Anonymous is not at all pleased with the speech Australia’s Attorney-General Nicola Roxon gave earlier this week, and is considering another round of action to make its point that data retention is an unacceptable erosion of personal liberty.
But the nature of those actions may not be the DDOS attacks or leaking for which the organisation has become famous, as an Anon who conversed with The Reg* in a private IRC channel said Anons have written submissions to the Inquiry into potential reforms of National Security Legislation . “An interdependent group was formed” the Anon said, “because it was felt more constructive to respond with a submission.”
Some Anons agitated to use DDOS and other tactics, and may have done so in the name of Anonymous but without a consensus among Anons that it was the best course of action to do so.
Anonymous has also, our source said, noted that other activist organisations like GetUp! may offer it a chance to publicise the issues it cares about. Our source said Anonymous believes it is responsible for tens of thousands of people joining, contributing to or signing up for GetUp! Campaigns.
GetUp!, for its part, told The Reg it would never work with known hackers.
Anoymous is now, our source said, considering how to react to Roxon’s speech, with the anon we chatted to telling us “another message might have to be sent”. The nature of that message is yet to be determined, but it’s intention will be to point out, as the Anon we chatted with wrote:
“The Australian government continues to push for new legislation defined by bad policy pushed by corporate international interests. Not only does this legislation completely remove the presumption of innocence which all persons are afforded, it goes against one of the essential dimensions of human rights and privacy law: freedom from surveillance and arbitrary intrusions into a person's life.” The group also hopes to protest the TrapWire and INDECT systems, details of which have been posted here. ®
*The individual with whom we chatted is, The Register can state with some confidence, an Anonymous operative. The individual, or others using the same name online, has been present in an IRC channel Anonymous has promoted, through the Op_Australia Twitter account, as an ‘official’ Anonymous outlet. On the several occasions The Register has chatted with the individual, the tone of the chat has been consistent. The individual or persons using the name also participates in Anonymous multimedia activities, in which familiar Anonymous messages are mentioned. We therefore conclude the individual is at the very least greatly familiar with Anonymous’ activities, aims and councils, and are therefore content to report his views on the group and its activities.