Sinodefence forum is hacked?


Hell, who we didn't badmouthed?
Actually, funniest of all is we badmouth everything so much, we don't stop there. We even have to badmouth each other, while the mods are ready to pounce and ban the next guy who they can lol. Perhaps we are one of the most violent community for an intellectual forum.

Or maybe NSA trying to make a point again. Hopefully next time they can be a good sport and at least leave behind something everyone can enjoy, like a troll face or something. I hope no goatse.

To those hackers who came here today: thanks for showing this forum's popularity. maybe we should feel proud we worth their attention?
 
Last edited:

The Financier

New Member
Registered Member
Likely it was an attack on Defencetalk rather than Sinodefenceforum by itself. SinoDefence.com for example functioned perfectly fine regardless of the status of the forum.
 

rhino123

Pencil Pusher
VIP Professional
Hmm... I wonder if it is just me... but after the attack... I find my speed in sinodefenceforum become faster... yeah, you heard it right, it was faster :)
 

siegecrossbow

Brigadier
Staff member
Super Moderator
My take on the recent hacking:

1) Is SDF the primary target?
No. The sinodefence.com main site was up yesterday, so were the individual subforums. The entire Defencetalk website, on the other hand, was down. We were simply collateral damage since we are defencetalk's sister site.
2) What was the motive behind the attack?
Defencetalk, as a whole, is pretty pro-establishment. I won't be surprised if real military personnel frequent that site. I think the attack was done as a reaction to the snowden incident. If the NSA spies on us, we'll leak government sensitive information like the soldiers' private info.
3) Is it easy to compromise SDF's security?
Very. In May, several adbots bypassed administration and made their pages unbannable. I expect competent hackers to breach a site like SDF pretty easily.

Ultimately, if my hypothesis is true, I think that their decision to expose soldiers' info online is hypocritical and shortsighted. Those people are just "grunts of the establishment", not decision makers. In a twisted sense, they are actually violating the privacy of average U.S. Citizens, just like their big enemy the NSA. This is almost as big of a blunder as adapting Guy Fawkes, who was an ardent conservative by 17th century England standards and as far from an anarchist as you can find, as their official logo.
 

AssassinsMace

Brigadier
A couple times I've clicked onto forum users and I've seen things like Bingbot Spiders and similar names listed as viewing the forum. I have no idea who or what they are. Should I report and notify when I see these in the forum?
 

WebMaster

The Troll Hunter
Staff member
Administrator
Hi Folks,

Its not clear why SDF or DT were the target but it appears and that both were the target for unknown reasons.

It is my understanding that an old exploit in php file on SDF led to this incident. No databases/usernames or any other information was impacted. So, DT was impacted through SDF and not the other way around, an embarrassing event nonetheless. In last 10 years online, this was first major "hacking" incident I had to deal with but good news is both websites were up in 5-7 hours. To be honest, I was expecting it because of all the hacking and hacktivist crap going around the world. We try to be as neutral as possible but folks with no clear agenda do not care about neutrality.

I am researching and looking for any other issues with php files.

AssassinsMace, the bots are normal, they spider the website for content for search engines.


Cheers.
 
Last edited:

advill

Junior Member
"Wot the bloody hack?" Nothing else better to do? Shows signs of immaturity & childlike behaviour - stop it!


My take on the recent hacking:

1) Is SDF the primary target?
No. The sinodefence.com main site was up yesterday, so were the individual subforums. The entire Defencetalk website, on the other hand, was down. We were simply collateral damage since we are defencetalk's sister site.
2) What was the motive behind the attack?
Defencetalk, as a whole, is pretty pro-establishment. I won't be surprised if real military personnel frequent that site. I think the attack was done as a reaction to the snowden incident. If the NSA spies on us, we'll leak government sensitive information like the soldiers' private info.
3) Is it easy to compromise SDF's security?
Very. In May, several adbots bypassed administration and made their pages unbannable. I expect competent hackers to breach a site like SDF pretty easily.

Ultimately, if my hypothesis is true, I think that their decision to expose soldiers' info online is hypocritical and shortsighted. Those people are just "grunts of the establishment", not decision makers. In a twisted sense, they are actually violating the privacy of average U.S. Citizens, just like their big enemy the NSA. This is almost as big of a blunder as adapting Guy Fawkes, who was an ardent conservative by 17th century England standards and as far from an anarchist as you can find, as their official logo.
 

AssassinsMace

Brigadier
Hmmm. I wonder if there's a connection.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



U.S. troops' details leaked in cyber attacks aimed at South Korea - reports
Reuters

SEOUL (Reuters) - Hackers say they have leaked personal details of tens of thousands of U.S. troops to websites, South Korean news reports and online security officials said on Wednesday, a day after cyber attacks disabled access to government and news sites.

The hacking attacks on Tuesday, the anniversary of the start of the Korean War in 1950, brought down the main websites of South Korea's presidential office and some local newspapers, prompting cyber security officials to raise the alert.

The identity and motives of the attackers were not immediately clear, but the reports come as cyber security and surveillance have become a global issue, with the United States seeking fugitive former security contractor Edward Snowden who leaked details about U.S. surveillance to the media.

North Korea has been blamed for previous cyber attacks on South Korean banks and government networks, although it denies responsibility and has said it has also been a victim.

The unidentified hackers said they had secured and released publicly personal details of more than two million South Korean ruling party workers and 40,000 U.S. troops, including those stationed in South Korea.

"We have seen the sites where the details were posted and clips that supposedly capture the process of hacking into web sites," an official at the South Korean online security firm NSHC said.

The legitimacy of the information could not be verified, the official who requested anonymity said.

An official at the Communications Ministry said authorities were probing the nature of the attacks and declined to comment on the reports of leaked information about U.S. troops.

The U.S. military in South Korea, where 28,500 U.S. troops are stationed, did not immediately comment.

North and South Korea remain technically at war after their 1950-53 conflict ended in a truce, not a peace treaty. The U.S. troops' presence is aimed at ensuring the truce holds.

News reports said personal details such as dates of birth and ranks of 40,000 U.S. troops including members of the 25th Infantry Division and the 3rd Marine Division were leaked to unspecified websites.

The websites of the presidential Blue House and the Prime Minister's office were down for more than six hours on Tuesday.

North Korea is believed to be running a large corps of computer experts aimed at hacking into the networks of governments and financial institutions and was blamed most notably for the 2011 shutdown of a South Korean commercial bank.

Last week it accused the United States of being at the forefront of rights abuse, pointing to Snowden's revelations of mass surveillance operations by the National Security Agency.

On Tuesday, access to some North Korean news sites was blocked after the hacker group Anonymous vowed to direct a denial-of-service attack direct at them.

(Reporting by Jack Kim; Editing by Nick Macfie)
 

Top