Re: Anonymous not freedom fighters

[Dave Paris <dparis () w3works com>]

Bob,

The attack is accurately named.

Denial Of Service.

If it's a service I'm paying for and your attack is denying me of that 
service, then it is clearly both forcible and injurious.  Paul's point 
is salient and cogent.

Best~
-d

On 2/13/2011 2:58 PM, robert_mcmillan () idg com wrote:
> Paul,
>
> You write
>
> "Denial of service is not merely a peaceful protest meant to garner
> attention for a cause. Denial of service is forcible and it is injurious.
> It is not like any form of civil disobedience, but rather it is criminal
> behaviour more like looting. "
>
> But is it really? If I loot your shop, I now possess something that
> rightfully should belong to you. DoS isn't entirely like this. How is DoS
> different from shutting down business at a brick-and-mortar location by
> holding a big rally? They're both "forcible" and "injurious."
>
> People are often arrested at these G20 protests, but they're generally
> later released or charged with a misdemeanor. The consequences of those
> arrests are much less severe than in the case of DoS attacks.  In fact,
> the consequences of those protests seem much more severe than a DDoS
> attack. I was in Toronto last summer and the city's center was essentially
> shut down both in anticipation of the G20 protests, and then moreso when
> the protests actually happened.
>
> Anyhow, I'd be interested in seeing you expand on this a little more, as I
> think it's an interesting question.
>
> Bob

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.