Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Friday December 12 2014, @12:38PM   Printer-friendly
from the opening-Pandora's-box dept.

Lily Hay Newman reports at Slate that Sony is counter-hacking to keep its leaked files from spreading across torrent sites. According to Recode, Sony is using hundreds of computers in Asia to execute a denial of service attack on sites where its pilfered data is available, according to two people with direct knowledge of the matter. Sony used a similar approach in the early 2000s working with an anti-piracy firm called MediaDefender, when illegal file sharing exploded. The firm populated file-sharing networks with decoy files labelled with the names of such popular movies as “Spider-Man,” to entice users to spend hours downloading an empty file. "Using counter-attacks to contain leaks and deal with malicious hackers has been gaining legitimacy," writes Newman. "Some cyber-security experts even feel that the Second Amendment can be interpreted as applying to 'cyber arms'.”

[Ed's Comment: As I understand it, the Second Amendment only applies in the United States or in its territories overseas — it doesn't give Americans the right to bear arms anywhere else in the world.]

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Arik on Saturday December 13 2014, @04:29AM

    by Arik (4543) on Saturday December 13 2014, @04:29AM (#125694) Journal
    "Exactly. The U.S. was truly a Revolutionary government. It's Founding Documents assert that Rights are 'self evident Truths' and that every human who has ever drawn breath possesses those Rights."

    Indeed. The first US Revolution is sometimes criticized as not a real revolution - unlike the French, it did not aim to tear the social fabric to bits and weave it into a new and better form at the directions of the capital. In some ways it was the opposite of the French Revolution indeed. It aimed instead to reassert,to defend, to secure the traditional rights of free men under common law against a despotic colonialism.

    But in its own way it was no less radical than the French Revolution, and in a way they are very similar. After a millenia during which Europe was ruled by kings of 'divine right' these two Revolutions challenged that concept openly.

    The detractors may point out that the U.S has failed, from the very first, to live up to its promise. They would be correct, but still, to some degree at least, missing the point. It's better the set high standards and fail than to set your standards lower than our fail point and call that success, no?

    "Personally I'm a bit wobbly of late on some of those founding concepts. If these Rights are so damned 'self evident' why did it take thousands of years for anybody to notice their existence?"

    The concept of morality itself occupies a rather rarified 'altitude' on the scale of abstractions. It's not surprising that it should take time to arise, and more time to become generally acknowledged. It's not surprising that acceptance of it should have crests and troughs. It's not surprising that brute will-to-power should leave us only very slowly, kicking and screaming, then playing dead before exploding into resistance again.

    Unfortunate, but not surprising.

    --
    If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2