This is very intriguing, because we just don’t know who is operating as Anonymous. It could be a legitimate group of do-gooders that want to attack the cartels, or it could be a competing cartel that wants to target the Zetas, and use the Anonymous handle to do this.
But as STRATFOR pointed out, the cartels have their own computer experts, and they will certainly hunt down any threats and make an example of them. They have already hunted down and killed reporters and bloggers, and this new threat from Anonymous will be dealt with in the same brutal and bloody way.
The other thing to remember is that the cartels have a ton of money to hire cyber lance teams. Or basically a team that can hunt people online, and kill or capture them with their armed component. I would not underestimate their ability to assemble such a team, and I am sure they already have such folks working as we speak. This will certainly be a true test of Anonymous’ OPSEC/PERSEC abilities.
This also brings up another concept that I have gone over in the past, and that is fifth generation warfare. A third possibility here, is that either an enemy of the Zetas or of Anonymous, or even of both, has put this whole thing together in order to create a ‘war’ between the two. That third party can constantly and anonymously feed both parties to make that war very bloody and costly, and that third party would benefit–and yet stay completely out of the mess. The question is, who is the third party? (Although I tend to agree with Lind that it is still too early to really define what fifth generation warfare is) But this theory would fit into some of the definitions that are floating around out there. Who knows?
Either way, we will see how this works out. I do know that with this kind of cyber warfare, there will be no limitations or niceties. Both sides will be trying to do massive harm, both online, and in reality. Although I would put my money on the Zetas for putting the lance in ‘cyber lance’. I hope Anonymous is ready to play, because this is when the game get’s very serious. –Matt
Edit: 11-08-2011, So Jester (a certain hacker that is well known for taking on Wikileaks and other folks in prime hacker fashion) has just posted a very interesting deal about this story. He just identified an individual named Barrett Brown who was behind all of this, and that the kidnapping was fabricated–all because he wanted to generate some buzz about Anonymous. The reason? To sell a book. lol Yep. Here is the quote from Jester:
Message to all. The truth of the matter is this, with Brown, it’s not about fighting Mexican injustice, it’s not about a ‘kidnapped’ Anon, it’s not even about him having a problem with the prices he has to pay to get high, it’s not about anything except him generating interest in his upcoming book.
Absolutely. This would also appear to be the first time that the porus nature of the Fawkes Mask has really been compromised. There have been tons of rank amateur attempts at grabbing the Anonymous helm but it's always been fairly transparent, and sloppy enough to be so dubious even mainstream media could form coherent doubts…but this was downright slick and very plausible.
If nothing else, indicates a major internal split, especially with Sabu insisting he/she is charging ahead regardless of dangers, even to fellow members.
Comment by humpjones — Wednesday, November 2, 2011 @ 11:23 AM
Interesting. Yeah, stuff like this would be a 'gut check' for Anonymous members. Especially when a cartel makes an example of one of them.
The other angle I forgot to get into was the amount of death Anon could create, just by posting names. Will members of Anon sit well with that, when once again the cartels act on that information, and chop the heads off these individuals?
So yeah, this kind of thing will definitely split up this group between those willing to cause that much death or accept that much risk, and those who want nothing to do with it all.
Comment by Feral Jundi — Monday, November 7, 2011 @ 9:24 AM