7 ms·

You're bragging about a cyber crime. One wonders how many parents-of-script-kiddies were affected, having their data or work destroyed by blind retribution for

You're bragging about a cyber crime. One wonders how many parents-of-script-kiddies were affected, having their data or work destroyed by blind retribution for having naive children.

worstan 2y ago
Fucking up the family computer is a formative experience for many techies.
- te_chris 2y ago
  Amen! I still remember the time I tried to install fedora in the late 90’s and set a bios password in the boot loader then forgot it. I was like 11
threatofrain 2y ago
One wonders how many parents of non-script kiddies were affected by these destructive criminals, or how many of these script kiddies are professionals making a living. This story concerns 18,000 script kiddies. Imagine the scale of impact we're talking about when magnified to their victims.
- wink 2y ago
  I think you just can't compare those 2 scenarios, 25 years apart. Back then: We got the 2nd computer in the household in 97, exactly so I would not have to use the family (actually business) computer anymore. Now: I mean ok, maybe it's already swung past a certain point that there is actually only one non-mobile device in the home, but the chance that it is the targeted script kiddie's machine (and not the important family computer) is so much higher.
- serf 2y ago
  why does this logic make sense to anyone, ever? someone does something bad -- by all means that gives whoever carte blanche to do whatever is just as bad or equally so to the victimizers. This doesn't make sense -- even less sense when you realize that 'script kiddies' is anyone who ran an executable from an image board; you couldn't ask for a lower bar. Half the people who downloaded the thing probably didn't even know what the fuck an IP address is, they probably shouldn't be the ones saddled with taking on the entirety of repercussion that was meant for the person(s) who wrote the tool. tl;dr : I bet half of the '18,000' people were 11 year olds who typed 'google.com' or their least favorite AIM screen-name into the target criteria of this already half-assed 'tool', yet people act righteous for wiping their hard-drives as if they were the real culprit. read : wiping the not-culprits parents hard-drives in many cases, I would bet.
  - voakbasda 2y ago
    First, parents are responsible for the actions of their children. Second, we assign blame to the person that pulls the trigger, not the maker of the gun. Third, these people are likely to never face any other form of punishment. Personally, I think these facts justify this level of retribution. That doesn’t make it “legal” or “right”, but I definitely do not think it is “wrong”.
    - celticninja 2y ago
      Just because something is legal it doesn't make it moral and just because something is illegal it doesn't make it immoral
    - jrflowers 2y ago
      > Second, we assign blame to the person that pulls the trigger, not the maker of the gun. The analogy here is more akin to a booby trap than a gun, in which case we do assign the blame to the person that made the contraption intended to harm the unwitting user. That aside, considering once it was discovered how the drive wiper that OP (aaza) claims to have made works, it basically just became a drive wiper that any bad actor could drop into a target system and run, “I intentionally distributed malware that I think, but have no way of verifying, only hurt The Wrong Sort Of People” isn’t just illegal and wrong, it’s stupid.
      - nulld3v 2y ago
        > That aside, considering once it was discovered how the drive wiper that OP (aaza) claims to have made works, it basically just became a drive wiper that any bad actor could drop into a target system and run, “I intentionally distributed malware that I think, but have no way of verifying, only hurt The Wrong Sort Of People” isn’t just illegal and wrong, it’s stupid. Imagine copying an entire binary onto a system just so you don't have to run `cat /dev/zero > /dev/sda`
        jrflowers 2y ago
        > Imagine copying an entire binary onto a system just so you don't have to run `cat /dev/zero > /dev/sda` Imagining script kiddies using stupid software in stupid ways very clearly and easily, also imagining a script kiddie pasting `cat /dev/zero > /dev/sda` into the windows command prompt of the computer he’s controlling with sub7 and getting very frustrated
- amelius 2y ago
  With LLMs, everybody can be a script kiddie. Imagine the scale ...
  - wwtl12 2y ago
    Running software from LLM output is like building a bomb with the Anarchist Cookbook.
throwaway5752 2y ago
The poster was preventing a crime against innocent parties. His "victims" were the criminals. The script kiddies were responsible for running malware and trying to launch attacks from their parents' computers in this scenario, and they would be the ones responsible for data erasure of others using the same computer. In that sense, file deletion is destructive but honest. The poster owned the systems at this point and could have exfiltrated data or used the control of the systems for further attacks. This was decidedly mild.
- genewitch 2y ago
  Detonating a bomb is illegal in many jurisdictions, regardless of property damage or injury to humans. The person who called this a cybercrime is more correct than people disagreeing
  - throwaway5752 2y ago
    They are both cybercrime. I'm not disagreeing with that. But if you sabotage a bombmakers tools and they blow their own household up instead of other innocent people, is it the same thing? Let's be very specific: "if they actually used it as part of a DDoS.". This wasn't embedded in warez or cracking tools, it was in botnet controllers, and ran when someone had pulled the trigger to execute an attack.
    - genewitch 2y ago
      you are saying it was "botnet controllers" all the op said was "ddos tool on 4chan" - LOIC wasn't a "ddos" tool. it was a DoS tool. sub7 wasn't a ddos tool. BO wasn't a ddos tool. butttrumpet wasn't a ddos tool. A "botnet controller" requires a botnet. The OP made malware. A program, when run, that would delete your files without permission. merely having the thought of doing something illegal isn't illegal and afaik the catholics have the only guidelines on how to deal with illegal thoughts, and "delete all the files on their hard disk or otherwise corrupt their system" wasn't in the canon that i saw.
      - 2y ago
morkalork 2y ago
I'm going to echo the unjustly dead comment: >Fucking up the family computer is a formative experience for many techies. It's true, I did it myself!

You're bragging about a cyber crime. One wonders how many parents-of-script-kiddies were affected, having their data or work destroyed by blind retribution for having naive children.

worstan 2y ago

Fucking up the family computer is a formative experience for many techies.

te_chris 2y ago
Amen! I still remember the time I tried to install fedora in the late 90’s and set a bios password in the boot loader then forgot it. I was like 11

threatofrain 2y ago

One wonders how many parents of non-script kiddies were affected by these destructive criminals, or how many of these script kiddies are professionals making a living. This story concerns 18,000 script kiddies. Imagine the scale of impact we're talking about when magnified to their victims.

wink 2y ago
I think you just can't compare those 2 scenarios, 25 years apart. Back then: We got the 2nd computer in the household in 97, exactly so I would not have to use the family (actually business) computer anymore. Now: I mean ok, maybe it's already swung past a certain point that there is actually only one non-mobile device in the home, but the chance that it is the targeted script kiddie's machine (and not the important family computer) is so much higher.
serf 2y ago
why does this logic make sense to anyone, ever? someone does something bad -- by all means that gives whoever carte blanche to do whatever is just as bad or equally so to the victimizers. This doesn't make sense -- even less sense when you realize that 'script kiddies' is anyone who ran an executable from an image board; you couldn't ask for a lower bar. Half the people who downloaded the thing probably didn't even know what the fuck an IP address is, they probably shouldn't be the ones saddled with taking on the entirety of repercussion that was meant for the person(s) who wrote the tool. tl;dr : I bet half of the '18,000' people were 11 year olds who typed 'google.com' or their least favorite AIM screen-name into the target criteria of this already half-assed 'tool', yet people act righteous for wiping their hard-drives as if they were the real culprit. read : wiping the not-culprits parents hard-drives in many cases, I would bet.
- voakbasda 2y ago
  First, parents are responsible for the actions of their children. Second, we assign blame to the person that pulls the trigger, not the maker of the gun. Third, these people are likely to never face any other form of punishment. Personally, I think these facts justify this level of retribution. That doesn’t make it “legal” or “right”, but I definitely do not think it is “wrong”.
  - celticninja 2y ago
    Just because something is legal it doesn't make it moral and just because something is illegal it doesn't make it immoral
  - jrflowers 2y ago
    > Second, we assign blame to the person that pulls the trigger, not the maker of the gun. The analogy here is more akin to a booby trap than a gun, in which case we do assign the blame to the person that made the contraption intended to harm the unwitting user. That aside, considering once it was discovered how the drive wiper that OP (aaza) claims to have made works, it basically just became a drive wiper that any bad actor could drop into a target system and run, “I intentionally distributed malware that I think, but have no way of verifying, only hurt The Wrong Sort Of People” isn’t just illegal and wrong, it’s stupid.
    - nulld3v 2y ago
      > That aside, considering once it was discovered how the drive wiper that OP (aaza) claims to have made works, it basically just became a drive wiper that any bad actor could drop into a target system and run, “I intentionally distributed malware that I think, but have no way of verifying, only hurt The Wrong Sort Of People” isn’t just illegal and wrong, it’s stupid. Imagine copying an entire binary onto a system just so you don't have to run `cat /dev/zero > /dev/sda`
      - jrflowers 2y ago
        > Imagine copying an entire binary onto a system just so you don't have to run `cat /dev/zero > /dev/sda` Imagining script kiddies using stupid software in stupid ways very clearly and easily, also imagining a script kiddie pasting `cat /dev/zero > /dev/sda` into the windows command prompt of the computer he’s controlling with sub7 and getting very frustrated
amelius 2y ago
With LLMs, everybody can be a script kiddie. Imagine the scale ...
- wwtl12 2y ago
  Running software from LLM output is like building a bomb with the Anarchist Cookbook.

throwaway5752 2y ago

The poster was preventing a crime against innocent parties. His "victims" were the criminals. The script kiddies were responsible for running malware and trying to launch attacks from their parents' computers in this scenario, and they would be the ones responsible for data erasure of others using the same computer. In that sense, file deletion is destructive but honest. The poster owned the systems at this point and could have exfiltrated data or used the control of the systems for further attacks. This was decidedly mild.

genewitch 2y ago
Detonating a bomb is illegal in many jurisdictions, regardless of property damage or injury to humans. The person who called this a cybercrime is more correct than people disagreeing
- throwaway5752 2y ago
  They are both cybercrime. I'm not disagreeing with that. But if you sabotage a bombmakers tools and they blow their own household up instead of other innocent people, is it the same thing? Let's be very specific: "if they actually used it as part of a DDoS.". This wasn't embedded in warez or cracking tools, it was in botnet controllers, and ran when someone had pulled the trigger to execute an attack.
  - genewitch 2y ago
    you are saying it was "botnet controllers" all the op said was "ddos tool on 4chan" - LOIC wasn't a "ddos" tool. it was a DoS tool. sub7 wasn't a ddos tool. BO wasn't a ddos tool. butttrumpet wasn't a ddos tool. A "botnet controller" requires a botnet. The OP made malware. A program, when run, that would delete your files without permission. merely having the thought of doing something illegal isn't illegal and afaik the catholics have the only guidelines on how to deal with illegal thoughts, and "delete all the files on their hard disk or otherwise corrupt their system" wasn't in the canon that i saw.
    - 2y ago

morkalork 2y ago

I'm going to echo the unjustly dead comment: >Fucking up the family computer is a formative experience for many techies. It's true, I did it myself!