# Anonymous takes down GoDaddy - Millions of sites down



## cgipson1 (Sep 10, 2012)

GoDaddy goes down, Anonymous claims responsibility - Tech Talk - CBS News

thoughts?


----------



## Derrel (Sep 10, 2012)

"Those bast&rds!"


----------



## 12sndsgood (Sep 10, 2012)

cant say im very fond of them if thats true.


----------



## ceejtank (Sep 10, 2012)

I like anonymous.. they took down scientology for a bit which was awesome.

don't know why they'd target godaddy.


----------



## cgipson1 (Sep 10, 2012)

Because godaddy supported the antipiracy bill... that's why! 

Pissed off all of the thieves out there apparently!

Hopefully you don't support this crap! This is terrorist activity no different than 9-11. The difference is that it is a huge monetary hit, instead of people being killed.


This pisses me off because two of my remote desktop / communication sites are on Godaddy...


----------



## GraceNFaith (Sep 10, 2012)

Wow! Don't want get in the cross hairs of anonymous...


----------



## sm4him (Sep 10, 2012)

ceejtank said:


> I like anonymous.. they took down scientology for a bit which was awesome.
> 
> don't know why they'd target godaddy.



Because godaddy supported SOPA.

EDIT Charlie beat me to that, but it didn't take ninja skills. I was busy discovered that my keyboard is now completely dysfunctional. I can only make caps with the caps lock on, not with the shift key--and i cannot make any of the 'shift plus key' combos work--like a plus sign, or an asterisk. Or a colon, which would have been nice to have after the word edit.


----------



## ceejtank (Sep 10, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> Because godaddy supported the antipiracy bill... that's why!
> 
> Pissed off all of the thieves out there apparently!
> 
> ...



That's unfortunate. I don't support them, but when they took scientology on I was pleased haha.  If you're apart of anonymous it'd be my assumption that you would pirate things, so they are probably pissed.  Kind of childish.


----------



## The_Traveler (Sep 10, 2012)

And my hosted sites are down.
Just spent xty minutes calling people.


----------



## Overread (Sep 10, 2012)

Bleh Anon is a wildcard and sometimes they do some funny or neat things; but I agree with the above points that its cyber crime which is the majority of their game. The result for the rest of us is that their antics often end up with even stronger laws which imped upon the rest of us just to contain the handful of them.


----------



## cgipson1 (Sep 10, 2012)

I used to think hacking was cool back in the late 70's / early 80's on my little ol' 300 baud modem... but we never did anything destructive. Would even leave notes for admins about what holes they needed to patch... 

but this is not COOL!


----------



## sm4him (Sep 10, 2012)

hostgator just tweeted; 'We've heard elephants never forget but *GoDaddy* seems to be experiencing quite a stampede. 30% off your 1st invoice! #*reliablehost*<promocode'.
wow, that's just cold. :twisted:


----------



## Overread (Sep 10, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> I used to think hacking was cool back in the late 70's / early 80's on my little ol' 300 baud modem... but we never did anything destructive. Would even leave notes for admins about what holes they needed to patch...
> 
> but this is not COOL!



I've read that a good few people have landed themselves coding jobs for banks and the like by breaking in and then showing up where the code problems were.

The other thing to remember about "anon" is that whilst they use a singular name and whilst there might be some core "Anon" cult/group they are for the most part not a unique organisation. Indeed it seems to be more a protest name random hackers adopt for certain situations and I'm sure there are many "fake anon" groups out there (especially if you believe their claim that even Anon don't know who the other Anon people are).


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Sep 10, 2012)

Great. My blog site is down. Thanks, cowardly, tiny, pimple-faced nerds! You're really cool.


----------



## Dao (Sep 10, 2012)

It was not Anonymous, it was from a single person (also related to Anonymous)

He twitted and asked the news to change that the attack is from him, not from Anonymous.
https://twitter.com/AnonymousOwn3r/status/245227793334546432

https://twitter.com/AnonymousOwn3r/status/245217519424634881



Either case, I thought Godaddy should have something already prepared to mitigate DDoS attack especially their name servers.


----------



## rexbobcat (Sep 10, 2012)

I do like that they took down Westboro Baptist Church for a little while.

(I host with Wix and iPage so I'm good, mwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha)


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 10, 2012)

Don't knock those folks, they keep Holga and Instagram in bizness


----------



## macpro88 (Sep 10, 2012)

One of our biggest clients (im an IT Manager, not pro photog; clearly lol) uses GoDaddy. They, are NOT happy campers right now.

I've never liked GoDaddy in the first place, we are actually working on getting that client off GoDaddy (Anon couldn't have waited another week?) because their service sucks.


----------



## zombiemann (Sep 10, 2012)

Somebody else said it earlier but it bears repeating, this was not a "sanctioned" take down by Anonymous.  The problem with Anonymous is ANYBODY can claim to be part of Anonymous.  

@Charlie: I do NOT in any way support or condone piracy, but I was as firmly against SOPA as a person can be.  The draconian nature of the bill without any checks and balances alone made it worth opposing.  Under SOPA I could file a DMCA notice against THIS site, regadless of it's EULA/site rules/stuff you had to agree to to join, and have it taken down without so much as a review.


----------



## cgipson1 (Sep 10, 2012)

macpro88 said:


> One of our biggest clients (im an IT Manager, not pro photog; clearly lol) uses GoDaddy. They, are NOT happy campers right now.
> 
> I've never liked GoDaddy in the first place, we are actually working on getting that client off GoDaddy (Anon couldn't have waited another week?) because their service sucks.



yea.. my boss registered a couple of domains with GoDaddy without consulting me first....  when we were fighting with the previous outsourced IT, trying to get control of the company's original domain name. So things are a little screwy! lol! I am going to have to setup some aliases....


----------



## Dao (Sep 10, 2012)

I have few domains registered via Godaddy, but I am not using their DNS servers so I am not affected.


----------



## cgipson1 (Sep 10, 2012)

Dao said:


> I have few domains registered via Godaddy, but I am not using their DNS servers so I am not affected.



Really? That's funny.. Because I don't use their DNS servers either... and yet I could not reach them earlier, period! Not by IP address... not by domain name.


----------



## SamSpade1941 (Sep 10, 2012)

Meh .... I cant say it affected me in the slightest. But I don't use Go Daddy when I did have a web page I used Mac Highway , outstanding company BTW if you need web hosting services.


----------



## unpopular (Sep 10, 2012)

We'd all like to believe that our civil liberty is won on nice speeches by charismatic men. In reality our civil rights must be fought for. 

The powerful don't hand over power without consequences.


----------



## macpro88 (Sep 10, 2012)

not everyone was affected though, a little more than half of my users email, we use GoDaddy for hosted exchange, were without email a select few had it all day and still do. We could not however, log into our admin panel on GoDaddy's site...

I don't think EVERYONE was affected, and changing the routing and IP address, done fairly quickly, sometimes, can remedy the damage, and I'm pretty sure it was only a DDoS attack anyways.


----------



## Kazooie (Sep 11, 2012)

I give my props to the person(s) who did this, to an extent. It clearly got some news for Anon, which I adore, but they could have done it a bit different. 

Actually, it was a great way of showing power, and I love that they did it. Granted, I'm also an advocate for privacy on the internet. That's why I (when I feel like it) run my internet connection through a proxy in France or Africa.


----------



## Dao (Sep 11, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> Dao said:
> 
> 
> > I have few domains registered via Godaddy, but I am not using their DNS servers so I am not affected.
> ...



I could be wrong, but here is what happened. When a domain name is registered through registrar, a pair (or more) of DNS servers are associated with it.  And that information is stored in the master database servers or the root servers placed around the world which are not owned by GoDaddy.

During the outage, I was not able to lookup godaddy.com, secureserver.net nor domaincontrol.com. But I was able to do so with my domains.





Now, GoDaddy said they were not under attacked yesterday.

Quoted from CNN.com
"It was not a 'hack' and it was not a denial of service attack (DDoS),"  Scott Wagner, GoDaddy's interim CEO, said in an e-mailed statement. "We  have determined the service outage was due to a series of internal  network events that corrupted router data tables."


----------



## cgipson1 (Sep 11, 2012)

Kazooie said:


> I give my props to the person(s) who did this, to an extent. It clearly got some news for Anon, which I adore, but they could have done it a bit different.
> 
> Actually, it was a great way of showing power, and I love that they did it. Granted, I'm also an advocate for privacy on the internet. That's why I (when I feel like it) run my internet connection through a proxy in France or Africa.



So you advocate disrupting millions of websites, causing people to lost money and time... just because you think it is Cool or something? What, are you twelve years old, with no sense of social responsibility?


----------



## cgipson1 (Sep 11, 2012)

Dao said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Dao said:
> ...




These are just NAT links for me anyway... and I do have secondaries, but still a pain in the butt!  lol!


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 11, 2012)

[h=1]Go Daddy denies hack, blames internal  problems for outage[/h]
Go Daddy denies hack, blames internal problems for outage - The Washington Post


----------



## unpopular (Sep 11, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> Kazooie said:
> 
> 
> > I give my props to the person(s) who did this, to an extent. It clearly got some news for Anon, which I adore, but they could have done it a bit different.
> ...



^^ she's 15.

I actually support this completely. Any business which is hosted by Godaddy financially supports SOPA, making it a legitimate target. I think what Anon did _is_ social responsibility.

If you don't want to be targeted in acts of civil disobedience, don't support companies which take on controversial positions.


----------



## cgipson1 (Sep 11, 2012)

unpopular said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Kazooie said:
> ...



If we didn't have so any software / media thieves, they wouldn't have to take positions like that!

I agree that SOPA was overkill, and would have impacted too many innocent people! We need to target just the Thieves... hopefully with a flamethrower!


----------



## cgipson1 (Sep 11, 2012)

unpopular said:


> ^^ she's 15.



I thought SHE was a HE? Just because Losing a Boyfriend was mentioned, doesn't automatically make him / her a GIRL, right?


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 11, 2012)

the thread takes a turn


----------



## cgipson1 (Sep 11, 2012)

2WheelPhoto said:


> the thread takes a turn



Doesn't it always?  lol!


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 11, 2012)

Indeed!


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Sep 11, 2012)

Re: Anonymous takes down GoDaddy - Millions of sites down

It was me, so sorry


----------



## cgipson1 (Sep 11, 2012)

Rotanimod said:


> Re: Anonymous takes down GoDaddy - Millions of sites down
> 
> It was me, so sorry



Damn.. can't flamethrower Majeed... so 50 lashes with a Black Rapid RS-7!


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Sep 11, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> Rotanimod said:
> 
> 
> > Re: Anonymous takes down GoDaddy - Millions of sites down
> ...



:geek: : time 2 defeet the interwebz!


----------



## unpopular (Sep 11, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > ^^ she's 15.
> ...




now. where did I put that ten foot pole ... ahh, there it is.

Nope. Still not touching it.


----------



## bentcountershaft (Sep 11, 2012)

2WheelPhoto said:


> *Go Daddy denies hack, blames internal  problems for outage*
> 
> 
> Go Daddy denies hack, blames internal problems for outage - The Washington Post



So they weren't hacked they're just incompetent?  That's good for business.  I figured they'd say Danica crashed it like she does her race cars.


----------



## The_Traveler (Sep 11, 2012)

bentcountershaft said:


> 2WheelPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > *Go Daddy denies hack, blames internal  problems for outage*
> ...



Go Daddy says that there is no one correct way to run a registry and the servers being down was an artistic decision.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Sep 11, 2012)

The_Traveler said:


> bentcountershaft said:
> 
> 
> > 2WheelPhoto said:
> ...



They "meant" to chop of the server head and limbs when they framed it.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 11, 2012)

Rotanimod said:


> Re: Anonymous takes down GoDaddy - Millions of sites down
> 
> It was me, so sorry



"*NO Burger King for YOU!*" said in the Soup Nazi voice!

And, zOMG to The_Traveler...I was gonna post the same basic excuse, that Go Daddy's massive dump-taking was "the way they like it," and "was intended to be that way," and, "I see it a lot elsewhere on the internet, so it MUST be cool!" buuuut...you already played that one. Nice one, Lew!


----------



## sapper6fd (Sep 11, 2012)

bentcountershaft said:


> 2WheelPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > *Go Daddy denies hack, blames internal  problems for outage*
> ...




Computer systems fail, servers fail, cars fail, it&#8217;s going to happen regardless of what setup you have or what experience your people have. How is this incompetence? Two space shuttles have blown up, Apollo 13 suffered an O2 tank explosion and mission critical computers fail on the International Space Station from time to time. Does that mean NASA is full of incompetence? Don&#8217;t think so.

Have you ever taken a poor picture before and thought it could have been done better? I guess you&#8217;re incompetent as well.


----------



## bentcountershaft (Sep 11, 2012)

sapper6fd said:


> bentcountershaft said:
> 
> 
> > 2WheelPhoto said:
> ...



Incompetent in that they had no emergency back up plan ready to switch to a different server location.  Could have been a lot less downtime.  If you have that many businesses relying on you it's kind of silly not to have that.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 11, 2012)

Emergency back up systems fail, power back up systems fail, the transfer to back up systems fail, software to drive back ups fail, etc

No such thing as a "perfect anything" when it comes to technology. The NASDAQ system failed the same morning the FB IPO kicked off, and try and count all the back ups and back up contingency plans in place for failure events.


----------



## Dao (Sep 12, 2012)

But it is hard to understand why it took them 7 hours to fix a corrupted router table.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Sep 12, 2012)

unpopular said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Kazooie said:
> ...




so your saying if i disagree with a law that you like, its okay for me to attack you and potentially destroy your livelyhood?  sorry I find that pathetic.  so you don't support sopa, its controversial. so your cool with me hacking your buisness?


----------



## Kazooie (Sep 14, 2012)

12sndsgood said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > cgipson1 said:
> ...


Let me ask you this: What advantages will SOPA do for America? Are you going to start shelling out money for every song you've heard *about* even though you might might not like it, because you couldn't hear it before on youtube? How about all the wealth of information on the entire internet, quotes from books, clips from movies, pictures, everything just gone. All because a group of people want you to buy it from them only, see it from their site only, etc. 

So no, I am not saying that, but I am saying that if I was a public company/organization and I announced that I supported a law that was *negative* to society (academic set-backs are never good for the world) then I would, at least in the back of the mind, expect to appear on someone's agenda of problem-people. 

But let's put you in someone else's shoes: Imagine you invested hours and days copying paragraphs from a text-book onto a website for a group of friends who are so poor that they have to work all day doing manual labor instead of in school. Since they can't be in school because they have to have a home and food on the table, they in essence have no future. So you, out of the kindness of your heart, supply them with a online version of a text book so they can study and get a high school diploma. But oh wait, you were giving those kids copyright material that belongs to some rich guy who wants more money. Sorry, can't let that happen, those kids just have to keep cleaning toilets and moving dumpsters because they were born into a bad situation.

And THAT is why I dislike SOPA, because it hinders the majority and helps the few.


----------



## Helen B (Sep 14, 2012)

If your livelihood depends on your web presence, don't you have a responsibility to yourself to ensure, to a practical extent, that there is no single point of failure? To check that, if you are relying completely on somebody else that that somebody has, for example, a redundant DNS server? If they don't then get that redundancy elsewhere. Do any of you really think that GoDaddy can be trusted with your livelihood? If you are willing to trust them, don't whine when they fail.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Sep 14, 2012)

Kazooie said:


> 12sndsgood said:
> 
> 
> > unpopular said:
> ...




Problem here is you think i'm for SOPA. i'm not i'm completly against it.  diffrence is you feel its okay for someone to attack a company, disrupt them disrupt probalby hundreds of thousands of people potentialll causing tons of lost revenue. for thousands of people who have nothing to do with this.  

you just happen to be against SOPA so you think "its okay to screw over a company" but what happens when someone who is for SOPA happens to take down say the bank you keep your money at. will it be okay then when you can't get your money out to pay your bills? most likely you won't like it.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Sep 14, 2012)

Helen B said:


> If your livelihood depends on your web presence, don't you have a responsibility to yourself to ensure, to a practical extent, that there is no single point of failure? To check that, if you are relying completely on somebody else that that somebody has, for example, a redundant DNS server? If they don't then get that redundancy elsewhere. Do any of you really think that GoDaddy can be trusted with your livelihood? If you are willing to trust them, don't whine when they fail.




Do you drive your car to work? if you do. your depending on your car for your livelyhood. would you ***** if your car broke down and left you stranded. sure most of us would. you depend on so many things for your livelyhood in everyday life. and when things happen, people are going to complain.  but you can't really compare this to your care breaking down. you can compare this to someone coming over and flattening all your tires. the car is still broken down. but its not the car's fault. its the person who flattened your tires.


----------



## ClickAddict (Sep 14, 2012)

Kazooie said:


> 12sndsgood said:
> 
> 
> > unpopular said:
> ...



And if that kid needs a car to get to his job, can you give me your address so I can go steal yours and give it to him?????
Just cause you can copy something doesn't mean it has no value. An artist can't live off one sale and a millions downaloded illegal copies. You are stealing from him. This is a photography forum. Digital content's worth should be clear to anyone here.  (And I am against SOPA, but some other lesser reaching law is needed)


----------



## unpopular (Sep 14, 2012)

12sndsgood said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > cgipson1 said:
> ...



All I have to say to this is that there are consequences for everything we do and everything we believe, these consequences is what makes us responsible in a free society. Just as I locking my doors at night isn't saying that that thieves and rapists are entitled, I'm not saying that hacking businesses should be protected, but there are also no innocent victims in these situations and whether it's illegal or not, or even if they should have or shouldn't have does not affect what has happened, or really, what will happen.

If a business refuses to serve anyone except white people, and their shop is vandalized, few people would feel sorry for the shop owner. We might agree that the vandals were not in the "right", but whether they are in the "wrong" is less certain. If this was done 65 years ago in a Southern state, the degree of certainty might be more ambiguous.

The act is very similar, vandalism, what has changed is the social acceptability of the circumstances. So I don't think our support is an issue of one's livelihood, but rather the circumstances which surround the action.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Sep 14, 2012)

I guess that is where we differ on this. I believe that as long as people are following the law then they are in the right, wether I agree on there stance or not. If you don't like the law, then go out and change it in a legal way. This country is a place where people should be able to have completly diffrent viewpoints, I feel sorry for this country if people start thinking its okay to "vandalize" other people just because they have a different viewpoint then my own.


----------



## cgipson1 (Sep 14, 2012)

Kazooie said:


> But let's put you in someone else's shoes: Imagine you invested hours and days copying paragraphs from a text-book onto a website for a group of friends who are so poor that they have to work all day doing manual labor instead of in school. Since they can't be in school because they have to have a home and food on the table, they in essence have no future. So you, out of the kindness of your heart, supply them with a online version of a text book so they can study and get a high school diploma. But oh wait, you were giving those kids copyright material that belongs to some rich guy who wants more money. Sorry, can't let that happen, those kids just have to keep cleaning toilets and moving dumpsters because they were born into a bad situation.
> 
> .



so poor that they have to work all day doing manual labor instead of in school???? And yet they have a computer and online access to access your stolen "book" ??? Something is wrong with this picture!


----------



## unpopular (Sep 14, 2012)

ehh. Computers are a one-time investment, it's the reoccurring expenses that break people, and internet access is easy to come by. I don't see a problem with the story at all.

Even homeless people have internet access at the library. of course, libraries also have books.


----------



## Helen B (Sep 14, 2012)

12sndsgood said:


> Helen B said:
> 
> 
> > If your livelihood depends on your web presence, don't you have a responsibility to yourself to ensure, to a practical extent, that there is no single point of failure? To check that, if you are relying completely on somebody else that that somebody has, for example, a redundant DNS server? If they don't then get that redundancy elsewhere. Do any of you really think that GoDaddy can be trusted with your livelihood? If you are willing to trust them, don't whine when they fail.
> ...



Analogies are always problematic. Right now I live only 4 miles from the studio, so I often walk - it happens to be a pleasant walk along a bank of the Hudson. I can also take the subway or the bus. I don't have a car right now, but if I needed one I could and would rent or borrow if my livelihood depended on it. Most of my life I have also had a bicycle. I've worked as a cinematographer for quite a lot of my life, and the idea of not turning up to a shoot because my car broke down is just not acceptable, and it is something I took care to avoid. 

My original post did, however, include the phrase "_to a practical extent_" which implies that one should weigh up the likelihood, prevention cost and potential damage extent of the failure of something that one relies on. You and I have different attitudes towards personal responsibility, perhaps. Bad things happen, whether through incompetence, accident or malice, and it is up to us to be prepared for them. In this case it wasn't someone letting the tyres down, it was a failure by GoDaddy, which I guess is the car in your analogy. 

Putting the analogy aside, do you disagree with the idea that those whose livelihood depends on the interwebs should consider having some redundancy in their system?


----------



## SamSpade1941 (Sep 14, 2012)

My opinion having worked in information security is that SOPA is bad it will do nothing at all to help in mitigating potential threats. Thats what information security is about mitigation or reducing risk. As a personal liberty advocate I absolutely am against anymore government legislation that regulates just about anything. We have have such voluminous amounts of regulation now that no one can can comprehend or even pretend to follow all of the regulations. Not even the the the regulators. The maze of laws and regulations is stifling and terrifying for businesses as well as individuals to try and be in compliance of.  

Groups such as Anon however though in my opinion go beyond civil disobedience and broach into criminal activity such as the DDNS attacks. They are nothing more than modern day weathermen, civil disobedience can be done without harming the property of others or injuring people. I have little sympathy and I do not support Anon. 

Having said that GO Daddy has a poor redundancy model for its whole web hosting services to be taken down so easily and it speaks poorly of their disaster recovery plan. 


One final thought on SOPA for those who may be on the fence... 



> It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is today, can guess what it will be tomorrow. Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known, and less fixed?


----------



## 12sndsgood (Sep 14, 2012)

Helen B said:


> 12sndsgood said:
> 
> 
> > Helen B said:
> ...





I worried about that when I used the car analogy lol.   

Do I blame go daddy because they were down? no I do not. this wasn't an oops i hit the wrong switch, this wasnt a server failure or backup failure, this was an attack.  I'm sure the have redundancy. but who knows what damage the attack caused, maybe the attack specifically hit each redundancy. we don't know nor will we.  when I drive to work i leave early so if im held up because of a traffic accident, or because I get a flat. i have a spare tire in case of a flat. but I don't plan on being attacked by a criminal. you can only plan for so much. Just seems odd people want to blame the victim in this case and not the criminal. Go Daddy never would have spent and entire day fixing the mess if they weren't attacked.  and even if they had reduncancy, i'm sure a lot of the downtime was spent on figuring out the attack itself and make sure the hole was closed up so they can't do it again. its just not as simple as pulling out a server and throwing one in.


----------



## Helen B (Sep 14, 2012)

12sndsgood said:


> Do I blame go daddy because they were down? no I do not. this wasn't an oops i hit the wrong switch, this wasnt a server failure or backup failure, this was an attack.  I'm sure the have redundancy.



Well GoDaddy disagrees - they say it wasn't an attack, but their fault.

"_GoDaddy's CEO attributes the service outage to "a series of internal network events that corrupted router data tables. He adds that corrective measures had been taken to fix the problem._"

They don't have redundancy in the DNS system, so it is wise to have a second DNS system provider.


----------



## SamSpade1941 (Sep 14, 2012)

Helen B said:


> 12sndsgood said:
> 
> 
> > Do I blame go daddy because they were down? no I do not. this wasn't an oops i hit the wrong switch, this wasnt a server failure or backup failure, this was an attack.  I'm sure the have redundancy.
> ...




I would say this also , its better to say it was an internal issue related the network infrastructure than to say it was the network was taken down malicious users.


----------



## Gromit801 (Sep 14, 2012)

SamSpade1941 said:


> Helen B said:
> 
> 
> > 12sndsgood said:
> ...



Except that "Anonymous" has disavowed the outage as well.  Not like them to lie about it, if it was them.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Sep 14, 2012)

SamSpade1941 said:


> Helen B said:
> 
> 
> > 12sndsgood said:
> ...



hacker got inside there network and corrupted the router.       and internal network event corrupted the router.   both mean the same thing. but one you keep quiet and one you tell the media.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Sep 14, 2012)

Gromit801 said:


> SamSpade1941 said:
> 
> 
> > Helen B said:
> ...



so they say it was them. and then backpedal and say they had nothing to do with it. wonder why that is.


----------



## Overread (Sep 14, 2012)

Lets remember that most media (esp fast online media) doesn't verify the info they get. If they see a story spreading and a possible source of info they run with it. Chances are it could be a loan hacker hacked the company and the company is denying it; or it could be that one loan person decided to claim it was him and suddenly found the whole net believed him.


----------

