Anonymous Member Calls PSN Users ‘Selfish’ and ‘Butthurt’

VG247 offers an interesting interview with a member of Anonymous, the hacktivist group that is best known for bringing down government, corporations, and the Church of Scientology websites. He says that it is no longer attacking Sony, but the unknown soldier in the army of Anonymous says that PSN users acted "selfish" and "butthurt" over the lengthy PlayStation Network outage.

VG247 put out the word on Twitter that it would like to speak to a member of Anonymous. One person replied, but said he wouldn’t speak for the organization as a whole.

When asked about the recent Lulsec operations, the Anon said:

"There is no support for Lulz Security’s actions of disrupting MMO’s ‘for the lulz.’ Anonymous, as a group, is about activism in defence of certain rights, and the lulz that can be had while doing this. This doesn’t follow or achieve this. Though, individual Anons are free to do what they want."

When asked about the attacks on Sony, he said:

"Our intention with our initial attacks on the PSN was that of a sit-in, preventing traffic to their service in order to protest their actions. We didn’t want to piss off the consumers as they were the ones whose rights we were campaigning for. Sony were removing true ownership of the console, as well as prosecuting hackers, and we were trying to spread this information to the consumers.

Instead of listening or reading what our cause was they just became butthurt. Their annoyance is understandable, but their actions were selfish as they cared more about immediate pleasure receival than they did about their rights as a consumer (and the rights of the hacker)."

Addressing the recent arrests of alleged Anonymous members in Spain, he said:

"..for every Anon they arrest, ten more will step in to their place. They are fighting a war against an ideology and just by mentioning our name their increase our numbers. We garner support from those who become disgruntled by the actions of someone we oppose. Anonymous is the manifestation of an idea, and ideas are bulletproof."

You can read the full interview VG247.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. MJimiD says:

    Okay. One person claiming to be part of Anonymous most certainly does not speak Anonymous, especially considering that there really is no organized central mind to Anonymous. The beauty of Anonymous is precisely that Anonymous is really anyone and everyone. Anonymous is an idea, an indestructible, undefineable, transmorphic collective of ideas. However, Anonymous is not selfish or mindlessly destructive. Crackers, not hackers, are responsible for the PSN attacks, and to suggest otherwise is incredibly hasty and unwise.

  2. greevar says:

    "Criminal behaviour took place. Are you seriously trying to say that criminals aren’t to blame for their behaviour?"

    Did I say that? No, my point was to the fact that the primary fault is Sony’s and I don’t see people throwing any blame at them. All I hear is "Anons are a bunch of whiney teenage snotty brats that think they’re big shit." You just come off as a butthurt jackass. Hackers did attack Sony and allegedly stole customer information. There is no evidence nor has Sony submitted any evidence to the fact. Sony said Anon did it, but they have absolutely no factual evidence to back it up. The Anons claim they were not a part of the subsequent attacks, but they did participate in the first DDoS (and denied being part of the hack). There is no evidence they were involved in the other attacks, so any claims to that are completely unsupported. The hacks used to get into their servers are easy to prevent, but Sony was just too lazy. They overwhelmed the SQL server by injecting code that caused it to crash and give them access. That’s easy to prevent by santizing your inputs, which they didn’t do.

    "Everyone accepts that Sony had poor security and they had many failings"

    Accepts? They accept Sony’s failure, but condemns and ridicules the hackers? That’s not acceptable. They failed to secure their servers and abused their customers’ trust. Their lackluster efforts lead to these hackers gaining access to sensitive data that should have been better protected. To give Sony a pass because you’re pissed at the group (or person, who knows?) who hacked them, is to allow Sony to continue their unsatisfactory behavior which may result in another breach of data in the future. No, Sony put our confidence in into question here. Sony had a job to do and so did the hackers. One of them did their job and the other failed. It’s a shame that the criminals where the former and not the latter. Sony isn’t a victim here, they are part of the problem. The hackers actually did us all a favor by pointing out that Sony is undeserving of being trusted with our sensitive data.

    "These so-called hackitivists are losing support by the day, as they continue to annoy law-abiding citizens with their fantastical war."

    Is that so? What’s your evidence? I’d say the increased mindshare among the public will only serve to expand and progress their movement. They are also not hackers. They are protesters. They didn’t "hack" Sony, they overwhelmed it with traffic. Their goal was not to access sensitive data, it was to disrupt the status quo to force complacent tools to take notice that things are not okay. Nobody has ever made a protest that didn’t result in a disruption. That’s what it takes to make a proper protest. If you aren’t pissing people off, you’re not doing it right. You may not like what they did, but they have your attention now don’t they?


    "Paste superficially profound, but utterly meaningless quotation here."

  3. State says:

    Criminal behaviour took place. Are you seriously trying to say that criminals aren’t to blame for their behaviour?

    Everyone accepts that Sony had poor security and they had many failings (particularly over the timescale to alert users). But there is absolutely no way that the criminals can be held blameless for their crimes. They didn’t have to commit their crimes, but they did.

    These so-called hackitivists are losing support by the day, as they continue to annoy law-abiding citizens with their fantastical war.

  4. greevar says:

    That’s a complete non-sequitur. Sony wasn’t waggling its admin account out there where it could attract the attention of any miscreant that might come by. Sony had what would be similar to a sign that says "DO NOT ENTER" next to a unlocked door that was in a secluded alley behind a iron gate. All they had to do is bypass the weak protections and get in. That’s what my logic is. What if your bank closed their vault, but didn’t lock it and someone stole your money and security box? Would you blame the robbers, or would you blame the bank for not doing a proper job of securing your important items?


    "Paste superficially profound, but utterly meaningless quotation here."

  5. State says:

    Greevar’s logic appears to follow the lines of what got the SlutWalk women so angry. He’s essentially saying that it isn’t the fault of the rapist it is the fault of the victim for enticing the criminal to rape.

    Sony’s security was poor, but you can only blame the hackers for performing the action that they did. They didn’t have to hack Sony yet they did.

  6. FlakAttack says:

    I would just like to note that greevar seems to be an intelligent, informed, and aware person.

    More than I can say for most of the people on this site.

  7. sqlrob says:

    My hardware, my rules.

    Sony banning modded PS3 from PSN: Acceptable response (their network, their rules)

    Sony removing the feature: Unacceptable response 

  8. hellfire7885 says:

    Yes, how dare Sony or even the developers releasing games on PSN expect to be paid for thair work. Every feature should be enabled even if it enables piracy.

  9. MJimiD says:

    Umm… who asked anybody who protests to protest in favor the people? You don’t have to be asked, dummy. You just act because it’s the right damn thing to do.

  10. greevar says:

    The insults game can be fun. I think I’ll join in. You’re just a dumb mainstream media zombie that believes anything you’re told. Sony needed a scapegoat to blame this on. Anon is the perfect scapegoat. No one can confirm nor deny their guilt because nobody knows who they are. Someone timed their hack to coincide with the Anon protest which made it easy for Sony to blame Anon for it. You, being the little corporate sap, took their word for it and have grabbed your torch and pitchfork looking for blood at their prompting. You are clueless.

    Anonymous aren’t the poeple you should be mad at, not even LulzSec really deserves your ire. The people you should really be pissed at are the people at Sony and the other companies that have been hacked. They failed you. They failed big time. Those hackers didn’t get in because they’re uber 1337 h4x0rs (though they might be competent from the looks of it), they just found an opening in Sony’s very weak security and exploited it. It’s Sony’s fault, not the hackers, that your data was breached and your services disabled. They fucked up and they took the services offline that you’re all butthurt about. Had Sony been keeping up with their security, hackers wouldn’t be getting in with tactics as simple as an SQL code injection to crash the server and force it to give the hacker access. That’s Sony’s fault, they did a piss poor job securing your data. Be pissed at them and the other companies first. Then be pissed at the hackers, but be glad that they showed you how much trust Sony and the other hacking targets really deserve from you.


    "Paste superficially profound, but utterly meaningless quotation here."

  11. Lou says:

    Your empty replies have proven to me that you’re just one dumb Anon fanboy.

    You can’t proclaim to be fighting "for the consumers" when nobody asked you to do so. Nobody other than hackers, pirates and the random "fight the power" dimwits are complaining for the Other OS option. Anonymous’ only excuse is simply not cutting it anymore and they know it. This so called Anonymous member is simply mad because they thought that the DDoS attack was going to make them popular and they were going to be treated like heroes and now they are more toxic than Paris Hilton’s twat.

  12. Lou says:

    Let me ask you this questions.

    Who asked them to defend the customers?

    Why attack Sony (I’m not talking about the mayor downtime so don’t even go there) when their claims simply affect a miniscule amount of end-users?

    Aside from notoriety what would they gain from this.?


    Although anyone can self-proclaim to be "defending the consumer"  there is one problem, nobody asked them to do so and they are simply catering to a very low percentage of users and you can’t expect that everyone is gonna go and cheer them up. And for the record this person is acting selfish and butthurt because users got mad at them.

  13. greevar says:

    Okay, what if Sony disabled Blu-Ray capability instead? Would you have a complaint then? Other OS and Blu-Ray were both features promised to those who bought the PS3. Their significance to the consumer is immaterial to the issue, but the fact that Sony sold a product that did certain things and then removed a feature because they didn’t like what consumers might do with it was wrong and they deserve to be taken to task for it.

    So you follow your line of thought: I do understand that some people want to run a Blu-Ray on their PS3, but I don’t get as to why when a capable Blu-Ray player is perfectly fine for the job.


    "Paste superficially profound, but utterly meaningless quotation here."

  14. greevar says:

    Yes, Sony took it offline because somebody hacked it. And then several of their other sites were hacked. It seems to me that Sony had shitty security and it’s their fault the sites were hacked and all of that information was leaked. Sony caused this to happen by not doing their job. Who did the attack and why doesn’t matter one bit. Hackers will hack. That’s nothing new, but Sony was trusted with your sensitive information and they didn’t secure it. Be mad at them. Being mad at the hackers for breaking into an unsecure site is like being mad at a pack of wolves that eat a chained deer.


  15. hellfire7885 says:

    Sony took it offline due to a security breach that some jackass took advantage of. The network going down was an effect, not a cause.

    As to the second point, well, I do understand that some people want to run a different OS on their PS3, but I don’t get as to why when most of them likely have a perfectly godo PC sitting on their desk.

  16. State says:

    Clearly all the attacks on these hacking groups has hit a nerve. Apart from the hackers themselves they’re struggling to find much support and give lame excuses for their behaviour. They’re essentially a bunch of irritating children who believe too much in these fantastical ideological wars.

    If they had something better to do then all of these attacks wouldn’t be happening, but it’s too easy to sit in a bedroom after school of their parents’ house and do these hacks. Haven’t they got some homework to do?

  17. DorthLous says:

    Yes, an individual stating that he does not speak for a group clearly represent them all, all groups are identical, action committed by a group are equally the fault of all other groups, all actions are the same and no rights other than the most basic ones are worth defending, especially through pacific sit-in or short disruption of service.

    You can argue whether the DDOS was good or not. You can attack this particular individual for his words. You can say what you want about the entity that bypassed the PSN security. But at the very least, stop the disinformation/get your facts straight.

  18. State says:

    It shows the maturity of these "hackers" when their vocabulary extends to "butthurt". It just shows them to be immature homophobic children.

    What exactly are they fighting? What is their purpose? When you consider that all the hacks are aimed at computer game companies then clearly the biggest thing in their lives is gaming. Their main concerns are that they are not allowed to cheat at COD or whatever, whilst in the Middle East people are protesting because of a lack of democracy. It makes these hackers look rather pathetic.

  19. greevar says:

    Oh, so you have to actively expose yourself to abuse when protesting something? People should ignore their instincts and just let them know where they need to attack to kill off any source of dissent? They are Anonymous because you can’t silence dissent when you don’t know who and where it’s coming from. Had those people you cite been given the tools we have today, you bet your ass they would have used it. A civil rights movement that has no head cannot be defeated by attacking a non-existent central command, because they all stand together equally and the only way to defeat them is to silence every single person on earth. I don’t think they have what it takes to silence everyone.


    "Paste superficially profound, but utterly meaningless quotation here."


  20. ecco6t9 says:

    There is no courage in hiding behind a computer screen and mask when protesting. Did Martin Luther King have a mask? Did Rosa Parks have a mask? Cesar Chavez,Susan B Anthony,Malcom X, People in Iran in 2009,People in Egypt in 2011 all showed thier faces.



  21. olstar18 says:

    This is not the work of anonymous. Refer to all my previous posts on the subject. I am really getting tired of everyone accepting the claims that this acts are the work of anonymous and not some anonymous idiot that chooses to use the inherent anonymity of the internet to claim membership in cool sounding groups while acting like a reject from the troll farm.

  22. Neeneko says:

    (1) There has been no confirmed leak, only Sony saying the servers were accessed

    (2) There has been no confirmed connection between anonymous and the PSN downtime

    (3) I  am guessing the interviewie is talking about the buthurt over the earlier DDoS attack.

  23. Snowgrog says:

    I’d keep those assumptions to yourself until some anon is actually proven to be part of the later attacks.  Apparently the "average consumer" wasn’t paying attention at the start, and fails to comprehend the full timeline.

    As far as Anonymous has said, they were the cause of the April 4 but not the April 17th hack.

  24. Arkiel says:

    Anonymous has denied having any part in the data theft that occurred while they were having their sit-in. Theft and DDoS are qualitatively different activities, and one cannot easy segue into the other. The current public understanding is a group of hackers exploited Anonymous’ diversion to get in and out while the admins were looking the other way.

    PSN was taken down because the backend security that protected customer financial records was easy to compromise, not because Anonymous had a cyber-sit-in.

    You don’t appear to care that companies are attempting to restrict people that have legally purchased a piece of equipment from using that equipment for equally legal means, so I’ll skip over that.

    Anyone can be the voice of the consumer. Anyone, anywhere at least semi-public, any time. There is no known means of restricting any given person from filling that role — even prisoners have an economy of sorts.

    Anonymous got pissed because Sony was shitting on their customers, someone snuck in the back while Anonymous was having their sit-in out front and stole a bunch of information, Sony takes down the PSN and tries to blame the whole thing on Anonymous without providing much in the way of evidence.

  25. Alex says:

    "OOh, I’m sorry Anonymous- it really is selfish of us to be concerned over whether our fucking names and credit card info gets leaked onto the internet."

    I thought he was referring to the initial DDOS attacks, not the hacks where info was stolen.

    I’m not under the affluence of incohol as some thinkle peep I am. I’m not half as thunk as you might drink. I fool so feelish I don’t know who is me, and the drunker I stand here, the longer I get.

  26. Craig R. says:

    No kidding. The problem with this anonymous idiot is that he believes Anonymous is there to decide what’s best for us. And if we don’t like it? Too bad.

    Of course, the irony with that attitude is that they end up sounding very much like the governments and corporations that they go ‘hacktivist’ on.

  27. Zerodash says:

    OOh, I’m sorry Anonymous- it really is selfish of us to be concerned over whether our fucking names and credit card info gets leaked onto the internet.  The average consumer is not interested in running shitty Linux or pirated games on their consoles- it seems that Anonymous is being selfish here.  Most people don’t give a damn about Linux, custom software, piracy, and all that shit- and even if they were, nobody made Anonymous the "voice of the consumer" let alone gave them the right to steal personal info and card numbers of consumers.   

  28. greevar says:

    Sony took the service offline, not Anon. Sony took it off because of the hackers who used the Anon DDoS to cover their attack. It had nothing to do with Anon, there’s no concrete evidence to that in any way. It was just the timing of the attack and coincidence. But let’s forget that, because your games were interrupted and you want to blame someone other than Sony because you know that will go nowhere. Anon is just an easy scapegoat to you.


  29. Lou says:

    And does it make a difference? I gues PSN users don’t have the right to be mad at a group of self-procliaimed activists when their services are affected.

  30. greevar says:

    If you think that, you’re not paying attention. They didn’t take down the PSN, they performed DDoS on it, which someone else used as a cover to hack the servers. In response Sony, not Anon, took down the entire network.

    As far as his justifications, you have no idea what the implications of what Sony and their ilk are doing to our civil liberties. They’re trying to erode our liberties the same way you boil a live frog; increasing the temperature slowly enough that it doesn’t notice it’s being boiled before it’s too late. You’re just taking the bait because they are buying your complacency with entertainment.


  31. Mr.Tastix says:

    His justification on Sony’s attacks are pretty piss poor. Not to mention that most of the PSN’s users probably aren’t going to agree with him, considering most consumers actually enjoy being able to use the services they paid for. Is that selfish? Probably not.

    Something I’m curious about is how many people claiming to be Anonymous members actually agreed with the hacking of Sony. Regardless of whether Anonymous actually done it, how many people who claim membership to the group actually supported the idea, and weren’t pissed off when they couldn’t access the PSN?

    I’m fairly sure there’ll be a large number of "members" who, like most of us, probably didn’t see how punishing the consumers harms the company in any way. Oh sure, Sony got some bad publicity that’s hardly worth potentially screwing over thousands of users for, is it?

    — Randi Tastix

  32. greevar says:

    Don’t mind him, he’s just trying to sound profound with a quotation he pasted from somewhere else without any notion of what it means.


  33. greevar says:

    "In the end we just want to enjoy outr online content without some jackass restricting it."

    Like Sony? You were talking about Sony, right? It sounds like you were talking about Sony. They did exactly what you’re complaining about, so you must be talking about Sony. Sony took the service offline, so you must be complaining about them, right? They took it down after someone hacked it, while Sony was distracted by Anon, so you are definitely directing your ire at Sony.

    "And quite honestly ,the average user doesn’t necessarily care about putting Linux on their console or the fact that one doesn’t want to pay for games."

    Ok, I get it. The rights of the minority don’t matter. So when you fall on the minority side of a civil rights matter, we’ll promptly ignore you too. Your issue doesn’t effect me one way or another, so I’ll just rip you apart when you try to do something about it that disrupts my complacent comfort.


  34. hellfire7885 says:

    Wow, I didn’t realize that expecting to be able to access content one has PAID FOR was wrong /sarcasm

    And quite honestly ,the average user doesn’t necessarily care about putting Linux on their console or the fact that one doesn’t want to pay for games. In the end we just want to enjoy outr online content without some jackass restricting it.

  35. greevar says:

    "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in an contemptible struggle." – Edmund Burke

    The contempt directed at Anonymous over the subsequent loss of access to the PSN and the apathy over the issues they are trying to champion is nothing more than complacency that does more disservice to liberty than Anonymous can inflict on those that were temporarily inconvencienced. It is far better that someone fights back to right the wrongs and cause people discomfort in the course of disrupting those that seek to restrict liberty than it is to allow these abuses to continue unchecked.

    So, yes. The people complaining about losing access to the PSN because of the DDoS are butthurt and selfish. Give me liberty, I will accept nothing less.


  36. Neeneko says:

    The right of people to not be sued into oblivion for explaining how other people can modify hardware that they paid money for?

    Perhaps not as important as other civil rights movements, but control over your own property and the ability to talk about it are pretty damn important. 

  37. DorthLous says:

    Do please keep in mind that Anonymous has not been seriously tied to the PSN backdoor attack yet either. They have claimed the DDOS attack, and that is the theoretical reason behind the arrests in Spain, but nothing ties them to the backdoor ( + they openly denied doing it on the same channel they claimed the DDOS .)

  38. captain_cthulhu says:

    the 2 are quite analogous actually:

    – DDOS is nearly identical to a sit-in logistically

    – the protesters take it upon themselves to speak for all who they represent regardless if they want to be championed or not

    – media coverage becomes the vehicle of communication and eventually, change

    – protesters are arrested or worse

    – protesters are criminals until some law changes then they are heros

    remember, no one knows if CC#’s were stolen so you can’t say that was the goal of the attack. Not to say that they are being honest when they say they were protesting but civil rights protesters do the same thing. Animal rights activists and conservation rights activitsts have done worse things than anonymous… much much worse…

    i’m on PSN and I had to change my CC# and it was a huge pain. now, sony’s security is tighter so when someone who really does want my CC# tries to get in, they’ll have a tougher time because of anon. if sony comes out tomorrow to say they won’t sue people for hacking the hardware they own, I’d even say it was worth changing my CC#.

    but as it is now, I’m just annoyed. so I simultaneously agree and disagree with you – I checked the rules, that’s allowed! 🙂

  39. Erik says:

    Don’t you DARE claim to be standing up for my rights you pompous anonymous dickbags.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  40. Ashkihyena says:

    What an asshole.  People’s personal information and credit card numbers were stolen, and yet they’re selfish and butthurt, nice.

  41. captain_cthulhu says:

    um, what?

    you’re on a tech site and you don’t understand how linux is used in industry?

    i’ll assume that was a (bad) joke, kthxbai.

  42. Zerodash says:

    I may be taking your comment out of context (hopefully), but the goals of Anonymous are hardly analagous to Civil Rights.  

  43. Conejo says:

    I see both sides of the argument, but it amuses me to think of all those people who complained about stopped traffic due to civil rights marches.

    just saying.

    Here are we — and yonder yawns the universe.

Comments are closed.