Welcome Guest.   Make a donation to an author on the site September 30, 2014, 12:59:29 AM  *

Please login or register.
Or did you miss your validation email?


Login with username and password (forgot your password?)
Why not become a lifetime supporting member of the site with a one-time donation of any amount? Your donation entitles you to a ton of additional benefits, including access to exclusive discounts and downloads, the ability to enter monthly free software drawings, and a single non-expiring license key for all of our programs.


You must sign up here before you can post and access some areas of the site. Registration is totally free and confidential.
 
Read the full one-year retrospective report on DonationCoder.com.
   
   Forum Home   Thread Marks Chat! Downloads Search Login Register  
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Down
  Reply  |  New Topic  |  Print  
Author Topic: DDOS Ethics  (Read 7243 times)
Stoic Joker
Honorary Member
**
Posts: 5,263



View Profile WWW Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #25 on: December 12, 2010, 12:58:10 PM »

But in these cases, the information is of questionable use, while causing real concern about diplomatic ties and future effectiveness.  I think it's pretty dangerous, personally.

Really? Why? Because some self important blow hard got caught popping off in an internal memo about a foreign dignitary? How about in the interest of professionalism (which isn't too much to expect given what they're paid...) they just kept the snide comments to themselves instead of documenting them on government servers where they're supposed to be archived forever?

It is absolutely no different then two IT pros leaving a location and (after accidentally butt-dialing said client) running the client into the ground. End result? somebody looses a client, and/or gets fired. Quite simple really, don't say anything that you're not willing to stand behind.

...This is the core premise behind why drunken ramblings are bad.

These aren't drunken ramblings, they are talks between colleagues in order to spread opinions and snap analyses, and weren't spread publicly.

It's an analogy, not a direct reference. The point being if you don't want to risk being quoted on something, don't say it.

In the interest of full disclosure all internal correspondence are to be stored for a period of time just in case they need to be reviewed by a committee of unknown people. So, tossing derogatory comments about foreign dignitaries around (which was "the rub" according to the main stream news reports) in that atmosphere is really pretty dumb ... As there is no actual expectation-of-privacy.

Sure Wikileaks short-stroked this to a much larger crowd than anticipated, but hay... Once again... For a group of people that are paid specifically for their ability to brilliantly articulate delicate subjects in a tactful manner... There almost just had to be another way of phrasing what ever it is that they said that would have been just as clear yet (some how) less abrasive ... Don't Ya think?


You are going to play the morality/ethics card for credit card companies and banks? Huge fortunes built on corpses and cocaine that haven't paid a dime in taxes because they pride themselves on tax (evasion) "loop-holes" that typically involve storing (hiding) money in other countries.

That's such absurd hyperbole that I won't bother to respond.

Funny really, some folks seem to understand that part quite well. antidisestablishmentarianism much?


Aside from the morality argument, you haven't addressed my point about the attacks being bad tactics (because they may give incentives for other companies to stay away).

You attempted to address the point about bad strategy:
Do you really think the government needs an incentive to strip away additional rights and freedoms?
But this isn't quite right. Of course they don't need any incentive. What they do need is an excuse, some rationalization that they can claim is the reason they need to do this. The fact that millions of dollars in revenue were lost because some of our most important commercial institutions were crippled by terrorists -- and that this happened during the Christmas shopping season, so mommy couldn't buy that doll for little Suzy -- proves that the government is needed to protect the citizens. The DDoS attacks give that fig leaf of rationalization (even though we both know there's nothing they could do about it anyway), and this is the opposite of what (I assume) the Anonymous folks want.


Keep your head down. Don't rock the boat. Don't make waves. Do what you're told. These are all popular phrases quipped by people that wish to keep individuality to a minimum so the line remains toed and the status quo enforced. Strangely nothing great has ever been accomplished this way.

Incentive vs. excuse, semantics - opposite sides of the same coin. Both words work perfectly in my sentence above. The point is the government gets what the government wants because it can and will spin-doctor anything into anything for the purpose of attaining a goal regardless of any (inconvenient) facts that may stand in the way. Much like the spaceship weather balloon that made Roswell New Mexico so popular back in the 40s. The only viable roadblock is to get enough people interested in what all the hub-bub is about that they stop and look into what is actually going on instead of just reflexively buying the party line. Then and only then, can you can get a grass-roots movement going that will have a chance of stopping the hammer from falling.

Now as far as tactics go. Is it considered to be a proper and acceptable tactic to try and silence ones opponent by filling all of the available space for communication with senseless chatter solely for the purpose of preventing them from stating their business in a timely fashion, even if this denies them of their right to a proper say? The answer to this - according to the rules of parliamentary procedure - is simply, yes. It's called a filibuster.

If the US government goes after this guy as a terrorist, for tattling on the US government it will most likely blowup in their faces by lending credence to his claims that they are indeed lying and hiding behind half-truths.
Logged
40hz
Supporting Member
**
Posts: 10,674



see users location on a map View Profile Read user's biography. Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #26 on: December 12, 2010, 01:15:50 PM »

I'm guessing that with Wikileaks effectively shut down (now that most future sources of information will be thinking twice) the whole incident will be allowed to fade into the background.

I also wouldn't be surprised if several of the principles involved eventually wound up: being arrested and convicted on some serious but unrelated criminal charge; overdosing on drugs or alcohol; committing suicide; or running their cars off deserted roads with no witnesses should they continue to embarass national governments after this.

Sad truth: you play in the big leagues, it's always for high stakes - and it's played for keeps.  Sad

 
« Last Edit: December 12, 2010, 01:19:36 PM by 40hz » Logged

Don't you see? It's turtles all the way down!
Stoic Joker
Honorary Member
**
Posts: 5,263



View Profile WWW Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #27 on: December 12, 2010, 03:20:36 PM »

I also wouldn't be surprised if several of the principles involved eventually wound up: being arrested and convicted on some serious but unrelated criminal charge; overdosing on drugs or alcohol; committing suicide; or running their cars off deserted roads with no witnesses should they continue to embarass national governments after this.

History is rather full of strange (but timely for some) accidents isn't it.
Logged
f0dder
Charter Honorary Member
***
Posts: 8,774



[Well, THAT escalated quickly!]

see users location on a map View Profile WWW Read user's biography. Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #28 on: December 12, 2010, 04:46:01 PM »

I'm guessing that with Wikileaks effectively shut down (now that most future sources of information will be thinking twice) the whole incident will be allowed to fade into the background.
...and I wonder if the people participating in WikiLeaks really didn't expect this coming? I was a bit surprised that it took so long before the heavy artillery was brought in.

I think it's a really big shame that WL started off by leaking, in the bigger perspective, not so saucy stuff. But of course, if they hadn't started off smallish, they probably wouldn't have got enough attention to get "really good stuff".
Logged

- carpe noctem
Renegade
Charter Member
***
Posts: 11,433



Tell me something you don't know...

see users location on a map View Profile WWW Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #29 on: December 12, 2010, 06:06:21 PM »

Given the timing, it seems like the rape charges are "Julian's accident".

Logged

Slow Down Music - Where I commit thought crimes...

Freedom is the right to be wrong, not the right to do wrong. - John Diefenbaker
40hz
Supporting Member
**
Posts: 10,674



see users location on a map View Profile Read user's biography. Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #30 on: December 13, 2010, 07:11:44 AM »

^ I his case, I'm afraid the current set of charges are just the opening act in a much larger tragic opera he's about to play a role in.

I wish him luck with that. He'll need it. Especially if his "real" crime was nothing more than pissing off the wrong people. Because that's a "crime" you don't get to walk away from without first getting seriously hurt.

The law is often lenient when dealing with real criminal offenses. However, it is seldom more arbitrary and brutal than when it's dealing with what it sees as an insult, or a challenge to it's authority.





Logged

Don't you see? It's turtles all the way down!
Renegade
Charter Member
***
Posts: 11,433



Tell me something you don't know...

see users location on a map View Profile WWW Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #31 on: December 13, 2010, 07:58:38 AM »

The law is often lenient when dealing with real criminal offenses. However, it is seldom more arbitrary and brutal than when it's dealing with what it sees as an insult, or a challenge to it's authority.

+1. And it's very sad... But you know... Some animals are more equal than others...
Logged

Slow Down Music - Where I commit thought crimes...

Freedom is the right to be wrong, not the right to do wrong. - John Diefenbaker
40hz
Supporting Member
**
Posts: 10,674



see users location on a map View Profile Read user's biography. Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #32 on: December 13, 2010, 08:09:48 AM »

And humans are still primates after all.  And as such, they behave accordingly.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2010, 08:16:15 AM by 40hz » Logged

Don't you see? It's turtles all the way down!
wraith808
Supporting Member
**
Posts: 6,328



"In my dreams, I always do it right."

see users location on a map View Profile WWW Read user's biography. Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #33 on: December 13, 2010, 08:47:42 AM »

These aren't drunken ramblings, they are talks between colleagues in order to spread opinions and snap analyses, and weren't spread publicly.

It's an analogy, not a direct reference. The point being if you don't want to risk being quoted on something, don't say it.

In the interest of full disclosure all internal correspondence are to be stored for a period of time just in case they need to be reviewed by a committee of unknown people. So, tossing derogatory comments about foreign dignitaries around (which was "the rub" according to the main stream news reports) in that atmosphere is really pretty dumb ... As there is no actual expectation-of-privacy.
[/quote]

I understand the incorrect analogy (Wink), it's just that it's incorrect.  In one case, there is no expectation of privacy.  In the other case, there is, at least amongst your colleagues, considering the brand of classified.  So you can make frank comments to your colleagues.  Whether they should be is a whole different conversation, and one you have before outing someone's comments that were made under that seal.  It would be like me telling you that I would hold what you say in confidence, then decide after you tell me in confidence that I think that everyone should hear it.  And many of these communiques included information from third parties that were sources in the diplomatic community.  I'm pretty sure that those sources are not very confident in our ability to keep communications private at this point... and for what concrete benefit was this done?  Was there anything that came out of this that was an undeniable benefit to the people that this is supposedly serving?
Logged

40hz
Supporting Member
**
Posts: 10,674



see users location on a map View Profile Read user's biography. Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #34 on: December 13, 2010, 03:23:07 PM »

Once again, the drawing talents of the marvelous Mr. Fish helps put it all in perspective:



Logged

Don't you see? It's turtles all the way down!
f0dder
Charter Honorary Member
***
Posts: 8,774



[Well, THAT escalated quickly!]

see users location on a map View Profile WWW Read user's biography. Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #35 on: December 13, 2010, 03:24:23 PM »

Once again, the drawing talents of the marvelous Mr. Fish helps put it all in perspective:
That's pretty awesome, 40hz.
Logged

- carpe noctem
40hz
Supporting Member
**
Posts: 10,674



see users location on a map View Profile Read user's biography. Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #36 on: December 13, 2010, 03:29:24 PM »

^Yeah.. his real name is Dwayne Boothe.
His stuff just slays me sometimes.  Thmbsup
Logged

Don't you see? It's turtles all the way down!
Stoic Joker
Honorary Member
**
Posts: 5,263



View Profile WWW Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #37 on: December 13, 2010, 06:12:52 PM »

Gotta fix the quote tags on that last one man, I'm gonna have a hell of a time trying to stitch this back together.

Quote from: wraith808
These aren't drunken ramblings, they are talks between colleagues in order to spread opinions and snap analyses, and weren't spread publicly.

It's an analogy, not a direct reference. The point being if you don't want to risk being quoted on something, don't say it.

In the interest of full disclosure all internal correspondence are to be stored for a period of time just in case they need to be reviewed by a committee of unknown people. So, tossing derogatory comments about foreign dignitaries around (which was "the rub" according to the main stream news reports) in that atmosphere is really pretty dumb ... As there is no actual expectation-of-privacy.

I understand the incorrect analogy (Wink), it's just that it's incorrect.

Just because you missed the connection doesn't mean it's not there. smiley

Drunken ramblings tend to be a bit too honest (tactless) - Which the commentary was (according to the story). And they tend to be a bit too sure of their surroundings (as in the-walls-have-ears) - Expectation of privacy being a foolish notion with certain types of information. Like the type of information that may, at some time, need to be read aloud in some committee hearing. Solely because it was available-to-be-read because it was stored electronically, according to policy, for a small eternity.

Never make a record of something that you can't destroy if the situation calls for it.

Now back in the Good Ol' Days, before idiots were allowed to use computers, any truly sensitive information dealing with a confidential source that was written down used a code name for the purpose of protecting said sources identity (Like Deep-Throat from Watergate - What was his real name?) ... Just in case it got found or confiscated.

The secrets game is just that, a game. And a damn dangerous one at that. It's not a bunch of frumpy old women at a coffee clutch who have to state their sources to lend credence to their tales of gossip. Once you decide to be a source you become a commodity pawn in a large game where you could easily be traded for another more tantalizing piece of information. Or you could just trust the wrong person who doesn't handle your identity in an appropriate fashion and blabs in an indiscreet manner. There is no guarantee of privacy on a corporate network. There are measures in place, there are policies, there are all the best of intentions ... But There Are NO Guarantees.


Now as far as what if anything was gained from said leakage... I've not a clue. It could be nothing, it could be the staff in DC learn that loose lips sink ships in glass houses.



@40Hz - Love the cartoon!
Logged
wraith808
Supporting Member
**
Posts: 6,328



"In my dreams, I always do it right."

see users location on a map View Profile WWW Read user's biography. Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #38 on: December 13, 2010, 10:54:22 PM »

Gotta fix the quote tags on that last one man, I'm gonna have a hell of a time trying to stitch this back together.

Quote from: wraith808
These aren't drunken ramblings, they are talks between colleagues in order to spread opinions and snap analyses, and weren't spread publicly.

It's an analogy, not a direct reference. The point being if you don't want to risk being quoted on something, don't say it.

In the interest of full disclosure all internal correspondence are to be stored for a period of time just in case they need to be reviewed by a committee of unknown people. So, tossing derogatory comments about foreign dignitaries around (which was "the rub" according to the main stream news reports) in that atmosphere is really pretty dumb ... As there is no actual expectation-of-privacy.

I understand the incorrect analogy (Wink), it's just that it's incorrect.

Just because you missed the connection doesn't mean it's not there. smiley

Drunken ramblings tend to be a bit too honest (tactless) - Which the commentary was (according to the story). And they tend to be a bit too sure of their surroundings (as in the-walls-have-ears) - Expectation of privacy being a foolish notion with certain types of information. Like the type of information that may, at some time, need to be read aloud in some committee hearing. Solely because it was available-to-be-read because it was stored electronically, according to policy, for a small eternity.

Never make a record of something that you can't destroy if the situation calls for it.

Now back in the Good Ol' Days, before idiots were allowed to use computers, any truly sensitive information dealing with a confidential source that was written down used a code name for the purpose of protecting said sources identity (Like Deep-Throat from Watergate - What was his real name?) ... Just in case it got found or confiscated.

The secrets game is just that, a game. And a damn dangerous one at that. It's not a bunch of frumpy old women at a coffee clutch who have to state their sources to lend credence to their tales of gossip. Once you decide to be a source you become a commodity pawn in a large game where you could easily be traded for another more tantalizing piece of information. Or you could just trust the wrong person who doesn't handle your identity in an appropriate fashion and blabs in an indiscreet manner. There is no guarantee of privacy on a corporate network. There are measures in place, there are policies, there are all the best of intentions ... But There Are NO Guarantees.


Now as far as what if anything was gained from said leakage... I've not a clue. It could be nothing, it could be the staff in DC learn that loose lips sink ships in glass houses.

Still not a direct analogy.  These people have to share information for the purposes of doing their jobs- it's not just a game of gossip at the company party.  Wasn't that one of the main criticisms that were leveled after 9/11?  That they didn't share information?  And now that they are, we're saying that they're wrong for it?  It's classified for a reason- it's not supposed to be shared.  And as I said, knowing this, you do have a reasonable expectation of privacy.  I don't think that Assange broke this expectation- whomever gave him the documents did.  Once that happened, it was up to his moral compass to decide what to do with it.  But whomever did break the contracts that they signed to allow them to have access to this documentation should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
Logged

Renegade
Charter Member
***
Posts: 11,433



Tell me something you don't know...

see users location on a map View Profile WWW Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #39 on: December 14, 2010, 06:11:32 PM »

Once again, the drawing talents of the marvelous Mr. Fish helps put it all in perspective:
 (see attachment in previous post)


Simply awesome~! A wonderful analogy.
Logged

Slow Down Music - Where I commit thought crimes...

Freedom is the right to be wrong, not the right to do wrong. - John Diefenbaker
Tuxman
Supporting Member
**
Posts: 1,478


OMG not him again!

View Profile WWW Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #40 on: December 16, 2010, 12:30:43 PM »

Haha, I love RMS' reaction to all these DDOS thingies. "DDOS is bad because the application which does them is not open source".  Grin
Logged

I bet when Cheetahs race and one of them cheats, the other one goes "Man, you're such a Cheetah!" and they laugh & eat a zebra or whatever.
- @VeryGrumpyCat
PeterRossy
Participant
*
Posts: 17


View Profile Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #41 on: December 17, 2010, 07:47:10 AM »

That sounds funny...how can such a black hat technique hav it's ethics? cheesy
Logged
40hz
Supporting Member
**
Posts: 10,674



see users location on a map View Profile Read user's biography. Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #42 on: December 17, 2010, 09:12:51 AM »

That sounds funny...how can such a black hat technique hav it's ethics? cheesy

Oooo..interesting point!  Thmbsup
Logged

Don't you see? It's turtles all the way down!
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Up
  Reply  |  New Topic  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  
   Forum Home   Thread Marks Chat! Downloads Search Login Register  

DonationCoder.com | About Us
DonationCoder.com Forum | Powered by SMF
[ Page time: 0.05s | Server load: 0.1 ]