Wikileaks Switches to Amazon After Distributed Hacker Attack
by Volker Weber
Whoever is trying to take down Wikileaks with a denial of service attack is now attacking Amazon.com.
Who is going to foot the traffic bill?
Comments
Wau Holland lässt grüßen...
Bin mir ja nicht sicher, ob Amazon da jetzt so glücklich drüber ist.
Die werden Wikileaks wohl weit weg von dem Severn für das Weihnachtsgeschäft ablegen.
Proves to me that the US government has access to botnets, which is interesting.
Frank, proves?
there is a cyber war going on all the time, and nobody notices, what a laugh. Just check on the official recommendations the government publishes on security. The means the governments dispose of (and that includes the US, but excludes no other government) are immense.
Our heads of state might not be overly clever when it comes to safeguarding their information, but very keen on finding ways to penetrate, attack, analyse other countries' data.
Of course, Mariano, the govenments have the ability to do DDOS attacks, if they would resort to that kind of thing is a different matter entirely.
If you can't do the time, don't do the crime - if you can't safeguard your data, don't go collecting it in the first place :-) And we all seem to think, GSV is a pretty neat idea.... LOL.
@Armin, of course it comes to mind that the US would benefit from those information kept secret, but that is not proof, except if it is meant in the "there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq" way.
Also I don't think it's likely as that would be a really stupid move.
If the website is down that is just an inconvenience. The press and other 3rd parties would be more than happy to host the content.
The added publicity that such a maneuver produces cannot be in the best interest of the US however.
So, Amazon is not hosting WikiLeaks anymore.
That was to be expected.
Could the DDOS actually be millions of people looking at or downloading the documents, even just out of curiosity? I know I have read a few of the cables, but have not bothered downloading the entire set.
My quick conclusion is that the diplomats should adopt Twitter, as it would keep them distracted so they won't do any useful work at all.
Hallo Amazon, I'll spend my money somewhere else!
Marc
Mariano, the truth can be like an onion. Peel it, and find questions like "were there weapons of mass distruction in the country Iraq invaded, and if yes, what kind? And where would they be now?" It's about whether we actually want to know things... Maybe not. If we venture further down these lines, we might find things are even worse than we thought. Mr. Assange is finding out right now the hard way. And who knows what information has been placed with what intention in the wikileak batch. What bits are missing. And so on.
Too much data is being collected: http://www.bfdi.bund.de/DE/Oeffentlichkeitsarbeit/Pressemitteilungen/2009/PM_12_22TB.html?nn=409394 (got this from heise).
And we still think, GSV is a pretty neat idea. All data might eventually be compromised or can be abused if all the dots are connected.
just wondering why it was impossible in the past to put down any silly nazi website hosted in the land of the free speech...
@Armin, agreed, too much data is collected where we don't have control over. I think I fear our government more than Google as the former is so clueless.
I do still think that GSV is a pretty neat idea ;)
When Colin Powell presented the "evidence" for weapons of mass destruction, this wasn't an onion topic, no matter how you look at it. It's only a question who exactly lied to whom.
In the US you pretty much have the right to say whatever you want. You can't, however, go into a crowded theater and yell "fire" just to cause chaos. You also cannot distribute documents that relate to national defense. If the government knows you have them and asks for them to be returned or destroyed and you don't comply, you are guilty of violating the Espionage Act. Whether you agree or not, that is how the laws are written.
So yes, you can create a website espousing the most heinous beliefs, and that is protected as free speech. As shown with The Pentagon Papers, you can even take classified information and make it public. There are limits, though.
To be clear, I do think all world governments need to be more transparent. Far too much is being done in secrecy.
@Charles, just makes me think: Here are people who form the government, the same people classify the information, the same people create the laws, the same people put people into office to control them. And then somebody gets accused of sexual abuse, which is normally very had to prove either way, if they cannot get him any other way. And funny enough, when it comes to things like that it is always a question of national defence.
