back to article Hacktivists nicked more data than CYBER-CROOKS in 2011

Hacktivism had a massive effect on the overall data breach scene last year. More than half (58 per cent) of data stolen last year can be attributed to hacktivism – hacking to advance political and social objectives – according to the latest edition of the Data Breach Investigations report from Verizon.  The figures contrast …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Paul Woodhouse


    bit obvious but aren't hactivists a lot more likely to boast about what they got and criminals keep quiet then they can keep using it...

    quite likely, criminals got a lot more thats not been detected yet...

    1. fatchap

      Re: umm


      Also the source of the report is "based on first-hand evidence collected during paid external forensic investigations conducted by Verizon from 2004 to 2011". Companies who think a phone company are best placed to help with a breach are also most likely to be the low hanging fruit a bunch of opportunists like Annonymous would go for.

      You cannot correctly extrapolate from this data set to the conclusions without massive assumptions.

    2. Tom 35

      Re: umm

      Or detected but not disclosed. Not every country has rules that require discloser of data loss.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Down

    Hactiivists - Criminals

    They are one and the same thing. They are both 'hacking' for personal gain.

    I can understand the motivations of the Cyber-Criminal which would be financial. I personally can't understand the 'Hactivists' . Anonymous' only motivation seems to be for the laughs, but they also seem to want to be seen as a social force for good.

    I was intrigued by the recent program on Internet Trolling showing the nice folks from anonymous (Dressed in the classic face mask anyway) posting videos of celebratory dances on tribute sites for the dead. How do they equate these two aspects of the legion?

  3. Big Al

    Quality, not Quantity

    Surely the quality, usability and retail value of the data compromised are more important than the crude volume?

    Sure, blagging a couple of hundred thousand user logins makes headlines, but how does this compare to swiping the plans to some commercially valuable hardware?

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Script kiddies

    Anonymous are just a bunch of naive children who have learnt how to execute a script.

    Giving them the title of "Hackivists" gives them far to much respect.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    That's why they are building more prisons

    With all the Anon and Antisec perp walks, they are building new prisons.

  6. DragonKin37

    The issue i see here is:

    Companies that still use default passwords for access to their systems. The Sys Admins and maybe even the IA Dept of those organizations should be thrown out of a window.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    CNN's headline was much more satisfyingly worded:

    "Hactivists stole 58% of online data in 2011"

    I'm thinking, man, I thought I'd have noticed if -that- much went missing...

    Also, to the people bitching about Anonymous - it's not a group. I could say I'm "in" Anonymous and there I am. The more press it gets, the more likely idiots are to claim affiliation.

    Some of the collective actions have been naïve to be sure, but the core of them generally seem genuine. I just wish they would stop giving ammunition to the bad guy.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Thumb Down

      Anonymous - it's not a group

      Anonymous not being a group is the reason that I oppose their activities. Whilst there may indeed be a core of genuine nice people, they are likewise affiliated to a whole group of people who's activities range from unpleasant, vicious (see my note about the anonymous trolling videos) to positively dangerous.

      The Register article 'ANONYMOUS: Behind the mask, inside the Hivemind' does indeed detail some of the 'Good' things that anonymous may have done. Personally following on from some of the responses I had to comments on that article I remain unconvinced on that score.

      I don't think anybody would actually try and seriously argue that the 'Legion' of cannon fodder that also follow anonymous do anything good, at best they are a nuisance, and at worst dangerous.

      I can accept that anonymous started out as a bunch of people with a penchant for Japanese porn, who may or may not at the time have had some sort of positive contribution to make. This may be why you delude yourself into thinking that there is a core of genuine people. Personally the actions of the majority far and away outweigh anything that may be positive in the 'legion'.

      As of today my impression of anonymous is a cadre of semi intelligent provecteurs herding a bunch of cannon fodder sheep. Most, if not all, of anonymous' activities is counter productive and doesn't do anything 'good' for anybody (well apart from the laughs the 'shepherds' get when the sheep get arrested).

      To 'stop giving ammunition to the bad guy' my advice to anybody in the core who is genuine would be to leave. If you must find a 'cause' that has clearly defined objectives.

  8. This post has been deleted by its author

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021