Report: Hackers Say Anonymous Likely Behind Sony Attacks

Two long-time members of hacker group Anonymous tell the Financial Times that members of the loosely organised entity are likely behind the hacking attack on Sony, despite the group's official denials.

"The hacker that did this was supporting OpSony's movements," one member of Anonymous told the FT, adding that he had seen technical details of a the vulnerability that enabled the break in discussed on an Anonymous chatroom shortly before the intrusion.

Another member told the FT that the attack on Sony's PlayStation Network and Qriocity services could have been perpetrated by other members of the group.

"If you say you are Anonymous, and do something as Anonymous, then Anonymous did it," said the hacker, who uses the online nickname Kayla. "Just because the rest of Anonymous might not agree with it, doesn't mean Anonymous didn't do it."

Hackers admit Anonymous likely behind Sony attacks [FT]


    I was wondering when will psn marry Anonymous because it looks like Anonymous has made psn its bitch..... :D

    Well the very special thing about anonymous is that it makes these 'members' right and wrong at the same time.

    Because there's no real syndicate behind anonymous, you can very well just say you're a part of them and you are!

    But because there is no real syndicate, you can't really say that you are!

    It's like saying you're actually a part of terrorist group A just because you like what terrorist group A did.

    Anonymous isn't a group - it's anyone who wants to hack without a concrete identity. Anyone can be a part of Anonymous, yes, even you, unbelieving reader at home! Just buy two large cereal packs of "Anony-mo's" and receive your very own "Anony-gang" power ring and membership card!

    All joking aside, anyone can say they are a part of Anonymous. I can. You can. Elderly Mr. Crenshaw down the street can. Hell, even Mr. Crenshaw's CAT could be a part of Anonymous. There's no membership fee, no list, no waiting period, no weekly or even yearly meetings.

    Like Schrodinger's cat, Anonymous is simultaneously guilty and not guilty. It's guilty because any hacker that hides his or her identity is, by DEFINITION, anonymous. It also can't be guilty because it's not a real group - it's a label that can be applied to any loose coalition of hackers.

    Well, this is the price of anonymity, and it's something Anonymous really should have seen coming. Because its members are, y'know, ANONYMOUS they can be blamed for anything and can't really deny it because they don't even know who is or isn't a member.

      But see, in saying "Anonymous" should have seen this coming you've already fallen into the trap of implying there is a discrete group. Some of Anonymous doubtless saw it coming, others probably didn't.

      I love the way Anonymous is to sociology as special relativity is to simultaneity.

    Really tho we shouldn't even be debating about Anonymous this or Anonymous that.

    There is a certain individual(s) who is responsible for these attacks and the question of whether he is affiliated with any group is only relevant for investigative purposes.

    These so called long time hackers interview added no value or info to the case.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now