mitnick-digest Sunday, November 1 1998 Volume 01 : Number 189 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 03:21:51 -0800 (PST) From: rOTTEN Subject: Re: [mitnick] Today's New York Times On Sat, 31 Oct 1998, Support Services wrote: > What does this have to do with Mitnick, you ignorant reporter asshole. > > > On Sat, 31 Oct 1998 10:46:10 -0500, Arik Hesseldahl wrote: > > > On the front of today's New York Times is a story on some political > > activists working with the rebels in Mexico. I have not yet read the > > article yet, but wanted the list to know. > > > > Arik out. Hmm...well, let's see. Mitnick ends in a "ick" sound...and so does "Arik", which leads me to believe that "Arik" is some foreign lingo for "Mitnick" Hesseldahl is polish for "Kevin"...that's a fact. True or not, it's a fact. Though I'm leaning more toward "not true". Therfore, it is my uncontested opinon and guess that "Arik Hesseldahl" must be a really fancy way to say "Kevin Mitnick"... Then again, I could be wrong. Though it would be a first. I thought I was wrong once, but that was a mistake on my part. Hey, BadGrlinLA, or, uh...whatever your name is...have ye any thoughts on the matter? Would you care to speculate on the rationale behind the Arik Hesseldahl post? You're just a girl in the world... And that's all that *I'll* let you beeeeeee <..rOTTEN..> nobody move, nobody get hurt error187(1) critical failure - - - - - - To do: 1) Update my "To do" list. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 07:08:42 -0500 (EST) From: ksandre Subject: Re: [mitnick] Today's New York Times On Sun, 1 Nov 1998, rOTTEN wrote: > > Hey, BadGrlinLA, or, uh...whatever your name is...have ye any thoughts on > the matter? Would you care to speculate on the rationale behind the Arik > Hesseldahl post? > Maybe Arik was trying to point us to the article so that we would see how the political activists here were organizing? Maybe there are some fresh ideas in that article (I haven't seen it)? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1998 11:35:24 -0600 From: Zach Miller Subject: Re: [mitnick] Today's New York Times ksandre wrote: > > On Sun, 1 Nov 1998, rOTTEN wrote: > > > > Hey, BadGrlinLA, or, uh...whatever your name is...have ye any thoughts on > > the matter? Would you care to speculate on the rationale behind the Arik > > Hesseldahl post? > > > > Maybe Arik was trying to point us to the article so that we would see how > the political activists here were organizing? Maybe there are some fresh > ideas in that article (I haven't seen it)? or maybe Arik was doing what (almost) everyone else has done, posted off-topic stuff on the list (i haven't seen the article either so i dunno) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 14:24:09 -0500 From: Arik Hesseldahl Subject: Re: [mitnick] Today's New York Times Ignorant reporter asshole eh? If your attitude is any indicator, then it's no wonder the media hasn't picked up your viewpoint on the Mitnick story. They can't take anyone like you seriously. If you fail to see the relevance of the NYT story on hacktivism to the Mitnick case, then you're the one proving yourself to be ignorant. Maybe it was off-topic, as it did not specifically cover the Mitnick case, but I bet several people on the list found the story interesting if they read it. I was simply giving a heads up. If you don't like it, then try mailing me personally about it, rather than flaming me on the list. Arik out. >What does this have to do with Mitnick, you ignorant reporter asshole. > > >On Sat, 31 Oct 1998 10:46:10 -0500, Arik Hesseldahl wrote: > >> On the front of today's New York Times is a story on some political >> activists working with the rebels in Mexico. I have not yet read the >> article yet, but wanted the list to know. >> >> Arik out. >> ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 17:50:48 EST From: Bobwil623@aol.com Subject: Re: [mitnick] Today's New York Times redux... > Ignorant reporter asshole eh? If your attitude > is any indicator, then it's no wonder the media > hasn't picked up your viewpoint on the Mitnick > story. They can't take anyone like you > seriously. If you fail to see the relevance of > the NYT story on hacktivism to the Mitnick case, > then you're the one proving yourself to be > ignorant. i have to register my strong agreement with arik on this one. after reading his mention of the article, i immediately went to the nytimes site and checked the article. once i realized how useful it could be to kevin, i printed it out, and it's going out in tomorrow morning's mail to km at the mdc. as i mentioned in those posts where i submitted articles in re the european data privacy laws, the issues at stake in kevin's case are enormous -- larger, even, than the u.s. economy itself, insofar as the issues of data privacy, encryption, and intellectual property now transcend the u.s. economy as well. in case anyone has missed it: kevin is taking the fall for most if not all of these issues, as USG (u.s. government) attempts to use his case to define the laws -- and the punishments -- the government wants to enact. note that this method is precisely the *reverse* of the way a democracy is supposed to work, and that it is exactly reminiscent of fascism, where the government decides what's best for the minions (often in response to the needs of capital). note, too, that the success or failure of the government's actions to enact sweeping measures that permit law enforcment monitoring of all digital information transactions will mean the gain of billions (if not *trillions* of dollars to corporations whose principal base of operations is the u.s. that much money also generates a significant amount of tax revenue as well, providing the rationale for USG to work vigorously for these goals. sadly, kevin (the person) has gotten caught up in global processes that few people knew little -- if anything -- about in 1995. here's a quote taken from a seminar at george washington university last fall: citing the inextricable way in which commercial sector interests are interwoven with government interests, jerrold m. post described the security of computing infrastructure as "very much a matter of national security concerns" vis a vis telecommunications, finance, and others. in english: usg views actions to "hack" computing systems as a matter of "national security", which is a fancy way of saying you're fucked if they catch you these days.... as USG seeks to roll out "back door" entrances into encryption, the role of britain in introducing such back doors into encryption, *and granting law enforcement access to those back doors with anything less than a warrant*, is instructive. the hacktivist article was "on point." let's have more such contributions. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1998 15:42:17 PST From: "TelePhreak ." Subject: Re: [mitnick] Today's New York Times redux... did anyone ever think maybe, some how some way, the kid screwed up and posted it to the wrong list? just a thought - - - - - - - - ->Phone Rangers<- - - - - - - - - - - F -TelePhreak R Email: AcidHak@Hotmail.com E mIRC: TelePhrk E ICQ: 10886438 K Aol Instant Messanger: TelePhrk 0 E NPA: 908 (NJ) V http://phonerangers.home.ml.org/ I - - - - - - - - ->Phone Rangers<- - - - - - - - - - - N ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Nov 1998 01:33:12 GMT From: squatex@fdt.net (John Barleycorn) Subject: Re: [mitnick] Today's New York Times redux... On Sun, 1 Nov 1998 17:50:48 EST, Bobwil623@aol.com shot across phone lines and fiber optic cable worldwide at amazing speeds: >as USG seeks to roll out "back door" entrances into encryption, the role >of britain in introducing such back doors into encryption, *and granting >law enforcement access to those back doors with anything less than a >warrant*, is instructive. I'll have to go with an old NRA phrase here: "You can pry my PGP key from my cold dead hands." When the US government starts peeking into my encryption, that does it: Im moving to Holland. Bigass Dale / John Barleycorn / SquateX ^^Depending who you ask^^ squatexNOSPAM@fdt.net <--Remove the NOSPAM FREE KEVIN MITNICK! - www.kevinmitnick.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 20:05:02 EST From: Bobwil623@aol.com Subject: [mitnick] Re: "moving to holland..." (was "today's new york times") > I'll have to go with an old NRA phrase here: > "You can pry my PGP key from my cold dead > hands." > > When the US government starts peeking into my > encryption, that does it: Im moving to Holland. my best guess is, you might want to start packing. unless far more people begin raising a *huge* ruckus about USG's actions to ensure the ability to read anything sent electronically by anyone, we'll see these issues enacted into law within the next 2-3 years at the outside. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 17:19:21 -0800 From: "Paul Hsieh" Subject: Re: [mitnick] Today's New York Times redux... > On Sun, 1 Nov 1998 17:50:48 EST, Bobwil623@aol.com shot across phone > lines and fiber optic cable worldwide at amazing speeds: > > >as USG seeks to roll out "back door" entrances into encryption, the role > >of britain in introducing such back doors into encryption, *and granting > >law enforcement access to those back doors with anything less than a > >warrant*, is instructive. > > I'll have to go with an old NRA phrase here: "You can pry my PGP key > from my cold dead hands." > > When the US government starts peeking into my encryption, that does > it: Im moving to Holland. I might move to Canada, but perhaps more preferable would be for states to simply sucede from the US. (Oh that's done it, now I'll have an FBI file on me and everything ...) - -- Paul Hsieh qed@pobox.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Nov 1998 03:00:58 GMT From: squatex@fdt.net (John Barleycorn) Subject: [mitnick] Re: Getting off topic here (sorry) (was: "moving to holland..." ) On Sun, 1 Nov 1998 20:05:02 EST, Bobwil623@aol.com shot across phone lines and fiber optic cable worldwide at amazing speeds: >> I'll have to go with an old NRA phrase here: >> "You can pry my PGP key from my cold dead >> hands." >> >> When the US government starts peeking into my >> encryption, that does it: Im moving to Holland. > > >my best guess is, you might want to start packing. unless far more >people begin raising a *huge* ruckus about USG's actions to ensure the >ability to read anything sent electronically by anyone, we'll see these >issues enacted into law within the next 2-3 years at the outside. On the brighter side, even if legislation like this is pushed through (which i agree looks likely) thers no way it could practically be enforced. eg: US (not intended for export) encryption algorithems make their way to europe weeks before they are released. Thers really no way to enforce laws like this anymore (not that Im saying its right writing them into law in the first place). Bigass Dale / John Barleycorn / SquateX ^^Depending who you ask^^ squatex@fdt.net FREE KEVIN MITNICK! - www.kevinmitnick.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 21:16:14 EST From: Antonlappe@aol.com Subject: Re: [mitnick] Today's New York Times redux... I am a writer who has written on hackers in the past ("The Good. The Bad. The Geeks." NYT 14 July 98). I was actually thinking of writing a story very much like Amy Harmon's piece of a couple of days ago - but she beat me to it. If there is anyone out there who has leads to similar types of political hacks that she missed could they please contact me directly - - or there are any political hackers who are planning actions - I would be interested in hearing about them (I write for NYT< New York magazine, and others). I am also interested in hearing about any interesting hacker cases that people haven't heard of. Thanks. Anthony Lappe National Affairs Editor Black Book Magazine ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 18:27:49 -0800 (PST) From: Support Services Subject: Re: [mitnick] Today's New York Times > Ignorant reporter asshole eh? If your attitude is any indicator, then > it's no wonder the media hasn't picked up your viewpoint on the Mitnick > story. They can't take anyone like you seriously. If you fail to see > the relevance of the NYT story on hacktivism to the Mitnick case, then > you're the one proving yourself to be ignorant. Yes, ignorant reporter asshole. My attitude is not at issue here. But as the typical scumbag reporter, you attempt to deflect my harsh words through a cloud of irrelevance. I at least will be taken more seriously than the scum reporters who feed on a story, regarless of relevance or accuracy (yourself included). Carefully explain to us how a NYT (the same scum who acted as a soap- box for Markoff, where he spouted his inaccuracies) article on Hack- tivism will specifically benefit the Mitnick case. Don't be a coy scumbag reporter -- tread on the issue and stay on-topic. Exactly how will Randolph, or anyone else defending Mitnick, use your stupid off-subject post to create a better situation for Kevin? Dumb ass. > Maybe it was off-topic, as it did not specifically cover the Mitnick > case, but I bet several people on the list found the story interesting > if they read it. Several people, including myself, would also find the latest Iraqi incidents interesting. That doesn't mean I post them all on here. That's obvious. The fact that you formulate such a weak excuse to cover-up your off-topic bullshit serves as just another indication of how intellectually bankrupt you are... especially as a reporter. > I was simply giving a heads up. If you don't like it, then try > mailing me personally about it, rather than flaming me on the list. Kiss my ass. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 18:32:11 -0800 (PST) From: Support Services Subject: Re: [mitnick] Today's New York Times redux... On Sun, 01 Nov 1998 15:42:17 PST, TelePhreak . wrote: > did anyone ever think maybe, some how some way, the kid > screwed up and posted it to the wrong list? > > just a thought No - I didn't think that for one minute. This guy's not a kid, he's a scumbag reporter out for a blood-story, at Kevin's expense. All the reporters play their little games to get what they want. His is to feed us off-topic bullshit, in an insincere show of patriotism and all that shit. Good thing Kevin is experienced enough to know better than to talk to the likes of this guy. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 18:38:22 -0800 (PST) From: Support Services Subject: Re: [mitnick] Today's New York Times On Sun, 1 Nov 1998 14:24:09 -0500, Arik Hesseldahl wrote: > If your attitude is any indicator, then it's no wonder the > media hasn't picked up your viewpoint on the Mitnick story. The media is a garbage pail of half-truths and self-serving interests. Therefore, why would I want to associate myself with that? If you're another one of the scum-buckets who writes for the media, so be it... you're a scumbag. Your interest is simply self-serving. Your relationship is no different than that of any other reporter or media person. Don't tell me you're different -- that you're willing to forego your interests and risk your career over accurately reporting the Mitnick story. Are you ready to chastise and scold other reporters publicly? Are you ready to lose the "respect" of your fellow scumbags, all in the name of Kevin? I didn't think so. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 21:39:51 EST From: BadGirlnLA@aol.com Subject: [mitnick] X-rated Mitnick T-Shirts If you want to see how good a Mitnick t-shirt looks on a real, live person, go to: http://www.babe.net and click on "cover-up/exposed". This will lead you to an x-rated display of a Mitnick t-shirt. You must be 18 years of age to enter this Mitnick site. I have been told that pictures of a stunning blonde will be available soon wearing the new black with gold "free kevin" shirt. Upon receipt, new photos will be posted. This isn't *off topic*, is it????????????? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1998 22:16:33 -0500 From: John Vranesevich Subject: Re: [mitnick] Today's New York Times Greetings All, Oook, I can't stand to keep quiet about this guy any longer. Allow me to step out on a limb and give you a profile of him, based on the thousands of hackers I've talked to over the past 6 years. Some of which were true geniuses, and others, well, were more like him. He's more than likely a social outcast. He probably feels like he has very little control over his own life, much less over anything else. He uses the Internet to lash out at people like Arik, because it gives him a sense of power over something. This sense of power over someone allows him to make up for the insecurities that he's feeling in his own life. Now, I'm sure that he, and others like him on this list, will lash out at me next. I'm a threat to their sense of power, a threat to their feeling of security. But, I think that he knows how close I really am to his true psyche. Call what I have said stereotyping if you will. But, as I have said, I've spoken to hundreds like him, and you'd be surprised how clear of a mold they come out of. What some of you seem to fail to realize, is that the media, and individuals such as Arik, could be allies to your cause. Sure, you can waste your time putting fliers on people's cars at Walmart, but that is insignificant compared to the reach that stories written by reporters like Arik have. It's people like you, that have given the scene today such a bad appearance to the general public as a whole. So, if you are younger, I suspect that you'll find yourself maturing in the future, as most of us do. If, however, you're not, I suggest you go seek counseling, because it's very clear to me, as it probably is to most other matured individuals on this list, that you have some serious issues which need resolved. I would also like to encourage the owners of this list to publicly denounce such childish and immature flames that are being posted to this list. It is beginning to create a hostile environment, that is surely detrimental to the continued productivity of the list, and VERY counter productive to your Mitnick plight. Yours In CyberSpace, John Vranesevich Founder, AntiOnline At 06:27 PM 11/1/98 -0800, you wrote: > >> Ignorant reporter asshole eh? If your attitude is any indicator, then >> it's no wonder the media hasn't picked up your viewpoint on the Mitnick >> story. They can't take anyone like you seriously. If you fail to see >> the relevance of the NYT story on hacktivism to the Mitnick case, then >> you're the one proving yourself to be ignorant. > >Yes, ignorant reporter asshole. My attitude is not at issue here. >But as the typical scumbag reporter, you attempt to deflect my harsh >words through a cloud of irrelevance. I at least will be taken more >seriously than the scum reporters who feed on a story, regarless of >relevance or accuracy (yourself included). > >Carefully explain to us how a NYT (the same scum who acted as a soap- >box for Markoff, where he spouted his inaccuracies) article on Hack- >tivism will specifically benefit the Mitnick case. Don't be a coy >scumbag reporter -- tread on the issue and stay on-topic. Exactly >how will Randolph, or anyone else defending Mitnick, use your stupid >off-subject post to create a better situation for Kevin? Dumb ass. > >> Maybe it was off-topic, as it did not specifically cover the Mitnick >> case, but I bet several people on the list found the story interesting >> if they read it. > >Several people, including myself, would also find the latest Iraqi >incidents interesting. That doesn't mean I post them all on here. >That's obvious. The fact that you formulate such a weak excuse to >cover-up your off-topic bullshit serves as just another indication >of how intellectually bankrupt you are... especially as a reporter. > >> I was simply giving a heads up. If you don't like it, then try >> mailing me personally about it, rather than flaming me on the list. > >Kiss my ass. > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 22:13:41 -0500 From: "Aaron D. Ball" Subject: Re: [mitnick] Today's New York Times On Sun, Nov 01, 1998 at 06:38:22PM -0800, Support Services wrote: > On Sun, 1 Nov 1998 14:24:09 -0500, Arik Hesseldahl wrote: > > > If your attitude is any indicator, then it's no wonder the > > media hasn't picked up your viewpoint on the Mitnick story. > > The media is a garbage pail of half-truths and self-serving > interests. Therefore, why would I want to associate myself > with that? Lay off the gratuitous flamage. It's not benefiting anyone. Actually, I get the impression that you don't really give a shit; otherwise, you'd notice the fact that "the media" (which is the plural of "medium", by the way, and refers to the several media TV, newspapers, and so on) are the only way to reach large numbers of people, which in turn is the only way to reach politicians if you don't have the money to buy them. We bloody well *need* to "associate" ourselves with the media in order to get the message out. > Don't tell me you're different -- that you're willing to > forego your interests and risk your career over accurately > reporting the Mitnick story. Are you ready to chastise and > scold other reporters publicly? Reporters make lots of money criticizing each other and talking about the evils of The Media. CF Brill's Content, for one obvious example. It's an advantageous career move, not a crusade. The more serious question is whether the criticism truly gets to the heart of the injustices we're concerned with (like Markoff and the NYT). (The answer is "no", by the way. Just in case you weren't sure.) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 22:22:21 EST From: EmpAllin@aol.com Subject: [mitnick] Digest Archive (for now) I just finished uploading all of the list digests I could find. I have some more but I'm not to sure where they are at. I will upload these as I get them. If anyone else has any of these, mail them to me and I will put them up. This site is pretty much just an archive of these without any bells and whistles. I still haven't done any kind of read.me file forthis but I thought I would go ahead and pass it on to those who are interested. So to see all of the bickering, in fighting, and ocassional on-topic post in all of their wonderful glory. New files will be added as the list generates them and as space permits. If this archive does eat up all my tripod space I will try to find another happy home for it.....but hopefully Kevin will be free long before that happens. We can only hope. so for now dig through...... http://members.tripod.com/~empallin/Free_Kevin_Mitnick/ As usual, Allin ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 22:58:16 EST From: Bobwil623@aol.com Subject: [mitnick] instructive comments in re subtlety.... post below is rather instructive when we consider the comments made by steven levy (author, "hackers," and "insanely great") -- see especially the paragraphs i've id'd with "!!!!" ============================== News sites: Don't let yourself be hacked the same way twice By Paul Eisenberg, Freedom Forum Media Studies Center 9.15.98 NEW YORK _ News organizations are vulnerable to hackers, as the group "Hacking for Girlies" proved when it commandeered the New York Times on the Web on Sunday. And while the Times and other online information providers will no doubt take measures to bolster their site security, the best rule for now is never allow yourself to be hacked the same way twice, says author Mike Godwin, online counsel for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "Make sure you understand precisely what was done to hack your site, and make sure to add adequate safeguards. If you need expert help, don't be afraid to ask for it," Godwin told free! Upon penetrating the Times site, the hackers posted photos of nude women and criticized the paper's coverage of Kevin Mitnick, a convicted computer criminal who has been in prison since 1995. Times staff discovered the breach Sunday morning and took down the site. After restoring service Sunday evening, the Times ran a story about the incident yesterday and has posted the following notice to its users: "The New York Times on the Web was unavailable for more than 9 hours on Sunday. Most of the site has been restored, but certain areas remain inaccessible, including the archive, forums and site search. Classifieds are available through New York Today." Steven Levy, author of Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution, says that a news organization's best response editorially is to be honest with its readers about what happened and post a statement saying it will take measures to prevent future incidents. "You apologize," Levy said. "Try to explain what you did wrong. It's not like the situation [faced by] financial institutions in the past that have had a big incentive to underplay any kind of break-ins." Bernard Gwertzman, editor of the Times online, told Wired that the paper considered the incident very serious, noting that the hackers were "interfering with the press' ability to function." Gwertzman added that although this was the first time that online Times content had been tampered with, the site was rendered inaccessible on election night in November 1996 when hackers attacked the site's server. What can editors do if their site is attacked? Godwin suggests three steps a news organization might take: "Step one: Don't get mad, get it fixed. The more public thrashing you do about the hack, the more gratification you give to the hackers." "Step two: Don't assume the cops can help. They have a different agenda _ catching the bad guys _ and may not have particularly useful advice for someone whose first priority is to undo the damage." "Step three: Cover the news story, but don't editorialize about it." "Big names are always going to be big targets. That's why security has to be factored into everyone's Web site design," Godwin added. !!!! Levy cautions news organizations that although hackings such as the flamboyant one suffered by the Times on Sunday are serious, a more worrisome hack is the subtle one. !!!! "The more dangerous hack that ... we should be concerned about is making [a news site's information] look really plausible, changing something subtly, sneaking in a sentence about something, changing a positive to a negative so that it might not be easily caught," Levy said. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 02 Nov 1998 05:13:46 GMT From: squatex@fdt.net (John Barleycorn) Subject: Re: [mitnick] Today's New York Times On Sun, 01 Nov 1998 22:16:33 -0500, John Vranesevich shot across phone lines and fiber optic cable worldwide at amazing speeds: > I would also like to encourage the owners of this list to publicly >denounce such childish and immature flames that are being posted to this >list. It is beginning to create a hostile environment, that is surely >detrimental to the continued productivity of the list, and VERY counter >productive to your Mitnick plight. Here Here! Bigass Dale / John Barleycorn / SquateX ^^Depending who you ask^^ squatex@fdt.net FREE KEVIN MITNICK! - www.kevinmitnick.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 23:17:23 -0500 From: "Aaron D. Ball" Subject: Re: [mitnick] instructive comments in re subtlety.... > Upon penetrating the Times site, the hackers posted photos of nude women > and criticized the paper's coverage of Kevin Mitnick, a convicted > computer criminal who has been in prison since 1995. Notice the wording here. "[A] convicted computer criminal who has been in prison since 1995", implying that he's been serving time for the crimes of which he was convicted, rather than awaiting trial for crimes he has merely been accused of. (I'm pretty sure that "prison" is the wrong word, too -- that "jail" is the word for a place of pre-trial detention, while "prison" refers to cold storage for convicts.) This seems to be a common misconception, and one that certain unpleasant people are very eager to propagate. Letters to the editor are definitely appropriate here. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 23:19:07 EST From: Bobwil623@aol.com Subject: [mitnick] read it for yourselves.... let the list members read it for themselves... ========================== October 31, 1998 `Hacktivists' of All Persuasions Take Their Struggle to the Web By AMY HARMON Until they declared "Netwar" against the Mexican government, Ricardo Dominguez and Stefan Wray earned their activist credentials the old-fashioned way, attending rallies in support of the Zapatista rebels, handing out pamphlets, shouting political slogans. Now, the two New Yorkers organize "virtual sit-ins" and recruit computer programmers to attack the World Wide Web sites of any person or company they deem responsible for oppression. Their new rallying cry: "The revolution will be digitized." Wray, 37, and Dominguez, 39, are co-founders of the Electronic Disturbance Theater. It is one of several groups around the world that are beginning to experiment with computer hacking, so far largely nuisance attacks and the equivalent of electronic graffiti, as a means to a political end. "We see this as a form of electronic civil disobedience," Wray told a group of about 75 people who had gathered in New York's East Village for an "anti-Columbus Day" event in October. "We are transferring the social-movement tactics of trespass and blockade to the Internet." The notion is a departure for both radical activists and hackers, whose distinct, subversive subcultures have rarely intersected until recently. In some ways, the two psychologies are polar opposites. Hackers, while reliably anti-authoritarian, tend to limit their critique of the military-industrial complex to its imperfect computer security apparatus. Enamored of their image as the cowboys of the electronic frontier, most at least pay lip service to the hacker mantra, "information wants to be free." But whatever capacity they might have to disrupt the social order has so far been largely restricted to pointless vandalism and pinching the occasional credit card number. Political activists, on the other hand, preoccupied as they are with the power structure, have typically paid little heed to the information infrastructure on which it rests. Motivated by the desire for social change, they generally see building communities of support and cooperation as essential. But the rapid growth of the Internet has transformed what was once a hacker playground into, among other things, a far-reaching political platform. What's more, the tricks invented by hackers have become easier for activists to learn and adopt because they are now widely published on how-to Web sites. As a result, radical groups are discovering what hackers have always known: Traditional social institutions are more vulnerable in cyberspace than they are in the physical world. Likewise, some members of the famously sophomoric hacker underground are finding motivation in causes other than ego gratification. In recent months, groups as diverse as the Animal Liberation Front, a militant animal-rights group; Radio4All, which supports pirate broadcasting, and international teams of teen-agers with cyber pseudonyms like Milworm and causes like anti-imperialism have increasingly begun pumping political protest through the Internet's security holes. On Oct., 27, a day after China's human rights agency announced its new Web site, the official view of that nation's human rights record was replaced with an electronic trespasser's manifesto: "China's people have no rights at all, never mind human rights. How can the United States trade millions and millions of dollars with them and give them most-favored trade status when they know what is happening?" Earlier in October, computer intruders scrawled "Save Kashmir" over the opening screen of a Web site that the Indian government set up last summer to provide information about the region, whose ownership is disputed by Pakistan and several separatist groups. The hacked site included photographs of Kashmiris allegedly killed by Indian forces, overlaid with the words "massacre" and "extra-judicial execution." In June, after the Indian government conducted nuclear tests, college students in Britain and the Netherlands claimed credit for placing the image of a mushroom cloud on the Web site of India's major nuclear weapons research center. In September, Portuguese hackers modified the sites of 40 Indonesian servers to display the slogan "Free East Timor" in large black letters, and they added hypertext links to Web sites describing Indonesian human rights abuses in the former Portuguese colony. No slouches in packaging and self-promotion, the burgeoning computer underground has adopted a catchy term for the trend: they call it "hacktivism." "Hacktivism is a way to be heard by millions," a group of three Mexican hackers known as X-Ploit wrote in an e-mail message to a reporter. "We want to speak out about what we and many, many people disagree with in this treasonous and corrupt government. If we protest both on line and off line, we'll have better chances to see a change." The tactic is not limited to one end of the political spectrum. A group of Serbian computer hackers this month claimed responsibility for crashing a Web site promoting the ethnic Albanian cause in the Serbian province of Kosovo. The Serbian newspaper Blic quoted one of the hackers as saying, "We shall continue to remove ethnic Albanian lies from the Internet." Wednesday, the group, called Black Hand, after a clandestine Serbian military organization at the turn of the century, attacked the site of the Croatian state-owned newspaper Vjesnik. Croatian hackers counterattacked the next day, inserting messages like "Read Vjesnick and not Serbian books" on the Web site of the Serbian National Library, Vjesnik reported Friday. Guerrilla attacks on Web sites may seem more of a headline-grabbing ploy than true information warfare. But security experts said the recent spate of digital vandalism underscores the risk to companies and governments that increasingly rely on the Internet for commerce and communication. "What this demonstrates is the capacity of groups with political causes to hack into systems," said Michael Vatis, chief of the National Information Protection Center, a new federal agency formed to protect the nation's crucial infrastructure. "I wouldn't characterize vandalizing Web sites as cyber-terrorism, but the only responsible assumption we can make is there's more going on that we don't know about." Established by Attorney General Janet Reno this year, the center is in part a response to the perception that "political forces which could not take on the United States in conventional military terms stand a better chance on an electronic battlefield," said Vatis. The potency of the sling-shot approach is not lost on would-be hacktivists, either. "If you have 10 people at a protest, they don't do much of anything," said a Toronto-based computer jockey who calls himself Oxblood Ruffian. "If you have 10 people on line, they could cripple a network." Oxblood is a member of Cult of the Dead Cow, a hacker group that recently reserved the Web address as an Internet distribution hub for tools to assist others in subversive digital activism. He said the group was planning to attack the Internet operations of U.S. companies doing business with China. But the effectiveness of such actions is unclear, prompting a debate over how best to implement the hacktivist brand of political protest. Under U.S. law, terrorism is defined as an act of violence for the purpose of intimidating or coercing a government or a civilian population. And breaking into a computer system and altering data are felonies. For that reason, the members of the Electronic Disturbance Theater emphasize that the software they use to attack Web sites disrupts Internet traffic but does not destroy data. In the tradition of civil disobedience protests, they encourage mass participation and use their real names. The group was forged in an online discussion among several American supporters of the Zapatistas, the first armed revolutionaries known to have solicited public sympathy for their struggle by publishing their communiques over the Internet. On Nov. 22, the group says, it plans to attack the Web site of the School for the Americas, a U.S. Army training center for foreign military personnel, some of whom have been accused of human rights abuses. Recent targets have included the sites of Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo and of the U.S. Defense Department. When online activists heed the call to "commence flooding!" they visit the group's Web site and click on an icon that launches a program called FloodNet. The software points their Web browser to the target of the attack, where it requests the same page over and over again at a rate of about 10 times per minute. This tactic is a variation of what is known in Internet security-speak as a "denial of service attack." An unusually large volume of requests will overwhelm the computer that is serving up the target's Web pages. This can cause legitimate visitors to see error messages instead of the pages they are seeking, and it can even crash the server computer. "This isn't cyber-terrorism," insisted Carmin Karasic, a Quincy, Mass., software engineer who designed the FloodNet program. "It's more like conceptual art." The U.S. Defense Department does not agree. Alerted to a planned FloodNet attack on its public site on Mexican Independence Day, the agency responded by diverting the requests to a nonexistent Internet address, a spokesman said. "If it wasn't illegal it was certainly immoral -- there are other constructive methods of electronic protest," the spokesman said. The victims of such attacks are not the only ones to criticize the digital desperados. In their quest for support from a public already suspicious of hackers and anxious about online safety, some political activists deride such methods as counterproductive. And hackers faithful to the ethic of electronic exploration for its own sake deride Web site intrusions as the work of "script kiddies," an epithet for people who break into systems by using schemes developed by others rather than by searching out new security holes of their own. Script kiddies have been responsible for a recent surge in attacks throughout the Internet -- of which politically motivated hacks are a small fraction. But in e-mail and telephone interviews, several hackers promoting a political agenda -- all of whom refused to give their real names -- insisted that their motives were pure. "We have hundreds of servers we could hack, and we don't," said Secretos, a Portuguese hacker in his early 20's whose group, the Kaotik Team, has taken up the cause of East Timor independence. "By contrary, we even help them to fix their bugs. The main objective of our hacking pages is to transmit the message. It is not, 'We are groovy, we have power."' John Vranesevitch, editor of Antionline, an Internet publication that tracks hacker activities, said the apparent political awakening among hackers reflects a generation's coming of age. "We're starting to see right now the first generation of people who have grown up on the Internet," said Vranesevitch, who at 19 counts himself among that group. "These hackers are entering the ages where people are most politically active. This is their outlet." And some are trying to make that outlet more accessible. A 26-year-old University of Toronto dropout calling himself Perl Bailey, after a computer language popular among Web developers, said he had earned a living as a software developer and had dabbled in not entirely legal computer exploration for several years. Now, he is writing a tool to arm computer novices with basic hacktivist techniques. "After you reach a certain point, it feels like you are dressed up with nowhere to go," he said. "I want to make people doing questionable business dealings with countries that have no respect for human rights worry that someone who doesn't have a grade school education can sit down and go click-click and create havoc. To me that to me is very powerful." ------------------------------ End of mitnick-digest V1 #189 *****************************