MI6 defaces Al Qaeda website with Cupcake-making recipes | Hacker News Reader

MI6 defaces Al Qaeda website with Cupcake-making recipes

theage.com.au

46 pointsteyc22 comments

Voltaire wrote, "I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: Oh Lord, make my enemies ridiculous. And God granted it."

It looks like MI6 have the same idea, to make Al Qaeda look like a bunch of chumps in public. This is some quality propaganda, precisely because of how silly it is.

While it's entertaining to think of wannabe terrorists reading materials about cupcakes, surely this is a missed opportunity?

Wouldn't it have made sense to plant almost-correct recipes for bomb making, back-doored advice on computer security, and lukewarm calls to Jihad?

(Maybe this has happened elsewhere - and this is just MI-6 thumbing their noses at the website owners)

This is the perfect way to hide such actions, though - an extremely obvious change, so that more subtle changes will be ignored. The article does note that MI6 is continuing to target the magazine, too, so it wouldn't be surprising if they were making subtle changes.

Really? Now that they know that they are compromised, they will actively look for all changes.

Given that MI6 didn't even officially exist till quite recently, I imagine that the fact that this is made public means it is just the tip of the iceberg.

Maybe you're much older than I so our contexts are different, or wikipedia is wrong, but it says there that the /term/ MI-6 has been around since world war 2, referring to the SIS. The existence has been only publicly acknowledged since 1994.

yeah I meant the public acknowledgement (although 1994 is earlier than I remember it).

The problem I suspect, with only slightly altered bomb recipes, is that you leave room for experimentation. A potential terrorist could try and work out how to correctly concoct a bomb after your supplied recipe has failed, he might even succeed.

Also, explosives by their very nature are unstable and providing a recipe slightly wrong could lead to premature explosion: 'Great!' you might think 'One less terrorist!' but terrorists don't often operate in seclusion, they operate in residential areas (look at the London 7/7 bombers, for instance). Meaning innocent people could be injured by their bomb making.

The deliberately bad computer security advice would seem a better idea, like 'Download the official Al Qaeda security suite! That only COINCIDENTALLY sends all your personal information and location to the security services!'.

It was reported on the news that the 7/7 bombers rejected the use of GPG or similar as being too imperialist, so they made up their own crypto software called Mujaheddin Secrets. Only it wasn't as cryptic as they thought!

Remember kids, when the civilians hack other people's webservers it's "cyber-terrorism", when is the Government the one that does it, it's "cyber-warfare".

Similarly, when I kill my neighbor I'm a "murderer", but when I kill my country's neighbors I'm a "soldier". Such distinctions are important.

I would be careful trying to equate hacking into Sony with hacking into Al-Qaeda.

If you or your country did not follow established protocol and international law for killing your country's neighbors, you are both a "soldier" and a "murderer".

Likewise, if MI6 defaces an online magazine without following established protocol as well as international law, they are engaging in "cyber-terrorism" in addition to "cyber-warfare".

Such distinctions are important. :)

Perhaps there will be a Geneva Convention for cyberwarfare in the future. Though perhaps a different city for the international protocols to be signed in is in order.

Until we start seeing hackers actually blow up computers or shut down major sectors of the economy, while issuing political demands, I refuse to call them "cyber-terrorists". It's such a stupid, meaningless, USA PATRIOT Act-esque piece of fluffy propaganda. Not every criminal is a terrorist. Nor every airline passenger, but I won't even get into that.

Now, that's not to say that some of these groups wouldn't do those things if they could. I can see a significant proportion of Anonymous deciding to take out the NYSE in retaliation for some bill or other, if they had the capability. Still, that's not terrorism, just crime.

This seems to me like spook marketing. They wanted to get in on a little of the lulz action and dislodge it from its antiestablishment roots.

They shouldn't have sent people to Ellen DeGeneres, who is just a civilian. Someone might decide to direct their retaliation towards her.

Is it just me or does this read like a spoof?

If it's a PDF there would be much more insidious things to do like embed an a tracking pixel. This really doesn't sound like spooks.

I wonder if they inserted any CPA offers into the cupcakes article. This whole lone wolf thing sounds like the perfect demographic for some online dating offers.

you can't embed external resources (e.g. tracking pixels) in PDFs, adobe stopped that a few years ago.

You'd be surprised at how many totally outdated pirated virus-ridden WinXP (or worse) installs are still around in developing countries. Sure, you'd only catch stupid wannabe terrorists, but I suspect that's a rather large fraction.

Should have used this http://elainerecipes.blogspot.com/2008/07/bombe-surprise.htm...

Its a nice way of messing around with people's minds. Makes AQ sound like amateurs... kind of like Sony. (couldn't resist)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com