Canonical/Ubuntu have been under DDoS for more than 15h
Raytheon: providing products specifically for the DOD
Pizza Hut: selling their usual product to the DOD
https://canonical.com/blog/meet-the-canonical-federal-and-do...
I think it would be unusual to call them all military contractors (as you called Canonical in another comment).
- Iran was able to attack Ubuntu.com
- Iran sees it in its interests to stress the UK / US relationship (albeit in a small way)
Because of that and the general ingrained hostility of the permanent UK security state to Iran, they view us as a legitimate target albeit not a particularly important one because we’re just not that powerful anymore
Having said that, I really can't believe that either Trump or Starmer will give a shit about this, especially given the recent friction in that relationship.
It's what they do to students inside Iran.
They also attacked the likes of Vrbo, Expedia and eBay, but they get more press by targeting Mastodon, Bluesky, Ubuntu and the likes, so they go after those now. People are desperately trying to somehow tie those victims to some ideological nonsense, but it's just advertising.
It was also perplexing when Iran was shooting missiles at their allies, until you realize they aren't rational humans.
Would you be able to point to any rational humans?
Imagine that being your moral leadership. And 3000 is the official Iranian number. Some claim as high as 30,000. Those religious leaders are calling for more murder/death in todays Friday prayers. I don't know how anyone who calls for (or especially signs off on in a religious theocracy) murder can be called spiritual leaders or anyone could follow their 'teachings' .
Edit: Just highlighting the horrors/behaviors you are normalizing/waive away as 'shared by everyone' with your statement 'but what humans aren't like this'.
Ok but could you point to anyone or any people and tell me that they're rational? I didn't just ask for a possible condition of rationality and "maybe" feels like a very flimsy foundation for the acidity of what you're saying.
Before and during 1979. They'd attack the security forces, deny their involvement and then blame the government for the response, which then was supposedly an attack (e.g. Khomeini would send armed men into protests then put out propaganda that security forces "fired at protestors"). Or argue that the response to their attack was disproportionate. Or argue that his forces "don't have any choice but to" ... etc. This has been the way their proxy forces fight (hamas, houthi's, hezbollah). Control and punish people who detail what their side does (they massacred their own soldiers and their own allies, not just once. This is why people argue they're not leftists: they massacred the leftist factions that helped them unseat the Shah government)
They never explain their own actions. If anything, they put them forth as rational. But more likely you'll never hear about them. Such as killing 30000 people in January when their propaganda efforts totally failed. That's what happened: due to devaluation a number of traders in the "Tehran Bazaar" (a set of streets with lots of stands) very publicly, including to tourists, complained that the government made their lives impossible through economic mismanagement.
They locked off the streets and started going through, killing everybody they possibly could, "clearing" the market as they called it. Men, women, a few children who were sent to buy bread for their families. A few hundred dead. (yes, the way the Iranian government fights has more than a few parallels to what the Nazi's did)
This then set off the large scale protests everywhere in Iran.
Btw: the Iranian tactics are obviously working to some extent. Hence it's probably rational to do this because
None of the gulf countries allowed offensive US strikes to occur from their territory. Its all used to defend against attacks from Iran trying to kill Gulf country children.
Saudi Arabia did after Iran bombed their residential buildings and civilian airports.
UAE doesn't have any US bases but they got hit anyway.
The school that the US hit on the first day of the war had been a school, visibly and physically separated from the military base next to it: https://giftarticle.ft.com/giftarticle/actions/redeem/a43bac...
How did you get to that realization?
Ah yes, the classic “my enemies are ontologically evil” gambit.
Bombing Iran is like nuking an asteroid. Now, instead of one giant asteroid on a collision course with Earth, there are a half-dozen medium-sized radioactive asteroids on a collision course with Earth.
congrats on the glorious past or whatever, in the actual present iran is a failed state ran and supported by loons
I don't understand their thinking if this is the case. DDoSing widely used project is going to turn people against you, not generate support.
What does a DDoS accomplish if the contracts are signed and a team embedded?
Why take down security.ubuntu.com? Surely even cyber jihadis need security updates?
Iran's position is that any organization that is in any shape or form aligned with the US and West is a target.
And being an anti-war westerner won't help you. People are forgetting that the Iranian government detests Israel and the entirety of the West.
The core principals of the revolution which is the IRGC's entire ideological basis is reversing westoxification (Gharbzadegi) and returning to the norms of the Imam Husayn (Velayat-e Faghih).
Khomeinei preached that Shia and Sunni is an arbitrary divide and that the ummah needed to be unified and guided by clerics (who just so happened to be Shia) and to purge decadent Western culture back to an idealized norm of the Imam Husayn.
In action, it meant funding insurgencies and revolutionary corps out of a mix of idealism and raw power projection, and those organs used to protect the revolution ended up taking over the entire state and economy for their own economic benefit.
Imagine if the Red Guard and the Gang of Four weren't purged in China in 1976 and the footsoldiers of the Red Guard became actual leaders - that is what Iran is today.
And like China under Mao during the Cultural Revolution, it alienated all of it's neighbors.
Westerners who dislike Israel or even the US think Iran would ally with them, but the entire regime views Westerners irrespective of political leaning with disdain. An undercurrent of the Iranian revolution was also Iranian nationalism and the view that Iran is a civilization state, and that the west and westerners are culture-less, decadent, loose, and immoral and that the entirety of western culture needs to be burnt to the ground (Gharbzadegi).
I bet a fair number of websites would collapse under the curiosity load if it were published in major news outlets they they were down. When was the last time you went to nissan.com? But you'd probably go check if you heard it was down.
The companies that fund Trump's ballroom might like these targets.
I could see low budget attackers deciding that they were the most (not very much) bang for the (also not very much) buck that they could get...
Ubuntu.com doesn't fit that narrative though. I would have thought canonical would have the servers and skill to weather quite a large attack (on the other hand it did go down...)
$ snap refresh
error: unable to contact snap storeOkay... so? I do not understand the connection between Linux and the US/Israel. You'd think Iran would be very pro-Linux since Windows is a very obvious liability for them.
Is there any reason to believe this attack even has anything to do with Iran? They could simply want money and they just happen to also be pro-Iran.
Canonical is a British company and the employees are westerners. That makes them targets in the eyes of Iran.
People are forgetting that the Iranian government detests Israel and the entirety of the West. The core principal of the revolution is reversing westoxification (Gharbzadegi) and returning to the norms of the Imam Husayn (Velayat-e Faghih). That's the whole crux of the Islamic Revolution and why the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC) exists.
Open source and anti-war westerners are viewed opportunistically but with disdain.