Re: Re: Timorese 'hacktivists' warn of revenge

[xdaydreamx@gmx.net]

[: hacktivism :]

The problem seems to be whether or not one can call such 
actions "hacktivism" or not. On the one hand BroncBuster 
says that groups such as those threatening to attack 
the Indonesian government and economy should not be grouped 
under the term "hacktivists". Others uphold that what 
they are doing is necessary and just and that this 
corresponds to their understanding of what "hacktivism" 
means. The essence is that people disagree on what are 
appropriate means and ends.
 Is this surprising? No, of course not. Whenever the 
politically active come together they will disagree 
simply because people come from different backgrounds 
and different experiences. Of course somebody who has 
enjoyed an upbringing in a liberal democractic country 
will have a very different attitude to somebody who has 
experienced state or non-state violence and oppression. 
And scores of people writing on an email list from loads 
of different places are _going_to_disagree_. That is, 
after all, what discussion is about. So far, you probably 
think, I'm stating the obvious.
 So if we are going to disagree on the means and ends,
maybe we should get away from giving the term "hacktivist/m" 
a normative meaning. Instead of insisting that all 
"hacktivists" must be law-abiding robin hoods or not 
call themselves/ be called "hacktivists", the term could 
be more useful if applied to any form of "hacking activism", 
whether we approve of it or not. There is no point in saying 
such and such a group are not hacktivists simply because 
we disagree with them. That brings us nowhere. It is about 
as helpful as the insistence that hackers are "good" and 
crackers are "evil".
So what do you say we simply concur that "hacktivism" covers 
a very wide range of activities and concentrate on the real 
discussion: what the results could be, what we can learn 
from them, and even whether they are "good" or "bad". But 
not whether they are "hacktivists".


jjf


> Look here, like I said in my post, I have no idea if their cause is just
> or not, and as far as I am concerned, it's totaly irrevelant. They might
> have all the right in the world to do what they are, but my post was
about
> the story and if it should of been grouped in with hacktivism or not. I
do
> not mean to belittle anyone, or any cause, I was just questioning that
> story.
> 
> As far as their skills go, who knows. I have been security consulting
for
> a while, and I know a lot of people in the security game as well, and we
> know what it would take to pull off such a feat as they are threating.
But
> again, that is neither here nor there, and was not what my post was
about.
> 
> regards,
>    Bronc Buster
>   bronc@2600.com
> 
> 
> On Mon, 30 Aug 1999, Lev Lafayette wrote:
> 
> > [: hacktivism :]
> > 
> > > 
> > I strongly suggest that you familiarise yourself with both the general
> > and specific information relating to the "threats" of Jose
Ramos-Horta.
> > 
> > In general, Indonesia's occupation of East Timor has no legitimacy.
Only
> > one other nation (Australia) has been stupid enough to recognise it,
and that
> > was on the basis of some resource bribery. The occupation has been
> > murderous, to say the least, engaging in wholesale massacres, forced
> > sterilisation of women, arbritraty arrest and torture, concentration
camps,
> > enforced famine, and so forth. To put simply, an estimated 1/3 of the
> > population has died during occupation.
> > 
> > In specific, Ramos-Horta suggested the campaign if Indonesia does not
> > comply with the results of the upcoming referendum, which
overwhelmingly
> > looks like it will vote for independence.
> > 
> > BTW, I seriously do think they have the skills and resources to carry
out
> > their "threats". Not that I would know anything about such things <g>.
> > 
> > These people are "hacktivists" of the most genuine kind.
> > 
> > 
> > Lev
> > 
> > 
> > > [: hacktivism :]
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Now this is a sad story. I can not belive they call these people
> > > hacktivist in any sense of the word. They are striking back at a
> > > government they do not agree with, and threatening to shut down
banks and
> > > government networks. Now I have no idea if their cause if a just one
or
> > > not, but this is nothing more than a case of 'cyber terrorism' if
their
> > > threats are carried out.
> > > 
> > > Personally, I think groups who issue statements like this want the
> > > attention this kind of threat brings with it. It brings attention to
their
> > > cause via their threat to cripple a government. I seriously doubt
they
> > > have the skills, or resources to carry this out (if it's even
possible),
> > > and I am sure other security professionals would agree on that. 
> > > 
> > > How many times have other groups issued threats like this in the
past,
> > > only to have nothing happen? But, like this article, have some eager
> > > reporter pick up on it to write another scary story about hackers
can take
> > > down an entire government. No wonder people in Congress want to
introduce
> > > all kinds of laws and control the net.
> > > 
> > > Hacktivism is a new word, coined in the last few years due to a few
> > > events. It would be a shame for reporters to ruin it by associating
it
> > > with these kinds of actions.
> > > 
> > > PS. Anyone know where this online? Or how to contact it's author?
> > > 
> > > regards,
> > >    Bronc Buster
> > >   bronc@2600.com
> > > 
> > > 


-- 
Sent through Global Message Exchange - http://www.gmx.net

[: hacktivism :]
[: for unsubscribe instructions or list info consult the list FAQ :]
[: http://hacktivism.tao.ca/ :]