Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Risk

Anonymous Says DDoS Attacks Like Free Speech

Hacktivist collective Anonymous petitions the White House to make DDoS attacks part of First Amendment protections. Shutdown attacks are akin to Occupy protests, group argues.

Can the Anonymous hacktivist collective hack the First Amendment?

A petition filed this week with the White House seeks to decriminalize distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, making them a legal form of protesting. In other words, it would extend the First Amendment's protections to protect people's right to disrupt websites.

"Distributed denial-of-service (DDoS), is not any form of hacking in any way," claims the "We The People" petition request. "It is the equivalent of repeatedly hitting the refresh button on a webpage. It is, in that way, no different than any 'occupy' protest."

According to the petition, "instead of a group of people standing outside a building to occupy the area, they are having their computer occupy a website to slow (or deny) service of that particular website for a short time." The petition also calls for anyone jailed for a DDoS-related crime to be immediately released, and the related charges to be expunged from people's arrest records.

[ For the latest on the ongoing John McAfee saga, see McAfee Strikes Back: Spyware Sting Targets Belize Government. ]

While the identity of the person who created the petition is partially anonymized -- it's ascribed to "Dylan K" of Eagle, Wis. -- members of the Anonymous collective are clearly backing the petition. "We Need Your Signature! Make, distributed denial-of-service (DDoS), a legal form of protesting," read a Friday YourAnonNews Twitter post.

For the White House to respond to the petition, the request needs to garner 25,000 signatures by Feb. 6. By Friday morning, however, the petition had received only about 2,000 signatures.

The First Amendment enshrines both the right to freedom of speech and "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." The DDoS petition, then, implies that current laws should be updated to protect people's right to disrupt websites. "With the advance in internet techonology (sic), comes new grounds for protesting," reads the petition.

The request highlights the fact that that there are currently different rules governing website shutdowns vs. interrupting businesses in the real world. For example, in many Western countries, protestors can choke the entrance to a business -- or even city streets -- for a few hours, and it's legal. "And the digital equivalent of that, a DDoS attack that takes a website offline for a few hours, is illegal," said Mandiant VP Grady Summers at last year's RSA conference in San Francisco. The prosecutions of numerous people involved in DDoS attacks -- or in some readings, protests -- further makes that clear.

If the petition gathers sufficient signatures, and the White House responds, would DDoS fans have any chance of seeing website disruptions get classified as a form of protest? Most likely Congress would need to pass a law that protects DDoS attacks as a form of free speech. Given that federal legislators can't even agree on a bill to protect people's privacy rights online, good luck scheduling a DDoS discussion.

In the meantime, law enforcement officials will no doubt continue to prosecute DDoS attacks. But FBI officials have said they're not unaware of concerns over people's right to protest online, and emphasized they're required by law to protect people's civil liberties, including online.

"That is a huge concern for us ... and there are a number of challenges associated with this," said Eric Strom, unit chief for the Cyber Initiative and Resource Fusion Unit Cyber Division at the FBI, at last year's RSA conference. One of the chief challenges, he said, is that many people who launch DDoS attacks are minors.

How does the bureau gauge when online speech or protests cross a legal line? "If they're just complaining about something, or an issue, they have every right to do that and certainly we don't have a problem with that," he said. "It's when they take that step across the line, to make a point ... [and] they hack into a system, or go after say someone in law enforcement and their families … obviously we're going to take a big interest."

Hack.me is a free platform to build, host and share simple and complex vulnerable Web applications. Find out more about it in this free Black Hat webcast on Jan. 17, with Armando Romeo, founder of eLearnSecurity.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Brittany
50%
50%
Brittany,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/14/2013 | 5:22:55 PM
re: Anonymous Says DDoS Attacks Like Free Speech
Wow, this is something else. It's one thing to protest and picket outside of business but doing so is not going to cost a company thousands of dollars in lost business like an outage would. Maybe a few customers walk away to avoid the protest but a DDOS is so much more destructive. What will they think of next?
Michael Endler
50%
50%
Michael Endler,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/13/2013 | 9:47:55 PM
re: Anonymous Says DDoS Attacks Like Free Speech
Yeah, I think several people here have it right: it might be legitimate if a DDoS attack involves hundreds of thousands of people trying to access a site simultaneously in a coordinated protest, but it's another matter when a handful of people (maybe just one?) use botnets. I can appreciate why the notion of corporate personhood makes the petition emotionally attractive in certain contexts, and I think there's a line to be drawn somewhere-- but, as Mathew points out, good luck if you expect the current Congress to find it.
Robert
50%
50%
Robert "DocSalvage" Watson,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/13/2013 | 11:28:41 AM
re: Anonymous Says DDoS Attacks Like Free Speech
Unless you can get quite a few others to freely use their computers in a coordinated attack, thus making it "distributed", then the target site will be able to thwart it pretty easily... automatically even.

One person with a picket sign (one computer launching a denial attack) does not much of a protest make. The more people join a protest, the more valid and effective it is.

The hijacking of computers for the bot-net seems clearly illegal to me though. A lot like taking hostages to use as human shields.

Perhaps then, it's a misnomer with consequences to call these "DDoS attacks," as those may be a valid 21st Century exercise of FoS. Instead, it is the computer hijackings that are the crime and, due to their number, might justify a fairly stiff sentence.
jries921
50%
50%
jries921,
User Rank: Ninja
1/13/2013 | 12:10:51 AM
re: Anonymous Says DDoS Attacks Like Free Speech
Now that's crazy. It's one thing to sabotage a computer system; it's quite another to deliberately kill or injure people to further one's political goals.
slimj091
50%
50%
slimj091,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/12/2013 | 5:26:22 PM
re: Anonymous Says DDoS Attacks Like Free Speech
"Anonymous" are mostly 13 to 15 year old boy's. do we really give two fucks about the speech rights of a bunch of kids who's idea of great comedy is lol dong's?
slimj091
50%
50%
slimj091,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/12/2013 | 5:22:45 PM
re: Anonymous Says DDoS Attacks Like Free Speech
DDoS attacks suppress free speech. the attack is no more free speech than me screaming in someone's face who is trying to have an intelligent debate with me.
moarsauce123
50%
50%
moarsauce123,
User Rank: Ninja
1/11/2013 | 11:47:50 PM
re: Anonymous Says DDoS Attacks Like Free Speech
So breaking other peoples stuff is free speech? What are they smoking?
jerrynesmith
50%
50%
jerrynesmith,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/11/2013 | 9:17:06 PM
re: Anonymous Says DDoS Attacks Like Free Speech
Kinda like corporations drowning out the voices of real people by exercising their "freedom of speech" more loudly, more often and by contributing more money and being more influential than any real person can possibly be.
NJ Mike
50%
50%
NJ Mike,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/11/2013 | 7:51:35 PM
re: Anonymous Says DDoS Attacks Like Free Speech
What a load of BS. What these self-righteous jerks are saying that they should be able to exercise their freedom of speech by denying somebody else's their's.
JerryJ
50%
50%
JerryJ,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/11/2013 | 7:23:51 PM
re: Anonymous Says DDoS Attacks Like Free Speech
lgaryHB is spot on. DDoS is not freedom of speech, it's criminal tresspass. As for jail time, the members of anonymous are civil disobedients (well, some of them are, the others are just bored or in it for kicks). A civil disobedient's duty is to submit to the punishment prescribed by law.
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 5/22/2020
The Problem with Artificial Intelligence in Security
Dr. Leila Powell, Lead Security Data Scientist, Panaseer,  5/26/2020
How an Industry Consortium Can Reinvent Security Solution Testing
Henry Harrison, Co-founder & Chief Technology Officer, Garrison,  5/21/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
How Cybersecurity Incident Response Programs Work (and Why Some Don't)
This Tech Digest takes a look at the vital role cybersecurity incident response (IR) plays in managing cyber-risk within organizations. Download the Tech Digest today to find out how well-planned IR programs can detect intrusions, contain breaches, and help an organization restore normal operations.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-10737
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-27
A race condition was found in the mkhomedir tool shipped with the oddjob package in versions before 0.34.5 and 0.34.6 wherein, during the home creation, mkhomedir copies the /etc/skel directory into the newly created home and changes its ownership to the home's user without properly checking the hom...
CVE-2020-13622
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-27
JerryScript 2.2.0 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (assertion failure) because a property key query for a Proxy object returns unintended data.
CVE-2020-13623
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-27
JerryScript 2.2.0 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (stack consumption) via a proxy operation.
CVE-2020-13616
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-26
The boost ASIO wrapper in net/asio.cpp in Pichi before 1.3.0 lacks TLS hostname verification.
CVE-2020-13614
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-26
An issue was discovered in ssl.c in Axel before 2.17.8. The TLS implementation lacks hostname verification.