“[Anonymous] risk government using their effort as evidence of why the government’s laws need to be introduced. They’re walking a very fine line between trying to argue a particular point, but having that turned back on them by skillful politicians,” [Dr Mark] Gregory [RMIT University senior lecturer at the School of Electrical and Computer Engineering] said. “Anonymous would be much more successful at achieving their aims if they identified insecure systems, like the AAPT’s systems, and either notified the company or made it public that their system was insecure, without going ahead and actually stealing the data,” he said.
There’s a good article quoting Martin Libicki of RAND Corp. and his talk at the CyberFutures symposium. Political leaders do not grasp the concepts of cyberspace and cyberwar at a level to confidently write policies, he said. “Cyberwar is a lot of magic. Try talking to high-level folks and figuring out what they actually understand about it. The best of them don’t have a clue and the worst of them think of things that have no basis in reality. So when something happens, it’s always a head-scratching event.