The Liberties, Ideologies, And Effects Of Hacktivism

In the early days of computing, a hacker was primarily referred to as a computer guru, someone who is extremely technical with a high expertise in computer also known as “Expert Programmers”. Nevertheless, as technology is advancing at a face pace, hacking has adopted a completely different definition. The modern definition is someone who access a computer system primarily to steal or destroy information. Hacking has caused major harm in the realm of technology. Over the years, hackers have become much more lethal in their craft. They manage to break into complex information systems from entities such as banks, government agencies, and private businesses. Furthermore, they often manipulate their victims through social engineering in order to obtain financial benefits. Hackers hold different label such as: black hat hacker and white hat hacker in which all have their own motives.

Merriam-Webster defines Hacker as, a person who secretly gets access to a computer system in order to get information, cause damage. But what if I told you that having a hacker is necessary? Ethical Hacking is paramount to the security of our Information Technologies (IT). The task of testing your computers and network for security vulnerabilities and plugging the vulnerabilities you find before the opposition gets a chance to exploit them. Without having the ability to do what devious personnel can do inside your IT, you will never fully understand the holes in your security.

The Facebook,Instagram, and Twitter social media sites with passwords that can be hacked no matter the “strength” of the password. Peter Ludlow effectively persuades using ethos,logos and pathos in the reading What is a ‘Hacktivist’? By talking about events that have happened to “Hacktivist” in the recent years due to “Lexical Warfare.” Lexical Warfare irs a phrase that I like to use for battles over a term is to be understood. When people think of hackers, the first thing to mind is people who sit on computers all day and steal information from everyone possible. The previous sentence provides an example of how people think of the word “hacker” because of what media tells people. It either gives them a good thought if you think “hacktivist” are doing right or unpleasing thought because it makes people feel unsafe since hackers can hack into whatever they please.

For example, they can shut down cell phone towers, cut power to trains, and turn off airport landing lights. In early October of this year, cyberattacks blocked access to very popular websites like Twitter, Netflix, and Amazon. They targeted such popular websites so that they could make the public known of their presence and what they can do. The author states, “It would be silent but enormously destructive. The two sides could block access to the Global Positioning System, disrupt air traffic control and electric grids, and block access to the internet or fill popular websites with propaganda - causing widespread chaos and fear.” In this passage, the author gives many examples of what these hackers are capable of. In conclusion, hacking and cyberattacks can be very destructive to all aspects of

Anonymous has claimed to have taken down accounts on twitter, battling against the terrorist group ISIS (Cimpanu, 2015). This type of approach, I view as hactivism as it is fighting against terrorism. I view Anonymous as a hacktivist group as they merely try to raise awareness to current events and the real terrorists using the digital world as their battleground. However, groups like Lizard Squad I will view as a cyberterrorist group. In (Gilbert, 2015)

The hacktivist group Anonymous has recently terrified many corporations and operations with its ability to hack, publically humiliate and to release confidential information in the name of freedom of speech. Although participation is widely dissipated throughout the world and its current power is quite possibly uncontrollable, Anonymous had humble beginnings and hasn’t always possessed such a violently noble cause. The evolvement of Anonymous from its not-so-respectable intentions to its worldwide movement for uncensored speech has effectively thrust the nation into a new era of cyber hackers and indignant hacktivists.

Adam Segal’s “The Hacked World Order” reveals many prevalent issues in today’s technologically centered society. Starting at Year Zero, June 2012 to June 2013, the battle over cyberspace witnessed world-changing cyberattacks. This was accomplished due to the fact that nearly 75% of the world’s population has easy access to a mobile phone, and the Internet connects nearly 40% of the total human population, which is nearly 2.7 billion people. With that being said, cyberattacks are becoming a more realistic form of terror.

Hackers have caused the government billions of dollars in damage over time and leaking tens of thousands of sensitive documents, most for sport. Although not all hackers are out there to cause damage; the Hacktavist group Anonymous is a group that strives to protect the users of the Internet. When many people think of hackers they automatically think they are doing it for nefarious reasons, they are unaware that most hackers actually help protect and improve the everyday life we have through the internet by not only strengthening the sites we use everyday, but also taking down known black hat sites and even protecting civil right by allowing us to see the vital information withheld from us by the government.

On February 6, hackers associated with Anonymous took down 20% of the deep web in a campaign against a host provider called Freedom Hosting 2. It was found that the host had multiple files of child pornography in its databases. Over 1,000 sites were taken offline and in place, a message was shown, saying how they were “disappointed they violated their zero tolerance for child pornography”. Anonymous is a hacktivism group with no leaders, identity, or nationality who are responsible for multiple attacks on websites and servers. Anonymous’ operations consist of a period of 25 days where the target is hacked, and information is stolen. Anonymous is doing a better job fighting corruption, censorship, cyber terrorism, and child pornography than the government.

Anonymous is more than just a hacking group—it’s a culture of people devoted to accessible information and transparency. Although the group is intent on making the rest of the world more transparent, Anonymous is also known for being secretive in its actions, making the actions it commits difficult to monitor and attribute to them. The Arab Springs uprising was one event in which Anonymous took part in where most of their actions were largely unknown to the public. However, despite the eponymous anonymity, Anonymous played a supporting role in sparking these uprisings and maintaining attacks as they saw fit, changing the dynamic and course of the uprising in a major way.

Though the First Amendment protects the freedom of expression [1], not all speech is protected by law.  What if material on the Internet advocates illegal conduct or issues threats of violence?  What if information such as bomb-making instructions helps someone carry out a threat of violence?  As stated in the preceding scenario-report, the controversial website Anarchist Fever inspired amateur anarchist Paul Berkowicz, to build a bomb (with instructions found on the internet) and blow up a federal courthouse.  Obviously, he will be punished for his actions, but the issue now is what will become of the websites that helped him etch his name in infamy?  What can be done about digital conspirators who hide behind free expression?  Often, there can be no direct link established between such websites and physical crimes they inspire.  When deciding about these gray areas of free speech on the internet, we must consider issues such as regulation of the Internet, the extent of free speech, and established legal precedent.  These are the real factors that determine whether or not content of the Internet is objectionable enough to be censored or even criminally punished.

As a loosely organized hacktivist group , Clay Shirky frequently says that hacktivist groups have immense power due to their strength in numbers. Due to technology, loosely organized groups can act on motives with minimal managerial oversight required making these groups highly effective . Indeed, Anonymous’ only leadership comes in the form of Operators who gain their status through previous hacking work, helping new users become part of the movement , and demonstrating leadership within the group. This organizational structure is the exact opposite of formal corporations like MasterCard and Visa, and it is the source of Anonymous’

The film Killswitch was about the government trying to monopolize and control user traffic on the internet. Whether it is for security purposes or financial gain, our system of democracy is being compromised at a technological level. Several speakers including Tim Wu, expressed how “hacktivism” was a revolutionary tool used to take a stand against government interference.

As Maras notice, it is imperative to note that not all events that a terrorist association might be included in through the Internet, or every cyber assault write a concrete, constitute manifestations of cyber terrorism. Maura Conway at Dublin City University depicts how a show of cyber terrorism must "ingrain dread as commonly comprehended (that is, result in death or vast scale obliteration), and they should have a political inspiration (Conway, 2002)." Terrorist associations of the total of what Hues have been using the Internet for different means including gathering pledges, arranging, and enrollment since its dangerous development in the 1990's (Weimann

There is a little yet developing populace of "hacktivists" who break in sites for ideological or political reasons. Regularly, the expectation of these individuals is to destroy website pages to create an impression or something to that affect, by defacement of law implementation agencies, annihilation of sites by ecological groups. In some cases, the incidents may be completed against national interests. In different cases, you see people in one purview