop from the backup mainframe. It will be a few minutes, tops.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Obligatory: http://xkcd.com/908/ [xkcd.com]
Re: (Score:2)
... but right now I'm busy downloading the entire US financial system into my laptop from the backup mainframe.
What? That's how it was done last century! Leave it there, forward copies to der Spiegel and Reuters, and just get on with rummaging around looking for the juicy dirt. Stop wasting time! If it's already on a drive accessible from the network, it's where you want it to be, yes?
Think like Linus. Make the world do your archiving for you. Sheesh, I gotta do *everybody's* thinking these days?!?
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely the most powerful. I don't know what they're waiting for. They should just go ahead and hold the world ransom.
ONE HUNDRED. BILLION. DOLLARS!! [youtube.com]
sounds about right.
Re: (Score:2)
They need a moon base first.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
What exactly is 'the issue'? Also, getting the online community to talk does not require power. On the other hand, getting the online community to shut up would demonstrate real power.
Re:So wait... (Score:5, Funny)
Same issue as ever, Pinky. People trying to take over the world.
Re: (Score:2)
What exactly is 'the issue'?
The same as it's always been; the !@#$heads "in power" shouldn't be. From corrupted politicians trying to buy themselves another term, to Scientology, to Gadaffi, to the MafiAA, to the dog's breakfast of TLAs and LEOs, to the old money corporations propped up via regulatory capture, ... This is how "Hope and Change" happens when too many people perceive themselves to have been lied to or victimized. Think 1776, and the Boston Tea Party. They dressed up like Native Americans. Anon just tries to stay ano
Powerful in their own minds, maybe (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Powerful in their own minds, maybe (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Powerful in their own minds, maybe (Score:5, Funny)
Ruthless efficiency? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Same will happen to anonymous. The idiots who run LOIC are easy enough to catch. I'm sure security and police agencies have already penetrated far deeper than that and have a few ringleaders in their sights.
Re:Powerful in their own minds, maybe (Score:4, Interesting)
15 years.
powerful in judges minds too. if that's real power or not is a wholly another matter..
thing with "anonymous" is though that potentially everyone is part of it. usually most "members" (probably like me and you) never do anything except maybe complain on forums about unjust sentences. this is pretty much also why most reporting on the issue is seriously fucked up. should just call them online flash mobs, that's what they are anyways.
(really, I guess he should have been out raping instead of flooding- hell, you could cause a real by blowing up a dam and claiming insanity and probably get off with less).
Re: (Score:3)
hell, you could cause a real by blowing up a dam and claiming insanity and probably get off with less
Probably even less if you claim you accidentally that real!
Re:Powerful in their own minds, maybe (Score:5, Interesting)
They're best known for DOS attacks, but Doyon claims in the interview that they do much more than this. For example, the article mentions gaining access to sensitive email databases. He claims they often don't even need to hack to obtain these, that they're being provided by people in governments/corporations.
Whether it's true or not, I don't know. All I'm saying is that the claim to power is based on more than website defacing that they're best known for.
The people (Score:5, Insightful)
Last I checked, the major players in the global financial network have actual power. And most central/federal governments, too.
Only the people have the actual power. Financiers, governments, crackers, drug cartels, religions, etc. exist solely at the will of the people.
Re:The people (Score:5, Informative)
Have you taken a good look around lately? The people got cut out of the loop decades ago. Time to wake up and smell the napalm.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Hmmm.... (Score:3)
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:5, Funny)
the US secrete service
Yes, those secretions are to be avoided at all costs.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
the US secrete service
Yes, those secretions are to be avoided at all costs.
They really dropped the ball during the Clinton administration.
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Indeed.
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:5, Funny)
the US secrete service
The sewer authority? I never knew.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you mean the Fred Durst Society of the Humanities and Arts. [cnn.com]
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:4, Funny)
the US secrete service
The sewer authority? I never knew.
80% of the US is on a sewer system, they can rain down a shit storm of epic proportions.
Re: (Score:3)
Think FSB, Mossad, the US secret service, or MI5
One of these does not really belong. For one thing, out of all of those you listed, the Secret Service is not an intelligence/national security apparatus. The Secret Service is tasked with 2 main things: protective services, and criminal investigations related to financial crimes (such as fraud). The more correct choice would have been the CIA, but even then, as an American, I'd rather take on the CIA and MI5 than the Mossad or FSB.
Re: (Score:3)
The list is even more confused than you point out. The FSB and MI5 are domestic counter-intelligence organisations, so their US counterpart would be the FBI; however, Mossad is a foreign intelligence agency, and counterpart to the CIA.
Re: (Score:3)
Isn't Imports & Customs Enforcement (ICE) part of the SS? Aren't they stealing net domains (with sealed indictments), charging foreigners with conspiracies, impounding privately held assets, etc., etc?
ICE is part of DHS. Secret Service is, I believe, still under the Treasury.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The expression is "free rein." It comes from horseback riding.
Really? (Score:5, Funny)
So how many guns and tanks does Anonymous control?
And yes, I realize this is like Stalin asking how many divisions the Pope has, but hey, at least I didn't Godwin it!
Re: (Score:3)
|So how many guns and tanks does Anonymous control?
Maybe all of them?
Re: (Score:2)
|So how many guns and tanks does Anonymous control?
Maybe all of them?
Just the ones that are networked.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Really? (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe that Adama fellow is right after all.
Re:Really? (Score:4, Interesting)
|So how many guns and tanks does Anonymous control?
Maybe all of them?
Never mind the tanks, it's the drones you need to be worried about. Fall out of the sky, dump payload on take-off, land safely in Iran, swap red for blue, just self destruct in mid-air... These things are flown over networks run by nerds, using code written by nerds, on hardware built by nerds. It's nerds all the way down.
This guy might have a point.
Power (Score:3, Insightful)
So far there are only two types of 'powerful organizations':
1. Governments, funded by tax payer money, using force (police, armed forces, etc.)
2. Corporations, funded by consumers and banks, using economic power
These two have a bit of a love-hate relationship, so their interactions are a fragile balance (how/how much to tax them, incentives, what they can get away with) and often work closely together (ACTA, TPP).
Having a new, unaligned powerhouse will of course upset that balance. The thing is the old adage 'power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely' will also apply to Anonymous.
Re:Power (Score:4, Interesting)
You forgot the criminal equivalents to each category. There are probably drug lords, pirates, etc. in certain parts of the world with economic and/or military power similar to that of a small nation, funded mostly or entirely by the proceeds of their crimes.
Re: (Score:3)
You forgot the criminal equivalents to each category.
Which, of course, is exactly what Anonymous is. The criminal equivalent to a bunch of bored web surfers.
And don't forget it! (Score:2)
"Most powerful on the planet!"
"We're still not having sex, nerd."
Ok, yeah, sure... (Score:5, Insightful)
So Anonymous first defines itself as being the collective voice of everybody (with a disproportionate representation of 4chan), then claims it's the most powerful organization in the world. Good for you, guys, really... Now you can take on the Tautology Club.
Unfortunately, I've just formed my own organization, called "Irresponsible", and everybody who doesn't know they're a part of Irresponsible is also a part of it! Because they're irresponsible in knowing what groups they're a part of, see? Since geological processes also don't take responsibility for their actions, they're also part of the organization. Who's the most powerful now, huh?
Now, Irresponsible! Scream at a wall! Tear down posters! Show how mad you are at everything that doesn't appease you by inconveniencing others!
Re: (Score:2)
Silly, Sarten-X - the Slashdot collective is the most powerful organization in the world. Um ... just look at how much influence alpha geeks have!
Somebody push this comment to the front page, m'kay?
Poseurs (Score:5, Interesting)
It's funny how if a group is *actually* powerful, you never see them making claims that they're powerful. Their actions say more than words.
Anonymous are just poseurs. Not only are they poseurs on world-scale power, they're poseurs on computer hacking, all they know how to do is run DoS attacks. They're an embarrassment.
Re:Poseurs (Score:5, Interesting)
Exactly. It seems to me that in order to be considered 'powerful' you must be capable of making others bend to your will. Exactly what has this so-called 'powerful' organization done other than annoy people?
Re: (Score:2)
all they know how to do is run DoS attacks
They've done a few e-mail archive thefts too. Some informative ones at that.
Just using the collective pronoun hurts, though.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Anonymous Member says... (Score:2)
Anonymous member says something stupid. News at 11.
Sure to be followed up by doing something stupid.
Murderers get less time in jail (Score:2)
The old people that run the USA seem to be major technophobe. I'm surprised they don't arrest people for knowing how to program computers.
I bet he would have gotten less than 2 years if her used a paintball gun to deface the court house instead of the web site.
Re:Murderers get less time in jail (Score:4, Insightful)
Can we stop with this stupid meme already? 15 years is the MAXIMUM sentence he COULD receive if convicted on all counts. Do you know what the maximum sentence is for murder? Life in prison without possibility of parole, or death, depending on where you are.
Online graffiti bigger than H-Bombs and money (Score:2)
Sure sure. Of COURSE it is.....
IPO (Score:4, Funny)
Um... no. (Score:2)
Big talk from a guy in hiding.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless Anon can call in an airstrike, or single-handedly cripple a first-world nation's financial system, they don't know what "power" is. Big talk from a guy in hiding.
Yeah the only thing that can cripple a first world financial system is a first world financial system.
Most Annoying Maybe (Score:2)
Of course it's silly, BUT... (Score:5, Interesting)
Anonymous is another (clearly not the first) example of what I'll for lack of a better term, call a "virtual nation".
It's obvious that the internet allows rapid worldwide communication. It's also obvious that it allows new aggregations of people to sort themselves out - that you can draw together like-minded people from all over the globe.
What's less-than-obvious is to call these aggregates "virtual nations".
But take a look at it from a slightly different perspective. People whose primary news source is Fox news live in the Unites States of America, and are quite proud of the fact. People whose primary news source is NPR also live in the United States of America, and are also quite proud of that fact. But when you ask the two groups of people what they thing the United States of America really is, beyond simple geographic attributes, you get two very different answers, two very different sets of allegiances. It's almost like they live in different nations. Perhaps in some sort of virtual way, they do.
But perhaps the best and worst example of a virtual nation is Al Qaeda. There is a group of people whose allegiance has little to do with physical boarders. Their sense of belonging, their cause, their peers transcend the mere physical. (Note that interesting characteristics don't make it good, and in this case, far from it.)
Anonymous is a less mature, less cohesive, less dangerous version.
Occupy Anonymous (Score:2, Funny)
Anyone can be a part of Anonymous (Score:2)
Nobody suspects the Belgians (Score:2)
Lets face it, the power of the Belgians is NOT the stuff of legend... the only hint you ever really had was the brief appearance of Jean-Claude Van Damme when he decided to dabble in acting.
Anonymous has NOTHING on the Belgians, or maybe they are the Belgians...?
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VxtEGsssxE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vD1Usk0DYc0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIUlVAjsIFw
Very well... (Score:2)
It appears it has become time to abandon the Slashdot comments section.
"Commander X" (Score:4, Interesting)
The most powerful organization on the planet doesn't give interviews from an undisclosed location.
I like what Anonymous represents, and much of the hacking that they've engaged in has had a populist appeal, but they are self-limited by their anonymity, and obviously they're no more the drivers of our social change than OBL was . . . he also gave his interviews from an undisclosed location.
If I were Anonymous or a member thereof, I'd be looking for a wealthy socially-conscious sponsor to legitimize what I was doing . . . and take the conversation they are trying to have out in the open, where it can't be dismissed.
Until they do that, they're just going to be treated like cyber-terrorists. I suspect that the need that Anonymous is attempting to fill will be met by someone else, wiser and cleverer.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, it is fitting that you chose those three examples, because they do perfectly illustrate the situation.
Ghandi and Rosa Parks (and other civil rights leaders) were not anonymous. You knew who they were. They did not hide out like cowards. They were willing to undergo much personal sacrifice for what they believed in. And perhaps most importantly, you knew exactly what they were unhappy with, and you knew exactly what changes they wanted to remedy the situation. The situations they put themselves
FBI (Score:2)
Yet the "most powerful organization on Earth" needs to skip borders to run away from the FBI.
Meh. (Score:3)
Anonymous are loud-mouthed vandals and computer criminals. I give a big cheer whenever law-enforcement officials catch some of them.
They give hackers a bad name.
not that powerful (yet) (Score:2)
Most powerful? (Score:2)
If Anonymous is so powerful, then why is one of its major "leaders" hiding in Canada?
15 years? (Score:4, Interesting)
He defaced a non-critical local government website. It did not cause any disruption of important services, he did not benefit fiancially or in any other tangible way, and the attack only lasted 30 minutes.
For that he gets a penalty similar to what he'd get if he'd committed murder one. wow.
Not that I condone the crime, but any system that far out of touch with reality deserves to be taken down.
Re: (Score:3)
Is it me, or are there others that see the irony in calling Anonymous "douchebag vandals" but only posting as ACs?
I think Anonymous, by this interview, may have a self-inflated view of themselves, but no more than many others. WikiLeaks, IMHO, has done more change for good. But if nothing else, they've sold billions in new security infrastructure... that probably won't work.
Re: (Score:2)
Quite the opposite, I believe, but in a different vector.
Anonymous Cowards perhaps may fear retribution. I don't doubt that Geeknet's user db would crack like an egg, given the right resources, and perhaps already has been breached, but I have no knowledge of this.... just a guess.
So it's easy to say bad stuff about Big Bad Anonymous if you're an AC, is my point.
Re: (Score:2)
They are a bunch of douche bags, they are not doing change for good. They are soley seeking profit (See the Sony incident).
Matt
Re: (Score:3)
Right, this is almost like a False Flag. (Guy identified by both his full name and Anonymous Handle) at an "undisclosed location"?
So won't two calls to your friends at the agencies connect the dots? ("Hello Motor Vehicles Dept, where does this guy live and what does he drive?")
Someone is building a figurative version of that ring they use to stop forest fires around Anonymous, of which this guy is a part.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And I think you missed my point.
The concept of Anonymous is that whether it has a spokesman at all is dubious, but if they were going to talk to a "Commander X", why then give his full name? Why is that somehow important to the credentials to make sure the interview is good?
"Hi my name is X and I am in Anonymous. Here's a list of another 100 people by name and handle, and they are Anonymous too."
Re: (Score:2)