Our website uses cookies

Cookies enable us to provide the best experience possible and help us understand how visitors use our website. By browsing Infosecurity Magazine, you agree to our use of cookies.

Okay, I understand Learn more

Anonymous 2 won’t happen, says Commander X

Anonymous 2 is the name given to proposals both within and from outside of the Anonymous collective, designed to ‘fix’ what some perceive to be broken. The concern is that the antics of distinct hacking groups and individuals (such as TeaMp0isoN and UGNazi and Reckz0r – who falsely claimed to have hacked MasterCard and Visa) who claim affiliation with Anonymous but have their own agendas will turn public opinion completely against the collective. Critics believe that Anonymous needs to win the hearts and minds of the public in order to achieve its stated aim of ‘freeing’ the internet.

Some go further to suggest that Anonymous needs to organize itself along military lines, with a chain of command that can control political activism and eliminate simple criminality. This view is that the two great exploits leading to the Stratfor and Syrian emails being released via WikiLeaks should be the goal of Anonymous. However, if anyone can claim the honorary title of ‘supreme commander’ within Anonymous, it is Commander X – and he says this can never, should never, and will never happen.

He talks about the solutions being aired. “One I heard was a sort of High Council of Anonymous. Another was better centralization of IRC servers. Yet another was a sort of code of conduct and ethics that would be created by consensus (good luck with that last one...)” he adds. His point is that the strength of Anonymous is because of the warts, not despite them.

“The bottom line,” he goes on, “is that these dubious improvements in Anonymous simply are not necessary. We are more powerful and effective than ever, and getting more so by the day. Like all good super-heroes we do have our dark and creepy side,” he concedes. “But that sinister and intimidating aspect of Anonymous isn't a liability, quite the opposite - it is our great strength.”

His primary concern is that the Anonymous 2 proposals, “however intuitively correct these ideas may sound... would destroy Anonymous.” It would fracture the group. He fears the current anarchic element of Anonymous would break away from an organized element. The weakness in his argument, however, is that such a fracture will still happen if the proponents of Anonymous 2 decide to break away from the anarchic element.

What’s Hot on Infosecurity Magazine?