MegaUpload shut down. Hackers hit back.

[Roy Karrde]

Wow I never thought Anonymous could become even worse scum bags but...

The hacktivist collective Anonymous is in the middle of a huge revenge spree after the Feds shut down popular filesharing site Megaupload. But they're using an evil new tactic that tricks people into helping their attack if they click an innocuous link.

The Department of Justice, MPAA and Universal Music websites have all been taken down in the past hour as part of Operation Megaupload, which is shaping up to be the biggest Anonymous campaign in months.

Here's one reason they've been able to muster so much firepower: Anonymous members are distributing a link that ropes internet users into an illegal DDoS attack against these websites simply by clicking it. The link is being shared widely on Twitter and in Anonymous chat rooms, often with no context except that it relates to Operation Megaload. I clicked it a few minutes ago because it was being spammed in an Anonymous chatroom and found myself instantly DDoSing Universalmusic.com, my computer rapidly pinging the page with no way to stop except quickly closing the window.

The link is a page on the anonymous web hosting site pastehtml. It link loads a web-based version of the program Anonymous has used for years to DDoS websites: Low Orbit Ion Cannon. (LOIC). When activated, LOIC rapidly reloads a target website, and if enough users point LOIC at a site at once, it can crash from the traffic. Judging from a Twitter search, the link is being shared at a rate of about 4 times a minute, mostly by Spanish-speaking users, for some reason. (Here's a link to the Twitter search, just don't click the PasteHTML link.)

The thing is, DDoSing is a criminal offense that could earn you 10 years in prison, if you do it intentionally. With previous versions of LOIC, participants had to acknowledge this risk and press a button labeled "fire." But now, it appears some enterprising anonymous member has retooled it so that it automatically fires if you click an unassuming link and leave a window open.

This is completely evil and could lead to huge numbers of witless internet users inadvertently attacking, say, the Department of Justice by clicking a random link they stumble across on Twitter. It also renders today's attacks largely meaningless. Anonymous' previous attacks had what political power they had because they were acts of conscious protest; participants knew what they were getting into. This recent round seems to be not much better than a Facebook worm. The safest thing now would be to avoid clicking anything to do with operation megaupload or Anonymous—especially if it's a mysterious Pastehtml link.

http://gawker.com/5877707/the-evil-n...revenge-attack

[Heald]

Wow I never thought Anonymous could become even worse scum bags but...



http://gawker.com/5877707/the-evil-n...revenge-attack

Not that I support hacktivism, or, indeed, duping unwitting people into clicking links that automatically perform an illegal activity, but the US Justice department shot first. By allowing itself to become the enforcement wing of the American movie and music industries, it is alienating itself from ordinary people who are denied basic justice everyday whilst giving the image that it will only serve and protect those who are rich enough to lobby Congress to get bills passed through the back-door.

Was Megaupload a bastion of illegal file-sharing? Yes, but like Napster before it, shutting it down won't do squat. Megaupload is merely the most high-profile of such sites. Besides, a lot of traffic on these sites is actually legitimate.

The movie and music industries have not changed their businesses models since 1990, and their refusal to adapt to new technologies is the reason why they are losing money, not piracy. They should attack the Internet and throw a huge hissy-fit just because they don't understand how the modern world works.

[Roy Karrde]

Not that I support hacktivism, or, indeed, duping unwitting people into clicking links that automatically perform an illegal activity, but the US Justice department shot first. By allowing itself to become the enforcement wing of the American movie and music industries, it is alienating itself from ordinary people who are denied basic justice everyday whilst giving the image that it will only serve and protect those who are rich enough to lobby Congress to get bills passed through the back-door.

Was Megaupload a bastion of illegal file-sharing? Yes, but like Napster before it, shutting it down won't do squat. Megaupload is merely the most high-profile of such sites. Besides, a lot of traffic on these sites is actually legitimate.

The movie and music industries have not changed their businesses models since 1990, and their refusal to adapt to new technologies is the reason why they are losing money, not piracy. They should attack the Internet and throw a huge hissy-fit just because they don't understand how the modern world works.

Here is the thing it doesn't matter who shot first, you do not go around and deface and attack other people's property just because you think something wrong happened. As the protest last Wednesday showed, change can be brought about through legal protests. If some one I knew was arrested on charges I thought were wrong, I am not going to go bust out windows of police cars, or bar the doors shut on the local police station. What they did was wrong. Period.

For Megaupload, it doesn't matter how much of their traffic was legal, they were still dealing in illegal materials as well as other charges. Its like the crack dealer saying "Hey 50% of the stuff I sell is legal!" it doesn't matter.

As for the Music Industry, it is still their product, they can throw a hissy fit all they want, it is their products being stolen. I know as a Game Designer if I saw one of the games I had spent years working on being downloaded illegally off the net I would be really pissed as well and want it shut down. Because that is not only a product I spent so much work and time making being stolen, but because by stealing it they are taking royalties away from me and my family.

[Heald]

Here is the thing it doesn't matter who shot first, you do not go around and deface and attack other people's property just because you think something wrong happened.

That's why I said I don't support it, but when legal avenues are exhausted (basically the industries have put their fingers in their ears, screaming that censoring the Internet is a price worth paying to ensure a few less people pirate stuff and continuing to defecate on the basic foundations of democracy by paying the government in order to legislate and enforce laws that no one supports) people are left with no other action but to take less legitimate avenues to vent their discontent.

For Megaupload, it doesn't matter how much of their traffic was legal, they were still dealing in illegal materials as well as other charges. Its like the crack dealer saying "Hey 50% of the stuff I sell is legal!" it doesn't matter.

The drug dealer analogy doesn't work, and personally I don't think you're stupid enough to really believe that it does. This is really no different to many other websites that make their money off content for which they do not have the copyrights nor have they sought the correct copyrights for (Youtube, ebaums, anime streaming websites etc.). Megaupload isn't even the worst offender, it is just the most high profile. This is just like the war on torrents, they went for the Pirate Bay but they lost that war because it was completely impractical and unenforceable to try and shut down every illegal torrent. I'm not saying it's right to let websites earn money off the hard work but paying the US government to make it so you can chase these people off isn't right to. This is why SOPA and PIPA is a big deal: the record and movie industries already have the US government on a leash, as the Megaupload shut down shows. SOPA and PIPA would just formalise the relationship between the two as the record and movie industries as master and the US government as attack dog. Furthermore, it would allow the industries to order the government to attack on command and on a balance of probabilities that favour the industries far more than it does now.

It comes down to a complete lack on the industries' part to adjust their business model for the digital age. On the whole, the video game industry has reacted remarkably well (perhaps because of the greater exposure the industry and their main customer base has to emerging technologies), since, despite a few high profile cock-ups (EA's minimum 3 installs, Ubisoft's always-on DRM, Half-Life 2's online activation) the industry has put in the work for providing a decent range of platforms that offer a much better alternative to pirating. Instead of spending all this money lobbying their US government, maybe the music and movie industries should invest that money into providing better services for their customers and lowering prices, so that people will want to buy product instead of pirate. In the UK, CD prices and movie ticket prices are astronomically expensive, and as a result stores that specialise in selling CDs and movies are going down the pan. The reason people aren't purchasing product isn't because they are pirating it, it is because it is too highly priced. Musicians that have taken themselves away from the record labels and actually marketing their product by themselves seem to do remarkably better as a result as you don't have a label taking most of your profits.

As for the Music Industry, it is still their product, they can throw a hissy fit all they want, it is their products being stolen. I know as a Game Designer if I saw one of the games I had spent years working on being downloaded illegally off the net I would be really pissed as well and want it shut down. Because that is not only a product I spent so much work and time making being stolen, but because by stealing it they are taking royalties away from me and my family.

It's a fact that one pirated download doesn't equal a lost sale, as much as the MPAA would like you to believe. Most people who pirate wouldn't buy the product if pirating wasn't an option. For every critic of the internet, you'll find as many supporters who enjoy the exposure that they gain through people sharing their work. It is noted that piracy can often lead to higher exposure and more sales of a product. To get to a point where people want to pirate your product, you must already be selling enough to gain that exposure. I'm not saying that it's right or ideal, but it's just being realistic. Just like a grocers who has to take into account the occasional smashed box of eggs or smashed bottle of milk, you have to take into account that if you decide to enter an industry where your product can be pirated and you should adapt your business model to reflect that. Realistically, nothing that is sensible or practical without enforcing a China-style internet blockade of everything but approved websites will stop pirating. Those that continue to bitch and whine about it while the rest of the pack does adjust their business models accordingly will be left in the dust.

[Roy Karrde]

The drug dealer analogy doesn't work, and personally I don't think you're stupid enough to really believe that it does. This is really no different to many other websites that make their money off content for which they do not have the copyrights nor have they sought the correct copyrights for (Youtube, ebaums, anime streaming websites etc.). Megaupload isn't even the worst offender, it is just the most high profile.

Yeah looking at what they are accused of its hard to say that they are the same as any of those websites. From money laundering to actually paying pirates to put up illegal materials they have gone way beyond Youtube and the rest.

It's a fact that one pirated download doesn't equal a lost sale, as much as the MPAA would like you to believe. Most people who pirate wouldn't buy the product if pirating wasn't an option. For every critic of the internet, you'll find as many supporters who enjoy the exposure that they gain through people sharing their work. It is noted that piracy can often lead to higher exposure and more sales of a product. To get to a point where people want to pirate your product, you must already be selling enough to gain that exposure. I'm not saying that it's right or ideal, but it's just being realistic. Just like a grocers who has to take into account the occasional smashed box of eggs or smashed bottle of milk, you have to take into account that if you decide to enter an industry where your product can be pirated and you should adapt your business model to reflect that. Realistically, nothing that is sensible or practical without enforcing a China-style internet blockade of everything but approved websites will stop pirating. Those that continue to bitch and whine about it while the rest of the pack does adjust their business models accordingly will be left in the dust.

I really couldn't care less about the MPAA and music, I am talking about the pirating of video games. In which even if a third of those pirated were to have bought the games, that could mean the difference between a designer receiving a bonus or not. Unlike the music and movie industry, those that make games are not filthy rich, and like it or not it is utterly ignorant to believe that everyone that pirates the game would not have gone out and bought it otherwise.

[Heald]

Yeah looking at what they are accused of its hard to say that they are the same as any of those websites. From money laundering to actually paying pirates to put up illegal materials they have gone way beyond Youtube and the rest.

I'm going to wait for the outcome of any trial before I make any judgements.

it is utterly ignorant to believe that everyone that pirates the game would not have gone out and bought it otherwise.

Ignorant isn't the right word here, and I never said everyone, just most, which really is the case. Most people who have the money to buy games will buy them, as games are pretty cheap comparatively speaking and the physical, legitimate copy is much better than the pirated copy, meaning its worth paying the dough. Not many people pirate INSTEAD of parting with cash, if someone wants to play a game bad enough, they will buy it. Those who do pirate are do so because they don't feel like parting with the money, and before downloading big files over the internet became viable people avoided purchasing in other ways (ripping CDs, borrowing/lending games, renting etc.). It is completely naive to believe shutting down the big file-sharing websites will provide any kind of boost to video game sales.

[Roy Karrde]

I'm going to wait for the outcome of any trial before I make any judgements.

Fair enough but until then the argument that they are just like Youtube does not really float.

Ignorant isn't the right word here, and I never said everyone, just most, which really is the case. Most people who have the money to buy games will buy them, as games are pretty cheap comparatively speaking and the physical, legitimate copy is much better than the pirated copy, meaning its worth paying the dough. Not many people pirate INSTEAD of parting with cash, if someone wants to play a game bad enough, they will buy it. Those who do pirate are do so because they don't feel like parting with the money, and before downloading big files over the internet became viable people avoided purchasing in other ways (ripping CDs, borrowing/lending games, renting etc.). It is completely naive to believe shutting down the big file-sharing websites will provide any kind of boost to video game sales.

It probably will, again will everyone buy the game that pirates? No probably not. But even a third, even a tenth that buys it, is money going back to the developers who worked long and hard on it. Not to mention there is a bit of a disrespect factor going in. Again like I said personally if I saw people downloading it, a product I had worked on for years, I would be pissed. As I don't know if you are going to buy it or not, no one is a mind reader in that. But either way by downloading it and not buying it, you are disrespecting all the people who worked on it, and for some, taking money that should rightfully go to them.