ROCK Announcement

[furball]

No, it doesn't - unless you are implying that ROCK is a terrorist organisation. I don't know whether you are a law student or not - but please go and read the Terrorism Act 2000 to understand why the theoretical ROCKer has committed no offence under that legislation.

[Smudge]

The Terrorism Act 2000 covers all people, they dont have to be recognised Terrorist Organisations

In the UK, under the Terrorism Act 2000, enacted into law in February 2001, people who endanger lives through the manipulation of public computer systems are to be considered under the anti-terrorism law as would any other terrorist.

Anyway, we could go off on a tangent with this, its up for a thread on GD. Why cant we just all get back on with the war and and Wakey accept he's lost a PR war?

[wakey]

Originally Posted by Squidly

Various Crap about supplying ips to let them prove its not them

Lets try this once again. The ip's wont show any ROCK members because its a DDoS attack

Why does no-one except Phil seem to be able to get their heads around this. The machines sending the flood data are NOT those of the person behind the attack. The machines attacking are inoccent people whom have had their machines 'infected' so that the the person behind it can use their machines, ip and bandwith to carry out the attack thus never directly implicating themselves. If there was a ROCK ip in the list id be more inclinded to believe this person was one such innoncent individuals whom was being used by someone else (either that or as Phil mentioned the bot master is extreamly dumb)

Due to the fact no-one seems to get this is why i'm hesitant to give ROCK the ip's. I just know they are going to look at them and use them as conclusive proof as people just cant seem to get their head around the notion of a DDoS attack. Pehaps thats why they are so happy to catogorically deny that anyone in ROCK was involved because they simply dont understand that this attack was probally 1 person controlling 50-60 zombies rather than 50-60 people all doing it. After all i'm sure if I didnt understand and someone accused 60 F-Crew members of doing such a thing I would act the same way, however 1 member is obviously a differnt matter as you cant vouch for everyone and understanding the situation it would be something id have to take more seriously

[JonnyBGood]

Did I ever tell you about that time back in salem when we were hunting for witches guys?

[Alki]

for the love of ireland close this thread irish

[lilboi]

Wakey, then how can you say that even 1 rocker did this?...seriously there is no discussion here, just because rock is at war with f-crew doesn't mean a rocker did this. If you want to use that line of arguement to prove everything, then half the world would be in jail. MOTIVE is not evidence and without EVIDENCE you can't slander people/alliance on forums.

How would you feel like it if we accuse YOU everytime our tools go down? Because YOU also have motive, probably more than us.

[Kargool]

Originally Posted by furball

No, it doesn't - unless you are implying that ROCK is a terrorist organisation. I don't know whether you are a law student or not - but please go and read the Terrorism Act 2000 to understand why the theoretical ROCKer has committed no offence under that legislation.

Wakey, call your pal Bush, he will take care of ROCK for you, making sure that PA is safe and that democracy once again will prevail and that we all can be safe knowing that Wakey and his pal Bush have saved the day once again.

[Remy]

Wakey, you seem intent on stressing the point that providing evidence is useless, since a ddos doesnt reveal the real attacker. You are correct in the fact that the log itself wont trace back to the original attacker.

However:

Originally Posted by Wakey

Its not suspecting someone of 'hacking'. Its a case of someone actually 'hacking'

And the evidence points towards someone in ROCK or someone helping rock

In this piece of post, you claim two things:

A - the tools server was attacked
B - you point towards rock

Ad. A:

Sofar, it is just your words that claim there was ever an attack. While I have no reason to doubt your claim, it wud benefit you if you cud supply some form of proof that an actual attack ever occured.

I will explain by giving an example (not trying to implicate that you have been lying, so don't attack me over that):

You have accidently pulled out the plug on your servers NIC. Or you installed an update on your server and forgot to configure it, resulting in a broken server for some time. Now you want to save face and claim a ddos attack occured. After 1 day, this story starts to lead it's own life and you cannot do anything else but to keep lying. You get entangled in a web of lies. Downside: you cannot produce the evidence you told everyone was there. So you refuse to give it because it is 'useless to provide it'.

Summary: the first reason ppl want evidence is to make sure the attack ever happened.

Ad. B:

You speak of evidence of rock being involved. Your explanation is that the attack happened at the same time you got rock hostiles. While me and most others would probably agree on it being quite a coincidence, it is not evidence. Maybe if you had additional proof, then this could be seen as circumstancial evidence. On its own, it says absolutely nothing.

But again, ppl would like to see the logs to make sure there is nothing else besides a lot of IPs. Maybe it was't even a DDOS. Maybe the person initiating the attack has tried to contact your server just before the attack happened. There could be things in those logs that you yourself haven't seen yet.

Summary: the second reason that ppl want the evidence, is for them to make sure you came to the right conclusions. If not, then supplying the log might actually DO point towards ROCK in some way, or NOT point to ROCK.

_______________________

There is a 3rd reason why ppl want to see the logs: ppl want to bait, flame, ridicule and do other nasty things. This IS PA forums after all, and 90% of all readers come here to seek sentation.

_______________________


In conclusion:

Why not get it over with an supply ROCK with the logs. If they want it so bad, give it. Probably it will result in them saying: it wasnt us. Fine. But you tried to help them from your side and you are seen as (more) trustworthy.

You might even get some more info if you supply it to others aswell, who are not affiliated with either fcrew or rock.

Also maybe you could consider the possibility that someone completely different did it, just to cripple your defense, because of their own 'fun'.

Another possibility is that your servers security sucks so bad, that you should consider putting that degree to good use and secure it.

For the rest: it happened. Get over it. Secure your server. Go on living.

[Phil^]

Originally Posted by Smudge

In the UK, under the Terrorism Act 2000, enacted into law in February 2001, people who endanger lives through the manipulation of public computer systems are to be considered under the anti-terrorism law as would any other terrorist.

Im pretty sure this d-dos attack on fcrew hasnt endangered lives, unless they were contemplating suicide as a result of it. Therefore the terrorism act does not apply.

I share wakeys incredulity at how little some people know about how things work on the internet

A D-Dos attack consists of one controller, and many zombies which do their bidding. the controller doesnt have to directly attack the target since all he does is order the zombies to do it for him. Therefore there is no trail from the IP addresses back to him
Demanding the IPs to compare against known ones is pointless as unless the attacker has been incredibly retarded in some way, it isnt going to point to the source.
Once commanded to attack, the zombies flood the target with requests, swamping the server - often crashing services on it and rendering it inaccessible to genuine users.
Ever tried having a conversation during a floodnet, or multiple netsplits seconds after each other? ( with joins/parts visible ofc ) - its not exactly possible now is it?
Same principle applies

Now, if some of you still cant get your head around this remarkably simple concept, please refrain from pretending that there is a magic solution which can identify who was responsible and wakey isnt doing it because 'theres something to hide' etc.
You only make yourself look rediculous

Originally Posted by Kargool

Wakey, call your pal Bush, he will take care of ROCK for you, making sure that PA is safe and that democracy once again will prevail and that we all can be safe knowing that Wakey and his pal Bush have saved the day once again.

If its possible to be more retarded in a reply, i cannot see how. Youve managed to take the biscuit.

Originally Posted by Alki

for the love of ireland close this thread irish

Agreed, or at least prune/split the damn thing

[DJet]

One thing that hasnt been mentioned is if the logs show multiple ROCK IPs then its highly likely that it was one of our members or someone connected / idles in #rock etc...

Why? well i cant think of a better way to harvest ips for infection than idling in our public/private channel and infecting anyone that went on it.

ofc i maybe missing the point due to lack of technical knowledge in this area of IT

[Phil^]

Originally Posted by DJet

One thing that hasnt been mentioned is if the logs show multiple ROCK IPs then its highly likely that it was one of our members or someone connected / idles in #rock etc...

Why? well i cant think of a better way to harvest ips for infection than idling in our public/private channel and infecting anyone that went on it.

ofc i maybe missing the point due to lack of technical knowledge in this area of IT

the only way they could be infected is if they ran a program someone sent them all, or they visited a certain website they were directed to which used an IE exploit to take over their computer etc. They would have had to do something to get infected, its not something that just happens
( unless perhaps they're using a pre-sp1 version of xp in which case they need to be banned from the internet for their, and everyone elses own good )
Idling in a channel is highly unlikely to be a source for possible infection though tbh

[XelNaga]

For everyone that doesn't know what a DDoS attack is, I recommand reading this link:

http://www.grc.com/dos/grcdos.htm

Unless you did, refrain from posting.

To Wakey: I think Remy explained very well why people would like to see this 'evidence'. I, for one, think it's more probable that is was a technical problem than anything like a DDoS attack. Of course I haven't seen any logs.

[wakey]

Ok seeing as I'm sick of this, i'm gonna make whats probally going to be my final post on this thread (and on AD, if not the forums in total as i'm just sick of this community that would rather believe that the attack didnt happen - this isnt an attack on you remy as i saw your reply after i'd finsihed writing this - and i'm just trying to fight a PR. If people think of me that lowly then why should i waste my time discussing things with you)

I hereby retract all allagations made against ROCK

The reasons for this are as follow
1) The fact I cant pinpoint a single person in ROCK
2) The fact that ROCK HC vouch for the intergrity of every las member of ROCK
3) The fact that ROCK state their members are too 'stupid' when it comes to computing to carry out such an attack
4) The fact the community seems to vouch that no-one in ROCK would ever do such a thing


I must conclude hence that Ace's theory that its a random script kiddie with nothing to do whom did it and it was pure coincedence that
1) That two differnt servers, on two differnt IP's and on two differnt hosts in two differnt countries were attacked at the same time
2) That the Timing that coincided with the the tick happening seconds earlier when ROCK's first wave was due to show
3) That the length of the attack was two hours thus covering ROCKS two launch waves

I deeply sorry for any hurt I caused people in ROCK, I shouldnt have blamed you without being able to tie the attackers IP's to a ROCK member as without that its clearly all just a coincedence and you didnt have anything to do with it

[lilboi]

Thank YOU Wakey...i think...(we'll ignore the sarcasim)

lets all move on....

[DJet]

ROCK officially accepts your retraction of allagations, and sincerly wishes that we as a community can work with you in an unbias manner to track down this attacker (most probably via word-of-mouth) and deal with them accordingly.
In future we request that if possible events of this nature should be kept out of the public eye until a more proper conclusion can be given, ie consulting us before going public with an accusation.
This just does not mean events that may or may not envolve ROCK and its members but also for anyother disputes like this between other alliances.

Events like this cause fractures in the community, and have caused much stress for a long standing respected member of the community and an alliance whose image has been tainted, whether the accusations are later found true or not.



I ask that people now leave the matter be until new evidence arises, and we are dealing with facts not coincedences or presumtions.
I also request that moderators lock this thread to prevent further abuses and tit-for-tat arguing from members of the community that arent even envolved in the incident.



(just for the record, our attack that night was a land tick attack, not a launch tick attack, therefore would have had launch ticks covering more than a 2 hours period)


- DJeteh
- ROCK High Council member

[JonnyBGood]

This thread was like a mule with a spinning wheel. Confusing and with many possible equally unlikely causes. Now it's like a fridge door. Closed but tempting.