http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/28/anonymous_australia_posts_data/

I watched this TED video a couple weeks ago, and had a similar thought.

Well except the Aussie break was before the data retention law. But it’s not a stretch to see some sort of breach. To me it would be more something that an insider would do like BManning, but either scenario will do what is needed.

http://isc.sans.org/diary/An+Analysis+of+Jester+s+QR+Code+Attack+Guest+Diary+/12760

https://th3j35t3r.wordpress.com/2012/03/09/curiosity-pwned-the-cat/

I tremble at these on twitter feeds and smart phones.  But hey it’s the Internet whats the worst that could happen.

Where does it go? does it really matter is it really worth clicking? I mean really really?

The whole situation just makes me smile, the irony of the boondock saint kinda makes it sink in.  I have not been following his feed for a while, but if that was just added for this, that would be pretty amusing.

The attack it self, with out going in to the technical details is more then elegant for what it accomplished.  The amount of effort alone to setup and modify the exploits alone deserves recognition.

While some of the others may not want to report this to the FBI to have their phones examined, I am sure Mr.Gordon will.  Long term I don’t see a happy ending for this, but you never know.

http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/6827936

Anon has hit a big fish.

Just remember that ToR is good, but there has been proven attacks from time to time to break it’s security.

Thing is Cyberwar is used to describe something, and I like what it’s used to describe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberwarfare

“actions by a nation-state to penetrate another nation’s computers or networks for the purposes of causing damage or disruption.”

So what do we  have going on mostly right now on the Internet between groups like anon and other hacking groups or persons?

I think the best term to describe what is going on is Guerilla warfare, I think adding the term cyber to these actions is a waste of time.  The combatants and targets all exist in the cyber arena so adding the term to is is redundant.

Guerilla warfare is a perfect term,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerrilla_warfare

“a form of irregular warfare and refers to conflicts in which a small group of combatants including, but not limited to, armed civilians (or “irregulars”) use military tactics, like ambushes, sabotage, raids, the element of surprise, and extraordinary mobility to harass a larger and less-mobile traditional army, or strike a vulnerable target, and withdraw almost immediately.”

Everything is cyberwar, a DOS attack, a DDOS attack, or skype goes down for a day CYBERWAR!

Is it really?

Forget the ‘Cyber’ part, does this look like war to you? a DDOS? Thats like everyone jumping queue in front of you for coffee.  Is it annoying? yea, war? not so much.  Really the term war is referring to two or more organized groups participating in organized conflict.  In the terms of the cyber acts people are talking about there is hardly more then one organized group (the target), if you are lucky, most targets are hardly considered organized.  Also the groups doing the attacking a either a single bot net controlled by one party or something like anon does.

So I think it’s time for another phrase to describe what is going on.