Re: quick question

Angus-

I'm going to be away from my computer for a while but if you'd like to
give me a call I can give you some answers on this. 940-735-9748

On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Angus Batey <angus-b@dircon.co.uk> wrote:

Dear Barrett,

Hello. I hope this finds you well, and that you'll have Echelon 2 back up
before too long.

I'm working on a piece on UK and US cyber defence/security policy for a
defence industry magazine over here called Digital Battlespace (more info
at: http://www.shephardmedia.com/publications/magazine/digital-battlespace/
 ) and they've asked me to do a panel/box/sidebar/thingy on hacktivism and
Anonymous. In trying to come up with something that's not just following the
"It's all fallen apart now that Antisec's been dismembered" line, I've
started wondering if hackers identifying themselves as Anons have switched
up their tactics in the period following Sabu's unmasking, specifically over
the use of Twitter.

A friend of mine who's been paying close attention to such things has
observed that a sizable number of Anon-related Twitter accounts usually used
to discuss various Ops and hacking issues in general have, roughly since
April, either gone inactive, been deleted, or have had no activity on them
other than Tweets being deleted (which could be user activity, or could be
glitches in the Twitter system). The numbers involved look to be reasonably
significant - over 80 accounts have fallen into these categories. There has
also been a pattern of accounts flagging up an imminent Op or data dump,
then "going dark".

Of course, this could be coincidence, or it could be that a lot of people
are being arrested or are worried about being arrested. Some people will
from time to time drift away for personal reasons that bear no relation to
anyone else's thoughts, feelings or dispositions. And it may just be an
understandable reaction borne of healthy paranoia regarding who else might
turn out to be working for the FBI. But I wondered if this might be a
deliberate new tactic by Anons to practice a form of operational security,
and try to even up the playing field a bit between them and the entities
they're targeting. It's always struck me that boasting about the hacks was
somewhat of an Achilles heel, though obviously I also appreciate that
there's no point doing these things if nobody knows. However, if the hackers
are being a bit more circumspect and are deciding - individually or in
ad-hoc groups - to accept less risk in how they operate, that's a
significant change, and one that suggests that they're not going to just
give up and go home.

While I realise you're not "the spokesman for Anonymous" and are not
directly involved yourself, I know you know folks who are, so I thought it
would be worth asking you. (Though I also realise that even if you do have
some info on this, you or the Anons concerned may not want to share it for
publication.) And if you've got a publication date/title/etc. for the book,
please let me know and I can at least make sure it gets a mention.

I've got to deliver the piece on Thursday, which I appreciate doesn't give
you much chance to respond - but if you have a moment and any insight you
think might be worth sharing, it'd be great to hear back from you. If not,
no problem, and thanks anyway.

Cheers,


Angus Batey
UK




-- 
Regards,

Barrett Brown
940-735-9748