Something looks suspicious about the IA attack, and I suspect the goal is to change sentiment about *something*, probably the Internet Archive, but it's not clear what, and it may be more than one thing. It seems like someone probably paid a hacking a...

[cwebber@octodon.social]

Something looks suspicious about the IA attack, and I suspect the goal is to change sentiment about *something*, probably the Internet Archive, but it's not clear what, and it may be more than one thing. It seems like someone probably paid a hacking agency to do this, very possibly a publishing house upset about copyright claims, and I say that especially because:

- "See you on Have I Been Pwned", but really, this is one of the least dramatic things to end up on HIBP of all time: it's names and email addresses sure, but all the passwords are properly hashed and there isn't much else. So why gloat about it?
- There seems to be an attempt to lower public impression of IA in terms of talking about its tech "held up with sticks". It is old tech, so maybe, but why the focus on that?
- If you analyze the HN thread about it for comments in terms of when posted, there were a bunch of sockpuppet accounts created almost immediately after the post was made, seemingly to add comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=Nathans220 https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=haha112 https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=19h00 https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=Mr-Hyde
- An allegedly pro-palestinean militant hacking group is claiming responsibility, but their rationale doesn't make sense: they say it's because the IA is an American company, and the US is helping Israel. But why the IA *specifically*? This seems like a false flag operation either to draw attention away from the real perpetrators, or possibly to try to turn technically inclined people against pro-palestinean activists https://x.com/sn_darkmeta/status/1844104165192253945?s=46&t=sGbGJDwPtKqKmSzYvGAl1A

The IA *is* engaged with several fights with publishers and people who have beef on copyright grounds. It's entirely possible one of them hired a nation-state affiliated hacking group (of which there are quite a few) that had a side beef, or that group is trying to throw the public off its tracks, but regardless, sock puppets like this typically appear after a hacking attack when there's a paid organization.

Regardless, nobody else is keeping the internet's history alive, and yes, the IA has made some mistakes sometimes, but I stand behind them and wish their staff strength in dealing with this time.

[gleick@mas.to]

@cwebber @ricmac Wait, seriously? You’re promulgating a theory that a BOOK PUBLISHER hired a hacking group to attack Internet Archive? That is genuinely nutty. I think you should both know better.

1. They wouldn’t know how.
2. The attack was certain to create a wave of sympathy and support for the victim (and rightly so).
3. Publishers did have a narrow grievance with one of the least important IA programs. But they solved that via the legal system.

[ricmac@mastodon.social]

@gleick @cwebber Well, I have no idea who this nutcase group on X is, I just thought Christine's theory was interesting and worth Re-tooting. I do agree that the Palestine stance this group is spouting seems off, and so the real reason they're hacking IA is probably not that.