Anonymous NZ hacks National websites

73 comments on “Anonymous NZ hacks National websites ”

• Comments are now closed

1. BrucetheMoose 1

   30 July 2013 at 7:10 am

   Nothing like a good taste of your own medicine. He will be steaming over his money markets and shares reports this good morning. Not to forget his latte and croissants.
2. One Anonymous Knucklehead 2

   30 July 2013 at 7:18 am

   “You see! You see! This is why we need the GCSB Bill!”

   My pick is that if the GCSB has been collecting metadata we’ll see some very quick arrests. Maybe I’m being naive, but I don’t think there’s any such thing as online anonymity. Tor schmor.
   • Sable 2.1

     30 July 2013 at 9:45 am

     What I see is someone who is willing to sell their rights on the premise that Keys and co will make them safe. Internet crime is worth billions of dollars, do you seriously think Keys and co can combat that with a bill that’s focused on domestic spying not real international criminals? We already have services in place to cope with this such as INTERPOL.

     Compared with hard core internet criminals Anonymous are no more than simple hacktivists. Real internet criminals use sophisticated teams of programmers to achieve their ends and are exceptionally hard to trace even with modern technology. Indeed even when pinpointed the move around so its not an easy task trying to catch them. They also tend to operate in environments where laws have little meaning and/or the criminals have more guns and manpower than the police.

     Will there be quick arrests, probably but they will be for pretty crap that distracts the ignorant and easily led from the real objective to silence dissent and establish government domination of the internet.
     • One Anonymous Knucklehead 2.1.1

       30 July 2013 at 9:59 am

       You see those little marks – ” – at either end of the first sentence? Those are “quote” marks – a signal that the text contained within them is to be read as a “quote”.

       In this case, the “quote” is what I imagine one of the official responses will be.

       If you’re going to criticise the lying Prime Minister please try and get his name right.
3. Tautoko Viper 3

   30 July 2013 at 7:36 am

   Nice. Better than the messages given to beneficiaries every day by this mean-spirited government.
4. Tautoko Viper 4

   30 July 2013 at 7:49 am

   If these hackers get arrested, then so should the GCSB who illegally spied on 88 people.
   • One Anonymous Knucklehead 4.1

     30 July 2013 at 7:51 am

     Specifically, those who authored and signed off illegal surveillance warrants.
     • Bob 4.1.1

       30 July 2013 at 3:12 pm

       Shooting the messenger isn’t it? Why not arrest the Labour Ministers that wrote the contradicting legislation that put these people in an impossible situation? Signing off the surveillence warrants was perfectly legal, but the GCSB executing them was illegal, brilliant.
       • Murray Olsen 4.1.1.1

         30 July 2013 at 6:32 pm

         The legislation seemed very clear to everyone but Key apologists. If the spy agencies thought they were in an impossible situation, why didn’t they bring this to government’s attention much earlier? Why only after they were caught?

         Please try harder.
       • Frank Macskasy 4.1.1.2

         30 July 2013 at 8:57 pm

         Bob, if you actually KNEW the contents of Section 14 of the current Government Communications Security Bureau Act 2003, you wouldn’t make such a godawful stupid statement like that.

         To wit,

         Restrictions imposed on interceptions

         14 Interceptions not to target domestic communications

         Neither the Director, nor an employee of the Bureau, nor a person acting on behalf of the Bureau may authorise or take any action for the purpose of intercepting the communications of a person (not being a foreign organisation or a foreign person) who is a New Zealand citizen or a permanent resident.

         Unless someone is terminally thick, that seems fairly straight forward, wouldn’t you agree?
         • Ugly Truth 4.1.1.2.1

           31 July 2013 at 10:01 am

           The devil is in the details. Not all people are persons:

           person:
           A man considered according to the rank he holds in society, with all the rights to which the place he holds entitles him, and the duties which it imposes. 1 Bouv. Inst. no. 137. A human being considered as capable of having rights and or being charged with duties, while a “thing” is the object over which rights may be exercised. (Black’s 2nd (1910))
5. richard 5

   30 July 2013 at 7:57 am

   Stupid, socially inept script kiddies. No doubt they are all slapping themselves on the back but this plays directly into Key’s cyber-attack argument for the “necessity” of spying on all New Zealanders.
   • weka 5.1

     30 July 2013 at 8:52 am

     Yeah, because they’ve been wanting an excuse to take more democracy from NZ. Oh wait…
6. karol 6

   30 July 2013 at 8:08 am

   offline:

   http://www.judithcollins.co.nz/

   http://www.johnkey.co.nz/

   http://www.billenglish.co.nz/

   http://brownlee.co.nz/

   http://www.stevenjoyce.co.nz/

   PS:

   http://www.simonbridges.co.nz/

   PPS: Note to Lynn: thank you! I have edit function!
7. David H 7

   30 July 2013 at 8:16 am

   I must say I did like the bit about the 170k jobs, and the 175k unemployed.
8. infused 8

   30 July 2013 at 8:23 am

   Shouldn’t be laughing, they just exploit common security holes in WordPress etc.
   • lprent 8.1

     30 July 2013 at 9:27 am

     Yeah the ones that should have been long since patched.

     I sometimes scan the HTTP headers and HEAD’s of wordpress sites. I think that more than 80% of the wordpress.org sites are running on old versions. Like leaving wide open doors bearing in mind how well documented some of those exploits are.

     If you can’t update as the updates come through, then you should be running on wordpress.com, blogger or the like.
     • infused 8.1.1

       30 July 2013 at 9:41 am

       Pretty much… no one seems to patch their wordpress instances.

       wordpress.com is good. only issue is the speed.
       • lprent 8.1.1.1

         30 July 2013 at 10:41 am

         Urrghh. I used to test the updates and plugins updates before applying them.

         But after doing that for 2 years without finding a problem, these days I just patch immediately first thing in the morning (the offsite backups happen at about 0400) or shortly after the incremental onsite backups every few hours. I got burnt in the last 4 years with a jetpack update and with another plugin update taking out the site for a period. Specific functionality has died a few times, and I take the plugins out and put a fix in when I have time (usually sending the patch to the author) and replace later

         The wordpress.com widely varying speed issues on the cheaper options and the constraints on shuffing in my own plugins are why I don’t use it. You do get much better performance on the higher end paid options. But the limitations on plugins and the inability to put in system level services like sphinx search are an issue.

         Tradeoffs… But for the types of untrafficked sites like the ones that got hacked, it is where I would go every time.
9. AsleepWhileWalking 9

   30 July 2013 at 8:32 am

   bluelibs.org.nz
   bluegreens.org.nz
   michaelwoodhouse.co.nz
   nikkikaye.co.nz (working)
   maggiebarry.co.nz
   national.org.nz (working)
   davidcarter.co.nz
10. felix 10

    30 July 2013 at 8:55 am

    It’s a good thing they made a video, otherwise no-one would have ever known.
    • weka 10.1

      30 July 2013 at 10:18 am

      Might be why they didn’t bother with UF’s site.
11. weka 11

    30 July 2013 at 9:07 am

    I’ve not seen an Anonymous video before. Are they always this melodramatic?

    How would we know it was them?
    • Pascal's bookie 11.1

      30 July 2013 at 10:25 am

      Yes they are pretty much always dramatic (think of them in this respect of being a bit like Alf’s Imperial Army).

      And there isn’t really a ‘them’ to know that they are part of.

      Anonymous kicked off in 4chan message boards (don’t bother going to look. really). If you didn’t fill in the name space, you would be listed as Anonymous, along with all the other ‘Anons.’ Slowly an ‘Anonymous commenter’ culture emerged as ‘Anon’ commenters took on ribal traits, then some other shit happened.

      It’s very meme based, and the video style is just another meme. As is the style of hack and pretty much everything else. But the short version is that you are anon if you claim to be anon, and that just means that you are anon. and not much more. It’s not a ‘group’ with membership per se. It’s name that doesn’t identify anyone, and so can be anyone and do anything. Some anons will get very pissed off with other anons, and there are big anon fights that weirdly stop being anon as participants are forced to adopt monikers in order to fight. etc.
      • weka 11.1.1

        30 July 2013 at 10:45 am

        Ta Pb.

        Someone was touting on Saturday (on Twitter I think) for hacktivists to join an Anonymous attack.
      • Lanthanide 11.1.2

        30 July 2013 at 1:30 pm

        “Some anons will get very pissed off with other anons, and there are big anon fights that weirdly stop being anon as participants are forced to adopt monikers in order to fight. etc.”

        Seems that would be just like the Founders in DS9: assume a moniker for the purpose of an argument, then blend back into the sea once it’s no longer required.
    • Sable 11.2

      30 July 2013 at 10:26 am

      Yes, they seem to like grand gestures but having said this they are people with their hearts in the right place. There is a documentary about them from the US (thankfully the non biased kind) which looks into their attacks, in particular, upon Scientology. If I can remember the title I’ll post it here.
      • Molly 11.2.1

        30 July 2013 at 12:54 pm

        Name is Anonymous: We are Legion – The Story of the Hactivists.

        Watched it a while ago with my teens. Anonymous is more of a swarm rather than a hierachical organisation, so no political affiliation etc.
    • muzza 11.3

      30 July 2013 at 11:55 am

      Anonymous, are a fictional group, a phantom creation, being used, like AQ have been, as the online boogy man!

      Run by the so called intelligence services, rolled out on command!
      • One Anonymous Knucklehead 11.3.1

        30 July 2013 at 12:59 pm

        🙄
        • muzza 11.3.1.1

          30 July 2013 at 1:46 pm

          Good idea side stepping a subject you know nothing about, well done!

          The name is a complete give-away – genuine hacking groups would not be seen in public under such open, brazen, obviously well funded theatrics!

          Just keep rolling your eyes, you’re smart enough to understand the game that’s being played!
          • One Anonymous Knucklehead 11.3.1.1.1

            30 July 2013 at 2:07 pm

            I’ve forgotten more of it than you’ll ever know.
12. Pete 12

    30 July 2013 at 9:10 am

    Is a DDoS attack really a hack? There’s a difference between infiltrating a site and overloading it, isn’t there?
    • Sable 12.1

      30 July 2013 at 9:31 am

      Yes its not really hacking, its a case of overloading the websites servers by flooding the system with messages to the point where it cannot cope.
    • infused 12.2

      30 July 2013 at 9:42 am

      No. It’s the easiest of attacks used by hackers that can’t hack.
      • Sable 12.2.1

        30 July 2013 at 9:52 am

        In other words its not hacking.
        • weka 12.2.1.1

          30 July 2013 at 10:15 am

          Is what they’ve done illegal?
          • Sable 12.2.1.1.1

            30 July 2013 at 10:31 am

            When it comes to governments here and in the US legality is what they want it to be. Some of their followers were arrested and imprisoned in the US. One guy got a year for denial of service which seems draconian for simply helping to overload a site with messages.
            • Colonial Viper 12.2.1.1.1.1

              30 July 2013 at 10:38 am

              Crush civil dissent
            • Molly 12.2.1.1.1.2

              30 July 2013 at 1:12 pm

              From recollection, I think one guy got imprisonment for running a script for that overloaded the Scientology website. He had no programming or hacking skills whatsoever.
          • Pete 12.2.1.1.2

            30 July 2013 at 10:41 am

            Yes.The maximum term is 7 years.

            Crimes Act s.250(2)(c)(ii)

            Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years who intentionally or recklessly, and without authorisation, knowing that he or she is not authorised, or being reckless as to whether or not he or she is authorised,—

            (a) damages, deletes, modifies, or otherwise interferes with or impairs any data or software in any computer system; or

            (b) causes any data or software in any computer system to be damaged, deleted, modified, or otherwise interfered with or impaired; or

            (c) causes any computer system to—

            (i) fail; or
            (ii) deny service to any authorised users.

            Participants could also be charged with conspiracy to commit the offence even if they are unsuccessful under s. 310 of the Crimes Act. The maximum term in this case would also be 7 years.
      • erikter 12.2.2

        30 July 2013 at 10:40 am

        Probably not so bright university students unable to find a job. Likely to be smelly and unkempt.

        [lprent: You are evidently one of those extremely assumption laden and quite stupid bigots. I’d suggest you read the policy because otherwise you may come to my moderating attention simply because you haven’t checked what I will allow on this site. The site might look wide open for you to wank off and spread your thick and stupid genes everywhere. But that is an illusion.

        Assumption is the mother of the ban here. Learn caution to help with a long commenting career. This is your warning.

        Scratch that – Santi is now on a permanent ban and consigned to auto-spam. He couldn’t resist the faux Labour leader support…. ]
        • erikter 12.2.2.1

          30 July 2013 at 2:14 pm

          Unfair, very unfair. The dictatorial way of the Left, I suppose.

          [lprent: It isn’t. One of your IP’s is an exact unique static match to Santi who is on a ban until after the election.

          That specific ban you were warned about if you persisted in astroturfing your leadership “support” for various Labour MP’s (despite being a right wing commentator all the way back to 2007 on this site). I’ll tolerate a bit of that type of trolling for its amusement value but repeating “jokes” endlessly is simply boring. So when I warn then you should damn well assume I mean it.

          Then I see “erikter” (who was last seen mostly in 2008) acting in exactly the same manner.. Now that is really dumb. Pointless doubling the ban as I would usually do.

          Now you’ll have to wait until we do one of the occasional amnesties because I’ll investigate anyone with your style and feed any of your comments that are likely to be yours to akismet. Eventually that will make it hard for you to leave comments on any wordpress site.

          It is fair to “reward” outright stupidity with an appropriate award – otherwise you might keep doing it. ]
          • Frank Macskasy 12.2.2.1.1

            30 July 2013 at 9:02 pm

            @ lprent,

            “Eventually that will make it hard for you to leave comments on any wordpress site. ”

            Please do.
13. Sable 13

    30 July 2013 at 9:22 am

    I wonder if Keys really gives a shit about a few hacktivists when he has the right wing press at his disposal to run interference and play it all down.

    I think it would be better for these people to use their skills to create satire to post on YouTube and the like. Its actually more damaging to a politician than hacking a site which Keys can label “illegal” and discount on that basis.
    • Molly 13.1

      30 July 2013 at 9:40 am

      Yes, but in the minds of most non-techies it shows how digital data that is collected is easily compromised.

      For them it takes away the glib reassurances of “safeguards” in a easily identifiable way. In that way it might get a few more interested in the details of the both bills (the GCSB and the TICS)
      • Sable 13.1.1

        30 July 2013 at 9:50 am

        Lets hope you are right.
14. erikter 14

    30 July 2013 at 9:52 am

    Criminal hackers like these need to be sent to prison. I do hope they are caught.

    [lprent: Santi is now on a permanent ban for violating his ban. ]
    • Sable 14.1

      30 July 2013 at 9:53 am

      How about criminals who illegally spy on their own countrymen and women?
    • tricledrown 14.2

      31 July 2013 at 10:10 am

      ding dong the grinch has gone!
15. karol 15

    30 July 2013 at 10:39 am

    And apparently Dotcom has said the Anonymous DOS action is counter-productive:

    But Dotcom this morning tweeted: “Dear Anonymous NZ, hacking National Party websites is just giving John Key a new excuse to pass the #GCSB bill (cybercrime). Please stop it.”
    • muzza 15.1

      30 July 2013 at 11:58 am

      Yeah, and that’s the give away about who controls Anonymous, right there!

      Of course it’s counter productive

      Problem, reaction, solution

      Job Done!
16. Veutoviper 16

    30 July 2013 at 10:41 am

    Kim Dotcom has told the hackers to stop it, it is only feeding into Key’s GCSB Bill

    Twitter

    “Dear Anonymous NZ, hacking National Party websites is just giving John Key a new excuse to pass the #GCSB bill (cybercrime). Please stop it.”

    Also http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10905329

    PS – what is incorrect in this Herald article? Hint: para 4.
    • Veutoviper 16.1

      30 July 2013 at 11:15 am

      Edit to the above – Snap, Karol! Must have been typing at the same time.
    • Te Reo Putake 16.2

      30 July 2013 at 11:17 am

      You are today’s winner of the Jonolism Spotter badge!
    • Tamati 16.3

      30 July 2013 at 11:32 am

      He has a point, this will be spun as ‘We need the GCSB to stop “terrorist” organisations such as Anonymous’.
    • emergency mike 16.4

      30 July 2013 at 2:43 pm

      “Labour Minister Simon Bridges shrugged off the attack on his own site.

      “I am very concerned about the hundreds of thousands of people who will have been looking at it daily now don’t know what to do.”

      “The technical advice I’ve had is it could take some time to back up, as it does have a lot of photos of me on it – I’m thinking over a period of days we’ll have it up and running,” he said sarcastically.”

      Oh dat Simon Bridges, such a cad!
17. Pascal's bookie 17

    30 July 2013 at 11:14 am

    lulz

    https://mobile.twitter.com/JudithCollinsMP/status/361966312890699776?p=v
    • Pascal's bookie 17.1

      30 July 2013 at 11:15 am

      https://mobile.twitter.com/search?q=@JudithCollinsMP&s=typd
      • Veutoviper 17.1.1

        30 July 2013 at 11:41 am

        LOL – she is really showing her ignorance!
18. Brett Dale 18

    30 July 2013 at 11:26 am

    Im waiting for the person here to say “It was national themselves, to get the bill pass”
    • Pascal's bookie 18.1

      30 July 2013 at 11:28 am

      Weird how it turned out to be you who said it!
    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 18.2

      30 July 2013 at 11:48 am

      Nah, this attack is genuine – last week’s white powder was the false flag op 😉
19. Winston Smith 19

    30 July 2013 at 12:27 pm

    This is good, gives National the excuse they (admittidly didn’t) need
    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 19.1

      30 July 2013 at 1:33 pm

      Wow, so if I wanted to make your continued access to oxygen illegal, all I’d have to do is propose it and wait for you to defend yourself, and then point to your self-defence and say “see – this is why Winston should be deprived of oxygen”, and you’d have no choice but to accept it on the basis of your own gumby rhetoric.

      Tempting.
20. infused 20

    30 July 2013 at 2:23 pm

    Pretty much all anonymous do is doss. There’s only a handful of them that are actually switched on enough and have hacking skills. Although, most of these guys are now before court.
    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 20.1

      30 July 2013 at 2:27 pm

      …and therefore by definition not anonymous. At least, not any more, if they ever really were, which I doubt.
      • infused 20.1.1

        30 July 2013 at 2:31 pm

        A lot of them are on irc networks. Had quite a bit of experience with them. Was involved in blocking, or re-routing their attacks. They are what people say they are, bunch of 16-20 year olds with access to compromised computers, aka botnets.

        And yeah, correct.
        • One Anonymous Knucklehead 20.1.1.1

          30 July 2013 at 2:39 pm

          …which further undermines any attempt to use their behaviour as a justification for ubiquitous surveillance.
21. Penny Bright 21

    30 July 2013 at 5:07 pm

    http://www.nbr.co.nz/opinion/anonymous-nz-attack-national-party-sites-good-news-john-key-gcsb-bill-supporters

    I agree with what Kim Dotcom has apparently said:

    “Dear Anonymous NZ, hacking National Party websites is just giving John Key a new excuse to pass the #GCSB bill (cybercrime). Please stop it.”

    (That’s if it isn’t a ‘false flag’ attack by those purporting to oppose the GCSB Bill?

    hmmm……….I smell a rat………….. )

    In my view – the focus should be on collecting signatures on petitions, or emailing directly to MPs who have supported the GCSB Bill at its first reading, to give them the message they CAN’T ignore:

    “YOU VOTE FOR THE GCSB BILL AND WE WILL CAMPAIGN FOR PEOPLE NOT TO VOTE FOR YOU”!

    (Politicians understand ONE thing – VOTES! )

    If I were in Wellington – I would have chairs, table and clipboards at the busiest place in the Ohariu electorate, collecting HUNDREDS of signatures on such a petition addressed to ‘Independent’ MP (for the ‘HYPOCRISY’ Party) – Peter Dunne.

    The template of a petition that can be used / adapted / whatever – is available here:

    http://www.occupyaucklandvsaucklandcouncilappeal.org.nz/

    Cheers!

    Penny Bright
    • Chooky 21.1

      30 July 2013 at 5:38 pm

      +1
22. BLiP 22

    30 July 2013 at 5:47 pm

    ‘

    I’m not buying that this is Anonymous. The video is too amateur, the targets are outside of the general Anonymous criteria, and there has been no “chatter” about this in the local Anonymous forums. This action could easily be the Church of Scientology looking to “fair game” its strongest on-line opponent by associated it with illegal activities. Its not like Scientology hasn’t done this sort of thing before. Just as equally, it could be some National Ltd™ PR spinner looking to create an “enemy”. If it is the latter, then I take it as a good in that it shows a certain sweaty desperation, if it is the former . . . meh, just more of the same.

    For those who think mentioning Scientology in this arena is a tad “tinfoil”, Google is your friend (or at least, used to be). Plus, we haz dox —> http://youtu.be/LHPwtNnc8zg
23. ak 23

    30 July 2013 at 9:30 pm

    ….. it could be some National Ltd™ PR spinner looking to create an “enemy”.

    Mmmm, poor tragic Simon Bridges’ obviously rehearsed and horrendously pitiable attempt at “humour” linked to above lends credence to this theory…..

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS