More on the defacement of Feminist News Daily site.

[ambitious_wench]

OK, I'll own my reaction and my response. It was pointed out by scascot and malloc1024 that the recent "kinghackteam" attacks on Feminist News Daily was not specific to them alone, but seems to have been a blanket attack over any unsecure website. See this Google search page

In my defense, I said the defacement was an act of cyber-terrorism and cyber-harassment. I did not say it was sexual harassment, nor did I say it was targeted pr specific anti-feminist terrorism. I will own that I was thinking it. I'm not thinking it any more. Nor do I think it was targeted at US sites; Other sites defaced included a Peruvian sports page.

Remember, if someone walks into your house and takes or breaks something, it is called "breaking and entering", even if you left the door unlocked, under US law. What makes it illegal is the lack of permission to enter. If a gang takes over a street, mass home invasion, it ups the level of crime; it becomes an act of terrorism. It is done with the intent to cause fear, and that by definition is terrorism. While cyber-terrorism is not analogous to terrorism in the real world, they do share the common element of fear.

This post came about as the result of an IM conversation with malloc1024. We both were trying to find ways of expressing ourselves with varying degrees of success. I'll own that I assumed this was targeted specifically at a feminist site. Mike pointed out that it lacked a specific or blatantly antifeminist message made it unlikely.

So, to recap:

This act was a deliberate attempt to cause fear. This act was widespread harassment.

It doesn't have to be a repeating pattern of attack on a single site for it to be harassment. One instance is enough per site to be harassment. Especially since multiple sites were attacked.

Rich, I know you've responded again to my reply. I have yet to read it. I hope this clears up any disagreements between us.

Edited to add:

Mike points out that the term "cyber terrorism" debases the idea of terrorism. He draws the analogy between its use and the use of the term "genocide" by pro-lifers. My response is that there are levels of terror and fear, and genocide is an absolute. Further, it's a given that cyber-anything isn't immanent; You can't get pregnant from cyber-sex, and you can't die from cyber-terrorism. Doesn't mean cyber-sex isn't enjoyable, and cyber-terrorism isn't scary.

Comments

[scascot.livejournal.com]

If there was a disagreement, it was minor and trivial. I was more interested in trying to understand your position than to disagree with you.

[ambitious-wench.livejournal.com]

Heh. I'm trying to understand me, too, Rich. It helped when I became aware of the low-level amount of fear I live with on a day to day basis because I am female. I'm seeing it in other women, too. I was once warned by an otherwise strong woman that I have to be careful on my hikes because I might get attacked, and she held on to that concept of stranger rape when I told her that the vast majority of rapists were known to their victims, and that statistically I was more likely to be raped by a co-worker here in the valley than by a fellow hiker on the trail.

You know what? Her comments rang true with my own fears. And yes, I do tend to be very vigilant on the trail. But I am also vigilant at work, and I have very well defined boundaries of what is acceptable and what isn't from my co-workers.

I'm coming to grips with my fears. One way I do that is by challenging and naming what I fear when I see it. Sometimes I jump to conclusions too quickly.

[lederhosen.livejournal.com]

you can't die from cyber-terrorism

Not true. Crash an ambulance dispatch system, for instance. Air-traffic and reactor control systems are generally well-protected, but not completely invulnerable. And so on...

[ambitious-wench.livejournal.com]

Point well taken, Art. Just out of curiosity, are there any documented instance of either of these?

[lederhosen.livejournal.com]

There have certainly been cases where people were killed by malware; I don't know of any where the culprits *intended* to kill anybody, but presumably what can be done by accident can be done deliberately.

http://www.nsta.org/quantum/virus.asp 1996 story: virus crashes diagnostic systems in a St. Petersburg hospital, two children killed.

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2002/05/06/cyber-terror.htm - discusses some of the major threats, and mentions attacks that penetrated security at a MA airport and an AZ dam. (No indication what the intent of those attacks were.)