News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Basecamp was under network attack by bertil on Monday March 24, 2014 @12:16PM (#7459064)
Actually, it’s not ‘a DDoS’ but a blackmail attempt, using a DDoS. That’s like confusing someone open-carrying a gun and an armed robbery.

> This attack was launched together with a blackmail attempt that sought to have us pay to avoid this assault.

Re:Basecamp was under network attack by chipotle_coyote on Monday March 24, 2014 @12:31PM (#7459164)
While I know this is a little pedantic, I'm pretty sure the analogy falls down a bit -- denial of service attacks are often illegal (for instance, in the US it's possible for them to be prosecuted under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act or even under trespassing or contract laws). Even without the blackmail attempt this could still be considered a criminal act.
Re:Basecamp was under network attack by bertil on Monday March 24, 2014 @05:28PM (#7461668)
So are open carry in most countries. You don’t come off as pedantic, just US-centric.
Re:Basecamp was under network attack by mpyne on Monday March 24, 2014 @07:51PM (#7462674)
The US is far from the only country to make DDoS a crime or tort in various situations.
Re:Basecamp was under network attack by bertil on Monday March 24, 2014 @10:11PM (#7463318)
Of course not, and that was not my point.

The original comment said that because DDoS could be illegal, is was different from openly carrying a fire-arm; that assumes that openly carrying a firearm isn’t illegal. It often is, outside of the US -- hence my response.

I would have appreciated you didn’t downvote me before you understood that.

Re:Basecamp was under network attack by mpyne on Monday March 24, 2014 @10:29PM (#7463415)
Fair enough, but the comment you had replied to had assumed quite reasonably that DDoS is a criminal act, and I can only assume your response quibbling about that was $SOMETHING-centric. Apologies for the downvote but that impression changed my interpretation of your later comment.