I asked the Computer Crime Expert from our local law enforcement some questions about Anonymous. I thought it would be interesting to hear from a different point of view.
- What do you know about Anonymous hackers?
The group Anonymous is not really a group in any formal sense of the word in that;
there is no membership, no hierarchy, no leadership and no prescribed rule book.
The group, instead, is a loosely knit conglomerate of online hackers with varying
levels of expertise that seem to have the broad common focus of reducing internet
censorship. Since there is no membership, and as the name Anonymous suggests; no
list of associates, it is truly unknown the volume of online attacks and pranks that
can actually be attributed to Anonymous. However, it is believed that Anonymous has
been responsible for hundreds of internet attacks and pranks that have ranged from
mildly amusing in nature, to vigilante justice, to dangerous.
- Do you think the government should label them ” terrorist”?
Although “terrorist” is often considered a relative term, whereas one may be a
terrorist to one but a freedom fighter or revolutionary to another; the U.S. Code
of Federal Regulations has defined terrorism as “the unlawful use of force and
violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the
civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social
objectives.” Does Anonymous “intimidate or coerce…in furtherance of …
social objectives”? I believe that there is a very strong argument Anonymous’
tactics are in fact intimidating as they have a skill set which allows them to
virtually gain access to digitally stored and displayed sources of which many of us
may have previously felt were secure and protected. Regarding their objective, it
is difficult to pinpoint a single focus but there does seem to be an overarching
dislike or even hatred toward internet censorship. Internet censorship as an issue
can absolutely be considered social in nature and therefore qualifies. However,
the definition leads with “the unlawful use of force and violence against person
or property…” Although it can be argued that Anonymous’ tactics are
unlawful, it could be a logical stretch to label these tactics as forceful or
violent. Despite the absence of actual force or violence, I believe that
definitions can be fluid and cannot encompass the potential evolution of society.
If the definition instead were phrased to include; “[an] unlawful [action]
against persons or property …”, the replacement of the verb action instead of
force and violence absolutely qualifies the ‘actions’ of Anonymous as terrorist
in nature.
- Do you think they are a threat to national security or local law enforcement
agencies? The have stole private information from law enforcement agencies, FBI and
CIA and threatened to release the information.
Anonymous is absolutely a threat to national security and law enforcement agencies.
The actions taken by individuals claiming association with Anonymous have ranged
in nature regarding the potential threat posed. For example, Anonymous has been
instrumental in bringing to justice perpetrators of child exploitation as well as
identifying and shutting down highly secure and secretive online cache’s of child
pornography through denial of service attacks. The group has also attacked secure
CIA, FBI, Scotland Yard, Interpol, DOD and many, many other government
organizations containing sensitive material. Despite the group’s actions
resulting in positive outcomes, it is very dangerous to allow a vigilante group to
police its society especially when those vigilantes are in fact, anonymous.
- In your opinion,what do you think they do with all the information they hack?
I believe this may be the most varied response to any of the questions as each
“member” of Anonymous most likely has their own unique motives. There are many
who most likely commit their online attacks for the sake of committing the attack
or to simply make a statement. There are others who are likely to be financially
motivated though. And even those who are or were not initially financially
motivated, it is not difficult to imagine that there is a price they may accept for
the data they acquire.
- Do you think Anonymous are just a group of kids playing around or should we take
them seriously?
Yes, I do think they are a group of kids playing around and yes I do think we should
take them seriously. The abilities of these “kids” are such that older
generations have a difficult time imagining that there was a need to secure from
such actions. One only needs to watch a parent with their three year old while the
latter plays with the former’s iPhone or Android manipulating the device as or
more efficiently as the parent to understand that the technical abilities of
children continue to grow exponentially and appears to be almost engrained. It is
also important to understand that these same “kids” are in fact kids and often
fail to truly grasp the implications of their actions. This is a very dangerous
combination that absolutely should be taken very serious.
The Enigma News 