One wonders how many parents of non-script kiddies were affected by these destructive criminals, or how many of these script kiddies are professionals making a living.
This story concerns 18,000 script kiddies. Imagine the scale of impact we're talking about when magnified to their victims.
I think you just can't compare those 2 scenarios, 25 years apart.
Back then: We got the 2nd computer in the household in 97, exactly so I would not have to use the family (actually business) computer anymore.
Now: I mean ok, maybe it's already swung past a certain point that there is actually only one non-mobile device in the home, but the chance that it is the targeted script kiddie's machine (and not the important family computer) is so much higher.
someone does something bad -- by all means that gives whoever carte blanche to do whatever is just as bad or equally so to the victimizers.
This doesn't make sense -- even less sense when you realize that 'script kiddies' is anyone who ran an executable from an image board; you couldn't ask for a lower bar.
Half the people who downloaded the thing probably didn't even know what the fuck an IP address is, they probably shouldn't be the ones saddled with taking on the entirety of repercussion that was meant for the person(s) who wrote the tool.
tl;dr : I bet half of the '18,000' people were 11 year olds who typed 'google.com' or their least favorite AIM screen-name into the target criteria of this already half-assed 'tool', yet people act righteous for wiping their hard-drives as if they were the real culprit.
read : wiping the not-culprits parents hard-drives in many cases, I would bet.
The poster was preventing a crime against innocent parties. His "victims" were the criminals. The script kiddies were responsible for running malware and trying to launch attacks from their parents' computers in this scenario, and they would be the ones responsible for data erasure of others using the same computer.
In that sense, file deletion is destructive but honest. The poster owned the systems at this point and could have exfiltrated data or used the control of the systems for further attacks. This was decidedly mild.
It’s not black and white, so I won’t argue for black or white, but an important factor to me is: ddos eventually stops and then everything is back to normal; no permanent damage is done.
threatofrain|1 year ago
This story concerns 18,000 script kiddies. Imagine the scale of impact we're talking about when magnified to their victims.
wink|1 year ago
Back then: We got the 2nd computer in the household in 97, exactly so I would not have to use the family (actually business) computer anymore.
Now: I mean ok, maybe it's already swung past a certain point that there is actually only one non-mobile device in the home, but the chance that it is the targeted script kiddie's machine (and not the important family computer) is so much higher.
serf|1 year ago
someone does something bad -- by all means that gives whoever carte blanche to do whatever is just as bad or equally so to the victimizers.
This doesn't make sense -- even less sense when you realize that 'script kiddies' is anyone who ran an executable from an image board; you couldn't ask for a lower bar.
Half the people who downloaded the thing probably didn't even know what the fuck an IP address is, they probably shouldn't be the ones saddled with taking on the entirety of repercussion that was meant for the person(s) who wrote the tool.
tl;dr : I bet half of the '18,000' people were 11 year olds who typed 'google.com' or their least favorite AIM screen-name into the target criteria of this already half-assed 'tool', yet people act righteous for wiping their hard-drives as if they were the real culprit.
read : wiping the not-culprits parents hard-drives in many cases, I would bet.
amelius|1 year ago
worstan|1 year ago
te_chris|1 year ago
morkalork|1 year ago
>Fucking up the family computer is a formative experience for many techies.
It's true, I did it myself!
throwaway5752|1 year ago
In that sense, file deletion is destructive but honest. The poster owned the systems at this point and could have exfiltrated data or used the control of the systems for further attacks. This was decidedly mild.
beng-nl|1 year ago
genewitch|1 year ago
The person who called this a cybercrime is more correct than people disagreeing