Lulzsec Leader betrays the entire group after being caught by the FBI

[Nemo]

http://gizmodo.com/5890825/lulzsec-l...l-of-anonymous


Hilarious. I think it's kind of cute that he'd risk his own safety to such a degree just so he could see his children. Then again, prison isn't really a cakewalk

[FlyingJesus]

Good on him. I don't care what stupid reasons they give (skewed views on justice, mainly) they are destructive criminals and fully deserve to be apprehended. Cannot see what problem people could possibly have with this.

[dirrty]

was reading it earlier, it all sounds like a film to me haha, i wonder how long until one will be made.

[FlyingJesus]

Danny Trejo starring as Hector Xavier Monsegur

[peteyt]

Finally a blow to the so called "Freedom Fighters."

It was good to read the comments on the article to see loads of people think the same about anon and Lulzsec like myself - they are just pretty criminals.

Someone even claimed them to be like a modern day Robin Hood - but that person was ripped to shreds really - Robin Hood stole from the rich and gave to the poor but it seems on many occasions both organisations have actually put the poor/general population at risk e.g. realising card details.

I wonder how many names the FBI do have now.

[Recursion]

Finally a blow to the so called "Freedom Fighters."

It was good to read the comments on the article to see loads of people think the same about anon and Lulzsec like myself - they are just pretty criminals.

Someone even claimed them to be like a modern day Robin Hood - but that person was ripped to shreds really - Robin Hood stole from the rich and gave to the poor but it seems on many occasions both organisations have actually put the poor/general population at risk e.g. realising card details.

I wonder how many names the FBI do have now.

I'd rather have known my card details were out in the open when Sony's network was attacked (so I could do something about it, which I did), than to open up my online bank to see all my money missing, in all honesty.

[FlyingJesus]

I'd rather have known my card details were out in the open when Sony's network was attacked (so I could do something about it, which I did), than to open up my online bank to see all my money missing, in all honesty.

If the intention was to help people they'd have alerted Sony to the problem and advise how best to secure it against such attacks, otherwise it's somewhat like saying "I'm glad I got stabbed, it means I now know not to walk into knives"

That is a really weak analogy I apologise

[peteyt]

I'd rather have known my card details were out in the open when Sony's network was attacked (so I could do something about it, which I did), than to open up my online bank to see all my money missing, in all honesty.

Here we go again - If there is a security risk people can point it out. It doesn't give them the right to actually release the information - they can if they want but then they are just as bad.

Imagine your card details got let out by anon or a similar organisation and you didn't know (because apparently they have released loads of people's information in the past without the person knowing). You wouldn't be happy if you ended up getting into debts because your money to pay bills and stuff had all vanished due to hackers but the evidence was hidden so you couldn't win it back.

All the people who support these practises only support it when it's to someone else - it's like jokes we laugh at jokes about people, incidents etc until it's to do with us. I'd actually like someone to hack the groups and release all the member info, card details etc. and then see what they'd think

[Inseriousity.]

The arrogance of these people means I'm really glad that they've been busted the good old-fashioned way. Just a snitch with lots of information.

[Recursion]

If the intention was to help people they'd have alerted Sony to the problem and advise how best to secure it against such attacks, otherwise it's somewhat like saying "I'm glad I got stabbed, it means I now know not to walk into knives"

That is a really weak analogy I apologise

Here we go again - If there is a security risk people can point it out. It doesn't give them the right to actually release the information - they can if they want but then they are just as bad.

Imagine your card details got let out by anon or a similar organisation and you didn't know (because apparently they have released loads of people's information in the past without the person knowing). You wouldn't be happy if you ended up getting into debts because your money to pay bills and stuff had all vanished due to hackers but the evidence was hidden so you couldn't win it back.

All the people who support these practises only support it when it's to someone else - it's like jokes we laugh at jokes about people, incidents etc until it's to do with us. I'd actually like someone to hack the groups and release all the member info, card details etc. and then see what they'd think

A lot of the time, companies refuse to accept they have security flaws, the only way to bring security issues such as this is to actually exploit them... of course, if you exploit them then tell the company what you've done and who you are, they'll press charges no matter what. It's a lose lose situation for the "good" guys.

I'm by no means supporting what they do, but they don't have much of an option.