<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Sorry my mistake. I meant to said: "condone". This is what we have
said: EFF doesn't condone cyber-vigilantism, be it against
Mastercard or #WikiLeaks. <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://twitter.com/eFF">http://twitter.com/eFF</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4D047CC5.7010703@eff.org" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
Hi Jeremy,<br>
<br>
Still the document will be read by governments. Para. 4 is not
well drafted. While EFF does not condone DDoS attacks to any of
both sides, as speech should be fight with more speech. Many
others (not me) believe that those attacks are also political
speech/civil disobedience. <font color="#330033" face="courier"
size="3">As Magagin 2006 said: "While there is great sympathy in
the hacker world for what Wikileaks is doing, this type of
activity is no better than the strong-arm tactics we are
fighting against."</font> In any case, I personally do not like
the way it is framed. You should not use the word hackers. Those
DDoS attacks were made by who knows! <br>
<br>
<font color="#330033"><br>
</font><font color="#330033" face="helvetica" size="3"><b>PRESS
RELEASE - 2600 MAGAZINE CONDEMNS DENIAL OF SERVICE ATTACKS</b><br>
Posted 10 Dec 2010 04:45:38 UTC </font>
<p><font color="#330033" face="courier" size="3">PRESS RELEASE </font></p>
<p> <font color="#330033" face="courier" size="3">HACKER MAGAZINE
CONDEMNS DENIAL OF SERVICE ATTACKS </font></p>
<p> <font color="#330033" face="courier" size="3">New York, NY,
December 10, 2010 - 2600 Magazine, a quarterly journal for the
hacker community that has published since 1984, is speaking
out against numerous media reports that hackers are
responsible for a spate of attacks on numerous e-commerce
corporations as part of the ongoing Wikileaks controversy. </font></p>
<p> <font color="#330033" face="courier" size="3">Denial of
service attacks against PayPal, Amazon, Visa, Mastercard, and
other corporations and entities have been underway for the
last few days, as widely reported in the mainstream media.
Each of these targets had previously taken some sort of action
against the whistleblower website wikileaks.org and its
affiliates. The media reports almost invariably refer to
"hackers" as being behind these actions. While there is great
sympathy in the hacker world for what Wikileaks is doing, this
type of activity is no better than the strong-arm tactics we
are fighting against. </font></p>
<p> <font color="#330033" face="courier" size="3">These attacks,
in addition to being a misguided effort that doesn't
accomplish very much at all, are incredibly simple to launch
and require no technical or hacker skills. While writing such
programs requires a good degree of ingenuity and knowledge of
security weaknesses, this doesn't mean that everyone who runs
them possesses the same degree of proficiency, nor should we
necessarily believe people who claim to be doing this on
behalf of the hacker community. </font></p>
<p> <font color="#330033" face="courier" size="3">What the above
named corporations have done to Wikileaks is inexcusable and
constitutes a different sort of denial of service attack, one
that is designed to eliminate an organization, an individual,
or an idea. We find it inexplicable that donations can easily
be made to hate groups and all sorts of convicted criminals
through these same services, yet somehow a website that
publishes leaked information - and which has never been
charged or convicted of a crime - is considered unacceptable.
We believe it's not the place of credit card companies or
banks to judge the morality or potential threat level of
anyone, let alone those who are following in the long
tradition of journalists and free speech advocates worldwide.
</font></p>
<p> <font color="#330033" face="courier" size="3">The assault on
Wikileaks must not be overshadowed by the recent denial of
service attacks and these certainly must not be allowed to be
associated with the hacker community. This will play right
into the hands of those who wish to paint us all as threats
and clamp down on freedom of speech and impose all kinds of
new restrictions on the Internet, not to mention the fact that
the exact same types of attacks can be used on "us" as well as
"them." (Interestingly, it was only a week ago that "hackers"
were blamed for denial of service attacks on Wikileaks itself.
That tactic was ineffectual then as well.) Most importantly,
these attacks are turning attention away from what is going on
with Wikileaks. This fight is not about a bunch of people
attacking websites, yet that is what is in the headlines now.
It certainly does not help Wikileaks to be associated with
such immature and boorish activities any more than it helps
the hacker community. From what we have been hearing over the
past 24 hours, this is a viewpoint shared by a great many of
us. By uniting our voices, speaking out against this sort of
action, and correcting every media account we see and hear
that associates hackers with these attacks, we stand a good
chance of educating the public, rather than enflaming their
fears and assumptions. </font></p>
<p> <font color="#330033" face="courier" size="3">There are a
number of positive steps people - both inside and outside of
the hacker community - can take to support Wikileaks and help
spread information. Boycotts of companies that are trying to
shut Wikileaks down can be very effective and will not win
them any sympathy, as the current attacks on their websites
are unfortunately doing. Mirroring Wikileaks is another
excellent method of keeping the flow of information free.
Communicating with friends, family, classes, workplaces, etc.
is not only a way of getting the word out, but will also help
to sharpen your skills in standing up for what you believe in.
This is never accomplished when all one tries to do is silence
one's opponent. That has not been, and never should be, the
hacker way of dealing with a problem. </font></p>
<p> <font color="#330033" face="courier" size="3">2600 Magazine
has been publishing news, tutorials, and commentary by, about,
and for the hacker community since 1984. We were sued in 2000
by the Motion Picture Association of America for linking to a
website containing source code enabling Linux machines to play
DVDs and thus became the first test case of the Digital
Millennium Copyright Act. In a similar vein, we are supporting
Wikileaks by linking to their existing website through
wikileaks.2600.com. We've already changed where this address
points to twice as Wikileaks sites have been taken down, and
will continue to ensure that this link always manages to get
to wherever Wikileaks happens to be. We hope people follow
that link and support the existence of Wikileaks through
whatever method is being publicized on their site. </font></p>
<p> <font color="#330033" face="courier" size="3">### </font></p>
<p> <font color="#330033" face="courier" size="3">CONTACT:<br>
2600 MAGAZINE: THE HACKER QUARTERLY<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:webmaster@2600.com">webmaster@2600.com</a><br>
Emmanuel Goldstein, Editor<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:Emmanuel@goldste.in">Emmanuel@goldste.in</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.2600.com">www.2600.com</a><br>
+1 631 751 2600</font></p>
<br>
On 12/11/10 10:24 PM, Katitza Rodriguez wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4D046AA9.6080007@eff.org" type="cite">Hi
there, <br>
<br>
I do not know why we should mentioned this paragraph (para. 4)
in a submission to the United Nations. BTW, the hacker community
is not involve in those attacks. You should be careful. The
hacker community (who does legal things) "freedom to tinker" has
issued a press release about it. See: 600 MAGAZINE CONDEMNS
DENIAL OF SERVICE ATTACKS. <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.2600.com/news/view/article/12037">http://www.2600.com/news/view/article/12037</a>
In any case, I think, that paragrahp does not add anything in a
submission to the UN, and it can be not well understood by
Government officials. <br>
<br>
Finally, I would apologize but I am not sure if I will be able
to get comments from my organization for this submission for
this tight deadline. However, I will do my best to see if I am
able to do it within your deadline. <br>
<br>
All the best, Katitza <br>
<br>
<br>
On 12/11/10 10:02 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: <br>
<blockquote type="cite">This is not to say that the Internet
community's governance methods are necessarily any more
legitimate; far from it, in the case of the retributive
attacks of hackers against those who targeted Wikileaks. In
truth governments, business, and Internet users alike have
responded to the Wikileaks affair in an arbitrary and
unaccountable fashion. <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Katitza Rodriguez
International Rights Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:katitza@eff.org">katitza@eff.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:katitza@datos-personales.org">katitza@datos-personales.org</a> (personal email)
Please support EFF - Working to protect your digital rights and freedom of speech since 1990</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Katitza Rodriguez
International Rights Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:katitza@eff.org">katitza@eff.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:katitza@datos-personales.org">katitza@datos-personales.org</a> (personal email)
Please support EFF - Working to protect your digital rights and freedom of speech since 1990</pre>
</body>
</html>