Evidence points to ‘Anonymous’ regarding PSN hack
Sony recently posted an update on its official bog summarizing what the company told the subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade of the U.S. House of Representatives. Some of the details revealed are startling as it may hold the key as to who was responsible for the PSN hack.
Kaz Hirai, Chairman of the board of Directors of Sony Computer Entertainment America submitted a written letter answering many of the questions posed by the subcommittee regarding the recent PSN hack. Hirai detailed the four key principles Sony followed in handling the situation:
-
- Act with care and caution.
- Provide relevant information to the public when it has been verified.
- Take responsibility for our obligations to our customers.
- Work with law enforcement authorities.
He also wrote that “Sony has been the victim of a very carefully planned, very professional, highly sophisticated criminal cyber attack.” Apparently Sony discovered that the intruders planted a file on one of the Sony Online Entertainment servers named “Anonymous” with the words “We are Legion” written in it.
This is surprising news as up to this point it wasn’t clear if Anonymous was involved in the PSN hacking incident. As Kotaku pointed out, Anonymous largely wants nothing to do with the PSN hack as it tried to distance itself from the incident.
However, since Anonymous is made up of many individuals there is no clear single accountable person. The group’s rule has always been that if you claim to be part of Anonymous then you are “Anonymous.” This has been the mantra pushed by the “leaders” of the group.
As reported by Kotaku, there is strong evidence Anonymous is doing everything in its power to distance itself from the PSN hack as the group has been “systematically” deleting channels dedicated to organizing attacks against Sony for several weeks now. Apparently, even mentioning the operation against Sony (Sony Ops) will lead to a swift ban.
One thing Anonymous realized during its initial denial of services attack was that by attacking PSN it was angering its biggest supports. Nerds stormed Anonymous chat servers crippling the very channels where the group planned its attacks.
Sony has indicated that there is no evidence found during its investigation which show that the hackers were able to get into the encrypted database table housing the credit card data. The company updated the subcommittee by stating, “As of today, the major credit card companies have not reported any fraudulent transactions that they believe are the direct result of this cyber attack.”
Related Posts:
62 Responses to “Evidence points to ‘Anonymous’ regarding PSN hack”
Leave a Reply:
You must be logged in to post a comment. Don't have an account? Register today!
May 5th, 2011
There are so many things wrong with that.
1> I could have put a file there for fucks sake. Just because there was a file there with those words doesn’t necessarily mean they did it.
2> With the very public stoush between Anon and Sony, it could easily be Sony’s way of shifting blame.
While I personally think Anon are nothing but a bunch of prepubescent fucking morons with Justin Beiber fetishes and multiple Kineytoys, I’m not going to be that quick to blame them till there is more substantial proof of their guilt.
May 5th, 2011
Some thing just never change. When your own recklessness is too much to accept, blame others for your negligence.
So, let’s see, for starters, Sony seems content to say that since no credit cards have been apparently used therefore this data is not compromised. If the table containing this data is encrypted, as they claim, it could take months if not years to find the key to unencrypt it, depending on which method was used in the first place, therefore it could be a long time from now before this is actually a problem.
What Sony has neglected to divulge is what security mechanisms failed to protect the servers and their underlying data stores. One thing is to hack the front end servers, where you deploy web services that are use-exposed, and another is to be able to get behind the front servers and past what surely would be another set of firewalls into the data servers where the actual data should be stored, all encrypted, all with specific permissions and audit logs that would trigger alarms whenever access is being executed from a different location. This is BASIC security infrastructure for a company of this size, but no, nobody wants to read in-between the lines and realize that Sony must have had all the data in the same network subnet as the front end servers that were used to gain access in the first place.
May 5th, 2011
With the PlayStation Network now out of commission for two weeks and counting, two members of the committee — Congresswoman Mary Bono Mack (R-CA) and “Congressman G.K. Butterfield (D-NC) — asked Sony a series of questions on how something like this could happen, and what steps Sony intends on taking to make things better with the millions of consumers who were victimized by these events. The PlayStation Blog posted a summary of Sony’s response to the subcommittee, the long-form of which spans eight pages…”
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/116/1165972p1.html
May 5th, 2011
At this point Sony themselves could claim to be Anonymous and none would be the wiser.
May 5th, 2011
CarlB IGN? really?
why don’t you throw in VGChartz, Digital Foundry, Eurogamer, Gamasutra, CVG, and all these anti-PS3, or anti-Japanese websites?
This ain’t competition anymore, M$ has declared war against Japan. So be it!
May 5th, 2011
ahhh.. conspiracy theories.
Terrorist declare war on the United States.
Terrorist attack occurs in United States and people blame the US not just for security this time, but for the actual attack too now.
I love 9-11 conspiracy theories. Oh wait……………
May 5th, 2011
@gunstar.
IGN posted Sony’s response.
I’ve shit on IGN for their bullshit out of touch with the rest of reality reviews, but the response to the subcommittee that’s 8 pages long is from Sony themselves, and it’s a pretty good read.
May 5th, 2011
@Rhino
“With the very public stoush between Anon and Sony, it could easily be Sony’s way of shifting blame”
Sony wouldn’t want to get into more trouble by lying on a legal document and it seems that document is based on data and evidence provided by the two 3rd party security firms Sony hired and the on going investigation of the FBI.
Another thing is that Annonymous can be anybody so anyone could be doing all the hacking in the name of annonymous.
May 5th, 2011
“The PlayStation Blog posted a summary of Sony’s response to the subcommittee, the long-form of which spans eight pages…””
Nothing IGN says matters because they are a bunch of idiot xbots.
May 5th, 2011
“anyone could be doing all the hacking in the name of annonymous.”
That is what Rhino was saying.
May 5th, 2011
@ncaissie
Title of the article: “Evidence points to ‘Anonymous’ regarding PSN hack”
no matter what ppls’ theories are, the evidence do point to Anonymous.
Don’t forget that Anonymous itself is made up of a group of randoms, so there is no actual control over any individuals actions. So anyone doing things in Anonymous’ name is part of the same group formed by random ppl.
How Anonymous be trusted? Let’s take at look at their previous actions:
1. [1st week of April] Anonymous attacked Sony’s websites and PSN taking them down for a short period of time.
2. [1st week of April] Anonymous threatened Sony’s employees
3. [1st week of April] Anonymous planned to attack Sony’s store to protest and promote the boycotting of Sony products
4. [a week before PSN was breached] Anonymous said:
“GeoHot has taken a settlement with sony. The case has been dropped. In the eyes of the law, the case is closed, for anonymous it is just beginning.
Sony. prepare for the biggest attack you have ever witnessed, anonymous style.
- Anonops.tk”
idk but it looks to me that they were behind the data breach.
May 5th, 2011
There are a bunch of idiots and I hope Sony tracks down every one of them and puts the boots to them.
May 5th, 2011
@ncaissie
Sony hired the equivalent of SEALs Team Six to track them down
http://kotaku.com/#!5798365/these-are-the-people-hired-to-hunt-the-playstation-network-hackers
May 5th, 2011
good
May 5th, 2011
The whole anonymous link is shaky at best.
I also don’t think it really matters one way or the other tbh.
May 5th, 2011
“Sony wouldn’t want to get into more trouble by lying on a legal document…
…Another thing is that Annonymous can be anybody so anyone could be doing all the hacking in the name of annonymous.”
Roca, I think you have no idea that you’ve just given a reason Sony could possibly be pretending to be Anon…
Think about it– It’s only lying if you get caught. How would Sony get caught, if by definition, Anon could never be brought to court to testify in it’s defense? If I know that, Sony knows that too.
Besides we all know Anon isn’t afraid to take responsibility for their actions. I mean, why would they be? You couldn’t catch them and you can’t stop them.
I agree with SW and Rhino– this Anon business is standing on egg shells. I can see Anon doing it, but Sony’s explanation is fishier than a prostitute on her period in a sushi bar
May 5th, 2011
You can come up with all the theories you want but fact is that they stated “Sony. prepare for the biggest attack you have ever witnessed, anonymous style” 6 days before PSN and few days after all their previous attacks (on Sony’s site, PSN, Sony employees and Sony Store)
Anonymous can’t take responsibility because they have no no actual control over any individuals actions, anonymous could be anyone and that anyone could’ve been the same person who hacked PSN.
Sony’s explanation is fishy? I would agree if they were the ones doing the investigation and logging all the evidence found but there are two external firms involved doing all the work and documenting all the evidence. The FBI is also involved.
Like SW, it doesn’t matter who did but Anonymous shouldn’t get the benefit of the doubt because 1. they started all this hacking and attacks, 2. they stated and promised their biggest attack was in the process and 3. a file with their name was found on one of the Sony servers.
May 6th, 2011
“Roca, I think you have no idea that you’ve just given a reason Sony could possibly be pretending to be Anon…”
HAHAHA. I called it. I just figured it would be Carlb and not Birdman that made the circle complete with the 9-11 analogy and Sony actually being part of the conspiracy.
May 6th, 2011
my bad. Carlb did say it.
May 6th, 2011
I’d like to point that, while I don’t think Sony planted the file, I think someone else did on purpose to shift blame, OR, because they are claiming to be part of a group that really has no membership/cohesive structure for the most part.
Man its like talking about a fart in the wind, its there, but its not, it gets blown around, separated. Blame Scientology is what I say…
May 6th, 2011
While it is indeed possible someone other than Anonymous is responsible for the attack, it’s pretty damn coincidental given the circumstances and time frame. Given Anon’s outspoken stance towards Sony lately they make the perfect scape goat for a third party with negative intentions.
IMO, I think they are the ones behind this. I think the end result spiraled out of control more so than they intended, and now they’re backpedaling as to not lose public support, and to not get fingered in a crime that will see people in jail for a significant sentence.
May 6th, 2011
So no Sony employees would be suspect in this crime and Sony would be forthright and very public in stating one or more of their own employees had a hand in this very sophisticated attack?
Okay.
May 6th, 2011
Or the other way around, which sounds more likey..specially after they stated “Sony. prepare for the biggest attack you have ever witnessed, anonymous style” 6 days before PSN went down.
Okay.
May 6th, 2011
Zero possibility a Sony employee could have been part of the attack.
Riiiight.
May 6th, 2011
Well, there’s also the possibility that Anonymous threatened that Sony employee (like they said they would) and forced him to help out in help out in the attack.
either way, all evidences point to anonymous.
May 6th, 2011
Carlb loves to play devils advocate. Noticed this when the timing of Credit card fraud was attributed to the hack in the other topic. Now Sony “may” be responsible for hacking themselves.
I’ll have to watch out for that Koolaid.
If it was Sony, wouldn’t it be more likely that the intrusion wouldn’t have been external, and we’d actually never find out about it?
May 6th, 2011
I think you have to be careful when saying ‘Sony’.
There’s a big diff. between Sony, and a Sony employee.
There is a chance a Sony employee was involved (just as there is a chance it was Anon., or a some other hacker that is now trying to make it look like Anon.), but I believe there is a low chance that Sony is involved.
May 6th, 2011
Have a great weekend.
May 6th, 2011
Fucking east coasters…
May 6th, 2011
If I was drinking the koolaid I might have thought PSN would come back up 12 days ago like Sony said it would, and that they had a minimally proficient enough staff of professionals already employed to recognize their system was hacked within 24 hours of it actually happening, let alone be able to announce it as soon as it happened. I’ll leave the koolaid to the “believers”.
May 7th, 2011
“So no Sony employees would be suspect in this crime and Sony would be forthright and very public in stating one or more of their own employees had a hand in this very sophisticated attack?”
Exactly.
Cue Sony defense force in 3. 2. 1.
“HAHAHA. I called it. I just figured it would be Carlb and not Birdman that made the circle complete with the 9-11 analogy and Sony actually being part of the conspiracy.”
smh
May 7th, 2011
“If I was drinking the koolaid I might have thought PSN would come back up 12 days ago like Sony said it would, and that they had a minimally proficient enough staff of professionals already employed to recognize their system was hacked within 24 hours of it actually happening, let alone be able to announce it as soon as it happened.”
Absolutely ripped the words from my mouth.
The real Kool-Aid drinkers are those that
1. Believe Sony would have rectified the situation by now. 3rd week, no excuses.
2. Believe it’s not possible Sony could have hacked themselves (Scientology church did it before)
3. Believe Sony is not at fault in any way.
Question: Is PSN up? It’s May 7th…
Roca, get to work. Or at least get us a solid date from your boss, jeez
May 7th, 2011
“Absolutely ripped the words from my mouth.”
LMAO.
So a strawman argument ripped the words from your mouth?
feel free to talk to yourselves. Once your ready to talk about what I’m addressing, maybe I’ll be here…maybe not.
May 7th, 2011
http://www.joystiq.com/2011/05/06/anonymous-members-say-sony-attacks-were-likely-connected-to-mo/
May 7th, 2011
I agree phranc, whoever is responsible is now “anonymous”… so therefore Anonymous must be held responsible, right?… lol… I know, KB must have been the culprit… he’s been awful quiet lately, must be a member… good god. Sony didn’t even know if it was a hack, so they should have real good luck pinning it on someone, let alone a group. I must admit though Anon make a wonderful scapegoat in an incident which is already embarrassing enough for Sony.
Of course the whole “but but Anonymous threatened me” as roca mentioned above wouldn’t come to anyone’s mind who was caught either. But wait a sec, how are they going to convict a criminal when they can’t even prove anything was “stolen”? Strawman indeed. The only “movement” here is the bowel movement Sony fans are taking worldwide in reaction to Sony’s continued missteps and miscommunication throughout this entire extended debacle, day 17 and counting.
You’re absolutely right thought, recently fired employees would have absolutely ZERO motive for perpetrating a crime such as this…
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/sony-online-entertainment-slashes-hundreds-173638
**phranc sipped the last of his koolaid as he typed the words “maybe I’ll be here…maybe not” above**
May 7th, 2011
Can somebody please explain this ‘Koolaid’ thing to me?
May 7th, 2011
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drinking_the_Kool-Aid
May 7th, 2011
Thanks Carl. Now these posts make some sort of sense.
May 7th, 2011
Yeah, it’s an American saying…
I personally hate Kool-Aid, buy the saying is pretty funny.
Frank, how is saying what we believe is drinking the Kool-Aid a strawman?? You believe we’re drinking the 9/11 conspiracy Kool-Aid, so we said who really is drinking the Kool-Aid– Sony fanboys (excluding me).
If this was back at college, my debate team professor would have deducted major points for incorrectly impugning a strawman….
May 8th, 2011
Besides, you don’t need to be a member of Anonymous to figure out a hack when there wasn’t even a stinking firewall up and it was outdated software to begin with. What the fuck were you thinking Sony?
http://consumerist.com/2011/05/security-expert-sony-knew-its-software-was-obsolete-months-before-psn-breach.html
May 8th, 2011
“If this was back at college, my debate team professor would have deducted major points for incorrectly impugning a strawman….”
If your posts are indicative of what your debate professor has taught you, I’ll take that as a compliment.
At no point is my argument addressed capt. Instead rather than explaining himself, Carl decides to retort by attacking all the others that don’t believe his POV as being koolaide drinkers. If who are koolaide drinkers is the primary debatable topic I would concede and cease my complaint of his debate methods.
It’s right up there with me saying I believe Obama is doing a bad job, and someone bringing up Bush in a counter argument.
At least his latest post about Sony layoffs addresses the point.
May 8th, 2011
“At no point is my argument addressed capt.”
Still, you misunderstand what a strawman is– it’s basically attacking a position you do not hold.
Saying you are a Kool-Aid drinker IS NOT A STRAWMAN.
Case in point, re-read what you typed:
“HAHAHA. I called it. I just figured it would be Carlb and not Birdman that made the circle complete with the 9-11 analogy and Sony actually being part of the conspiracy.”
You are definitely making a case where Carl and I are Kool-Aid drinkers here, are you not? Here I’ll rephrase for you so you can better understand:
““HAHAHA. I called it. I just figured it would be Carlb and not Birdman that ‘drank the Kool-Aid’ about the 9-11 analogy and Sony actually being part of the conspiracy.”
Now you see why we are saying you are in fact a ‘Kool-Aid drinker’. This is not a strawman argument dude.
“If your posts are indicative of what your debate professor has taught you, I’ll take that as a compliment.”
HA! Your arse would have failed that class guaranteed. You don’t understand something as basic to debates as strawman arguments. To you, it’s just a term that has become en vogue, so you felt “hip” using it.
May 8th, 2011
If you need to change my sentences around to make it appear that I wrote something I did not you just failed debate class yourself.
My point paints Carlb and yourself as conspiracy theorist willing to believe Sony is behind this.
Rather than addressing that my post is dissected and all focus turns to Kool-aid.
It’s not until I called him on it that he actually provided substance to the topic I was addressing.
I call him a conspiracy theorist.
The proper way to address that is to provide evidence that he is in fact not one. Does he do that? No.
Changing the argument to suite his needs, and not addressing my debatable questions is him setting up a strawman. It’s unrelated to my argument that he is a conspiracy theorist which is clear as day. He took the secondary argument and made that primary which wasn’t the focus.
May 8th, 2011
Anyway.
Let’s cut the bullshit and discuss what you guys actually believe.
Do you really think that it’s a Sony employee or pissed off hackers?
May 8th, 2011
“If you need to change my sentences around to make it appear that I wrote something I did not you just failed debate class yourself.”
LOL!!!!!!!!111oneoneone
Dude–
“My point paints Carlb and yourself as conspiracy theorist willing to believe Sony is behind this.”
IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS
“My point paints Carlb and yourself as conspiracy theorist willing to ‘drink the Kool-Aid’ that Sony is behind this.”
It’s exactly the same! Carl already provided the definition for Dans, but I suggest you read it.
“Rather than addressing that my post is dissected and all focus turns to Kool-aid.”
Very weak. It turned into what one is willing to believe, and drinking the Kool-Aid is an expression used to highlight what one is willing to believe.
“I call him a conspiracy theorist.The proper way to address that is to provide evidence that he is in fact not one.”
Really? Ah then perhaps that is why you feel we were strawmanning– because we didn’t conform to what Frankie here considers the proper way to counter his finger pointing. Well I’ve got news for you dog– we can answer any way we feel like.
If you say “the sky is blue,” I can answer this many ways:
1. Sure it is
2. The fuck it’s not
3. Actually the sky is only reflecting blue, it itself has no colour
4. My dog ate my homework
Neither is a strawman, even though 4 changed the subject entirely. Get your definitions right bro.
When you call someone a conspiracy theorist, YOU ARE SAYING THEY ARE A KOOL-AID DRINKER.
“”Drinking the Kool-Aid” is a phrase and metaphor, used in the United States and Canada, that means to become a firm believer in something, to accept an argument or philosophy wholeheartedly or blindly without critical examination.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drinking_the_Kool-Aid
Interestingly, Skeptisism is in the “see also” section.
To answer your question, I don’t know. But I wouldn’t put it past a big corporation to do something ‘evil’.
I’m not drinking that Kool-Aid
May 8th, 2011
“When you call someone a conspiracy theorist, YOU ARE SAYING THEY ARE A KOOL-AID DRINKER. ”
They really aren’t one and the same.
By definition, Carlb is correct in addressing me as a Koolaide drinker. He doesn’t realize that he’s actaully incorrect in that respect though. While it appears I take what Sony says wholeheartedly, I really question the “other” sources more so. Rumors don’t immediately equal truth.
The link between the two is the only thing keeping your head above water despite the fact the my original point differentiates from that.
Maybe I was wrong in saying Koolaide. Quite frankly, If I knew the the 9-11 analogy was going to only be be about koolaide (Carlb’s winning debate. cough Strawman) I’d likely not say that.
Let’s get back on topic though.
I’m laughing and saying like the 9-11 US conspiracy, Carlb is pointing fingers at the victim. He can retort to that or instead just call me conspiracy theorist [koolaide drinker] instead.
May 8th, 2011
Maybe I’ve misunderstood what a straw man is..maybe not.
IMO,
when someone disregards your initial argument and focuses in on an unrelated winnable for them argument, it’s setting up a strawman.
We appear to differentiate on the similarity of conspiracy theory and koolaide, and that appears to be our problem.
May 8th, 2011
“when someone disregards your initial argument and focuses in on an unrelated winnable for them argument, it’s setting up a strawman.”
nice description of Birdman…maybe this why he’s being so defensive
May 8th, 2011
OK I can understand where you’re coming from Frankie.
“We appear to differentiate on the similarity of conspiracy theory and koolaide, and that appears to be our problem.”
However, I do see the problem– for some reason you can’t correlate someone believing in a conspiracy to someone drinking the Kool-Aid. Try to look at these two sentences objectively and honestly tell me they aren’t pretty much the same thing
“I’m…saying like the 9-11 US conspiracy, Carlb is pointing fingers at the victim.”
“I’m…saying like the Kool-Aid drinkers of the 9-11 US conspiracy, Carlb is pointing fingers at the victim.”
C’mon man it’s honestly the same thing…
Lackey- 1.a servile follower; hanger-on; a toady
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/lackeys
nice description of Robi– I mean Roca…maybe this is why he never argues against his personal Batman, Phranctoast
May 8th, 2011
“My point paints Carlb and yourself as conspiracy theorist willing to believe Sony is behind this.”
phranc, I’m willing to believe that there is a good chance a recently fired employee(/s) could have been behind the incident. It’s a reasonable possibility. They would have had motive.
I’m also willing to believe that Sony did not do everything in their resources to have a professional security system that meets today’s current standard for those doing millions in online business today, otherwise they would not be working on it today, let alone the last few weeks.
I’m also willing to believe that said former employees could say they are part of Anonymous either truthfully or to misdirect the focus of blame and investigations.
If you really think the above beliefs constitute “drinking the koolaid”, well, I hope SDF is working out well for you.
“Do you really think that it’s a Sony employee or pissed off hackers?”
I think there is a very good chance it is a combination of groups of the two. Recently fired Sony employees that may still have friends in the company and also ready access to the hacker underground. Inside access can be key to a job like this.
Now, considering how promptly forthcoming Sony has been in the recent past about their system even being hacked, I really doubt that they would want to flaunt the above information around publicly, because there is also a good chance that would decrease consumer confidence even more than the incident itself already has.
*puts on tinfoil cap and returns to offline console*
May 8th, 2011
LOL….
you can be pretty funny when you aren’t trolling like the internet is new, Carl…
May 8th, 2011
Wait a sec… the internet isn’t new???
*rocks back and forth slowly to sooth the trauma of revelation*
May 9th, 2011
“soothe”
May 10th, 2011
@Capt.
You appear to see it as one and the same and I see the differences.
my argument:
Carlb is a conspiracy theorist.
His argument:
well phranc. You believe anything Sony says.
I think your professor would have an issue with this.
May 10th, 2011
@Carlb
You appear to entertain conspiracy like scenerios that differentiate what most everybody else believes to be the case. You mention motive while ignoring the strong motive hackers have said. Geeze. Even anonymous related hackers believe they’re responsible and your hanging on to this slightly possible more improbable solution.
While there’s nothing wrong with having an open mind and being willing to look at all possible scenarios, lately it appears you want to only push the scenarios that put Sony in a terrible light. The doctor that testified in congress for one, where the information was quickly refuted.
May 10th, 2011
@Carlb
Since you apparently like to entertain conspiracy theories I figured I’d play along and toss another your way.
Maybe a rogue MS employee or corporate sponsored sabotage is the real culprit.
While an individual has less to gain other than CC info disguised as anon intrusions, the possibility exists.
As a corporate entity however MS has millions to gain with the FUD caused by such an attack. From new users to general distrust in the competition.
Of course all this is a revenge tactic where it was revealed early 360 hardware faults were due to a Sony subsidiary hardware screwup.
May 11th, 2011
“you want to only push the scenarios that put Sony in a terrible light. The doctor that testified in congress for one, where the information was quickly refuted.”
For one, I don’t think the scenario I mentioned above would put Sony in a “terrible light”. Disgruntled former employees are nothing new, and Sony did what it had to in order to stay profitable. Corporations not wanting to air their dirty laundry is also nothing new. Two, the Dr.’s statements placed the outdated servers existing Jan 20, and have not been refuted.
Personally I think the scenario above doesn’t even scrape “conspiracy theory” level.
I mean, it’s not like I’m saying Howard Stringer and Co is stating their system was hacked but they weren’t able to even know it was hacked or even announce anything until after they decided to shut it down “for maintenance” days on end, or that they haven’t been able to give up the details of their thorough investigation and refused to attend Congressional hearings while continuing to give false deadlines for their service to be back up, or that they were attacked by the same organization in less than a month because they fail to prepare properly for another attack, or that they had weeks, months, or perhaps even years notice before now to prepare properly for a coordinated hacker attack. Now that would be a conspiracy theory.
FYI, I already mentioned M$ and corporate sponsored sabotage. Quit trying to steal my conspiracy theories.:D
May 11th, 2011
http://m.ign.com/articles/1166503
:p
May 11th, 2011
“For one, I don’t think the scenario I mentioned above would put Sony in a “terrible light””
Sure it does. It essentially says that the servers were outdated with no firewall. That looks far from good.
“the Dr.’s statements placed the outdated servers existing Jan 20, and have not been refuted. ”
The Doctors statement were meant to insinuate that the protection to this day were still sub par. Everyone was able to read between the lines including yourself. Cut the bullshit.
“Personally I think the scenario above doesn’t even scrape “conspiracy theory” level. ”
Me neither. Never said it did. reread what I said. It was evidence of you posting shit (rumors, misinformation, and straight up BS) to put Sony in a terrible light. Mike called you on that as well. LOL. Like Phish says. “When the only tool you have is a hammer….everything looks like a nail”
My conspiracy theorist accusation is quite simple. There’s overwhelming evidence that points to a coordinated hacker attack. The DDOS, and the two hacks of multiple servers (PSN,Qriocity, and SOE). They’ve threatened that something big was coming and it did. Members of that group even think they’re responsible.
While the possibility exist of your proposed scenario, it is by far the least likely and non accepted by the majority, and I personally don’t even believe you believe it.
May 11th, 2011
“Sure it does.”
Sony is already in a terrible light. If the real explanation as to exactly what happened was so golden they would have went public with it by now.
“The Doctors statement were meant to insinuate that the protection to this day were still sub par.”
The doctor’s statement was taken out of context of the hearing itself and purposely misquoted in order to discredit him and his testimony.
“Everyone was able to read between the lines including yourself. Cut the bullshit.”
“Everyone”, meaning the fanboys, were only reading secondhand sites which took the quote out of context. Cut the bullshit.
“rumors, misinformation, and straight up BS) to put Sony in a terrible light.”
So when rumors, misinformation, and straight up BS is posted to put Sony in a favorable light it’s alright? Please. One. The doctor’s quote I used still hasn’t been disproven. Two. Sony has publicly stated more misinformation about PSN coming back online than I have. I’m just quoting them.
“There’s overwhelming evidence that points to a coordinated hacker attack.”
Yes. We agree.
“it is by far the least likely and non accepted by the majority”
Saying recently fired Sony employees or their close friends are not probable to fall into this equation is disingenuous. It still allows for Anonymous (whatever that is), and allows for a way in to a system that supposedly was up to date and had all standard security measures taken before the attack.
And yes, I do believe it. Inside resources are key to highly secure areas, whether they be physical, digital, or both. The employees also could have been bribed or blackmailed. If it can work for helping almost 500 Taliban escape a highly guarded prison, it can work for infiltrating a videogame network.
May 12th, 2011
“Sony is already in a terrible light. If the real explanation as to exactly what happened was so golden they would have went public with it by now.”
They probably feel that after a thorough investigation and answers obtained when they know fully would be sufficient. As of now, we know the hacker used the time of the DDOS attack to query the servers. They also covered up their tracks fairly well. Quite frankly, I’m more interested in the system being up at a quicker pace than how exactly it happened which is likely out of my understanding of computers anyway.
“The doctor’s statement was taken out of context of the hearing itself and purposely misquoted in order to discredit him and his testimony. ”
I never took it out of context. As soon as I saw you post it, and you posted it in several blorge stories, I read the original article and was able to see it for what it was. Here-say gathered from a forum post. The doctor can’t say one way or another if what he says is true, because he did not witness it. The information is a “Bombshell” as if true it insinuates that the protection was sub par and could have still been sub par during the hacker attack. There’s reasons it was a news story and there’s a reason you posted it all over the place.
Again, I don’t suggest your scenario is impossible, just very unlikely given the circumstances.
Maybe several paid off Americans walk on baggage screeners helped coordinate the 9-11 attack, but likely it’s just a bunch of pissed off Muslims using vulnerabilities in the system .
May 12th, 2011
“The doctor can’t say one way or another if what he says is true”
Google Jan 20 like they did Mar 20 and you will see whether it is true or not.
“There’s reasons it was a news story and there’s a reason you posted it all over the place.”
The reason it was a news story was because it was a Congressional Hearing, Sony didn’t show, what the doctor said was true to the best of his knowledge, and no one has been able to disprove it as yet.
“I don’t suggest your scenario is impossible, just very unlikely given the circumstances”
That’s fine. You’re entitled to your opinion. I simply think it is very likely given the precise timing of several events. These events have multiple similarities to those in my past experience of network security.