Stephen Howell

Professor Springer-Woods
ENG 111 S15 N24B
Boss 3 Essay 7 Apr. 2015

Protesting or Terrorism?
As the world evolves around us, so do our laws. In the recent years, there has been a push
to legalize DDoS or Distributed Denial of Service. Most people may be unaware of what a DDoS
is or what hacktivist are, but it is important to know what each are and why hacktivists are
fighting to legalize what is currently considered to be a crime.
For those who dont know what a DDoS is, it is a technique that hackers use to either
shutdown a server or to slow it down immensely. Hacktivists are a sort of internet freedom
fighters who believes in freedom of speech and freedom of information. These people may see
themselves as good people, but their activities can be seen by some as acts of terrorism. DDoS is
a frequent technique used by hackers, and is a powerful tool they use to voice their opinions.
In January, 2013, the internationally recognized hacker group Anonymous petitioned the
White House to legalize DDoS as a legal form of protest.
With the advance in internet technology, comes new grounds for protesting.
Distributed denial-of-service (DDoS), is not any form of hacking in any way. It is
the equivalent of repeatedly hitting the refresh button on a webpage. It is, in that
way, no different than any "occupy" protest. Instead of a group of people standing

outside a building to occupy the area, they are having their computer occupy a
website to slow (or deny) service of that particular website for a short time. (K,
D.)
They also requested that anyone who had been previously charged with committing a DDoS to
be release from jail and to have their records expunged. This would mean the release of several
Anonymous members that are serving jail time for their federal offenses. The petition only
reached 6,048 signatures before the deadline. This still left the petition short 18,952 signatures to
be recognized by the Obama Administration, whether they would do anything about it or not.
Nonetheless, this was still a strong statement that was made at the time and had the backing of a
lot of anonymous members.
One website made the comparison between a DDoS and a sit-in. They referred to it
as the modern equivalent of a sit-in. (Masnik, Mike.) When comparing the two, we can see
similarities and differences. In the 1960s, there was a movement of sit-ins. At the time, it was
illegal. People sat in restaurants and refused to buy anything to protest segregation. With a
DDoS, you are using your computer to take up space. But here, you can make the argument that
only one person is needed to perform a DDoS while an actual protest takes multiple people. A
single person bringing down a website is not a protest, but more as a display of anger. Also,
when DDoSing a website, there is more than just money at stake for the company. You affect
peoples lives with these attacks. On a Sunday morning in August, 2012, half of the Chinese
internet was brought down from a DDoS attack. (Cox, Ryan.) Civilization is becoming more
and more reliant on technology to go about our day to day activities. This is where we see the
thin line between protest and terrorism. Just because you dont like the way a country is run
doesnt mean you have the right to shut it down.

The Dutch opposition party D66 has recently stated that there should be regulations set in
place for DDoS attacks so that they are regulated in the same manner that street protest are. If
there were ground rules set in place for a DDoS attack, it could definitely see legalization in the
coming future. Under the proposals, hacktivists would need to give prior warning of their action
to allow companies to take whatever defensive measures they choose. (Infosecurity Magazine.)
If the website was given warning of the attack and time to prepare for it, there is no feasible
reason why DDoSing cant be legalized. Ground rules need to be set in place as well as a need
for more than one person to participate in the DDoS. There also needs to be a consideration for
who is being DDoS and the people that will be affected by it. Schools, hospitals, and
transportation services as well as other important services should not have to be subjected to
these attacks. Their day to day operations are a crucial part of society and would cause far more
harm than any good.
The only problem with DDoS right now is the fact that it is illegal. The Computer Fraud
and Abuse Act (CFAA) is what defines a DDoS as illegal. One website even gave a counter
argument against DDoS stating that it is not the equivalent of a sit-in. Free speech is silenced,
inimitability of occupying space, and DDoS attacks lack a form of individual presence in
cyberspace. (Kostadinov, Dimitar.) These are all very true statements that pokes holes in many
hacktivists arguments for the legalization of DDoS and the comparison of a sit-in. Free speech is
denied when DDoSing someone as the sever shutdown and no one can speak up or speak out.
This also prevent access to legitimate users trying to make use of the website. Also, you cant be
certain that someone isnt using more than one pc to bolster the number of participants in the
protest.

In conclusion, the only arguments against DDoS attacks would be of course the law as
well as the fact that a virtual sit-in does have its differences from its non-virtual counterpart.
Most people believe that DDoS can be legalized as long as it is regulated like any other form of
protest. Ground rules need to be set in place to prevent too much harm. It is only a matter of time
before we see the legalization of DDoS. But remembering what was stated earlier, there is a thin
line between protesting and terrorism when DDoS is involved.

Bibliography
Cox, Ryan. "5 Notorious DDoS Attacks in 2013: Big Problem for The Internet of
Things." Siliconangle. N.p., 26 Aug. 2013. Web. 28 Apr. 2015.

K, D. "Make, Distributed Denial-of-service (DDoS), a Legal Form of Protesting." We the People.

N.p., 7 Jan. 2013. Web. 13 Apr. 2015.

Kostadinov, Dimitar. "Legality of DDoS: Criminal Deed vs. Act of Civil

Disobedience." Infosecinstitute. Infosecinstitute, 12 Dec. 2013. Web. 29 Apr. 2015.

"Legalize DDoS, Says Dutch Opposition Party." Infosecurity Magazine. Infosecurity, 25 June
2012. Web. 13 Apr. 2015.

Masnik, Mike. "Anonymous Launches White House Petition Saying DDoS Should Be
Recognized As A Valid Form Of Protest." Techdirt. Floor64., 10 Jan. 2013. Web. 13 Apr.
2015.