Virgin Media website hit by Anonymous cyber attack

Several days ago, the UK's High Court ruled that a number of ISPs in the UK, including Virgin Media, must block access to The Pirate Bay website for its customers. The High Court agreed with UK record companies, who felt the site promoted online content piracy.

Virgin Media complied with the court's order a few days later, but added that the ISP " ... strongly believes that changing consumer behavior to tackle copyright infringement also needs compelling legal alternatives ... to give consumers access to great content at the right price."

Now it looks like Virgin Media's decision to block The Pirate Bay has lead to the company's website getting hit with a denial of service attack. The Register reports that the hacker group Anonymous has taken credit for the attack via a Twitter message, calling Virgin Media's decision "censorship".

Virgin Media has admitted in a statement that the virginmedia.com site was taken down "for a short period of time" on Tuesday. However, the company repeated its claim that while it complied with the High Court's ruling, it still feels that the issue of copyright infringement on the Internet needs to be dealt with via alternate methods.

The Register's report claims that another UK ISP, TalkTalk, has also been the subject of a cyber attack but there's no evidence to confirm this.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Yahoo to look more closely into CEO's resume

Next Story

New Dead Space game coming from EA

37 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

This is the first time you haven't got my support, Anonymous. The problem here is the high court and not VM.

So VM's web-site was taken down for a couple of hours on Tuesday?

Did anybody notice , or even care much ... no!

Nice job anonymous ...

Pikey said,
So VM's web-site was taken down for a couple of hours on Tuesday?

Did anybody notice , or even care much ... no!

Nice job anonymous ...

What if these hackers were young teenagers. Would that be justified?

Meanwhile, you all are missing the point: terrorists are allowed to run rampant. Someone needs to track down the members of Anonymous and put them down. Permanently, if necessary.

So are anonymous going to attack every United Kingdom internet service provider that eventually blocks the pirate bay. Seems a little radical, seen as they are abiding by a ruling from the hight court.

Trying to defend Virgin Media's customers rights by shutting down a site that provides several functions for them, the site of a company who also opposes the court order....

Wouldn't this be as illogical as breaking down prison walls because the system lets people out too early?

lt8480 said,
Trying to defend Virgin Media's customers rights by shutting down a site that provides several functions for them, the site of a company who also opposes the court order....

Wouldn't this be as illogical as breaking down prison walls because the system lets people out too early?

Exactly. They took down the PSN which I PAY for ... meaning Anonymous owe me money. They now want to f**k with the ISP I use, which offers me brilliant speeds and a great uptime... oh, they took away a website designed purely to facilitate the theft of data. Right. I don't give a crap. And neither does most of the country. These anonymice need to get over their ego's ... seriously.

Whilst I disagree with how the whole copyright / online media services industries are run, I cant help but feel that Anonymous would be far better off (and so would we) by not attacking companies in this way and choosing a more traditional, honourable fight - i.e. pickets, posters, blogs, demonstrations etc. Even elaborate stunts a la "Father's for Justice" would be noticed and get people talking.

WP7 said,
Whilst I disagree with how the whole copyright / online media services industries are run, I cant help but feel that Anonymous would be far better off (and so would we) by not attacking companies in this way and choosing a more traditional, honourable fight - i.e. pickets, posters, blogs, demonstrations etc. Even elaborate stunts a la "Father's for Justice" would be noticed and get people talking.

You would think that would be the right way to do things. But our government don't listen to protests. They have seemed to show this quite clearly, due to the fact that they have ignored all protests regarding budget cuts, especially when it came to education. The violent acts of the student riots, to me was a symptom of a government with its fingers in its ears.

Ad Man Gamer said,
The violent acts of the student riots, to me was a symptom of a government with its fingers in its ears.

No, it was a bunch of louts enjoying the violence. End of.

Kelxin said,
http://www.neowin.net/forum/to...law-first-among-eu-nations/

^^^^ Choice. I have to give the Netherlands a big thumbs up on this.

That's not choice.... similar to the UK that is a legal requirement - the only difference is its the opposite position to what's happening in the UK.

You could argue in the Netherlands the ISPs have even less choice, just its generally seen as a more positive position for customers.

I'm sure ISPs in the UK would welcome such a law as has been passed in the Netherlands.

lt8480 said,

I'm sure ISPs in the UK would welcome such a law as has been passed in the Netherlands.

Problem is, the UK, doesn't have to follow the majority of what the EU say.
For example, the UK uses the £ pound sterling still, while euroland uses the € euro dollar. But it goes futher then that, the UK does not have to abide by any EU policing or court matters. Infact, the UK hasn't even signed into the EU's fundamental rights charter.
The majority of it that does get passed in the UK when the EU high courts say so is because its easier for the UK to just accept it or they wanted to include it in law but it would not normally pass parliament anyway.

""OMG, they were court ordered, they have no choice!!""

I hate sheep. Everyone has a choice. Right now you sit there and you choose to breath, you choose to live, you choose to read this. If they truly opposed it, they wouldn't have done it. I guess that's the difference between the US and the UK, in the US they do whatever they want, in the UK they use excuses to try to cover the fact that they're sheep.

Kelxin said,
""OMG, they were court ordered, they have no choice!!""

I hate sheep. Everyone has a choice. Right now you sit there and you choose to breath, you choose to live, you choose to read this. If they truly opposed it, they wouldn't have done it. I guess that's the difference between the US and the UK, in the US they do whatever they want, in the UK they use excuses to try to cover the fact that they're sheep.


LOL what are you rambling about?

Kelxin said,
""OMG, they were court ordered, they have no choice!!""

I hate sheep. Everyone has a choice. Right now you sit there and you choose to breath, you choose to live, you choose to read this. If they truly opposed it, they wouldn't have done it. I guess that's the difference between the US and the UK, in the US they do whatever they want, in the UK they use excuses to try to cover the fact that they're sheep.


So you're willing to sacrifice the life of your entire company, which includes many employees who have families to feed, for the sake of a website that is very piracy-inclined? Court order are court orders...

Kelxin said,
""OMG, they were court ordered, they have no choice!!""

I hate sheep. Everyone has a choice. Right now you sit there and you choose to breath, you choose to live, you choose to read this. If they truly opposed it, they wouldn't have done it. I guess that's the difference between the US and the UK, in the US they do whatever they want, in the UK they use excuses to try to cover the fact that they're sheep.

Sorry to nit pick, but breathing is an automatic subconscious function - by default we do not take a conscious active decision to breathe.

Kelxin said,
""OMG, they were court ordered, they have no choice!!""

I hate sheep. Everyone has a choice. Right now you sit there and you choose to breath, you choose to live, you choose to read this. If they truly opposed it, they wouldn't have done it. I guess that's the difference between the US and the UK, in the US they do whatever they want, in the UK they use excuses to try to cover the fact that they're sheep.

I lol'd.

Your living in cuckoo land, but that is your choice.

I am off to tell all the prisoners that they have a choice, they are all free to leave prison if they want after all it is only a court order that is keeping them there.

Kelxin said,
""OMG, they were court ordered, they have no choice!!""

I hate sheep. Everyone has a choice. Right now you sit there and you choose to breath, you choose to live, you choose to read this. If they truly opposed it, they wouldn't have done it. I guess that's the difference between the US and the UK, in the US they do whatever they want, in the UK they use excuses to try to cover the fact that they're sheep.

Sorry, why does this matter? The Pirate Bay being shut down is of such unimportance. These mental freaks who clearly don't understand the law had zero reason to do this. They get off on it. I bet they sit there jacking off to their little hacks and DoS attacks. Seriously... they really do need to get out and get a life. There's more to life than worrying over every company who does them a disservice. Because I am a Virgin Media customer, and Anonymous don't stand up for me or my rights, they simply annoy me. And I 100% bet they annoy (even indirectly with these attacks) 90% of all internet users.

Grow up already. Please. For the love of all things sacred, one day these people will wake up at the age of 50 and think ... "Oh wow ... I just acted like a little baby my whole life".

Thats like me attacking UK army based because I disagreed with Iraq war.

It is not Virgins fault.

Annon = power with no brains.

stevember said,
Thats like me attacking UK army based because I disagreed with Iraq war.

It is not Virgins fault.

Annon = power with no brains.

Yeah I've put anon in the same category as sea Shepard.

jbrooksuk said,
Shame, although I bet they thought they might become a victim of it as soon as they announced it. I sure would.

I'm sure they knew they were going to be attacked, and I'm sure they have multiple attacks on their other home/services pages every day...

However, it does bring up an interesting topic.

How secure is it to block a website when the blocker is getting hacked?

Fast forward a few years when the majority of the internet has been blocked, all the porn sites and free speech sites, parts of facebook service and sites like twitter are being censored, if they are governed by one server blocking accesss on your ISP, how are you supposed to 'trust' any website you visit without in advanced knowing its a blocked site or not.
Right now, we have anti-virus or browser tools that'll warn you of potential risky websites, ones that are known to be hosting exploits that'll infect your PC. These safe guards will be come useless as one site, such as thepiratebay.se, will be totally different then what the rest of the world sees. A long shot, but when no one is auditing the blocker server who knows what hackers have access to and have done.

the better twin said,
Going after the company who supports you. Makes sense. Its not like VM were forced by a court order or anything
Other's were ordered and said no.. (ie BT).

Xerax said,
Other's were ordered and said no.. (ie BT).
They said they would seek legal advice first before they agree to it, they didn't say no..

Xerax said,
Other's were ordered and said no.. (ie BT).

No they didnt.
BT, requested "a few more weeks" to consider their position on blocking the site.
They will likely be forced to implement similiar measures shortly.

stevember said,

BT never said no, just asked few weeks grace.

I'm sure they asked for that few week's grace to prepare a law suit against the block. Why else would they? And "no" and "need more weeks" are in the mean time, the same thing..

If you think 'no' and 'need more weeks' are the same things the next time your boss asks for something and you need a 'need extra time' try telling him 'No'.

Do it, it will be funny.

the better twin said,
Going after the company who supports you. Makes sense. Its not like VM were forced by a court order or anything

The speed with which VM implemented it compared with other ISP's is very telling.

simplezz said,

The speed with which VM implemented it compared with other ISP's is very telling.

They knew they'd lose. How is that telling? Other than the fact that soon every ISP will have to do it.