Feeds

Second US man admits DDoS attack on Scientology

Not so Anonymous after all

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

A Nebraska man has admitted he participated in a mass attack last year that briefly brought the Church of Scientology's website to its knees.

In a plea agreement signed Friday, Brian Thomas Mettenbrink, 20, said he downloaded custom software from a message board controlled by the anti-Scientology group known as Anonymous with the intent of inflicting damage to the COS, or Church of Scientology.

"Defendant used that software to, without authorization, access the COS websites at such a high rate that it impaired the integrity and availability of the COS websites and the computer system where they were hosted," the agreement stated.

Mettenbrink was scheduled to stand trial next month on charges that in late January of 2008, he took part in attacks that left websites associated with the COS intermittently unavailable. A group calling itself Anonymous took credit for the crippling denial-of-service attacks and said it was part of an ongoing war it had declared against the highly secretive group.

He is scheduled to formally enter his guilty plea in court next week, according to a release issued by the US Attorney's office in Los Angeles.

Mettenbrink will become the second individual to plead guilty in the attacks. In October 2008, Dmitriy Guzner, then an 18-year-old from Verona, New Jersey, admitted he also helped carry out the attacks. In November, he was sentenced to more than a year in federal prison.

Anonymous launched the campaign against the COS after the organization demanded websites pull a video of Tom Cruise that was shot at an church awards event. Tactics used in the campaign included nuisance phone calls to COS premises, denial-of-service attacks, and monthly protests outside COS facilities. Members of the loosely-affiliated group are known for wearing Guy Fawkes-style masks during protests.

The plea agreement said Mettenbrink and prosecutors agreed that 12 months of incarceration was an appropriate sentence, but the judge will have the final say. ®

Internet Security Threat Report 2014

More from The Register

next story
FYI: OS X Yosemite's Spotlight tells Apple EVERYTHING you're looking for
It's on by default – didn't you read the small print?
Russian hackers exploit 'Sandworm' bug 'to spy on NATO, EU PCs'
Fix imminent from Microsoft for Vista, Server 2008, other stuff
Edward who? GCHQ boss dodges Snowden topic during last speech
UK spies would rather 'walk' than do 'mass surveillance'
Microsoft pulls another dodgy patch
Redmond makes a hash of hashing add-on
NOT OK GOOGLE: Android images can conceal code
It's been fixed, but hordes won't have applied the upgrade
Apple grapple: Congress kills FBI's Cupertino crypto kybosh plan
Encryption would lead us all into a 'dark place', claim G-Men
DEATH by PowerPoint: Microsoft warns of 0-day attack hidden in slides
Might put out patch in update, might chuck it out sooner
'LulzSec leader Aush0k' found to be naughty boy not worthy of jail
15 months home detention leaves egg on feds' faces as they grab for more power
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Why and how to choose the right cloud vendor
The benefits of cloud-based storage in your processes. Eliminate onsite, disk-based backup and archiving in favor of cloud-based data protection.
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.