Concerted attack on ex-JW websites

by RayPublisher 87 Replies latest members private

• 

  Simon

  To think that the WT is going to hack ex-jw sites is giving them to much credit. Wouldn't they just get a court order to shut down your website completely, like they did with jwsurvey? The WT GB has better tools and mountains of money to fight in a much more efective way, thus the reason why they keep our family members hypnotized to their propoganda and makes any person who speculates the ENEMY. Why bother with hacking?

  Exactly. Hacking would be a huge risk to them legally and would only remove a site momentarilly which is why it is laughably ludicrous to claim they are doing it and that it isn't the obvious platform vulnerability exploited by a bot.

  So no benefit but huge risk and requires lots of skill and resources ... not really a believable scenario IMO.

  But hey, I get it ... if I had a server stuffed with sites about Star Wars then I'd be seeing nothing but Star-Wars sites being attacked and maybe that would lead me to mistakenly imagine that the Sith were behind it.

  The people whose credibility I seek allow me to have unsupported hunches. But thanks for the concern.

  Really? Your target audience are people who'll just believe anything you say or claim? Wow!

  They must love that you think they are like that ...
• 

  committeechairman

  (EDIT - this is a comment about one further back in the thread about attacking jw.org) -It is my understanding that the fundamental architecture of jw.org and related sites is that they run in a distributed fashion across datacenters in various regions across the world. The specific objective of the design was to have jw.org survive a government attack or shutdown.

  If a group determined that they wanted to take the site down, involving some social engineering would definitely be the way to go. Direct attack would only force a switch to another part of the distributed hosting.

  (EDIT - this comment applies to the sites that are the main focus of the thread) -I would have a hard time believing that someone at HQ directed an attack against sites viewed as apostate. Besides being illegal, the huge amount of work going on right now that would completely preclude any kind of effort like this. This is probably some other self-appointed zealot or group of zealots doing what they think is right. I find it fascinating because this kind of stuff only focuses attention where they don't want it. People who don't agree with what these various sites say, a better approach would be to address the issues raised directly witha valid argument (if that is even possible) or just ignore and focus effort elsewhere. Attacks are a complete waste of time and give away the attacker as having a 12-year-old's attitude to life, IMO.
• 

  Simon

  Yes, large sites with more resources often work like that. It provides both better performance and protection and resilience.

  We're talking about exJW sites though, not the official JW site.
• 

  cedars

  Simon

  Really? Your target audience are people who'll just believe anything you say or claim? Wow!

  If that's how you want to spin what I said, be my guest. I think people know what I was getting at. I think you do to.

  Cedars
• 

  Simon

  Cedars: I think we do our readers a disservice if we start shouting 'bogeyman' when there was no bogeyman and we damage our ability to communicate if we do it too much. This isn't the first time I've heard or read these claims when the real story is simply a technical lapse.

  I'm pretty sure even you can understand what I've been getting at and why it's important.

  However, I doubt again that you will see or appreciate I've actually been giving you useful advice and yet again you instead choose to get pissy about things.
• 

  cedars

  Simon

  I'm pretty sure even you can understand what I've been getting at and why it's important.

  I understand exactly what you're saying Simon. It's just I'm a big boy and I can look after my own credibility. If people won't allow me to have unsupported hunches, especially when they are presented as such, then I'm not really interested in garnering their approval.

  Am I allowed to differ with you on this, or do I need to add to my mental list?

  Cedars
• 

  Violia

  I can easily believe it is some self appointed zealots. The wts encourages vigilante type things ( off record), but if you get caught don't expect help from them.

  I really have No problem believing that a group of self appointed jws are doing this. They have no real problem violating the law when it comes to "mother". it is all for the greater good, you know.

  This site seems safe and fine so whatever Simon is doing , perhaps the other sites should follow .
• 

  cedars

  Violia

  This site seems safe and fine so whatever Simon is doing , perhaps the other sites should follow .

  It's a shame we can't clone Simon and get him to sort out security on all the sites. In all sincerity, and to his credit, he does know his stuff.

  Cedars
• 

  adamah

  Cedars said-

  I understand exactly what you're saying Simon. It's just I'm a big boy and I can look after my own credibility.

  Seems to me the responsible thing to do would be to advise anyone who's visited any of these compromised sites (only to be re-directed to another site) to make sure THEIR computer's security patches are up-to-date, since THEIR PC is now vulnerable to being turned into a bot?

  Adam
• 

  Simon

  Am I allowed to differ with you on this, or do I need to add to my mental list?

  Of course you are allowed to differ. I'm just trying to tell you how things appear from the perspective of someone who knows a little about the subject.

  Many will read some of the claims made in this topic and believe them to be true, maybe even repeat them elsewhere. "A lie get's half way round the world before the truth gets out of bed" as Churchill said. The claims may fly with some but to others they are a turn off and then cast doubt over anything else that comes from the same source. I'm not saying people are deliberately lying, they may 100% believe what they are claiming because it appears to be a concerted attack from their perspective.

  If nothing else, I'm saying that *I* don't believe the WTS has done this or would be stupid enough to do it. It would be great if they did and were that stupid as they'd easily be taken down!

  Others are free to believe and claim whatever they want to.