[samstave]

>"If this is a regular meeting it's possible that Anonymous has been listening in every week."

I find this to be one of the more beautifully hilarious things I have read in quite a while!

The idea that Anon has been slurping info from a regular conf call between two intelligence/LEO orgs is just downright amazing.

Imagine though if Anon had forgot to put themselves on mute at one point and were being addressed by others on the call:

"Whomever is working from home with the dog in the background, please mute. Thanks. Anyway - as I was saying, these Occupy Protesters need to go down...."

It would also be great if, at the end of these calls, when everyone is saying "thanks" and "bye" is Anon also said "thanks" and "bye" as they hung up :)

[fleitz]

I have a feeling that they havent been tapping the call for weeks because if they had they'd probably be smart enough to shut up about it.

[roc]

Or, perhaps the information being gathered from these calls wasn't too useful and embarrassing these agencies was judged more useful?

If they've gotten onto this phone call, one would imagine they can likely replicate this feat with regards to more detail-level meetings at one or more intelligence offices that were on the call.

And by exposing this call, they increase the level of doubt that any one agency IT team has that it was their network/phone system that was compromised. It's the ideal call to publicize.

[InclinedPlane]

The only reason anonymous's security operations aren't more frightening is due to their culture and goals. They just want quick wins and publicity (for themselves and for the material they unearth). However, their capabilities are top notch (limited mostly by their hesitance to do anything that requires physical presence). If they were, say, employed by a hostile government or were motivated by greed or specific political goals they would be scary.

Anonymous's MO is to spew their exploits to the world and move on. This minimizes the damage of their intrusions. If they kept quiet and spent time soaking up information or leveraging breaches to gain more and more access the things they could do would be jaw dropping.

[Kadin]

There's no evidence, at least that I've seen, to suggest that "Anonymous" is anything approaching a cohesive organization. I think it's a mistake to refer to it that way.

Absent anything other than a common name, there's no reason to assume that the individuals compromising the "Anonymous" that recorded the FBI conference call has anything to do with the "Anonymous" who dumped Stratfor's credit card DB, or who leaked those Ron Paul emails.

[samstave]

Isn't the term we use for such actions "Grey hat"

[InclinedPlane]

That's probably closest, but I'm not sure any color of hat fits on anonymous' head.