Actually did some more thought on it, if they took the domain(not just the DNS) then that would explain the msg. Someone who knows more about networking should chime in on this.
Now im not a yank, but wouldnt this come under a freedom of speech? Not all of those sites were/are "counterfit", there was a couple of rap sites.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." From wiki
So because there's no law your saying that its not against the amendment? If thats the case, how are they taking it down?
Thats one of the sites actual ip's - when you goto it, yup you got the taken down message. Thats not a domain name seizure, thats a server seizure(i havnt tracert'ed it yet... actually doing it now...)
Wow getting some weird results, someone who knows more about networks will have to look at that(not my field).
So it seems like they have seized more than just the domain name...
Despite the risks, some people will continue to release these documents as they are found.
Its not like he didnt know the risks going into this, and while i think it was foolish of him to use his name freely, its his decision at the end of the day.
Back to the subject though, your president cannot bring legal action against this site, not without everything blowing out of proportion, and just a large game of wack-a-mole.
They cant shut down wikileaks because its not US based guys. Its run by an aussie, but last i checked, it was hosted somewhere else.
Also as Mike notes, some of us are mirroring the Wikileaks site, if it go's down, were going to put it back up somewhere else. (on a side note, im going to need a new HD soon if they release much more roflol).
As much as i dont want to derail this conversation(even aussies find this interesting, might be happening to you guys across the pond, but it shows us what to look out for over here).
Non compatible version? What the hell are you smoking?
Unless some hacker installs it on your computer... SQL injection attacks, email scams(with links to infected webpages) etc sound familiar?
As for the danger of using torrents, id strongly argue that more stupid users get infected from clicking bad links or from bad direct downloads than torrents(because they are that stupid).
BTW your writing style makes you seem like a damn 4yo who cant control his voice, save the rest of our eye's eh? If you really want to emphasise use a damn * around the world.
And aside from all that, what was the entire point of derailing this thread for your not-exactly coherent ramble?
Stupid law, as mentioned above wont work(as peeps will just start using work arounds for any blacklist.) And yay, mike accidently double posted, i dont feel so bad now when i do that :P
Great so when me and my mates stand outside the city loop stations handing out flyers about how to get around the new filter, their going to call me a terrorist :s
remember folks you heard it here first, im not a damn terrorist!
And fentex, yeah we dont have one, damnit.
Whats my country coming to, warrentless search's, a badly designed NBN with a mandatory filter that reduces speed and a blacklist thats mostly grey :S
What an inflated sense of entitlement! So basicly if we cannot handle our own workload, any mistakes we make are our own? Not because were not suited to the job at hand, but because everyone else makes things hard.
Boo-freaking-who.
God if she thinks writing a magazine about chefs is hard, then "Hey love, try being one for a few years!"
A little to the left of this topic but its been bugging me. Here in aus we have whats called a VISP(virtual isp), for example i can rent bandwidth/connections off an existing supplier(or even isp with extra bandwidth) and rent that out to consumers at a fairly decent rate.
Surely you can do something similar over there - i just asked my isp who's supplying their bandwidth and they told me, then i contacted that company and voilla, im basicly ready to start it with me and a few mates.
re: Flack's
"Any denial of service should be prosecuted and punished. If the attacker doesn't like a politician today he may not like a bank or your hospital or city mayor tomorrow.
DoA at a bank could prevent people from getting access to their money when they need to eat or pay a mortgage and avoid late fees/foreclosure. And certainly we can think of medical systems that supply life critical information OK for him to DoA? Is it OK if he attacks your town's traffic systems causing hours of delays, pollution and emergency access?
Punishment should be sever so that attackers won't say "It was just a harmless joke or a lark." Peoples lives, livelihoods, and safety are sometimes the unanticipated consequences of those DoA masking as pranks.
DoA is an intentional crime. The manslaughter mentioned above is sad, but mainly punishment for negligence (We don't know all the circumstances obviously - and there is unfairness in sentencing out there.)
If a DoA attack on a city or hospital causes people to die is that when you want to increase the penalty?
"
Are you nuts?
Dos a bank - they should be smart enough to have internal systems in place for this, switching ips to the next one(while temp banning the high freq incoming for 30 mins).
Dos a hospital - Since when is the equipment accessable over the internet? At the very least they should be running multiple networks, with a few physically seperated.
Dos traffic lights - Again, if not on a seperate system - why not?
To stop people from using their money your attempting to take down all ADSL traffic from the EFTPOS machines - which all have a manual option for when the networks are clogged/down to allow purchases anyway.
What im saying is all important services are not vunerable to this so stop scare mongering :P
The guy did take down a university, but again, THEY should have been prepared(if i dont insure my car and i crash into someone, can i blame them as i wasnt prepared?) - my uni site was recently taken down by a ddos, it was back up quickly with a work around(its a tech uni, id hope to hell my lecturers know what their doing).
30 months for a prank? Glad i dont live over there.
On the post: If Newly Seized Domains Were Purely Dedicated To Infringement, Why Was Kanye West Using One?
Has your govt suddenly lost all rational thought during that holiday you had recently? Too much beer? :s
On the post: Amazon Bows To US Censorship Pressure: Refuses To Host Wikileaks
I hope anon steps up and has a go at amazon now. ;)
On the post: YouTube Sensation Justin Bieber Blocked From Uploading His Own Music To YouTube By Copyright
On the post: Axl Rose Sues Activision For $20M Because Guitar Hero Shows Former GNR Guitarist Slash
On the post: Five Questions For Homeland Security Concerning Its Online Censorship Campaign
Re:
On the post: Five Questions For Homeland Security Concerning Its Online Censorship Campaign
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." From wiki
So because there's no law your saying that its not against the amendment? If thats the case, how are they taking it down?
On the post: Five Questions For Homeland Security Concerning Its Online Censorship Campaign
http://74.81.170.110/
Thats one of the sites actual ip's - when you goto it, yup you got the taken down message. Thats not a domain name seizure, thats a server seizure(i havnt tracert'ed it yet... actually doing it now...)
Wow getting some weird results, someone who knows more about networks will have to look at that(not my field).
So it seems like they have seized more than just the domain name...
On the post: Obama 'Considering Legal Action' Against Wikileaks
Re: Wikileak
Its not like he didnt know the risks going into this, and while i think it was foolish of him to use his name freely, its his decision at the end of the day.
Back to the subject though, your president cannot bring legal action against this site, not without everything blowing out of proportion, and just a large game of wack-a-mole.
On the post: Obama 'Considering Legal Action' Against Wikileaks
Re: Secret Govt. Docs...
So let me get this straight, you want to ruin your ties with my country, because someone posted something leaked by your own countryman?
Over-reacting much? Did you stop to think of what those consequences would be, if you started making ill-thought out demands of your allies?
On the post: Obama 'Considering Legal Action' Against Wikileaks
Also as Mike notes, some of us are mirroring the Wikileaks site, if it go's down, were going to put it back up somewhere else. (on a side note, im going to need a new HD soon if they release much more roflol).
Hephaestus, do you mean this one?
http://www.demonoid.com/files/details/2466654/4932480/
On the post: Five Questions For Homeland Security Concerning Its Online Censorship Campaign
Re: For those that dont remember
Non compatible version? What the hell are you smoking?
Unless some hacker installs it on your computer... SQL injection attacks, email scams(with links to infected webpages) etc sound familiar?
As for the danger of using torrents, id strongly argue that more stupid users get infected from clicking bad links or from bad direct downloads than torrents(because they are that stupid).
BTW your writing style makes you seem like a damn 4yo who cant control his voice, save the rest of our eye's eh? If you really want to emphasise use a damn * around the world.
And aside from all that, what was the entire point of derailing this thread for your not-exactly coherent ramble?
On the post: Why Voting For COICA Is A Vote For Censorship
On the post: Australia Says No Warrants Necessary If Law Enforcement Thinks You're A Terrorist
remember folks you heard it here first, im not a damn terrorist!
And fentex, yeah we dont have one, damnit.
Whats my country coming to, warrentless search's, a badly designed NBN with a mandatory filter that reduces speed and a blacklist thats mostly grey :S
On the post: How Warner Bros. Should Have Responded To Harry Potter Leak
On the post: Cooks Source 'Apology' Really A Rant Blaming The Woman It Copied For Daring To Tell People
Boo-freaking-who.
God if she thinks writing a magazine about chefs is hard, then "Hey love, try being one for a few years!"
On the post: The Day The WSJ Attributed My Quote To Someone Else
Im surprised they emailed you, id say its a start at least, their paying a little more attention to detail now.
On the post: Comcast Buying NBCU Will Lead To Higher Prices... But Is That Really A Bad Thing?
Surely you can do something similar over there - i just asked my isp who's supplying their bandwidth and they told me, then i contacted that company and voilla, im basicly ready to start it with me and a few mates.
On the post: Comcast Buying NBCU Will Lead To Higher Prices... But Is That Really A Bad Thing?
Re:
A) Love that quote at the end
B) This is going to be interesting to see what the end results are.
On the post: ACTA Negotiations Are 'Done'... But Negotiators Still Getting Together For A 'Legal Scrub'
On the post: 30 Months In Prison For Denial Of Service Hit On Politicians' Websites
Re: You're missing the point
"Any denial of service should be prosecuted and punished. If the attacker doesn't like a politician today he may not like a bank or your hospital or city mayor tomorrow.
DoA at a bank could prevent people from getting access to their money when they need to eat or pay a mortgage and avoid late fees/foreclosure. And certainly we can think of medical systems that supply life critical information OK for him to DoA? Is it OK if he attacks your town's traffic systems causing hours of delays, pollution and emergency access?
Punishment should be sever so that attackers won't say "It was just a harmless joke or a lark." Peoples lives, livelihoods, and safety are sometimes the unanticipated consequences of those DoA masking as pranks.
DoA is an intentional crime. The manslaughter mentioned above is sad, but mainly punishment for negligence (We don't know all the circumstances obviously - and there is unfairness in sentencing out there.)
If a DoA attack on a city or hospital causes people to die is that when you want to increase the penalty?
"
Are you nuts?
Dos a bank - they should be smart enough to have internal systems in place for this, switching ips to the next one(while temp banning the high freq incoming for 30 mins).
Dos a hospital - Since when is the equipment accessable over the internet? At the very least they should be running multiple networks, with a few physically seperated.
Dos traffic lights - Again, if not on a seperate system - why not?
To stop people from using their money your attempting to take down all ADSL traffic from the EFTPOS machines - which all have a manual option for when the networks are clogged/down to allow purchases anyway.
What im saying is all important services are not vunerable to this so stop scare mongering :P
The guy did take down a university, but again, THEY should have been prepared(if i dont insure my car and i crash into someone, can i blame them as i wasnt prepared?) - my uni site was recently taken down by a ddos, it was back up quickly with a work around(its a tech uni, id hope to hell my lecturers know what their doing).
30 months for a prank? Glad i dont live over there.
- Marak
Next >>