How would I go about writing a virus that takes down CP websites? I know C and perl, but I've never written a virus or done any Greyhat things before. I'm not asking for a tutorial, but just a few pointers in the right direction to start learning.
Thanks in advanced for the advice.
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-14 18:40
Things you will need:
- A botnet, to attack the sites without fear of retaliation.
- A vulnerability scanner capable of operating within your botnet, with a design that allows for distributed, parallel operations, unreliable nodes, and that is scalable.
- A machine vision component that is capable of scanning images and videos for underage forms with a fairly high accuracy rating.
- Some sort of mutating infection vector that defies detection and removal. Your nodes will need to be operating for a very long time, so you can't risk one going down in the middle of an operation.
- Vulnerabilities in encryption cyphers such as AES-256 or enough computing power to crack them.
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-14 18:41
Why would you want to get rid of CP?
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-14 18:54
"Stopping the spread of CP" is impossible, you should think how to stop child abuse: that's the real problem
also I think you are in the wrong place dude
>>1 >>2-san's suggestions are a good starting point, but the most important component is social engineering; if the paedophiles set up and use a perfectly secure network, you won't be able to do anything solely through technical means.
>>2 A botnet
Attacking public sites directly isn't necessarily a good idea, unless you can manage to take control and get a hold of the server logs (to publish them). Some of the public sites might even be honeypots, so attacking them might be counterproductive.
A machine vision component
But then you need to train it with some actual CP, which is illegal to acquire or possess regardless of the motives. Not a good idea unless you work as part of a police force or something.
Vulnerabilities in encryption cyphers such as AES-256 or enough computing power to crack them.
Forget about it. The best you can get is a flaw in the implementation, not in the actual ciphers used.
>>3
Because it supports child abuse, which in turn destroys lives and causes life-long psychological trauma to the affected. Even if it's a public site, the ads serve to pay for more, and in third-world countries a few dollars might be enough to create another victim.
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-14 19:16
Your better off fighting the pedos, not the equipment. Get them to talk about things that will get them locked up.
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-14 19:29
I hate CP, but it keeps drawing me back. I'm sick /prog/. Help me.
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-14 19:31
lulz
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-14 19:40
>>6
There are no ads on CP sites. There are no commercial CP sites. That's fucking retarded. Only old people buy CP and that's on VHS from the mafia.
How would I go about writing a virus that takes down the websites of people who want to take down CP websites?
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-15 13:04
Censorship of information is bad. Information that contains naked children should be censored.
I agree that child porn, like regular porn, screws up people who use it, but I don't try to restrict people from distributing such material. Find other ways to discourage people from using child porn without contradicting your own ethics, you confused morons.
Name:
!L33tUKZj5I2012-06-15 15:42
>>2 - A botnet, to attack the sites without fear of retaliation.
This is the preferred way of doing it.
But another way to look at it is this - all the coonections just need to be coming from different IPs. So you can use proxies.
Taking down a server...just overloading how many open connections they allow. Windows is a bit lame for this unpatched, there's something like only 135 connections you can open at once...or at least it was after xp sp1, not sure whther it still is. Probably is.
But on linux, you can open as many as you want. Just open loads of page loads through loads of different proxies, you can overload the server and make it unaccessible. Any fule can do it.
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-15 16:35
>>26
DDoSing through proxies just DDoSes the proxies, you shithead.
>>27 DDoSing through proxies just DDoSes the proxies, you shithead.
If you send the entire flood through one proxy, then yes. But if each connection is going through a different proxy, no. ``faggot''
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-15 17:20
>>29
The appropriate term is ``sick fuck''. And yes, I know. I am a very, very bad person.
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-15 17:34
As mentioned, the best way to do this is through social engineering. You will have to infiltrate some paedo circles, but you can be sure the authorities will do a better job than you can.
First, you need a DNA sequencer, so you can find a specimen that is close enough, and also so you can find the pedo gene in humans. Then you have to alter the virus to only infect pedos and either cure them or kill them.
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-15 18:25
Pedophilia is not a choice, but pedophobia is!
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-15 18:30
>>36
Eat my slimy nutsax yeast jelly, pedocunt. You and your ilk will never be accepted. Just kill yourself.
>>42
It's no different to making an animation where a villian kills other people. Nobody has to get hurt in the making of that animation. Is Arnold Schwarzenegger a killer for his role in the Terminator? Is Matt Damon a killer for his role in Mr Ripley?
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-15 23:50
>>43
Yes, but why would a moralfag make the distinction? Sexualized images of children means a death sentence to most of them. Why would the fact that lolicon is 2D make any difference to 99% of voters when they get into ``think of the children'' mode? For instance, take >>1. Someone asked if lolicon was included in the definition of CP to the OP, who seems to be so much of a moralfag that he wants to be a vigilante too. Why would the fact that lolicon is a cartoon make a difference to a faggot like that? It wouldn't, because people who sexualize children are pedophiles and pedophiles must be destroyed.
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-15 23:56
Lolicon is pig disgusting. You should be ashamed, whoever it was that mentioned how good it is. Ashamed!!
>>44
Tell them that we have to ban all movies and video games involving violence or otherwise everybody is a violent thug and a killer.
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-16 0:39
>>49
They will say that those are completely different, because children should not be sexualized. You can't argue with logos with them because they don't care about logic. you can't argue ethos because they think that molestation is worse than murder and for some reason think ridiculous things, such as that every pedophile is a child rapist who would use lolicon to groom children, or do some slippery slope nonsense that a single picture of drawn loli is going to turn any man into a serial rapist.
The only thing that might work is pathos. You should appeal directly to the moralfag's emotions. It is how they form opinions, almost invariably. Don't try to alert them to their cognitive dissonance, because that will only serve to convince them further that you are delusional. Don't try to argue freedom, because you are different, thus they don't think that rights should apply to you.
So, once again: Why should a moralfag make the distinction between lolicon and actual child pornography.
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-16 0:50
>>50 they think that molestation is worse than murder
Actually, murdering someone ends their suffering immediately; molestation might result in life-long trauma and suffering, and possibly incessant feminist-like whining. Do you really want more feminists on this planet?
>>10
And you'd know would you? You've visited all CP sites? How about motherless?
>>43
I guess they could argue that it enticing the viewer to carry out these fantasies in real life. Whether, there's any evidence behind this I do not know.
On a general note why was peadestry[sic] acceptable in ancient Greek times but isn't now? Not that I'm defending that sort of thing, but it's all a matter of perspective.
Paedophilia can be an illness. As characterized by that man who had a tumour on the part of his brain that controls decision making.
The more you ostracise them, the further you'll drive them underground and make the problem worse.
>>53
Societal taboos and expectations change over time. There's a reason why most of all societies do not eat fecal matter - people will get sick. There's a reason why most of modern societies outlawed involutary servitude. There's a reason why modern societies establish a rule of law that ought to be accountable to the rest of society.
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-17 4:53
>>57
People don't eat faecal matter because it tastes like shit.
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-17 4:55
THERE'S A REASON WHY MOST OF ALL SOCIETIES DO NOT EAT FECAL MATTER OUT OF MY ANUS
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-17 4:59
>>58
The point is about changes in human understanding, and how that affects taboo and behaviour. An example is our understanding about why society should live in the planet in understanding and sustainability as opposed to exploiting what we can for now with minimal regard to the ecological consequences.
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-18 18:53
>>60
Will glowball warming kill pedos? If so, I'm all for it.
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-18 20:37
>>61
Sadly it'll kill the rest of us non-paedos as well, I would imagine.
Websites don't rape children. Defacing some Tor site wont reverse what mapped nor will prevent future rapes. If you want to help the community volunteer in some social service. Your childish rage hurts nobody but yourself.