PayPal, Symantec hacked as Anonymous begins November 5 hacking spree

PayPal, Symantec hacked as Anonymous begins November 5 hacking spree

Summary: As it becomes the 5th of November around the world, Anonymous announced a hacking spree that has claimed many websites and a few databases - plus a planned V For Vendetta reenactment at the Houses of Parliament.

SHARE:

The press arm for Anonymous has announced that it has begun its hacking spree for the 5th of November - Guy Fawkes Day.

Claims are circulating that hackers - some affilaited with Anonymous, and some not - have dumped user and employee account information on accounts from PayPal, Symantec, the defacement of Saturday Night Live's website, Australian government websites and much more.

CLARIFICATION: Claim for Symantec goes to @Doxbin, and they have stated that "HTP is not affiliated with Anonymous."

UPDATE Nov. 4, 10:20 PM PSTAnonymous has claimed a document dump on The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) "the world's largest security-oriented intergovernmental organization."

UPDATE Nov. 5, 12:20 AM PST: Reagrding Anonymous' post of docs and statement it hacked PayPal, PayPal's head of PR has tweeted that there is "no evidence to validate this claim." Yet at the time of this writing Anonymous Australia posted this URL to a PrivatePaste page - linking to five pages of data on an estimated 27,935 PayPal accounts. Within the past few hours that PrivatePaste page has since been removed. 

UPDATE Nov. 5, 11:38 AM PST: PayPal has responded to request for comment and Anuj Nayar (PayPal's Senior Director of Communications) tells me via email, "It appears that the exploit was not directed at PayPal after all, it was directed at a company called ZPanel. The original  story that started this and was retweeted by some of the Anonymous Twitter handles has now been updated." PayPal sent me this link to Cyberwars' newly updated post (the primary post information originated from).

/End updates

anonymous

Monday's main focus seems to be an anti-suveillance protest - like with the recent Anonymous October 20 protest - with November 5th intent aimed at surveillance systems such as TrapWire and INDECT.

Trapwire and INDECT's opponents believe that the surveillance systems to be direct threats to privacy and certain civil freedoms and that their implementation could constitute human rights violations.

According to the various Anonymous Twitter accounts announcing the hacks and linking to document dumps, this is just the beginning of doc dumps and defacements for its day of protest. News of the protest is being shared on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and Pastebin.

The hacktivists have also included in its Nov. 5th announcements tonight the hacking and defacement of Australian government sites, ImageShack and PayPal (claiming a zero day exploit), Ascension Australia, NBC.com and Lady Gaga's fan site (claimed for the spree by "Pyknic"), Saturday Night Live's website, the Jimmy Fallon and Jay Leno portalsAustralian steel and mining company Arcelor Mittal, homewares website GiftNow, the Greek City website, the Ghana Consulate website, and claim to have leaked VMware ESX Server Kernel source code via twitter today.

Anonymous Australia seems to be the most active at this time.

At the same time, the press arm for Anonymous has announced - via a press release on Pastebin - that it is rallying the public for an in-person V For Vendetta protest at The Houses of Parliament, at 8PM in London.

Protesters in Canada will get a rude surprise if they don Guy Fawkes masks - because last week Canada's House of Commons approved a bill that bans people from hiding their faces during riots.

We're watching and following the developments as they happen.

And right now they're happening fast - and furiously.

Topics: Security, Government AU, Symantec, Australia

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

25 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Protesting != Rioting

    "At 8pm on November 5th 2012, Anonymous will march on The Houses of Parliament peacefully and unarmed. "

    Canada has banned masks during riots, not protests. Anonymous has posted a call for a *protest*. For the love of God, please tell me that people still understand the distinction.
    Untoldent
    • Agreed, but here's the citation:

      http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2012/11/04/masks-banned-in-canadian-riots-just-in-time-for-anonymous-day-of-action/

      Not sure how Canada determines lawful protesters vs. unlawful. Here's a quote from the bill's champion:

      "It will ensure that those who come to these events [protests] to cause trouble can be brought to justice and discouraged from those kinds of behaviours, so that the people who come to a gathering, for whatever peaceful means, whether it be protest or otherwise, have the ability to do their activities safely and freely."
      Violet Blue
      • Not sure how Canada determines lawful protesters vs. unlawful...

        Simple;
        lawful: Walk peacefully
        unlawful: Do vandalism or any other criminal offense

        [...] face-paint them on. Then, you are not wearing a mask
        It boils down to the same thing: You are still hiding your face.

        Common sense please.
        mack.
        • I agree. A little common sense goes a long way

          a lawful protest is one in which your actions don't deter someone else from going about their business uninterupted.

          To protest by making a human chain across the road is unlawful - you have no right to keep me from going to where I need to be.

          lawful protest - marching with signs, or doing something that may affect your life going forward, but not mine or anyone else who is not interested or involved in your protest.

          Seems kind of straight forward to me.
          William Farrel
          • Lawful vs Unlawful

            Mr. Farrel: By your definition all protests would be unlawful because a group of peaceful demonstrators walking down the main avenue to the House of Commons will probably prevent me from "going about .... business uninterupted.

            A lawful protest is one that follows all laws pertaining to protests. An unlawful protest is one that does not.
            RBoveroux@...
          • and...

            straightforward to you, maybe. But a rogue police group that is pissed off, not!

            If the rule of law isn't clear, then throw it out!
            SpankyFrost
    • But what's an "unlawful assembly?"

      As a Canadian, I can see both sides of this issue. I've watched masked rioters destroying property in Vancouver. I've seen masked police officers kettling innocent bystanders and people trying to get to work in Toronto. I've seen masked protestors peacefully raising awareness about the seedy side of Scientology.

      What concerns me about this legislation is the definition of "unlawful assembly" (if indeed this wording is in the legislation, I haven't read it personally) and the fact that while it was proposed some time ago, there has been virtually no public debate about it. There are very specific guidelines about how to declare a riot, and due process involved. Does the same exist in declaring an "unlawful assembly?" Will the participants know when their assembly becomes "unlawful?" Who has the authority to declare an assembly "unlawful? Can an assembly be declared "unlawful" after the fact? These are the sorts of questions that need to be asked.
      murnende
  • Stupid, stupid, stupid!

    It is stupid to ban masks at demos because Islamic ladies protesting in their veils should also be arrested under the same "laws". My suggestion is don't use the "Anonymous - V for Vendetta" masks, but face-paint them on. Then, you are not wearing a mask, just "make-up". They can't ban people from wearing make-up, can they? Can they? Please tell me they can't, please!!!!!
    Graphic Equaliser
    • I believe

      a good little toe-the-line judget would say Sir, THAT is a mask! Hang 'em!
      SpankyFrost
  • A Bit Redundant...

    Apparently we already have a law here in Canada (not sure where to get citation from :|) that already makes it illegal to wear a mask while committing any kind of crime (misdemeanor, etc).

    So the Vancouver riots are already covered by that law, and in a way, this new law is redundant. What the government seems to be doing making life easier for itself, saying "arrest them all, let the judge sort them out. Don't wait for them to commit a crime." Pre-crime. I like the direction we're going, Canada.

    It's opening the door wide open for police on the street to just flip a coin and decide whether an assembly is lawful or not. There was a huge crackdown on people during the G20 protests in Toronto for no real reason, and this is going to be just one more lever that authorities can use to chill public dissent.

    The media is not really focusing on the 'loophole' of peaceful assemblies still allowing for masks, and they're basically exaggerating the crap out of this thing... but it's still really important.

    Also, it still has to pass the senate to become law, so the process is not fully finalized yet. There's still hope.
    MiguelTaur
  • From A Little Guy

    Hey Anonymous,

    I'm poor. I don't like facebook and I don't play games. Whatever you do, p;ease don't screw me up any more than I already am. I mean it...I'm broke, I do old house repairs for a living on a T&M basis. I make less than 20K a year.

    I'm also a Liberal and my laptop keyboard doesn't work...I had to borrow one. My dog is 2,600 miles away from me. My life sucks. So, don't hurt me.

    Thank you for your time.
    Chuckterzella
  • WTF ?

    This is very scary if its true. Me and my wife just started using paypal along with their "here" service. We have a very small internet service in rhode island. We don't have the financial resources to take any kind of loss. Is this for real ????????????
    beau parisi
    • No, it's not

      After analyzing the "PayPal breach" as released by Anonymous,
      this appears to be a database dump from a third-party site which used PayPal as a payment gateway, and *not* a PayPal service itself.

      There are several reasons for this:
      1. The dump refers to several tables. Most notably, 'transactions' in the 'klarpsp1' database.

      2. Inside this table is the only reference to 'PayPal'. Specifically, this is mentioned under the 'gateway' column.

      3. In other words; this column is used to indicate which payment gateway was used to complete a transaction.

      Thus making it highly improbable that PayPal itself was breached.
      Anon_Commenter1
      • are you sure

        are you sure about this ? cuz the article looked pretty clear at the start that it was paypal itself that got hacked ???????
        What in the world is going on grrrrr :(
        beau parisi
        • Yes, definitely

          See also the update that was added to the article earlier. Hope this puts you a little bit more at ease.
          Anon_Commenter1
  • Hack fest

    I wonder what inspired this latest spree.
    lipanitech
  • Remember, remember the November 5th!

    Remember, remember the November 5th!
    http://woisio.com/
    Alicemillerp
  • facepalm

    It's "Remember, remember, the 5th of November"
    AND pathetic griefers?
    I'm embarrassed to be in this thread.....
    :puts mask on, flips off laptop, shuffles off:
    Kublakhanonomous
  • A deleted postie does not a hack job make

    I call BS on the alleged hack of paypal by Anonymous. A deleted postie does not a hack job make. The world wants to see PROOF! Defacement or whatever. Heck there wasn't even a screencapture of the supposed dump.

    Anonymous FAIL!
    beau parisi
    • You sound like Yoda...

      Hmm? Proof you need?, Speak clearly, you must...
      greatnewproducts