5 ms·

A YouTuber is promoting DDoS attacks on Russia – how legal is this?

incomingpain 4y ago
I thought about this early on when DDOS against russia were being promoted here on HN. Projecting DDOS across continents isn't practical. The entire idea is pointless, Oceanic cables are all going to have IPS running to better utilize them. They are a highly utilized precious resource. Later on, Russia released the IPs of ddos attackers and they were all from their neighbours. No attacks really came from the USA. 1. It is obviously a crime, not actual ddosing as that's difficult to prove. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encouraging_or_assisting_a_crime_in_English_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encouraging_or_assisting_a_cri... 2. What prosecutor can find a jury that will convict you for being anti-Russia? They won't even consider wasting their time for a second charging you. 3. If you'll never be charged let alone be found guilty, it is illegal? 4. Morality and ethics? You are clearly in the wrong here. Don't try to add to the problem. You don't end a war by adding to it.
- rvz 4y ago
  > 4. Morality and ethics? You are clearly in the wrong here. Don't try to add to the problem. You don't end a war by adding to it. Precisely. Especially telling less technical people / followers of that YouTuber to put themselves at risk of running a program that they don't know what it does and instead attacks them instead of the intended target and also gets themselves de-anonymised and caught by the authorities. It is indeed a pointless endeavour that gets them no where.
phendrenad2 4y ago
What a pathetic article. It claims to confront a question on a lot of people's minds ("Would the US government charge you with computer lawbreaking if you attack only Russian targets") but then just lists some computer laws and says "here are some laws that exist".
codefreeordie 4y ago
Russia is an enemy of the people who make YouTube censorship decisions and also the people currently in charge of the enforcing of the laws, so it's probably fine.

I thought about this early on when DDOS against russia were being promoted here on HN. Projecting DDOS across continents isn't practical. The entire idea is pointless, Oceanic cables are all going to have IPS running to better utilize them. They are a highly utilized precious resource. Later on, Russia released the IPs of ddos attackers and they were all from their neighbours. No attacks really came from the USA. 1. It is obviously a crime, not actual ddosing as that's difficult to prove. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encouraging_or_assisting_a_crime_in_English_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encouraging_or_assisting_a_cri... 2. What prosecutor can find a jury that will convict you for being anti-Russia? They won't even consider wasting their time for a second charging you. 3. If you'll never be charged let alone be found guilty, it is illegal? 4. Morality and ethics? You are clearly in the wrong here. Don't try to add to the problem. You don't end a war by adding to it.

rvz 4y ago
> 4. Morality and ethics? You are clearly in the wrong here. Don't try to add to the problem. You don't end a war by adding to it. Precisely. Especially telling less technical people / followers of that YouTuber to put themselves at risk of running a program that they don't know what it does and instead attacks them instead of the intended target and also gets themselves de-anonymised and caught by the authorities. It is indeed a pointless endeavour that gets them no where.

phendrenad2 4y ago

What a pathetic article. It claims to confront a question on a lot of people's minds ("Would the US government charge you with computer lawbreaking if you attack only Russian targets") but then just lists some computer laws and says "here are some laws that exist".

codefreeordie 4y ago

Russia is an enemy of the people who make YouTube censorship decisions and also the people currently in charge of the enforcing of the laws, so it's probably fine.