Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Mar 2005
- Posts
- 11,255
- Location
- Newbury
Double post fail.
Last edited:
Lulzsec!
- Thread starter Greg0986
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Mar 2005
- Posts
- 11,255
- Location
- Newbury
I doubt he's innocent, but somehow don't think he's any where near "glorious leader". Probably just some kid that took part without a clue what he was doing and got caught.
Hopefully they can find something on all the gear they've confiscated from him to round up a few more muppets.
Associate
- Joined
- 25 May 2010
- Posts
- 117
I can't personally see why they haven't disabled the Lulzsec twitter account/website etc. Surely there is enough proof and evidence to justify doing so? Apologies if this has already been discussed I haven't read all 13 pages.
I don't think they've broken any T&C for Twitter so I guess that's why they haven't been removed of there.
as if they would admit it was one of them anyway
Yeah I get the feeling the whole 'glorious leader' thing was the media spin on it. Though they are making fools of themselves...
The public face of a group of illegal hackers isn't breaking any T&Cs? If thats really the case then the T&Cs need a review because they're obviously crap.
I could be wrong I don't know what the T&Cs so I can't quote anything but I don't see that they've done anything to get removed from twitter.
Why on earth would you disable places of information?
The more they post the more intel you have...
Associate
- Joined
- 25 May 2010
- Posts
- 117
That's is a very valid point AHarvey, my opinion is that it all seems like a publicity stunt to me. They seem to love being in the spotlight in the media and their twitter account for instance is generating them lots of publicity. Surely if they shut twitter and their website down that would go a long way in reducing the number of people that hear what they are saying. Surely a site/twitter dedicated to a hacking organisation is at one level no different to a site dedicated to any other sort of crime such as terrorism for instance (I know that an extreme comparison 
). Having said that there must be a good reason why they either haven't tried to take it offline, or have decided not to try, maybe it is because they see it as such a good source of information.
). Having said that there must be a good reason why they either haven't tried to take it offline, or have decided not to try, maybe it is because they see it as such a good source of information.
That's is a very valid point AHarvey, my opinion is that it all seems like a publicity stunt to me. They seem to love being in the spotlight in the media and their twitter account for instance is generating them lots of publicity. Surely if they shut twitter and their website down that would go a long way in reducing the number of people that hear what they are saying. Surely a site/twitter dedicated to a hacking organisation is at one level no different to a site dedicated to any other sort of crime such as terrorism for instance (I know that an extreme comparison
As AHarvey said, their website, IRC servers and twitter feed produce lots of potential information that can be used to track down the people behind it and used as evidence - obviously you can't take everything they say at face value neither will it lead you to them directly.
For instance they said they wouldn't take one game offline because they played it and thought it was awesome - request the account records from that developer/publisher and while you've got 100s or 1000s of users theres a good chance you have them amongst that data, cross-reference with other data and you can narrow down potential targets for closer investigation.
There are powerful tools available now too that can scour the web looking for peculiar turns of phrase, recurring spelling mistakes and other obscure references that they might let slip on their twitter feed and other places that could give other potential avenues for investigation.
Another example, say you think you've traced back the individuals involved but they are using a public wifi connection or connections - by leaving the infrastructure up you have a chance to catch them in the act and so on.
Last edited:
Indeed. That security guy that got wtfpwnd by Anonymous did have a good point that social networking can be very good for tracking people down. The problem is you really need access to more than whats in the public sector to be completely sure.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 16 May 2005
- Posts
- 31,297
- Location
- Manchester
I think you might run afoul of data protection issues with that tbh. I'm not sure that someone saying that they like to play BFBC2 (or whatever game) on twitter or irc is grounds enough for such a massive amount of personal data to be handed out.
Security services can and have requested that kind of information before and while my examples were just that examples, this is often the way these kinda people are tracked down. (tho often its the other way around, a request is made against specific intel for matching data to be made available rather than ad hoc release of client data).
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 16 May 2005
- Posts
- 31,297
- Location
- Manchester
The bit in brackets is a scenario I can believe, yes. The description in your previous post suggested something more more wide-ranging though, which is why I brought it up.
Data protection acts don't prevent the wholesale release of data anyhow - they only require that certain levels of justification are met and systems in placed for secure handling of the data and so on.