What Is Hacktivism? Essay Sample

Hacktivism is the merger of hacking and activism ; political relations and engineering. More specifically. hacktivism is described as hacking for a political cause. In this context. the term hacker is used in mention to its original significance. As defined in the New Hacker’s Dictionary. a hacker is “a individual who enjoys researching the inside informations of programmable systems and how to stretch their capabilities” and one who is capable of “creatively get the better ofing or besieging limitations” . ( 1 ) Activism is defined as “a policy of taking direct and hawkish action to accomplish a political or societal goal” . ( 2 ) Therefore. a clinical definition of hacktivism is: Hacktivism: a policy of choping. phreaking or making engineering to accomplish a political or societal end. ( 3 ) However. both choping and activism. and therefore hacktivism. are laden words ripe for a assortment of reading. Therefore it is preferred non to clinically specify hacktivism but instead to depict the spirit of hacktivism. Hacktivism is root. It is the usage of one’s collective or single inventiveness to besiege restrictions. to chop cagey solutions to complex jobs utilizing computing machine and Internet engineering. Hacktivism is a continually germinating and unfastened procedure ; its tactics and methodological analysis are non inactive. In this sense no 1 owns hacktivism – it has no prophesier. no Gospel and no canonised literature.

Hacktivism is a rhizomic. open-source phenomenon. In the Beginning… Since hacktivism is a recombinant enterprise comprised of two divergent communities ( hackers and militants ) it is necessary to understand their several backgrounds in order to analyse this historic amalgamation and to analyze its challenges and future capablenesss. “Hacker” was originally a term that encapsulated an individual’s deep apprehension of computing machine systems and webs and the ability to contrive. modify. and polish such systems. It is a recombinant attitude that promotes job resolution and originative inherent aptitude for it does non restrict one’s options to the possible. Choping thrives in an environment in which information is freely accessible.

We will write a custom essay sample on
What Is Hacktivism? Essay Sample
or any similar topic only for you
Order now

The hacker ethic formulated by Steven Levy in his 1984 book “Hackers: Heros of the Computer Revolution” outlines the hacker dogmas: 1. Entree to computing machines should be unlimited and entire. 2. All information should be free. 3. Mistrust authorization – promote decentalisation. 4. Hackers should be judged by their hacking non fake standards such as grades. age. race. or place. 5. You create art and beauty on a computing machine. 6. Computers can alter your life for the better. ( 4 ) The GNU/Linux operating system evolved from this hacker ethic. As fellow hackers from the MIT AI lab were lured into commercial ventures Richard Stallman became progressively concerned about the decay of the hacker community and the increasing control being exerted over proprietary codification. Stallman decided to make a free

operating system modeled after the proprietary UNIX system. ( 5 ) Linus Torvalds began development on a meat and released the initial beginning codification for his meat. named Linux. ( 6 ) Together the work of Stallman and Linus form the GNU/Linux operating system. This package is released under the General Public License ( GPL ) . which is known every bit “copyleft” as opposed to right of first publication. The GPL allows users to modify and copy the package every bit long as they make the beginning freely available to others. ( 7 ) There is now a vibrant planetary. unfastened beginning community that thrives based on the free flow. and sharing of information. Hackers abhor censoring. Censoring is frequently seen as a human rights misdemeanor. particularly when it is combined with a repressive. regulating government. In add-on. hackers mistrust restrictive statute law that encroaches on free entree to information and cherished electronic privateness. Thus a natural antipathy to repressive authoritiess and predatory. private establishments has developed.

In Phrack magazine. Dr. Crash explains that computing machine engineering is being misused non by hackers but by authoritiess and corporations: The fantastic device meant to enrich life has become a arm which dehumanizes people. To the authorities and big concerns. people are no more than disc infinite. and the authorities doesn’t usage computing machines to set up assistance for the hapless. but to command atomic decease arms. ( 8 ) This sentiment is non an stray harangue. There is decidedly a tendency within hacker civilization that non merely focuses on proficient facets of calculating but political facets every bit good. In the “Hacker’s Manifesto” the ment0r explains: We make usage of a service already bing without paying for what could be dirt-cheap if it wasn’t run by profiteering gourmands. and you call us felons. We explore… and you call us felons. We seek after knowledge… and you call us felons. We exist without tegument colour. without nationality. without spiritual bias… and you call us felons. You build atomic bombs. you pay wars. you murder. darnel. and lie to us and seek to do us believe it’s for our ain good. yet we’re the felons. ( 9 )

There is an hostility between government/corporate limitations and domination of computing machine engineering and hackers who want to guarantee free entree to information. to besiege censoring. and to forestall monopoly control of engineering. Militants recognized the benefits of incorporating activism and computer/Internet engineering comparatively rapidly. The new unfastened architecture engineering of the Internet played a complementary and good function that fit absolutely with bing. decentralized. activist webs. In fact. computerized activism was already taking topographic point before the birth of the WWWeb. Stephan Wray notes that the creative activity of PeaceNet. a text-based newsgroup service. in 1986 allowed “political militants to pass on with one another across international boundary lines with comparative easiness and velocity. ” ( 10 ) This has allowed militants with small or no proficient accomplishments to use the benefits of digital communications. The Internet allows for the convergence of meetings. arguments. and research in one convenient and fast medium that greatly enhances non merely activists’ organisational capablenesss but besides the ability of militants to respond to a invariably altering universe in a timely mode.

In order to educate the populace and promote causes and runs. militant organisations have utilized the Internet and established an accessible. updateable. synergistic. and international presence that antecedently would hold been hard if non about impossible to keep. Applied Hacktivism Hacktivism is the merger of the development of computing machine activism with the politicization of the hackers. The evolutionary advancement of both communities has put them in a place where they can congratulate each other because they face the same techno-political resistance: the inhibitory usage of Torahs and engineerings by private corporations and authoritiess to progressively supervise and command the Internet. The outgrowth of techno-politics has emboldened each community and provides a conduit for electronic activism. Oxblood Ruffin of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention explains: Hacktivism forges scruples with engineering and girds us against the disagreeable nature of struggle. It allows us to mount better statements. rally unobserved Alliess. and take on any dictatorship. ( 11 )

The realization of politicized hacking has taken a assortment of signifiers runing from electronic civil noncompliance to besieging restrictions through engineering development and execution. However. there is major expostulation to and controversy of the motive and methodological analysis of activities that are frequently described as hacktivism. As with the hacker/cracker dichotomy many distinguish between hacktivism and “cracktivism” . The former is used to depict politically motivated hacking that is constructive and the latter disruptive. Cracking is defined as “the act of interrupting into a computing machine system” ( 12 ) and when such Acts of the Apostless are carried out for an expressed political intent they are frequently described as hacktivism.

But hacktivism is unstable and its focal point and look has evolved over clip. To avoid “definition confusion” . it is better to analyse specific state of affairss contextually and analyze the ends. methods. consequences. Events frequently described as hacktivism have been classified as: snap ( including disfigurement and denial of service ) . practical sitins. and engineering development. Unauthorized entree. disfigurement and DoS comprise “cracktivism” and should be examined with peculiar examination since cases of unauthorised entree and web break are conspicuously featured in the current sensationalized media clime. Such onslaughts are frequently labeled by the media as “hacktivism” despite there being a clear deficiency of political significance and small if any originative. technological proficiency involved in the onslaught. Furthermore. they are labeled as such despite the fact that the culprits themselves. along with the hacktivist community. seldom describe such events as hacktivism. In 1998 there were several targeted events in which computing machine invasion and disfigurement was used to protest unfairness.

( hypertext transfer protocol: //thehacktivist. com/archive/news/1998/MexicanHac kers-Reuters-1998. pdf ) Kaotik Team defaced 45 Indonesian Web sites to include messages naming for full liberty for East Timor. ( hypertext transfer protocol: //thehacktivist. com/archive/news/1998/E-GuerrilasOttawaCitizen-1998. pdf )

Defacement. despite being the most normally cited hacktivist maneuver in the media. is non considered hacktivism merely because of some obscure message that. when taken as political. all of a sudden makes a defacement hacktivism alternatively of merely another disfigurement. Hacktivism must hold a degree of deliberately that the overpowering bulk of disfigurements don’t have. A disfigurement itself is non hacktivism. Kevin Poulsen distinguishes between hooliganism and hacktivism: Vandalism is malicious devastation or harm. non disingenuous and insurgent meddling. The cogent evidence for protest is in the quality of the work. the lucidity of the message. and the motivations behind it. ( 13 ) When random web sites are defaced – web sites that have no connexion to the supposed issue of protest – it is non hacktivism. Defacements began to drastically increase in 2000 dues to general slack security and the airing of feats for Microsoft IIS waiter. most notably the Unicode Directory Traversal Vulnerability which allowed disfigurements to be conducted through a web browser – every bit easy as you would see a URL ( 14 ) .

This resulted in a focal point on unpolitical high profile disfigurements go forthing disfigurement as a method to pull attending to a political cause and as a mechanism of protest overshadowed and spent. Although some politically motivated disfigurements do go on to take topographic point they are considered an mistiming by many hacktivists and neglect to impact political alteration or even draw attending to a political cause. Unlike the disfigurements of 1998. modern-day “political” disfigurements are frequently the consequence of ongoing feuds between disfigurement groups. Embedded within a nationalist discourse. the twits between opposing defacers are interpreted as politically motivated “cyberwars” and enflamed by sensationalist media describing. In a widely cited illustration that occurred in 2001. a “cyberwar” erupted after a U. S. spy plane was shot down in China.

However. as Attrition. org discovered. it was more a instance of “self-fulfilling prophecy” – defacers who had non shown any political motives all of a sudden became political merely after the media interpreted their disfigurements as political. Alternatively of being a “cyberwar” . Attrition. org describes the event as “the corporate dick-waving of a clump of script-kidiots fueled by alleged journalists bring forthing media ballyhoo – the former seeking to feed their self-importances and the latter to feed their hit counts. ” ( 15 ) It has been suggested that viruses and worms are used by hacktivists to advance political messages. The merely good documented event occurred in 1989 when a political worm known as WANK targeted the HEPnet and the NASA SPAN webs to protest the development of atomic arms ( 16 ) . There have been few politically motivated viruses and worms since WANK. The few which have been identified as political include:

Milw0rm broke into computing machine systems at India’s Bhabha Atomic Research Centre. Bombay ( BARC ) in a protest against atomic arms trials. ( hypertext transfer protocol: //www. wired. com/news/technology/0. 1282. 12717. 00. hypertext markup language ) LoU members Bronc Buster and Zyklon disabled firewalls in order to let China’s Internet users uncensored entree to the Internet. ( hypertext transfer protocol: //www. wired. com/news/print/0. 1294. 16545. 00. ht milliliter ) X-Ploit defaced the web sites of Mexico’s Finance Ministry and Health Ministry to protest the authorities of President Ernesto Zedillo and to demo solidarity with the Zapatista rebellion.

? Mawanella: A virus that appeared in 2001

depicting the firing down of two mosques and one hundred Muslim-owned stores in Mawanella. ( hypertext transfer protocol: //www. sophos. com/virusinfo/articles/mawanell a. hypertext markup language ) Injustice: A worm that appeared in 2001 protesting the violent death of 12 twelvemonth old Palestinian kid Mohammad Al-Durra.

( hypertext transfer protocol: //www. sophos. com/virusinfo/articles/injusti. hypertext markup language ) Vote-A: A 2001 worm that calls for a ballot on whether America should travel to war. ( hypertext transfer protocol: //www. sophos. com/virusinfo/analyses/w32v ote-a. hypertext markup language ) Yaha-E: A 2002 worm that attempts a denial of service onslaught on a Pakistani government’s web site. ( hypertext transfer protocol: //www. sophos. com/virusinfo/articles/yahae3. hypertext markup language )

Ame La Paz stated that non merely had the EDT failed to confer with with Mexican organisations they besides did non confer with with the Zapatistas. Furthermore. Ame La Paz suggested that such actions may take to increasing confrontation and the escalation of belligerencies in internet. There have been other such reviews of electronic civil noncompliance from within the militant community. ( 20 ) The etoy narrative of 1999/2000 is a tale starring the European art corporate etoy. com and Internet plaything giant eToys. com. etoy is a dynamic graphics that “uses the corporate construction to maximise cultural value” in order to research the jobs of globalisation. ( 21 ) After etoy turned down an offer by eToys to purchase the sphere name etoy. com. eToys sought and won a impermanent tribunal injunction denying etoy the usage of the sphere etoy. com despite the fact that etoy. com had been registered before the eToys Corporation had even existed.

The logical thinking was that etoy. com was bewilderingly similar to etoys. com Not content to discontinue. protagonists of etoy. most notably RTMark began a run. a toy war. designed non merely to decrease the value of eToys stock to make a case in point that “would coerce e-commerce companies in the hereafter to believe twice approximately censoring for fiscal net income. ” ( 22 ) A Virtual Sit-In was organized to cross the premier shopping yearss of Dec. 15-25 and promotion runs targeted eToys investing boards all of which had an impact on the stock monetary value of eToys. In fact the stock began to drop the twenty-four hours the protests began. eToys finally drop their claim and etoy regained control of the etoy. com sphere with eToys picking up the legal costs. ( 23 ) Another major ECD action. one which introduced the construct of synchronised electronic and street based protest. was initiated by the electrohippies collective to co-occur with the 1999 street presentations in Seattle. Washington against the meeting of the World Trade Organization.

They argue that by organizing street and Internet based protest the involvements of the populace are furthered. The web. they argue. is non separate from the street: Therefore. we must happen mechanisms for lobbying and protest in internet to complement those usually used in existent life. Without public force per unit area internet will hold no moral or normative controls to command the surpluss of politicians. groups or corporations who would seek to rule that public infinite. ( 24 ) The action was conducted “To supply a mechanism for ordinary people. who can non acquire to Seattle. to register a protest that may hold the impact tantamount to really being there in person” ( 25 ) by decelerating or barricading entree to the WTO’s waiters.

It is of import to observe that the anti-virus signifier Symantec current has a turning database of over 65000 viruses and worms of which few contain any content that could be interpreted as political. However. the self-seeking involvements of security houses have led them into overstating the being of political viruses and worms. For illustration. the text of the Yaha-E worm is merely several lines of misspelled twits directed at a rival disfigurement group – a message that is barely political. The fact is that viruses and worms are infrequently associated with political intents. The development and usage viruses or worms is non loosely accepted within the hacktivist community – in fact most oppose it. Electronic Civil Disobedience ( ECD ) is a legitimate signifier of non-violent. direct action utilized in order to convey force per unit area on establishments engaged in unethical or condemnable actions. Within the electronic environment. ECD aims to interrupt the operation of information and capital flows of carefully selected mark sites without doing serious harm.

Presently based on. but non limited to. the tactical usage of encirclement and trespass. ECD acts as a mechanism through which “the value system of the province ( to which information is of higher value than the person ) is inverted. puting information back in the service of people instead than utilizing it to profit establishments. ” ( 17 ) The realization of ECD in this respect has been an effort to obstruct electronic marks through mass engagement. Stefan Wray explains: In early 1998 a little group naming themselves the Electronic Disturbance Theater had been watching other people experimenting with early signifiers of practical sitins. The group so created package called FloodNet and on a figure of occasions has invited mass engagement in its practical sitins against the Mexican authorities. EDT members Carmin Karasic and Brett Stalbaum created FloodNet to direct a “symbolic gesture” against an opponent’s web site.

FloodNet is a Web-based Java applet that repeatedly sends browser reload bids. In theory. when adequate EDT participants are at the same time indicating the FloodNet URL toward an opposition site. a critical mass prevents farther entry. Actually. this has been seldom attained. Given this. possibly FloodNet’s power lies more in the fake menace. ( 18 ) It should be noted that a Mexican organisation. Ame La Paz. while supportive of the construct issued a statement critical of the EDT’s action: We besides think your Electronic Civil Disobedience on April is a brilliant. intelligent and well-planned proposal. but it is unneeded and unsafe. ( 19 )

Oxblood explains: Many online militants claim to be hacktivists. but their tactics are frequently at odds with what we consider hacktivism to be. From the cDc’s position. creative activity is good ; devastation is bad. Hackers should advance the free flow of information. and doing anything to interrupt. prevent. or idiot that flow is improper. For case. Center for Disease Control and Prevention does non see Web disfigurements or Denial of Service ( DoS ) attacks to be legitimate hacktivist actions. The former is nil more than high-tech hooliganism. and the latter. an assault on free address. ( 29 ) Alternatively. it is argued that the focal point of hacktivism should be shifted from electronic break to job solution. Oxblood Ruffin explains: Hacktivism is an open-source implosion. It takes the best of choping civilization. and the jussive moods of the quantum community. and fuses a solution. ( 30 ) Hacktivismo chooses to re-define hacktivism as “using engineering to progress human rights through electronic media. ” ( 31 ) Re-focusing on the initial hacker moral principle. hacktivists seek originative solutions that circumvent restrictions in codification.

If. as Lawrence Lessig suggests. “code is law” ( 32 ) so code itself is the primary location of battle. Despite being heralded as a democratising engineering by virtuousness of its decentralized. open-architecture design the Internet is progressively coming under force per unit area by establishments. authoritiess and corporations that seek to have and command it. The increasing incursion of Draconian cyberlaw – including anti- ( cyber ) terrorist act commissariats every bit good as rational belongings jurisprudence – combined with technological steps that restrict freedom of address and look online threaten the Internet both as a communications medium and as a agency of activism. Some hackers have been disputing limitations to free address and just usage rights in the tribunals. 2600 Magazine has been taken to tribunal several times over such issues. most notably the DeCSS instance. In Nov. 1999 Masters of Reverse Engineering ( MoRE ) released DeCSS. a plan that allowed users to do transcripts of copy-protected DVD’s. MoRE member Jon Johansen claimed they had released the codification so that users could play DVD’s on the Linux operating system. 2600 Magazine was sued by the MPAA for printing the DeCSS beginning codification. ( 33 )

Although 2600 decided non to appeal a opinion against them in the U. S. ( 34 ) Jon Johansen won his tribunal instance in Norway and has since released an unfastened beginning public-service corporation that dumps the contents of a Quicktime watercourse pulling attending to fair usage rights. ( 35 ) Increasingly. militants and hacktivists are being criminalized and labeled as terrorists. Users. militants. and hackers likewise face censoring and surveillance on the Internet. Therefore hacktivists have begun to develop engineerings aimed at authorising Internet users and militants with security and privateness enhancing tools. There are legion ongoing hacktivist undertakings to develop engineerings that would enable militants. citizens and civil society webs to procure themselves against. or work about. Internet censoring and surveillance. The range of these engineerings ranges from little. simple books and plans to extremely developed peer-to-peer web protocols. and stegonography tools.

The new collaborative hacktivist community Hackforge. cyberspace purposes to convey together hackers and militants in an unfastened beginning collaborative package development environment in The practical sit-in. or client-side DDOS. differs from serverside DDOS since “client-side distributed actions require the attempts of existent people. taking portion in their 1000s simultaneously” while the latter requires the snap of computing machines to utilize as living deads in an machine-controlled DDOS onslaught. Attrition. org’s Brian Martin explains server-side DDOS: Prior to establishing this signifier of DDoS inundation. the aggressor must first via media assorted hosts on different webs. The more webs and machines used as launch points. the more powerful the onslaught. Once each host had been broken into. they would put in a DDoS client plan on the machine that would sit ready to assail. Once the web of compromised waiters was configured with the new client plan. the aggressor could direct a speedy bid from the DDoS waiter package triping each machine to establish an onslaught. ( 26 )

Others within the hacker/hacktivist fierily oppose the maneuver of the practical sit-in proposing that there is no difference between a practical sit-in and a DDOS onslaught. In a response to the electrohippies. Oxblood Ruffin of cDc/Hacktivismo explains: Denial of Service. is Denial of Service. is Denial of Service. period. The lone difference between a plan like Stacheldraht a DDoS application written by The Mixter ] and the client side javascript plan written by the Electrohippies is the difference between blowing something up and being pecked to decease by a duck. ( 27 ) Hacktivism is non purely the importing of militant techniques into the digital kingdom. Rather it is the look of hacker accomplishments in the signifier of electronic direct action. It acknowledges that neither the tactics nor the aims of hacktivism are inactive. Rather. they must continually germinate in order to be effectual.

Therefore a differentiation is made between hackers engaged in activism and militants trying use the proficient facets of choping to mime and apologize traditional signifiers of activism. This sentiment is summed up by Oxblood Ruffin of cDc/Hacktivismo: Hacktivism is about utilizing more facile statements – whether of codification or words – to build a more perfect system. One does non go a hacktivist simply by infixing an “h” in forepart of the word militant or by looking backward to paradigms associated with industrial organisation. ( 28 ) Break ( whether by computing machine housebreakings. disfigurement or denial of service ) . in this respect. is non feasible option. In order to ease the continued development of hacktivist engineerings. Hovering between creative activity and confrontation hacktivism is returning to its hacker roots.

True to the hacker definition of “circumventing limitations” hacktivists have ever focused on engineering development. with a peculiar focal point on guaranting freedom of address on the Internet. although this facet has frequently been ignored by the media and faculty members. Hacktivism is non simple pranksterism. nor is it malicious or destructive. It is non synonymous with disfigurements and DoS onslaughts. Hacktivism is a signifier of electronic direct action in which originative and critical thought is fused with scheduling accomplishment and codification making a new mechanism to accomplish societal and political alteration. Hacktivists are committed to procuring the Internet as a platform of free address and look. This ensures that the Internet remains a medium for activism and an environment that facilitates the free flow of information.


29. hypertext transfer protocol: //hacktivismo. com/news/modules. php? name=Content & A ; pa=showpage & A ; pid= 10 30. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. cultdeadcow. com/cDc_files/cDc-0361. html 31. hypertext transfer protocol: //hacktivismo. com/news/modules. php? name=Content & A ; pa=showpage & A ; pid= 10 32.
hypertext transfer protocol: //code-is-law. org/ 33. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. theregister. co. uk/content/archive/23633. html 34. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. 2600. com/news/view/article/1233 35. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. theregister. co. uk/content/4/34141. hypertext markup language

What is Hacktivism? 1. 0 can be found at: hypertext transfer protocol: //www. thehacktivist. com/hacktivism1. php

Notes: 1. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. drudge. gr/jargon/html/H/hacker. html 2. hypertext transfer protocol: //dictionary. mention. com/search? q=activism 3. This definition appeared on the CULT OF THE DEAD COW’s now defunct website hypertext transfer protocol: //www. hacktivism. org which is archived here: hypertext transfer protocol: //web. archive. org/web/19981203083935/http: //www. hacktivism. org/ 4. hypertext transfer protocol: //mosaic. echonyc. com/~steven/hackers. html 5. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. wildebeest. org/gnu/thegnuproject. html 6. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. Li. org/linuxhistory. php 7. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. wildebeest. org/copyleft/gpl. html 8. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. phrack. org/phrack/6/P06-03 9. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. phrack. org/phrack/14/P14-03 10. hypertext transfer protocol: //thehacktivist. com/archive/edt/wwwhack. html 11. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. drudge. gr/jargon/html/C/cracking. html 12. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. securityfocus. com/bid/1806/info/ 13. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. techtv. com/cybercrime/print/0. 23102. 2000216. 00. html 14. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. abrasion. org/mirror/attrition/defacements-graphs. html 15. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. abrasion. org/security/commentary/cn-us-war. hypertext markup language 16. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. cert. org/advisories/CA-1989-04. hypertext markup language 17. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. critical-art. net/books/ecd/ecd2. pdf 18. hypertext transfer protocol: //thehacktivist. com/archive/edt/wwwhack. html 19. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. thing. net/~rdom/ecd/amelapaz. html 20. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. thing. net/~rdom/ecd/harrycontrib. html hypertext transfer protocol: //www. nettime. org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9808/msg00028. html 21. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. etoy. com 22. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. rtmark. com/etoymain. html 23. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. wired. com/news/politics/0. 1283. 33111. 00. html hypertext transfer protocol: //www. wired. com/news/politics/0. 1283. 32936. 00. html hypertext transfer protocol: //www. rtmark. com/etoy. html 24. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. gn. armored personnel carrier. org/pmhp/ehippies/files/op1. htm 25.
hypertext transfer protocol: //www. gn. armored personnel carrier. org/pmhp/ehippies/archive/wtoir. htm 26. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. abrasion. org/~jericho/works/security/dos. html 27. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. cultdeadcow. com/details. php3? listing_id=410 28. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. cultdeadcow. com/details. php3? listing_id=410


Hi there, would you like to get such a paper? How about receiving a customized one? Check it out