Internet Anthropologist Think Tank: Anonymous to weaponize stuxnet?

  • Search our BLOG

  • HOME
    Terrorist Names SEARCH:

    Saturday, February 19, 2011

    Anonymous to weaponize stuxnet?

    More of our INTEL

    Anonymous to weaponize stuxnet?

    There is a file on the Internet with
    Stuxnet in a decompiled mode.

    The first step in rewriting or changing the code,
    is to break it open so you can read it.

    Does Anon have the capability to re weaponize
    Stuxnet, to re target it, NO.

    Our paradigm Intel indictes Stuxnet was so
    written not even the Russians, (read RBN ),
    or China can't reweaponize Stuxnet.

    But the game model is there, the road map
    for the first surgical cyber mutipl-headed missile
    is there.

    There is nothing new in stuxnet, just old technology
     pushed to the limit and combined in a very comprehensive

    The anon operation to put Stuxnet out there in a decomplied 
    mode was rogue operation, 
    and not approved by top levels of Anonymous.
    Anonymous is herding cats, young punks, and their
    retribution  is swift and heavy among their own members.
    Animal  rights groups would not approve.
    Think about what it takes to discipline young cyber
    punks in cyber space.
    Think about that age groups tendency to revolt against
    authority, Anonymous moto applies to the membership also.

    Would Anonymous weaponize stuxnet, I don't think so,
    they have a stated policy against it.
    Would they bastardize it and use it for penetration activities
    And their attacks on the banks, would they be angry enough
    to erase bank records, rob banks?
    So far all of Anonymous attacks have been temporary,
    without any real damages, more of a hindrance, attention
    PR motivation attention getting. Not attack for propose
    of doing real damages.

    Does Anonymous have the capability to bastardize
    Stuxnet, NO but axillary groups do. The Groups
    Anonymous draws on for heavy hacker work.
    Like HBGary's Aaron Barr operation.
    Was a nic piece of work, but to be fair
    to Aaron, their is NO security on the WWW now.
    In what case might Anonymous use a cyber WMD,
    or guided surgical strike cyber missile?
    Is there a case where Anonymous would
    do real damage?


    In the words of one of Anonymous's own
    cadre, Commander X, their maybe extenuat  circumstances.
    He was interviewed recently and I recognized his style of writing.
    His demeanor and temper are easily recognizable.
    I got a few ass chewings from him for not producing Intel fast enough
    or a poor lead, and misunderstanding orders.
    I have worked with/for him on the Iran Anonymous operation.
    I have no intel on him and all records were deleted to NSA standards,
    related to our Iran operations. I am proud of the work we all did on
    re-connecting Iranian people to the web and taking down Iran regime
    sites, and other operations. 
    And salute him on that operation.

    He says:

    One of the stories floating about after the hack is that HBGary had decompiled code for Stuxnet, and now that's in the hands of the Anons. Any truth to that?
    Absolutely none. Anonymous does NOT create viruses or other malicious code. Ever. It's one of the guiding principles and it is never broken.
    ( But it is on the WWW, and attributed to an Anonymous member,  )
    So if the PLF had access  to Stuxnet, you wouldn't use it against an evil dictatorship?
    We have different rules, that’s all I can say. We have a bit more flexibility in those areas with the choices we can make. But IF we did something like that it would be a completely Black Op and no one would ever know of it.
    End quotes:

    And he goes on to say:

    But Egypt and Iran (and now Bahrain) are certainly not the only targets Anon has picked over the last few years. Scientology, for one. WikiLeaks (or rather, its enemies). Soulja boy???
    Look... Scientology pre-dates the PLFs relationship with Anon Ops. I think there was a moral imperative, but I question how large a one. I think it was a hysterical fight against a truly deserving enemy that maybe didn't need to happen, but whatever. As for defense of WikiLeaks and Julian....  Let me say something for the record. If they harm one hair upon Julian Assange’s head, or if they destroy or damage WikiLeaks - the PLF WILL bring down the wrath of f***ing god on them.

    What does "bringing down the wrath of f***ing god on them"
    Is prison "harm one hair upon Julian Assange’s head" 
    does that produce Anonymous wrath of god?

    I think Anonymous is making a paradigm error here,
    they are used to dealing with Law Enforcement, and 
    are adept at it. He has been in FBI custody before.

    Anonymous are running the risk of bringing down
    the full weight of the GWOT apparatus down on them.
    But Anonymous has no experience in dealing with the
    guys in Black, if anonymous were viewed as a real
    security threat to US, wet teams would be considered.

    The stuxnet issue isn't so much about the weapon its
    self as it is about possible Anonymous motivations.

    Has the decompling of stuxnet moved al qaeda one step 
    closer to a effective cyber weapon?

    Bin Laden with edema

    Was this a motivation? Or even a consideration?

    It doesn't look like it, and feels like a rogue operation.

    I've asked  directly why he released Stuxnet
    on line and am still waiting for a reply. His helpers:
    DCoderLT (author)
    UPDATE  has deleted his Tweet regarding
    the link to the web page with his name on it.
    It feels like Anonymous is trying to distance its self
    from this action. But then?

    He Has now posted this:


    Here is another decompile of a more complete 

    Just not sure what they are saying.

    Internet Anthropologist Think Tank: 
    Anonymous on the ropes

    Would Anonymous go nuclear?
    Julian seems to be their fair haired boy,
    who can do no wrong.
    Anonymous reaction to his imprisonment
    will be measured, and I don't think Anonymous
    would take on NSA, but there is the consideration
    of cyber suicide rogue operations, with the capability
    to do significant damages.

    What would they target?
    The target would be a major player involved 
    in hurting their fair haired boy; Julian.
    Justice Dept and attorneys
    FBI and agents
    CIA, looking to leak docs
    or even NSA if involvement
    becomes public.
    Something they would perceive as a clear moral imperative.
    A big statement for Anonymous and their reputation.

    I hope Anonymous survives this Wikileaks operation.
    And as of today we have deployed no operations against
    Anonymous, and have perceived no operations
    against us, but we are prepared.

    We wish Anonymous the wisdom to find their
    way through this and hope for their survival.

    War Anthropologist

    We have new paradigm on Stuxnet hidden 
    capabilities, watch for post.


    Interesting side note:
    Thought for Anonymous.
    I've been told by a few bloggers,
    Rule #1 is you don't talk about
    Anonymous, fear of retribution.
    Fear of the "defenders of free speech"
    on WWW. Are you turning into that 
    which you fight?

    Follow up:
    Read: Anonymous Tells Westboro Baptist Church 
    to Cease and Desist 

    While Westboro enjoys the right to free speech,
    they maybe subject to sanctions from the public,
    not saying its right, but I understand,
    and Expressing my right to free speech,
    I find Westboro is an abomination, disgusting.G

    Change subject:
    Jawa hackers Burned.



    Post a Comment

    Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

    << Home