Because I am a bit outside of my area of expertise, I want to think about this Malaysian situation in hypothetical terms.

If my blog is shut down by another country, shouldn't I be allowed to use similar methods in retaliation against the forces working for that country? Analogizing to my home, no one would deny that I have the right to defend it against invaders -- and that would include armed invaders from another country.

Why should an attack against my computer be treated differently? America's Most Wanted Host John Walsh has urged victims of DDOS attacks to do the same thing in return. This strikes me as common sense, and in accord with basic principles of self defense.

Immediately after the September 11 attacks, American hackers launched a series of successful, spontaneous DDOS attacks against foreign sponsors of terrorism. This was good. Was it legal? Why not use "hacktivism" as a constructive outlet?

The FBI's National Infrastructure Protection Center has warned against DDOS attacks before, of course, so no one should be surprised. Here is an Institute for Security Studies paper, "Cyber Attacks During the War on Terrorism," which goes into more detail. Exhaustive descriptions of DDOS attacks, in lay terms, can be read here and here.

Not much by way of hands-on assistance to aggreived bloggers, though. Other than promote a boycott of Malaysia, how are bloggers to take recourse against those who launch attacks like this one? Is Mrs. du Toit correct in her assessment that it is unwise for so many leading bloggers to all be on the same site (in this case HostMatters)? But what about the Blogspot bloggers? Many leading bloggers are also there.

Posted by Eric at October 22, 2003 06:23 PM | TrackBack