Is the Internet a weapon of the proletariat?
Is the Internet a weapon of the proletariat?
It is strange that the concept of Internet weapons has not yet been implemented. The idea lies on the surface - in order, for example, to support Amnesty International and express its attitude to George Bush, Jr. covering torture in US concentration camps , the user is encouraged to install a small program and join the army of the people's avengers.
The software gives you the opportunity to see how many people are already in the “brigade”, predicts the number needed for a “shot” and displays it in an accessible form, and at the right moment gives a signal that the user automatically or by pressing the “START” button himself becomes a member of the good old DDOS-attack on the site contrary to his beliefs.
')
It turns out as if the bot-no , only participate in the network is not bots, but quite real people who are aware of their actions.
During the attack, the software monitors the response of the attacked server, and at that moment when the server crashes and stops responding, it draws to the joy of the winners an animated explosion / failure / inversion in the attack targets.
If the power of the "red avengers" is not enough to carry out his plans, there is an opportunity to send an invitation to friends to help in the action. Well, all sorts of side services there can also be thought out. But this is the second time.
The attractiveness and ease of participation in such promotions should ensure their wide distribution. Efficiency is also not in doubt. Moreover, it is not only and not so much in the “rubble” of the server, as in the realization of the fact that in this case thousands and tens of thousands of people united. And those people and organizations against which this community of people is directed should also feel this. Not to mention the fact that the media will gladly spread the news about the virtual victory in the offline part of the world, which will increase its importance.
Now about the unpleasant:
1. The ethical side: the use of Internet weapons is not much different from conventional weapons. Yes, it does not shed blood. But it can also be directed against erroneous goals. Is there absolute justice in the world?
2. By disguising themselves as a human rights, environmental, and similar organization, attackers can easily place spyware on users' PCs, which will turn them into natural participants of bot nets.
3. The “blockage” of sites is habitually associated with the activities of hackers. Will have to build up from the "competitors".
and this is just what immediately came to mind.
What do you think about this strange thing?
It is strange that the concept of Internet weapons has not yet been implemented. The idea lies on the surface - in order, for example, to support Amnesty International and express its attitude to George Bush, Jr. covering torture in US concentration camps , the user is encouraged to install a small program and join the army of the people's avengers.
The software gives you the opportunity to see how many people are already in the “brigade”, predicts the number needed for a “shot” and displays it in an accessible form, and at the right moment gives a signal that the user automatically or by pressing the “START” button himself becomes a member of the good old DDOS-attack on the site contrary to his beliefs.
')
It turns out as if the bot-no , only participate in the network is not bots, but quite real people who are aware of their actions.
During the attack, the software monitors the response of the attacked server, and at that moment when the server crashes and stops responding, it draws to the joy of the winners an animated explosion / failure / inversion in the attack targets.
If the power of the "red avengers" is not enough to carry out his plans, there is an opportunity to send an invitation to friends to help in the action. Well, all sorts of side services there can also be thought out. But this is the second time.
The attractiveness and ease of participation in such promotions should ensure their wide distribution. Efficiency is also not in doubt. Moreover, it is not only and not so much in the “rubble” of the server, as in the realization of the fact that in this case thousands and tens of thousands of people united. And those people and organizations against which this community of people is directed should also feel this. Not to mention the fact that the media will gladly spread the news about the virtual victory in the offline part of the world, which will increase its importance.
Now about the unpleasant:
1. The ethical side: the use of Internet weapons is not much different from conventional weapons. Yes, it does not shed blood. But it can also be directed against erroneous goals. Is there absolute justice in the world?
2. By disguising themselves as a human rights, environmental, and similar organization, attackers can easily place spyware on users' PCs, which will turn them into natural participants of bot nets.
3. The “blockage” of sites is habitually associated with the activities of hackers. Will have to build up from the "competitors".
and this is just what immediately came to mind.
What do you think about this strange thing?
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/59/
All Articles