Anonymous hacks Alcoholics Anonymous website

I think I'm missing something, how is this amusing exactly?

ANON seem to be turning into bullies - unless, like LOG I am missing something.

Let's see...a bunch of hackers running amuck on the internet, shutting down sites with which they have some kind of personal problem, which will lead to greater regulations and more government interference in how the average citizen uses the internet.

Yeah. That's really amusing. That's so funny I might break a rib from laughing so hard.



There is nothing funny or beneficial about Anonymous. Nothing at all.

This one is a bit underwhelming. Just a bit. A teensy-weensy bit. Eeensy-weensy-meensy-meensy bit.

For the record there's no malicious code on the site (as of right now anyway).

I don't feel particularly sad. I've always disliked AA and their obvious disdain for non-Christians.

Why are they citing John 15:13?

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+15%3A13&version=NIV

Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.

Click to expand...

They have a military theme to the graphic. Are they mocking the notion of soldiers who lay down their lives for their friends and their countries? What do they hope to accompllsh by hacking a non-profit and by interweaving military threads into the wordcraft of resulting hacker vandalism?

Payback? Who is getting paid back? And for what crime? For the crime of laying down one's life for one's friends?

This is a great big WTF for me.

i suspect that this wasn't really Anonymous.

Monkey said:

i suspect that this wasn't really Anonymous.

Click to expand...

It doesn't look like Anonymous, and why would they have a problem with AA?

Hacking their site and quoting John 15:13 -"Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends." - suggests to me that this group finds the whole of AA a hypocrisy.

Not funny. Not amusing. And if it is Anonymous they're the ridiculous tyrants I originally thought they would end up being.

That's the problem with Anonymous - anyone can claim to Anonymous, and none of them are lying.

(and no, it's not funny)

Celia Cyanide said:

It doesn't look like Anonymous, and why would they have a problem with AA?

Click to expand...

Maybe it was Charlie Sheen's fire-breathing fists that did it.

Add me to the not funny list.

Cyia said:

That's the problem with Anonymous - anyone can claim to Anonymous, and none of them are lying.

(and no, it's not funny)

Click to expand...

Exactly. There's no membership list; a ship flying the Jolly Roger doesn't pay dues to the International Pirates' Guild.

Yeah, I'm not amused by this, either. I'm just trying to figure out the "why?" behind it.

Plot Device said:

They have a military theme to the graphic. Are they mocking the notion of soldiers who lay down their lives for their friends and their countries? What do they hope to accompllsh by hacking a non-profit and by interweaving military threads into the wordcraft of resulting hacker vandalism?

Payback? Who is getting paid back? And for what crime? For the crime of laying down one's life for one's friends?

This is a great big WTF for me.

Click to expand...

AA is often a court-mandated treatment where no other treatment is even considered, despite the fact that it is a religious organisation as per the ruling of the 9th District on this. I think it's the 9th, or the 8th. Not too up on US law.

In which case I would have a problem with the courts, not AA.

Is there any boasting, a manifesto, a screed of some sort? The graphic is a head-scratcher. People who would tend to fly the Anonymous flag tend not to deface sites without some sort of clearly understandable statement to make, even if it is 'im in ur base pwning ur doodz.'

Possibly the image was ganked from somewhere where the context made more sense, in which case an agent provocateur?

veinglory said:

In which case I would have a problem with the courts, not AA.

Click to expand...

Pretty much.

No, it's not Anonymous. You can see the real 'Operation Payback' logo here, and you'll see even the url is different - ie anonops.net rather than anonops.in. They've made it impossible to hotlink, so the hoaxer had to make up their own.

Someone (or more likely some organization) is simply trying to discredit Anonymous, and it's getting very tiresome. I'm not a fan of the 4-chan style of Anonymous, but at least they're open about what they're doing, whereas media smears of this kind are just filthy.

When in doubt, you can always go to AnonNews and look at the latest press releases, but so far they've only targeted corruption, censorship, and organizations that have threatened them so it's pretty easy to guess what's real and what's not.

The Biblical quote here is interesting, though - I wonder if the 'threat' Westboro claimed to get was actually one of these hoaxes and not a publicity ploy of their own after all. Wouldn't it just make your heart bleed to think they got done over for nothing?

Swordswoman said:

No, it's not Anonymous. You can see the real 'Operation Payback' logo here, and you'll see even the url is different - ie anonops.net rather than anonops.in. They've made it impossible to hotlink, so the hoaxer had to make up their own.

Someone (or more likely some organization) is simply trying to discredit Anonymous, and it's getting very tiresome.

Click to expand...

As noted upthread, anyone can claim to be a part of Anon, there's really no membership list to verify the claim (much like being a tea partier, oddly enough).

And I see no reason to accept/trust something like AnonNews. The set-up is--imo--getting dangerous: any action can be laid at the feet of Anonymous and the "real" Anonymous can always back out of any action by claiming it wasn't responsible. There's nothing positive going forward here. Bad news all the way around, imo. And it's not unsurprising.

Monkey said:

i suspect that this wasn't really Anonymous.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Looks like Anonymous-wannabes. Anonymous tends to be much more flamboyant in their attackspranks.

robeiae said:

As noted upthread, anyone can claim to be a part of Anon, there's really no membership list to verify the claim

Click to expand...

That's absolutely true, but there's a difference between anonymous and Anonymous. The open-posting pages are only a shop window - if you dig deeper you'll see the real stuff happens behind very much closed doors. Somebody has to release the protected logo, somebody has to approve the press release. I'm guessing that's a collective thing, yes, but it gives them a definite identity as a group even while maintaining anonymity.

There's some kind of hierarchy too. One of the 'comments' in the 'payback' thread is from a distressed teen in Wisconsin saying people are having their homes broken into and their computers hacked. You'll see there is absolutely no further discussion on the page - he is immediately directed to someone much higher up the chain who 'may be able to do something about it', but the request has to be made on IRC.

I'm obviously not a member, but anyone who really was would know a lot more about whatever security they have in place. That's why it seems most likely these hoaxes are coming from people who have nothing to do with Anonymous at all, not even as wannabes.

And I see no reason to accept/trust something like AnonNews. The set-up is--imo--getting dangerous: any action can be laid at the feet of Anonymous and the "real" Anonymous can always back out of any action by claiming it wasn't responsible.

Click to expand...

I thought that too, till I saw the restrictions surrounding that Payback logo, and the limits on press releases. This way if the real logo appears, then no, Anonymous can't back out of it later. If they do it and change their minds, then there are always screen shots to catch them out.

To me, that's a good thing. However currently well-motivated Anonymous appear to be, I still feel happier knowing they're taking at least some responsibility.