Bona fide threat, in my book
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jcustis
I made mention of this in the Haditha thread, but Anonymous is beginning to become a threat to national security.
Am I just paranoid about the perception, versus a bona fide threat?
Having been on the receiving end of AntiSec's very thorough and devastating hack over Christmas, and spending several weeks digging into the Anonymous/AntiSec activities (and still waiting for the other shoe to drop), the threat is real and growing.
However, I perceive that there are some confusing dynamics in play that the media doesn't bother to clarify.
AntiSec is a highly malicious offshoot from Anonymous. However, any 7th grade computer whiz who plays around with hacking can "become" Anonymous simply by claiming to be -- the nature of the beast being what it is. But the AntiSec subset is much more specialised, and is likely to be a very small clique. The attack on STRATFOR was a large departure from previous Anonymous DDoS and site defacing activities.
The dude Sabu (#RealSabu) is tied to AntiSec, but from what I've seen the publicity 'ho "Anonymous spokesman" Barrett Brown is self-appointed and has no direct involvement with the highly destructive AntiSec activities. Anonymous is a nebulous and disorganised 'movement' -- not the monolithic 'group' that the press makes it out to be -- making a self-styled spokesman rather difficult to take seriously. The Twitter feeds for AntiSec and RealSabu display only dismissive disdain for Barrett Brown's "spokesman" activities.
By the way, I'm not defending anyone...I detest them all, and happily use printed Guy Fawkes masks for targets at the range, often. But, as y'all know, the threat cannot be effectively addressed until it is accurately identified and pinned down.
