For clarification...
There has been some confusion over what's legal and not legal concerning the attack protocols (wget, vampire scripts/sites, multiple-mass downloads), so here to set the record straight is a bunch of evidence compiled from the past few days!
NOTE: Turner responses are in italics
1. "'sup guys. Time for an FBI-chan update.
Here's some welcome news for everyone who missed me in the IRC channel last night, and some more for those who DID catch me but were in the US. Although I did not raid, I do feel the need to help you in some way with such a noble cause, Anonymous.
I wouldn't bother worrying about anything that Hal has to say against what I'm typing, either, due to the fact that I have three well-paid lawyers in two different countries, and he has... well, JACK and SHIT.
I got through talking to my barrister a couple of days ago on this matter. [For those who don't know what a barrister is, in the UK there are two types of lawyers - the barristers tend to deal with higher courts, whilst soliciters deal with lower ones. Anyway...] You have completely NOTHING AT ALL TO FEAR if you are in the UK. NOTHING. Let me say that again: NOTHING.
I also heard back from my US lawyer earlier today. The current 'attacks' on his site are 100% PERFECTLY LEGAL. It's only when you start pinging malformed packets with forged sender addresses that it becomes a DoS or DDoS attack. What you are doing is merely comparing the sizes of your BANDWIDTH PENISES. There is nothing illegal about downloading a file many times. The only person Hal has to blame regarding this is himself, he does have the ability to deny multiple simultaneous accessing of a single file from any given IP. But hey, we all know that Hal isn't exactly the smartest kid on the block. Even knowing that he has this ability, he would have no idea how to implement such a feature.
The only way that he has grounds for ANY sort of shit at ALL is if you keep ringing his house and threatening him, which I sincerely doubt any of us did. That's grounds for harassment, and even then it wouldn't hold up since it's pretty much suicide for him to sue you for something he's guilty of.
FURTHERMORE, feel free to WRITE ANYTHING THAT YOU WISH, and I mean -anything-. The first ammendment protects your right to libel and that means that written items (including those on the internets) cannot get you charged with slander.
See, kids? We fucking SLOPES/NIPS/CHINKS/GOOKS know what we're talking about, because we the white man's university places with our SUPERIOR intellect. This in turn gives us money to simply throw away on solicitors, barristers and lawyers as we see fit. Though I will concede, this is a good cause and genuinely deserved the extra consultation fees.
Also, on the offchance that Hal's reading this, I MARRIED A WHITE, BLONDE MAN WITH BLUE EYES OF GERMAN DESCENT AND I FUCK HIM, UNPROTECTED, NIGHTLY. GOOD DAY TO YOU, SIR, AND ENJOI UR 60 YEAR OLD CAUCASIAN SACK OF ROTTING FLESH.
tl;dr: You're legally untouchable so far. Just don't ping malformed packets or call his house/threaten him repeatedly."
2. Sophren's post over legal grievances that can be used against Turner.
3. You do realize that 7chan (like 4chan, & TOR, AND Onion) do not keep logs on who posted what (the cycle over and over write themselves) due to the volume of traffic through their sight. So you'll be hard pressed to get that court order for their IP records.
Addidionaly, the chans (4chan 7chan 12chan etc) are communities (and i use the term loosley) for free discussion (albeit retarded discussion sometimes). As such there are few (if any) safeguards on that is disucussed.
Think again. That's how they arrested your member for putting up the threat to bomb NFL stadiums.
There ARE logs. You will be caught.
HT
4. It only counts as a DDoS attack if people use malformed packets or zombies. Neither of which are being used here.
The bottom line is, you're providing a public service people are accessing it in large numbers.
This is legal. Also, I liked your radio show where you got your wife to pretend to be your mother.
Tell that to the judge. Explain to the judge why you needed 10,000 copies of the exact same image in a single day.
He'll laugh at you - before making you pay for what you did.
In law, there is something called "the reasonable person test" What would a reasonable person do, think, say?
Your actions fail that test. You and all your buddies are going to be hauled into court.
5. The saved 7chan page will eventually slide to the back and get deleted, rendering his information useless.
6. A fight to the death? On the internet? You gonna shoot kilobytes at us? lol Lets look at it logically. If you do get any of us, it'll be the dumb fucks who didn't bother to use anonymizers. I'm using a combination of anonymization websites and Tor. Tor runs not only through official Tor servers, but also server resources offered by other Tor users. 100000 of people use it a day. And since this isn't the destruction of a football stadium we're talking about, no government agency is going to bother with the damn near impossible task of sorting through all that. Now then, you could try to sue 4chan or 7chan into providing you with the IPs. You can't sue them directly, as I'm sure you've learned, because they do not take responsibility for the actions of their users, and in fact delete illegal content. Even if you do manage to get some sort of injunction and get the IPs, that doesn't prove that those users took part in the attack. Maybe there are some charges you can press, but thats assuming it even gets that far. On 4chan's /b/ board, threads disappear in an hour, leaving no record. Football bomb guy was caught because he posted multiple times over the course of a month. You might get a few of us, thats it. And even if you do get us, you forget that you threatened us with bodily harm, minors included, which is a crime. And ever heard of the unprotected wireless network defense? I have a wireless network with no encryption. Anyone with a laptop and a basic wireless network card within range could have logged in and used it to steal your bandwidth. A lady beat the RIAA with that excuse.
And to Hal's supporters: None of you have yet posted anything that any of us would give a damn about. The ranting of old rednecks and army marines, well, we don't care. And the religious fanatics? Wth would we care? You think you're being smug, but when we don't even believe anything you speak of, its just dumb pointlessness.
And to anonymous: We are here becuase Hal threatened us. He couldn't take a joke. Thats all. If you have a personal vendetta against this guy for being a racist dick, fine, but we aren't hear to make him tone down his views. I mean, he does have 1st amendment rights, you guys are just being retarded. We're here to show him that you DON'T fuck with anonymous. That is all.
7. Nobody is stealing from you because you are free to take the site down.
Nobody is stealing from the donaters because they are free to stop donating.
Nobody is maliciously harming your computer because they are simply downloading its content as your site allows, which is its intended purpouse.
The DDoS would be a zombienet or simliar setup flooding icmps packets or simply udp spam with spoofed header, this is just mass downloading.
It is NOT a denial of service, it is an abuse of your service. But while you still provide that service to the world, it is free to be downloaded, maliciously or not.
It's akin to you handing out free flyers, and some people kept taking more than they need and throwing them away, costing you money in producing more flyers, and causing unavailable flyers for legitimate targets.
And to top it off:
--------------- Hal laughs:
You may be "legion" but the people stealing the bandwidth and launching Denial of Service attacks are not "legion." The people raping the bandwidth and invoking Denial of Service attacks are a tiny group of social misfits who can't get along in real life, so they stay glued to their computers as though it is a life. From what I've learned about 4chan / 7 chan they are HUGELY popular web sites with very high traffic and very many users.
HOWEVER -- the people engaged in intentionally deluging my server with automated software designed to eat-up bandwidth are VERY few in number. The people invoking Denial of Service attacks are even fewer. Sure, this whole fiasco has gotten a lot of attention and publicity. There are very many more people coming to this site to see what the drama is about. Naturally, they want to chime-in with comments. Yet it is only a tiny fraction of a percentage of those people are intentionally doing harm. It is that tiny fraction of people that I am targeting with my legal action. When this is all said and done, I suspect it will turn out to be fewer than fifty people who did the most, real, harm. Those 50 or so will pay a heavy price.
Hal Turner
Sorry for the overtly-long post, but it's for clarification. Tl;dr--Turner's assuming the wrong things, Anonymous is protected by the argument of mass downloading of files, the RICO laws Turner constantly cites do not have any effect due to the type of attacks, and Hal potentially faces copyright violations because of hosting a 7chan HTML page. Numbers 1 and 2 originate from Blogspot (mine and Sophren's blogs, in fact), and the rest are from Hal's comment list.
NOTE: Turner responses are in italics
1. "'sup guys. Time for an FBI-chan update.
Here's some welcome news for everyone who missed me in the IRC channel last night, and some more for those who DID catch me but were in the US. Although I did not raid, I do feel the need to help you in some way with such a noble cause, Anonymous.
I wouldn't bother worrying about anything that Hal has to say against what I'm typing, either, due to the fact that I have three well-paid lawyers in two different countries, and he has... well, JACK and SHIT.
I got through talking to my barrister a couple of days ago on this matter. [For those who don't know what a barrister is, in the UK there are two types of lawyers - the barristers tend to deal with higher courts, whilst soliciters deal with lower ones. Anyway...] You have completely NOTHING AT ALL TO FEAR if you are in the UK. NOTHING. Let me say that again: NOTHING.
I also heard back from my US lawyer earlier today. The current 'attacks' on his site are 100% PERFECTLY LEGAL. It's only when you start pinging malformed packets with forged sender addresses that it becomes a DoS or DDoS attack. What you are doing is merely comparing the sizes of your BANDWIDTH PENISES. There is nothing illegal about downloading a file many times. The only person Hal has to blame regarding this is himself, he does have the ability to deny multiple simultaneous accessing of a single file from any given IP. But hey, we all know that Hal isn't exactly the smartest kid on the block. Even knowing that he has this ability, he would have no idea how to implement such a feature.
The only way that he has grounds for ANY sort of shit at ALL is if you keep ringing his house and threatening him, which I sincerely doubt any of us did. That's grounds for harassment, and even then it wouldn't hold up since it's pretty much suicide for him to sue you for something he's guilty of.
FURTHERMORE, feel free to WRITE ANYTHING THAT YOU WISH, and I mean -anything-. The first ammendment protects your right to libel and that means that written items (including those on the internets) cannot get you charged with slander.
See, kids? We fucking SLOPES/NIPS/CHINKS/GOOKS know what we're talking about, because we the white man's university places with our SUPERIOR intellect. This in turn gives us money to simply throw away on solicitors, barristers and lawyers as we see fit. Though I will concede, this is a good cause and genuinely deserved the extra consultation fees.
Also, on the offchance that Hal's reading this, I MARRIED A WHITE, BLONDE MAN WITH BLUE EYES OF GERMAN DESCENT AND I FUCK HIM, UNPROTECTED, NIGHTLY. GOOD DAY TO YOU, SIR, AND ENJOI UR 60 YEAR OLD CAUCASIAN SACK OF ROTTING FLESH.
tl;dr: You're legally untouchable so far. Just don't ping malformed packets or call his house/threaten him repeatedly."
2. Sophren's post over legal grievances that can be used against Turner.
3. You do realize that 7chan (like 4chan, & TOR, AND Onion) do not keep logs on who posted what (the cycle over and over write themselves) due to the volume of traffic through their sight. So you'll be hard pressed to get that court order for their IP records.
Addidionaly, the chans (4chan 7chan 12chan etc) are communities (and i use the term loosley) for free discussion (albeit retarded discussion sometimes). As such there are few (if any) safeguards on that is disucussed.
Think again. That's how they arrested your member for putting up the threat to bomb NFL stadiums.
There ARE logs. You will be caught.
HT
4. It only counts as a DDoS attack if people use malformed packets or zombies. Neither of which are being used here.
The bottom line is, you're providing a public service people are accessing it in large numbers.
This is legal. Also, I liked your radio show where you got your wife to pretend to be your mother.
Tell that to the judge. Explain to the judge why you needed 10,000 copies of the exact same image in a single day.
He'll laugh at you - before making you pay for what you did.
In law, there is something called "the reasonable person test" What would a reasonable person do, think, say?
Your actions fail that test. You and all your buddies are going to be hauled into court.
5. The saved 7chan page will eventually slide to the back and get deleted, rendering his information useless.
6. A fight to the death? On the internet? You gonna shoot kilobytes at us? lol Lets look at it logically. If you do get any of us, it'll be the dumb fucks who didn't bother to use anonymizers. I'm using a combination of anonymization websites and Tor. Tor runs not only through official Tor servers, but also server resources offered by other Tor users. 100000 of people use it a day. And since this isn't the destruction of a football stadium we're talking about, no government agency is going to bother with the damn near impossible task of sorting through all that. Now then, you could try to sue 4chan or 7chan into providing you with the IPs. You can't sue them directly, as I'm sure you've learned, because they do not take responsibility for the actions of their users, and in fact delete illegal content. Even if you do manage to get some sort of injunction and get the IPs, that doesn't prove that those users took part in the attack. Maybe there are some charges you can press, but thats assuming it even gets that far. On 4chan's /b/ board, threads disappear in an hour, leaving no record. Football bomb guy was caught because he posted multiple times over the course of a month. You might get a few of us, thats it. And even if you do get us, you forget that you threatened us with bodily harm, minors included, which is a crime. And ever heard of the unprotected wireless network defense? I have a wireless network with no encryption. Anyone with a laptop and a basic wireless network card within range could have logged in and used it to steal your bandwidth. A lady beat the RIAA with that excuse.
And to Hal's supporters: None of you have yet posted anything that any of us would give a damn about. The ranting of old rednecks and army marines, well, we don't care. And the religious fanatics? Wth would we care? You think you're being smug, but when we don't even believe anything you speak of, its just dumb pointlessness.
And to anonymous: We are here becuase Hal threatened us. He couldn't take a joke. Thats all. If you have a personal vendetta against this guy for being a racist dick, fine, but we aren't hear to make him tone down his views. I mean, he does have 1st amendment rights, you guys are just being retarded. We're here to show him that you DON'T fuck with anonymous. That is all.
7. Nobody is stealing from you because you are free to take the site down.
Nobody is stealing from the donaters because they are free to stop donating.
Nobody is maliciously harming your computer because they are simply downloading its content as your site allows, which is its intended purpouse.
The DDoS would be a zombienet or simliar setup flooding icmps packets or simply udp spam with spoofed header, this is just mass downloading.
It is NOT a denial of service, it is an abuse of your service. But while you still provide that service to the world, it is free to be downloaded, maliciously or not.
It's akin to you handing out free flyers, and some people kept taking more than they need and throwing them away, costing you money in producing more flyers, and causing unavailable flyers for legitimate targets.
And to top it off:
--------------- Hal laughs:
You may be "legion" but the people stealing the bandwidth and launching Denial of Service attacks are not "legion." The people raping the bandwidth and invoking Denial of Service attacks are a tiny group of social misfits who can't get along in real life, so they stay glued to their computers as though it is a life. From what I've learned about 4chan / 7 chan they are HUGELY popular web sites with very high traffic and very many users.
HOWEVER -- the people engaged in intentionally deluging my server with automated software designed to eat-up bandwidth are VERY few in number. The people invoking Denial of Service attacks are even fewer. Sure, this whole fiasco has gotten a lot of attention and publicity. There are very many more people coming to this site to see what the drama is about. Naturally, they want to chime-in with comments. Yet it is only a tiny fraction of a percentage of those people are intentionally doing harm. It is that tiny fraction of people that I am targeting with my legal action. When this is all said and done, I suspect it will turn out to be fewer than fifty people who did the most, real, harm. Those 50 or so will pay a heavy price.
Hal Turner
Sorry for the overtly-long post, but it's for clarification. Tl;dr--Turner's assuming the wrong things, Anonymous is protected by the argument of mass downloading of files, the RICO laws Turner constantly cites do not have any effect due to the type of attacks, and Hal potentially faces copyright violations because of hosting a 7chan HTML page. Numbers 1 and 2 originate from Blogspot (mine and Sophren's blogs, in fact), and the rest are from Hal's comment list.
posted by BFAnon at 5:57 AM
6 Comments:
Jake Brahm turned himself in, did he not?
And if Hal thinks that it's only 50 people involved in this, he's sorely underestimating the full numbers of anonymous.
The clarification on the tor thing was good; it confirmed what I'd thought about the technology.
Yeah, Brahm turned himself in. All the hype afterwards was really overplayed and unnecessary bullshit.
So far during this hilarious charade Hal has exhorted his listeners to murder teenage prank callers, tried to pass himself off as an FBI agent (the "403: FBI intercept" error business), stole a possibly copyrighted image from a backyard wrestling website, and faces another possible copyright violation by hosting a 7chan page on his website.
Now he encourages whatever supporters he may have left to engage in precisely the sort of "attacks" he's been whining about.
Does he really think he wouldn't be laughed out of court if he tried to sue anyone?
Does he really think any ISP in their right mind would give a psychopath like him the info of their customers?
"50 people" means rather 50 proxies, right?
Oh, and that's far too less, just think of the additional number of TOR nodes. As always - bullshit :D
Assumedly, he thinks there are only upwards of 50 people attacking, which would make it sound like 50 different proxies. In all likelihood, it's a combination of proxies and actual IPs of Anonymii who want a better, quicker shot at the bandwidth. And 50 different IPs sounds way too low, natch.
I've added a good 4 Tor servers tonight, all on gigabit links. Enjoy.
To clarify on Tor server logging, logs are of course disabled by default except for error notifications, and they never list the destination or sources, only the port (80, 6667, whatever). Even if you enable all Tor's logging options to the verbose debug level you still never get the dest/source.
Post a Comment
<< Home