avri at acm.org
Mon Dec 20 21:03:51 UTC 2010
DDOS usually refers to a technique whereby zombie computer services are stolen in the service of a crime. As far as I understand this is not the techniques being used in this peaceful protest against those who have denied wikileaks service.
As the article by Richard Stallman indicates calling this action DDOS is a misnomer and that it really needs to be understood as public protest in a digital age. While it is true that the notion of digital protest is still new, it nothing fraudulent is being done and no services are being stolen, then tarring this with the name DDOS attack may be extreme and prejudicial.
As the new realities of wikleaks, government and business reaction against wikileaks, and protest against the reaction occur we should attempt to understand the full dynamics of what is going on. To those of use who believe in the necessity of maximum transparency, except when it involves the privacy of natural persons, the necessity of viable and effective protest seems important. Is this the best way to pretest? I don't yet know, but we cannot move toward understanding it, if we lump it in with criminal behavior before we even examine the full phenomenon.
On 20 Dec 2010, at 15:30, Carlton Samuels wrote:
> There are certainly some troubling political developments surrounding the
> official Wikileaks web presence, not the least of which are the denial of
> commercial service by some organisations in the ecommerce ecosystem...and
> the responding DOS attacks on their web interests by alleged Wikileaks
> Goes to show the usual suspects don't have an exclusive on dissuasion
> techniques. So the next time I hear the sanctimonious bleat against...take
> your pick....action of the Chinese, Iranians, Cubans et. al., I'm likely to
> respond with a yawn. Common hypocrites.
> Whaddya know, it turns out the old nomenklatura, somewhat reconfigured to
> purpose, is alive and well....and flourishing!
> Carlton A Samuels
> Mobile: 876-818-1799
> Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround
> On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 6:24 PM, Yassin Mshana <ymshana2003 at hotmail.com>wrote:
>> That is what is happening ....
>> Politics and the Internet can be an explosive compound. They should be
>> kept far apart and separate in mind and perspective.
>>> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 00:31:18 +0200
>>> From: derek at aa419.org
>>> To: at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>> Subject: Re: [At-Large] Wikileaks.org
>>> Thank for that John. Apologies Franck, I totally missed what you were
>>> Interesting how the two topics under discussion are merging.
>>> On 2010/12/19 23:52, John R. Levine wrote:
>>>>> At issue is wikileaks.info, not wikileaks.org.
>>>> The web site at wikileaks.org redirects to the dodgy web site at
>>>> The WHOIS at wikileaks.org is a privacy service, and the DNS is at
>>>> dynadot, a generic DNS provider, so it's anyone's guess who or what is
>>>> control of wikileaks.org at this point.
>>>> At-Large mailing list
>>>> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>>> At-Large mailing list
>>> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>> At-Large mailing list
>> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
More information about the At-Large