I wonder which three-letter agency is doing it? EDIT: Or could it be the BofA War Room?

My guess would be that 4chan is somehow DDOSing itself, in pursuit of some subtle poetic irony outsiders like us simply could not understand.

The packets are coming from inside the house!

Ebaumsworld. It's always Ebaumsworld.

I miss the Something Awful vs. Ebaumsworld internet fights from back in the day.

In my day, the goons were always fighting against the farkers. Ebaumsworlds didnt reach their radar.

I can't claim to understand 4chan, but it reminds me of 4chan's past reactions to negative press such as the "Ya dun goofed" incident.

For those who didn't notice "Ya dun goofed" here is a brief summary: 4chan trolled a young girl to tears, provoking the rage of her dad, who then called the police. The incident of cyber bullying caused widespread media coverage, and 4chan responded by briefly adding music to /b/, removing porn ads, calling it SFW (with the blue background theme), posting kittens and rainbows, and deleting porn threads. Needless to say /b/ quickly tired of this and returned to their old ways. However, I mentioned it as an example of 4chan's long history of alternating between making themselves look really bad, and then trying to make themselves look good.

I may be that they are running this DDOS on themselves so that they will be seen as innocent victims just like Paypal, Mastercard, etc.

> seen as innocent victims

Anonymous is as much 4chan as Reddit is Hacker News, so more likely they're mocking Paypal, Mastercard.

It's Anonymous. I don't have access to Twitter right now, but they make it pretty clear it's them.

Either they do it for lulz, or they believe moot has worked together with FBI.

Three Letter Agencies don't have to DDOS. They just send in the heavies. It's cheaper.

There are so many legal difficulties with DDoS, you can almost guarantee that neither a bank nor a government agency is likely to do it, regardless of paranoid delusions. As for the government, they generally have more effective means so long as their target's servers aren't located in the ass-end of nowhere.

You've been watching too many movies. In reality most spy and law enforcement agencies are huge, bureaucratic messes that can barely get anything done, even if national security is clearly at stake.

Cheaper than just hiring out a botnet?

Can you imagine how many meetings it would take for the US security agencies to go about hiring a botnet? Whereas they have a pretty much unlimited supply of heavies on retainer.

Especially given the DDOS against Wikileaks, I'm pretty sure they also have at least one botnet on retainer.

And there have been voices high up in the government saying that the US needs to develop offensive cyberwarfare capability. If that's not a call to develop state-owned botnets... the people in charge don't understand technology.

Of course, the use of the term cyberwarfare might be a giveaway anyway.

In any case, I'm sure it's a pretty simple matter for some people in the CIA to quietly hire out a botnet.

What the heck is a "heavy?"

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=heavies It's a general term for a grunt. In this context think: Black SUV, black suit, silenced pistol, shades.

He's a tall, muscular, bald Russian guy who likes guns, sandwiches and has an unhealthy bond with his family physician...I think.

So...Karnov? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karnov

Russians in general are not that fond of sandwiches!

sudo shut up

Thanks. I love not only your appreciation of humour, but also your loving demeanor.

He is credit to team.

I figured it was a Team Fortress reference. Considering both of the 'agencies' that control the teams are denoted by three letters (BLU, and RED).

Not your brother.

Why can't they just send out a heavy who knows someone who knows someone with a botnet?

ebaum's?