Operation Payback | Breaking Cybersecurity News | The Hacker News

On December 10, 2010, Anonymous released a press statement to clarify its identity and objectives. Who is Anonymous? Anonymous, often misunderstood, is not a conventional group. Instead, it is an internet gathering without formal structure. Both Anonymous and the media acknowledge the perceived internal disagreements within the group. However, this does not imply a failure in their command structure. The decentralized nature of Anonymous is based on shared ideas rather than hierarchical directives. Unique in its form, Anonymous learns through trial and error. The collective is now working on better communication of core values to its members. They also aim to inform the public and media about their identity and principles. Contrary to popular belief, Anonymous is not a group of hackers. Members are average internet citizens driven by frustration over daily injustices. They do not seek to steal personal information or credit card details, nor do they intend to attack critical infras

Do you support WikiLeaks? Are you angry at critics trying to suppress it? Maybe you're considering joining online protests to shut down the websites of its opponents. Don't. A group of vigilantes named Anonymous has turned their Operation Payback campaign, previously targeting antipiracy organizations, on PayPal, Visa, MasterCard, Senator Joe Lieberman, Sarah Palin, and others who have criticized WikiLeaks or stopped doing business with the document-sharing project. The fallout from WikiLeaks has reached a fever pitch since the site began releasing diplomatic cables last month, causing embarrassment for U.S. diplomatic efforts. Launching denial-of-service (DOS) attacks against target websites to send a message and disrupt their operations is the modern-day equivalent of walking the picket line with a sign. However, the electronic version is illegal. "Participating in a botnet with the intention of shutting down a website violates the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act,"

For years, securing a company's systems was synonymous with securing its "perimeter." There was what was safe "inside" and the unsafe outside world. We built sturdy firewalls and deployed sophisticated detection systems, confident that keeping the barbarians outside the walls kept our data and systems safe. The problem is that we no longer operate within the confines of physical on-prem installations and controlled networks. Data and applications now reside in distributed cloud environments and data centers, accessed by users and devices connecting from anywhere on the planet. The walls have crumbled, and the perimeter has dissolved, opening the door to a new battlefield: identity . Identity is at the center of what the industry has praised as the new gold standard of enterprise security: "zero trust." In this paradigm, explicit trust becomes mandatory for any interactions between systems, and no implicit trust shall subsist. Every access request, regardless of its origin,

Hackers rushed to defend WikiLeaks on Wednesday, launching attacks on MasterCard, Visa, Swedish prosecutors, a Swiss bank, and others who acted against the site and its jailed founder, Julian Assange. Internet "hacktivists" under the banner "Operation Payback" claimed responsibility in a Twitter message for causing severe technological problems on MasterCard's website. MasterCard had recently severed ties with WikiLeaks. Although MasterCard acknowledged a disruption in its Secure Code system for verifying online payments, spokesman James Issokson assured that consumers could still use their credit cards securely. Later on Wednesday, Visa's website also became inaccessible. These online attacks are part of a broader wave of support for WikiLeaks sweeping the Internet. Twitter was flooded with messages of solidarity for the group, while its Facebook page reached 1 million fans. However, late Wednesday, Operation Payback itself faced difficulties as many of i