4 ms·
Confirming that it is indeed down for me. I wonder what the CIA are going to do, especially because LulzSec is directly targeting them now.
by dvdhsu 15y ago
Confirming that it is indeed down for me.
I wonder what the CIA are going to do, especially because LulzSec is directly targeting them now.
- brown9-2 15y agoI doubt that the core of the CIA cares too much about it's public-facing website.
- vidiviciveni 15y agoWhether they care about it or not, it's a great excuse to tighten internet regulation and track these people.
- canadiancreed 15y agoTrue, it's probably little more then a coat of paint on it's house. That being said, they're probably paying more attention to those that just threw eggs all over it, and if they chose, to act accordingly. Not like there woudl be much that would stop them.
- philthy 15y agoI agree with the coat of paint comment but if we have learned anything about government agencies or large corporations being hacked in the past it is that their Internet security practices can sometimes be painfully bad. @Below and HBGary was a IT security firm after all...
- dvdhsu 15y agoThe CIA should be relatively secure: they are an intelligence agency, after all. Breaching a intelligence agency's website will cause the agency to lose more face than a Senator does after his or her website is hacked.
- marshray 15y agoEither way, the result is a budget increase for "cyberwar operations".
- lallysingh 15y agoIt's got a few important uses. Recruiting, public relations, etc. And then, there's the loss of face in having it down.
- blhack 15y agoCIA also runs the CIA world factbook, which is an incredibly useful resource. Mostly, though, I'd say this is just egg on their face.
- abraham 15y agoEven if they don't care that they site id down they will probably care about the public opinion that a couple of script kiddies took down the site if a top US government agency.
- blhack 15y agoDown from here as well.
- emilepetrone 15y agoDown for me too
- Graham24 15y agowhat they always do. overreact.