Stefan/Unixmad - This Guys May Have Had Something To Do With Servers Going Down

Spark910 · #1 04-21-2002, 06:33 PM

I dont know who the are but they make it sound like they did it and all over paying $15! Well there pathetic!:

I think Unixmad has seen it and posted but i may have been them imperinations him!

www.sg111.cjb.net

^They need shutting up and to be shut down

-Spark911

Spanko · #2 04-21-2002, 06:44 PM

It was apparently Viper alone who did that, causing the leader of that group to not like him anymore.
Thuogh that's what I picked up on another thread. I haven't seen so for myself.

Flameuss · #3 04-21-2002, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spark910
I dont know who the are but they make it sound like they did it and all over paying $15! Well there pathetic!:

I think Unixmad has seen it and posted but i may have been them imperinations him!

www.sg111.cjb.net

^They need shutting up and to be shut down

-Spark911

I don't think some stupid anti graal group can do anything that big. They might have forced server to shut down if they went to Germany, and forced it to shut down... (Pressed power Button) and unless they know any info about where server is it is impossible for them to do anything. They are helpless...

- Androk

Spanko · #4 04-21-2002, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Flameuss

I don't think some stupid anti graal group can do anything that big. They might have forced server to shut down if they went to Germany, and forced it to shut down... (Pressed power Button) and unless they know any info about where server is it is impossible for them to do anything. They are helpless...

- Androk

Have you ever heard of DDoS attacks? Basically sending so much information to a server that it can't handle it anymore and shuts down?
It's quite likely that's what happened.

Saga2001 · #5 04-21-2002, 06:47 PM

wow, and here i was thinking it was the ghost busters bringing down graal...man do i feel stupid.

darkriders_p2p · #6 04-21-2002, 06:49 PM

apparently graal isn't hack proof =\
their leader is insane x.x;;

Mman · #7 04-21-2002, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spark910
I dont know who the are but they make it sound like they did it and all over paying $15! Well there pathetic!:

I think Unixmad has seen it and posted but i may have been them imperinations him!

www.sg111.cjb.net

^They need shutting up and to be shut down

-Spark911

LOL!! I went to that site and while Viper claimed full responsibilty just abouve his message SG111 himself talked about how bad it was to make graal unavailible to play. Seems like Viper's actions came back and bit him in the ass, even someone as Anti-Graal as SG111 doesn't agree with what he did.

_0AfTeRsHoCk0_ · #8 04-21-2002, 09:33 PM

Hah, I am glad to see SG111 was against those attacks, and Viper acted alone, he was not affiliated with them. There is plenty of evidence on the forums and on the main page to convict him of whatever.

Griffyn · #9 04-21-2002, 10:20 PM

how pitiful

GrappaRoo · #10 04-21-2002, 10:45 PM

I like how it claims it'd be down for weeks and that Graal is dead and yet it's up the next day. Silly Viper, tricks are for kids.

ZORG1986 · #11 04-21-2002, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanko
Have you ever heard of DDoS attacks? Basically sending so much information to a server that it can't handle it anymore and shuts down?
It's quite likely that's what happened.

Its DoS not DDoS
Standing for Denial of Service.
Meaning they ping the computer lots of times sending lots of information..good enough to shutdown most home PCs but it takes alot of people doing it at once to have any affect on a server...and most basic firewalls can stop them type of attacks..seen as DoS attacks were something going on like 5 years ago.

Kadar · #12 04-21-2002, 10:54 PM

This was done a year ago or something on yahoo.. i remember it on the news

ZORG1986 · #13 04-21-2002, 10:55 PM

and call me stupid but that SG111 site just looks like a bunch of old women complaining about stuff that has nothing to do with them...really they should find something more constructive to do with there time.

ZORG1986 · #14 04-21-2002, 10:56 PM

"GraalOnline is crippled dead, don't take my word for it though, go check for yourselfs, and GraalOnline will remain injured and crippled or injured for weeks" - Viper, SG111
Haha I find that damn funny seen as it was only down for a day. What an idiot.

GrowlZP2P · #15 04-21-2002, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ZORG1986

Its DoS not DDoS
Standing for Denial of Service.
Meaning they ping the computer lots of times sending lots of information..good enough to shutdown most home PCs but it takes alot of people doing it at once to have any affect on a server...and most basic firewalls can stop them type of attacks..seen as DoS attacks were something going on like 5 years ago.

Actually, there is such a thing as a DDoS, or Distributed Denial of Service. It's where more than one computer launches a ping attack on a system, usually through a IRC Zombie trojan. Although I think this sounds more like a DoS than its advanced counterpart.

Shorty2Dope · #16 04-21-2002, 11:33 PM

Viper is a *****.. that is only obvious. Look at some of his post on the forums. He acts like an immature 10 year old crying over a game. He is so obsessed with Unixmad I think he is jealous or in love.

vsignasv · #17 04-21-2002, 11:52 PM

*Pings SG111*

Googi · #18 04-22-2002, 12:08 AM

Gah, the problem is that Viper said that he was going to take Graal down on April 20th, and that is when it happened. We should all get together and Ping SG111 at the same time

Spark910 · #19 04-22-2002, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ZORG1986
"GraalOnline is crippled dead, don't take my word for it though, go check for yourselfs, and GraalOnline will remain injured and crippled or injured for weeks" - Viper, SG111
Haha I find that damn funny seen as it was only down for a day. What an idiot.

Lol and me!
Prpas hell do it again?

haunter · #20 04-22-2002, 12:19 AM

Looks to me like all this "Viper" fellow did was make a bunch of people hate him, and give the dogs a taste for meat. I bet they'll sue him.

Mman · #21 04-22-2002, 02:29 AM

I bet GO staff could get Viper in jail if they wanted to, but they have more important things at hand, like making money.

Echos · #22 04-22-2002, 02:36 AM

Does anyone read? SG111 had nothing to do with it. Sure, some of the stuff was on his site, but who posted it? Viper!!! Where is Logo on IRC when you need him.

Mman · #23 04-22-2002, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Echos
Does anyone read? SG111 had nothing to do with it. Sure, some of the stuff was on his site, but who posted it? Viper!!! Where is Logo on IRC when you need him.

Yes I read, not only did SG111 not have anything to do with the attack on Graal's servers, he also stated that he objected to them.

Quote:

Originally posted on SG111's website
Although I do not care for the way Graal is currently ran, I CANNOT agree with the methods that were employed today. There is a difference between giving a player an oppertunity to choose not to play Graal and making Graal unavailable to play! There is also a difference between being a low level thorn in a persons side and costing a company large amounts of money in downtime. What happened is wrong and should not have taken place.
I had heard rumblings of such a thing for a while but mistakenly assumed that they were only threats not to be taken seriously. I was wrong. I cannot view what has happened as any type of victory. If anything, it is a setback.

It's one thing to say "I hate the way Graal is run". It is another to crash the servers because you hate the way Graal is run.

Milkdude99 · #24 04-22-2002, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanko
Have you ever heard of DDoS attacks? Basically sending so much information to a server that it can't handle it anymore and shuts down?
It's quite likely that's what happened.

It is exactly what is being done from 20 different IPs and prolly will shut down Graal again.....:grrr:

WHIPENIE4 · #25 04-22-2002, 07:21 AM

(X-Mann)
Everyone knows that man. I plan to take my own actions im sure unix does too.

Milkdude99 · #26 04-22-2002, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mman

Yes I read, not only did SG111 not have anything to do with the attack on Graal's servers, he also stated that he objected to them.

It's one thing to say "I hate the way Graal is run". It is another to crash the servers because you hate the way Graal is run.

ahh but they are as much to blame as Viper is, why?
Because they continued to let him post and post info to hack Graal with and where to get the programs from to do it , along with the port addresses , so they ARE JUST AS GUILTY AS VIPER IS>>>> And deserve whatever they get. If you go by that logic , just because the person driving the getway car in a bank robbery is not guilty because they did not go in the bank? I don't think so... they were accessories to the fact and it is adsurd to try to absolve them from any blame , they are the DAMN Launching pad from which this was done........
There are 20 different IP's hacking Graal right now and would not be that many IF THEY had not kept that info up...

__________________

Snappledragon · #27 04-22-2002, 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Milkdude99

ahh but they are as much to blame as Viper is, why?
Because they continued to let him post and post info to hack Graal with and where to get the programs from to do it , along with the port addresses , so they ARE JUST AS GUILTY AS VIPER IS>>>> And deserve whatever they get. If you go by that logic , just because the person driving the getway car in a bank robbery is not guilty because they did not go in the bank? I don't think so... they were accessories to the fact and it is adsurd to try to absolve them from any blame , they are the DAMN Launching pad from which this was done........
There are 20 different IP's hacking Graal right now and would not be that many IF THEY had not kept that info up...

__________________

Hey *****, it isnt against the law to talk about doing something against the law... what is against the law is doing ILLEGAL STUFF! SG111 neither talked about it, or helped in the doing of the act, which is even more evidence he should not be blamed. All he did was create a website, where people communicate... if terrorists planned to bomb some place over ICQ, should ICQ be shut down for allowing them to contact like that? No.

c0nsp1racy · #28 04-22-2002, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Flameuss

I don't think some stupid anti graal group can do anything that big. They might have forced server to shut down if they went to Germany, and forced it to shut down... (Pressed power Button) and unless they know any info about where server is it is impossible for them to do anything. They are helpless...

- Androk

are you a...... f*cking morn? go into dos do a netstat. look at all them pretty numbers k? Connect to the 2001 server do another netstat. Wow a new pretty number must be the 2001 ip and port

dun talk bout technical **** k? ***** you sound like 1 of them movies bout computers when they dun knoe wts they talkin bout like operation swordfish *****.

This guy and a couple other people got the server ip and pinged it with such big packets that if enough people did it the server would crash and that it did.

Milkdude99 · #29 04-23-2002, 03:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Snappledragon

Hey *****, it isnt against the law to talk about doing something against the law... what is against the law is doing ILLEGAL STUFF! SG111 neither talked about it, or helped in the doing of the act, which is even more evidence he should not be blamed. All he did was create a website, where people communicate... if terrorists planned to bomb some place over ICQ, should ICQ be shut down for allowing them to contact like that? No.

No join reality stupid if a terrorest group uses a website THEY ARE held responsible for it's content as accessories and it is shut down and they are arrested as such , check the laws ***** .... its called aiding and abeding in a crimimal offense ..... they can be held responsible and are as well as the site I have am responsible for what is on it. If some one uploads illegal MP3s to your site , your saying "hey I didn't put them there so I am not resonsible for them?" Horseshit the host will shut you down and delete your account for illegal activity why? because it will fall back to them in a court of law thats why and they will be sued by the owners of the MP3s and this is no different , so grow up and face the real world children....

Milkdude99 · #30 04-23-2002, 03:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Snappledragon

Hey *****, it isnt against the law to talk about doing something against the law... what is against the law is doing ILLEGAL STUFF! SG111 neither talked about it, or helped in the doing of the act, which is even more evidence he should not be blamed. All he did was create a website, where people communicate... if terrorists planned to bomb some place over ICQ, should ICQ be shut down for allowing them to contact like that? No.

And you talk as if you were one of the "offending persons " attacking Graal so maybe your IP needs to be checked against those that are attacking Unixmads comp.....

Milkdude99 · #31 04-23-2002, 03:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by WHIPENIE4
(X-Mann)
Everyone knows that man. I plan to take my own actions im sure unix does too.

Bringing yourself down to their level is not worth it and makes you no better than they are so don't do it.....

Snappledragon · #32 04-23-2002, 03:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Milkdude99

No join reality stupid if a terrorest group uses a website THEY ARE held responsible for it's content as accessories and it is shut down and they are arrested as such , check the laws ***** .... its called aiding and abeding in a crimimal offense ..... they can be held responsible and are as well as the site I have am responsible for what is on it. If some one uploads illegal MP3s to your site , your saying "hey I didn't put them there so I am not resonsible for them?" Horseshit the host will shut you down and delete your account for illegal activity why? because it will fall back to them in a court of law thats why and they will be sued by the owners of the MP3s and this is no different , so grow up and face the real world children....

With your logic you are saying ICQ would be shut down. Any kind of communication used by terrorists should be shut down. what the forums and the main page of SG111 really are is a way of communication. ICQ and e-mail is a way of communication.
----
Of course the site would be shut down if it was made by terrorists. Everything terrorists are known for is Illegal. What SG111 does it simply critizises graals management, he may have some pictures of Unixmad and Stefan that are altered, but people do that to celeberties ALL THE TIME. You dont see them going crazy. Viper is just someone he allows (or used to allow) to post on his site, not knowning what he would do.
----
Of course the host would shut you down because most likely they have many other people to host, and losing just one person isnt that much, and they can't tell if you are lieing or not. For them to sit there and deal with that would be pointless. You shouldnt of even mentioned that.
----
SG111 never helped with the attacks. He simply created a website, long before this was EVER planned. Viper and a few others have constantly been talking about doing something like this for a long time... but never to go through with it. SG111 simply thought this was another one of his little "Im pissed and I want to talk about taking down graal" which he has every right to do.
----
REMINDER: I DO NOT SUPPORT VIPER IN A LITTLE WAY. WHAT HE DID WAS WRONG AND SHOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED. SO DONT THINK I AM STICKING UP FOR THEM.

Snappledragon · #33 04-23-2002, 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Milkdude99

And you talk as if you were one of the "offending persons " attacking Graal so maybe your IP needs to be checked against those that are attacking Unixmads comp.....

Check my IP. I know for a fact that I am not one of those *****s Ddosing Graal...

Milkdude99 · #34 04-23-2002, 04:09 AM

ICQ is a piss poor example because it is a "chat program" and we are not talking about a Chat program....something you fail to see is , they provided the "means " for the "tools " they used in a illegal activity, this in itself makes them responsible, by allowing the link to the tools they need to hack Graal and gave out info on the ports which is also illegal... To run a responsible journalistic site to post "freedom of speech" you must also take responsiblity for it's content to make sure what is there is first "true and accurate " and not slanderous .. for this will make them responsible in a court of law as spreading malious slander..As the same goes for a newspaper , that is why they have a legal dept to guard the paper from this kind of thing. If a paper willingly prints lets say "top secret papers " of the Goverment something that will harm the defense of that country, do you still say they have the right because of "free speech?" Of course not , why? because it would be harmful to that said country , what is the difference here? What they "allowed to stay up " was indeed harmful to others and yet they choose to ignore that and let it remain and because of this fact are directly resonsible for the actions taken against Graal lanched not by one but by many because they allowed it to be "spread by their site". To be responsible Journalist they should have removed it from their site so as not to be involved with any illegal activity , whether directly or indirectly... This is my gripe with them and check with an Attourney and see if what I say is correct or not...

Neonight · #35 04-23-2002, 04:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spark910
I dont know who the are but they make it sound like they did it and all over paying $15! Well there pathetic!:

I think Unixmad has seen it and posted but i may have been them imperinations him!

www.sg111.cjb.net

^They need shutting up and to be shut down

-Spark911

All of them are idiotic poseurs, none of which can actually "hack." Getting the passwords using Brutus and deleting them with telnet or such is not hacking.

Viper or whoever does not know how to use PSP very well, because that is not what unixmad looks like and you can see where it was airbrushed.

I'm laughing so hard right now, my stomach hurts. These guys give off a good laugh. Now let's watch a picture of a skinny Lycia roll in that's been airbrushed.

/Edit\
Oh, and if unixmad does send in the FBI, or whatever against SG111, I am fully with that. I support it, in fact.

Toujours pret
Always Ready

Snappledragon · #36 04-23-2002, 04:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Milkdude99
ICQ is a piss poor example because it is a "chat program" and we are not talking about a Chat program....something you fail to see is , they provided the "means " for the "tools " they used in a illegal activity, this in itself makes them responsible, by allowing the link to the tools they need to hack Graal and gave out info on the ports which is also illegal...

"They" the ones who posted the tools and ports was VIPER. Not SG111.

Read that over and over... please...

Quote:

Originally posted by Milkdude99

To run a responsible journalistic site to post "freedom of speech" you must also take responsiblity for it's content to make sure what is there is first "true and accurate " and not slanderous .. for this will make them responsible in a court of law as spreading malious slander..As the same goes for a newspaper , that is why they have a legal dept to guard the paper from this kind of thing. If a paper willingly prints lets say "top secret papers " of the Goverment something that will harm the defense of that country, do you still say they have the right because of "free speech?" Of course not

Of course YES. The whole point of a newspaper is to give information to the public. If they can get there hands on the information, then they print it. There are no ethics in the media. Do not tell me that there are, the only place where you see ethics is on the Disney shows full of queers. In this case, it would be the countrys fault for allowing those papers to get out. The way the paper got them though was probally illegal, inless the country's management was made up of ****ing gummy bears. The news paper would get in trouble for abtaining the documents illegally but not for posting them.

shavomombetto · #37 04-23-2002, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Milkdude99
ICQ is a piss poor example because it is a "chat program" and we are not talking about a Chat program....something you fail to see is , they provided the "means " for the "tools " they used in a illegal activity, this in itself makes them responsible, by allowing the link to the tools they need to hack Graal and gave out info on the ports which is also illegal... To run a responsible journalistic site to post "freedom of speech" you must also take responsiblity for it's content to make sure what is there is first "true and accurate " and not slanderous .. for this will make them responsible in a court of law as spreading malious slander..As the same goes for a newspaper , that is why they have a legal dept to guard the paper from this kind of thing. If a paper willingly prints lets say "top secret papers " of the Goverment something that will harm the defense of that country, do you still say they have the right because of "free speech?" Of course not , why? because it would be harmful to that said country , what is the difference here? What they "allowed to stay up " was indeed harmful to others and yet they choose to ignore that and let it remain and because of this fact are directly resonsible for the actions taken against Graal lanched not by one but by many because they allowed it to be "spread by their site". To be responsible Journalist they should have removed it from their site so as not to be involved with any illegal activity , whether directly or indirectly... This is my gripe with them and check with an Attourney and see if what I say is correct or not...

yeah thats all find and dandy, but bill clinton basically protects them when he signed the internet laws that prevents a site from shutting them down because of the content on their page. Just like porn sites, they have the right to be there. Providing the "tools" is not illegal, the people who misuse them are irresponsible.