MY NAME IS STEFAN WRAY. I'M A CO-FOUNDER OF THE ELECTRONIC
DISTURBANCE THEATER, ALONG WITH RICARDO DOMINGUEZ, CARMIN
KARASIC AND BRETT STALBAUM. WHEN WE FORMED, I LIVED IN NEW YORK AND WAS IN A DOCTORAL COMMUNICATION PROGRAM AT NEW YORK
UNIVERSITY. SINCE JANUARY, I'VE LIVED IN AUSTIN, TEXAS, WHERE I WORK AS AN EDITOR.

RICARDO DOMINGUEZ LIVES IN NEW YORK, WORKS AT A MULTIMEDIA COMPANY
IN MANHATTAN AND IS THE SENIOR EDITOR AT THING.NET.

I'M HONORED TO JOIN THIS CONFERENCE. I WOULD NEVER HAVE IMAGINED
BACK IN 1995, WHEN I FIRST PICKED UP A COPY OF WINN
SCHWARTAU'S BOOK ON INFORMATION WARFARE, THAT FOUR YEARS LATER
I WOULD BE AT A CONFERENCE LIKE THIS. TO BE FRANK, I MUST ADMIT
I COME HERE WITH SOME TREPIDATION. I REALIZE THAT THE MAJORITY
OF SPEAKERS HERE REPRESENT DOT MIL, DOT GOV, AND DOT COM
ENTITITES. CLEARLY THE DOT NET, DOT ORG, AND DOT EDU
SPOKESPEOPLE ARE A MINORITY. IN SOME WAYS IT FEELS LIKE WE ARE
WALKING INTO THE LION'S DEN OR CROSSING THE LINE AND ENTERING
ENEMY TERRITORY. AFTERALL, IT WAS AN ACTION IN THE FALL OF 1998
IN WHICH WE TARGETTED DOT MIL, DOT GOV, AND DOT COM WEB SITES
SPOTLIGHT. A SPOTLIGHT THAT ATTRACTED THE ATTENTION OF WINN
SCHWARTAU AT THE END OF LAST YEAR. IT IS BY HIS INVITATION THAT
WE ARE HERE.

IN THE PAST, I'VE ADDRESSED AUDIENCES MOSTLY FRIENDLY TO MY POINT
OF VIEW. AS THE TITLE OF THIS CONFERENCE IS "OPTIONS,
DIRECTIONS, AND SOLUTIONS FOR DEFENDING PRIVATE AND GOVERNMENT
INFRASTRUCTURE" AND AS THE KEY SPEAKERS, REPRESENTING THE
MILITARY, GOVERNMENT, AND CORPORATIONS, HAVE TALKED ABOUT "
COMPUTER NETWORK DEFENSE" AND "INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION," I FIND MYSELF WONDERING WHAT I SHOULD SAY AND WHAT YOU WANT TO HEAR.

I CAN'T EXPECT TO CONVINCE YOU THAT WHAT THE ELECTRONIC DISTURBANCE
THEATER HAS BEEN DOING IS A GOOD THING. SOME OF YOU MAY BE
INTRIGUED BY OUR ACTIONS. BUT MY GUESS IS THAT THE VAST
MAJORITY OF YOU SEE IT AS YOUR JOB TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO STOP
THE SORT OF ACTIVITY WE'VE BEEN IN ENGAGED IN FROM SPREADING.
WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, IT IS IN OUR INTEREST TO SEE THAT WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS MERELY A PREMONITION, A SIGNAL OF MORE TO COME. IN
THIS WAY, THEN, IT APPEARS THAT THERE MAY BE INHERENT
CONTRADICTIONS BETWEEN YOUR AGENDAS AND OUR AGENDA.

BEFORE WE GO ANY FURTHER IN ATTRIBUTING MEANING TO ACTIONS THAT
HAVE ONLY BEEN DISCUSSED IN VAGUE GENERALITIES, LET ME DISCUSS
THE FACTS AS I SEE THEM.

I FIRST MET RICARDO DOMINGUEZ ON THE INTERNET. I WAS IN AUSTIN,
TEXAS AND HE WAS IN NEW YORK CITY. IN JANUARY OF 1997 HE
PARTICIPATED IN A DIGITAL ART PROJECT BASED OUT OF BOSTON
CALLED THE ZAPATISTA PORT ACTION. THE PERFORMANCE INVOLVED THE
USE OF CUSEEME AND REAL AUDIO. IT INCLUDED A SERIES OF
INTERVIEWS. RICARDO INTERVIEWED ME, VIRTUALLY, AS A RESULT OF
SEEING SOME OF MY WRITINGS ABOUT THE DRUG WAR AND THE
MILITARIZATION OF MEXICO.

AT THAT POINT, IN EARLY 1997, IT HAD BEEN THREE YEARS SINCE JANUARY
FIRST, NINETEEN NINTY FOUR, WHEN THE ZAPATISTAS, OR THE
EJERCITO ZAPATISTA DE LIBERACION NACIONAL, THE E-Z-L-N, FIRST
EMERGED FROM THE CHIAPAS JUNGLES TO ENTER THE GLOBAL STAGE.
FROM THE VERY BEGINNING BOTH RICARDO AND I PARTICIPATED IN U.S.
SOLIDARITY GROUPS AND SUPPORT ACTIONS. WE HAVE BEEN PART OF AN INTERCONTINENTAL NETWORK CENTERED ON THE ZAPATISTAS.

IN AUSTIN, I WAS PART OF A UNIVERSITY BASED GROUP CALLED ACCION
ZAPATISTA. ONE THING THAT DISTINGUISHED ACCION ZAPATISTA FROM
OTHER ZAPATISTA SOLIDARITY GROUPS BOTH DOMESTICALLY AND
THROUGHOUT THE WORLD WAS THE DEGREE TO WHICH WE FOCUSED OUR
EFFORTS ON THE INTERNET, BOTH IN PRACTICAL AND THEORETICAL
TERMS. SOMEONE IN OUR GROUP WAS HARRY CLEAVER, AUTHOR OF "THE
ZAPATISTAS AND THE ELECTRONIC FABRIC OF STRUGGLE" AND A FIGURE
REFERENCED REPEATEDLY IN THE RECENT WORK OF RONFELDT AND
ARQUILLA - PARTICULARLY IN THEIR BOOK ON "SOCIAL NETWAR."

BY MY INVOLVEMENT IN ACCION ZAPATISTA, AND MY OWN THESIS RESEARCH,
I DISCOVERED THE LITERATURE ON INFORMATION WARFARE. I
EXTENSIVELY EXAMINED THE WRITINGS OF INFOWAR THEORISTS AT RAND,
THE NATIONAL DEFENSE UNIVERSITY, THE AIR FORCE, AND OTHERS FROM
THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

WHEN I MOVED TO NEW YORK IN AUGUST OF 1997, I WAS WELL EXPERIENCED
IN U.S. ZAPATISTA SOLIDARITY EFFORTS, BOTH VIRTUAL AND THE
PHYSICAL WORLD, AND WELL VERSED IN INFOWAR THEORY. SO TOO WAS
RICARDO, WHO I FINALLY MET FACE-TO-FACE IN SEPTEMBER.

THE NUCLEUS FOR THE ELECTRONIC DISTURBANCE THEATER WAS AN INFORMAL
SEMINAR ON THE SUBJECT OF INTERFACE ECOLOGY IN THE FALL OF
1998. BOTH RICARDO AND I PARTICIPATED. ONE OF THE WORKS
DISCUSSED WAS THE CRITICAL ART ENSEMBLE'S "THE ELECTRONIC
DISTURBANCE." THESE DISCUSSIONS WERE THE BACKDROP TO LAUNCHING
THE ELECTRONIC DISTURBANCE THEATER SOME MONTHS LATER.

WE WERE SPURRED ON BY THE ACTEAL MASSACRE IN CHIAPAS THAT LEFT 45
DEAD AT THE END OF DECEMBER, 1997, AND THE FACT THAT
INTERNATIONAL OBSERVERS WERE BEING EXPELLED FROM MEXICO. AT
THIS TIME WE BEGAN SERIOUS TALK ABOUT HOW TO EXPAND THE USE OF
THE INTERNET VIS A VIS THE ZAPATISTA STRUGGLE. UNTIL THEN, PRO-
ZAPATISTA INTERNET USE HAD BEEN CONFINED TO ENHANCING
INTERCONTINENTAL COMMUNICATION. MOST ZAPATISTA SOLIDARITY
GROUPS VIEWED THE INTERNATIONAL CIRCULATION OF STRUGGLE AS THE
BEST USE OF THIS COMMUNICATION MEDIUM. BUT WE STARTED THINKING
MORE ABOUT HOW THE INTERNET COULD BE A SITE FOR PROTEST.

AT THE BEGINNING OF 1998 THERE WAS AN INTERNATIONAL OUTPOURING OF
SUPPORT FOR THE ZAPATISTAS AND RAGE AGAINST THE MEXICAN
GOVERNMENT. NEWS OF THE ACTEAL MASSACRE FIRST REACHED PEOPLE BY
THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA, BUT WAS LATER ONLY CARRIED BY THE
NUMEROUS ZAPATISTA FOCUSED LISTSERVS AND WEB SITES THAT HAD
SPROUTED UP IN THE PREVIOUS YEARS. BESIDE STREET PROTESTS
OUTSIDE MEXICAN CONSULATES AND EMBASSIES, THERE WAS HEIGHTENED
ACTIVITY ONLINE. THE BULK OF THIS CONSISTED OF PEOPLE SENDING
EMAIL PROTEST MESSAGES TO MEXICAN GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS, IN
PARTICULAR TO PRESIDENT ERNESTO ZEDILLO. BUT WE ALSO OBSERVED
AN ITALIAN GROUP CALLING FOR A "VIRTUAL SIT-IN" ON MEXICAN
FINANCIAL INSTITUTION'S WEB SITES, A MEXICAN GROUP HACKING INTO
MEXICAN GOVERNMENT WEB SITES TO LEAVE WORDS OF SUPPORT FOR THE
ZAPATISTAS, AND, IN A MORE HYPERBOLIC MOMENT, AN ANONYMOUS
SOURCE CIRCULATING A COMMUNIQUE DECLARING "NETWAR" AGAINST THE
MEXICAN GOVERNMENT.

BOTH THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL UNDERPINNINGS OF THE ELECTRONIC
DISTURBANCE THEATER BEGAN TO EMERGE IN JANUARY AND FEBRUARY OF
1998. SINCE THEN OUR GROUP HAS DEVELOPED AND ADVANCED BOTH THE
DISCOURSE ABOUT AND THE REALITY OF ELECTRONIC CIVIL
DISOBEDIENCE, WHAT WE NOW CALL HACKTIVISM. AT THAT TIME,
RICARDO AND I WROTE TEXT AND PROPAGATED IDEAS, WHILE BRETT
STAULBAUM AND CARMIN KARASIC WROTE CODE AND FURTHERED THE
PRACTICE. THIS TWO-PRONGED APPROACH OF BEING TEXT WRITERS
- PRODUCING THEORETICAL WORKS - AND OF BEING CODE WRITERS -
PRODUCING PRAGMATIC EXAMPLES - IS, TO A DEGREE, A BASIS FOR OUR
SUCCESS.

IN MARCH, ON THE EVE OF GOING PUBLIC WITH OUR FIRST ACTION, RICARDO
AND I DELIVERED A PRESENTATION TO A CONFERENCE IN NEW YORK. IN
OUR TALKS - MY "ON ELECTRONIC CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE" AND RICARDO'S
"DIGITAL ZAPATISMO" - WE LAID THE BASIS FOR LATER
THEORY AND ACTION. I ASSERTED THAT "AS ACTIVISTS BECOME
COMPUTERIZED, AND COMPUTER HACKERS BECOME POLITICIZED, WE ARE
GOING TO SEE AN INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF CYBER-ACTIVISTS WHO
ENGAGE IN WHAT WILL BECOME MORE WIDELY KNOWN AS ELECTRONIC
CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE." SIX MONTHS LATER WIRED MAGAZINE USED THE
TERM "HACKTIVISM" TO DESCRIBE THIS PHENOMENA.

IN THAT SAME PIECE I CONCLUDED THAT "IN THE NEAR FUTURE, WE CAN
EXPECT TO SEE HYBRID CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE ACTIONS THAT WILL
INVOLVE PEOPLE IN ELECTRONIC CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE FROM BEHIND
THEIR COMPUTER SCREENS WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY PEOPLE ARE ENGAGING IN
MORE TRADITIONAL FORMS OF CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE OUT IN THE
STREETS." THIS YEAR ON JUNE 18, THE RECLAIM THE STREETS
ACTIONS, STARTED BY GROUPS IN ENGLAND AND JOINED BY PEOPLE ALL
OVER THE WORLD, EXPERIENCED A CYBER-PROTEST DIMENSION.

N "DIGITAL ZAPATISMO" RICARDO DISCUSSED THE BETA ACTIONS OF THE
FIRST ZAPATISTA VIRTUAL SIT-INS, HOW THEY "BROUGHT THE
POSSIBILITIES OF DIRECT ELECTRONIC ACTIONS TO THE FOREFRONT OF
THE ZAPATISTA NETWORKS," AND THAT IN ORDER TO "MOVE BEYOND
THESE BETA ACTIONS" WE NEEDED "TO MAP THE GENERAL
CONDITION OF INFOWAR AT THIS SHIFTING POINT IN TIME." HE
CONCLUDED BY SAYING "WE MUST BEGIN TO INVENT OTHER METHODS OF
ELECTRONIC CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE," LIKE ENHANCING "ALTERNATIVE
NETWORKS WITH MORE ACCESS AND BANDWIDTH," ENGAGING IN DEEP
PROGRAMMING WITH A FOCUS ON SPIDERS, BOTS, AND OTHER AGENTS,
AND ESTABLISHING OFFSHORE DOMAINS. HE ENDED THIS PIECE WITH
THIS: "THE ZAPATISTA NETWORKS, IN THE SPIRIT OF CHIAPAS, ARE
DEVELOPING METHODS OF ELECTRONIC DISTURBANCE AS SITES OF
INVENTION AND POLITICAL ACTION FOR PEACE. AT THIS POINT IN TIME
IT IS DIFFICULT TO KNOW HOW MUCH OF A DISTURBANCE THESE ACTS OF
ELECTRONIC CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE SPECIFICALLY MAKE. WHAT WE DO
KNOW IS THAT NEOLIBERAL POWER IS EXTREMELY CONCERNED BY THESE ACTS."

OUR PLANS WERE MADE PUBLIC ON MARCH 31, 1998, JUST DAYS AFTER THE
NEW YORK CONFERENCE. A PRESS RELEASE FROM A NEW YORK CITY
SOLIDARITY GROUP - THE NEW YORK ZAPATISTAS - ANNOUNCED AN
INTERNATIONAL DEMONSTRATION FOR APRIL 10, THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE
DEATH OF EMILIANO ZAPATA, AND STATED THAT "IN ADDITION TO
SUPPORTING DEMONSTRATIONS IN THE STREETS, THE NEW YORK
ZAPATISTAS ARE URGING PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD TO SEND A
POWERFUL MESSAGE TO THE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT BY COMMITTING
ELECTRONIC CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE."

A WEEK LATER, ON APRIL 7, RICARDO DISTRIBUTED THE FIRST NOTICE
ABOUT, "FLOODNET: TACTICAL VERSION 1.0." THE MESSAGE SAID,
"JUST KEEP YOUR BROWSER TUNED TO THE FLOODNET: TACTICAL VERSION
1.0 U-R-L, WHERE A JAVA APPLET WILL HIT RELOAD FOR YOU, AND
WHERE VARIOUS FEATURES OF EITHER A CLICK ON THE APPLET, OR THE
'PERSONAL MESSAGE' FORM, WILL LET YOU SEND SECRET MESSAGES TO
THE ERROR LOGS OF THE SERVERS IN QUESTION." TWO DAYS LATER, ON
APRIL 9, A MESSAGE WITH THE SUBJECT LINE, "GO---URL---SPREAD,"
WAS SENT TO HUNDREDS OF EMAIL ADDRESSES: "IN SOLIDARITY WITH THE ZAPATISTAS WE CALL ON ALL NETSURFERS TO USE THE AUTOMATED
FEATURES OF FLOODNET…ON THE 10TH OF APRIL FOR 24 HOURS."

THAT MESSAGE INFORMED PEOPLE OF THE U-R-L WHERE THEY SHOULD DIRECT
THEIR BROWSERS TO JOIN THE FLOODNET ACTION. THE FIRST
TARGET WAS THE WEB SITE OF MEXICAN PRESIDENT ERNESTO ZEDILLO.
THAT SAME DAY, ANOTHER MESSAGE WAS SENT OUT TO ARTIST
AND ACTIVIST LISTS ANNOUNCING THE "1998 TACTICAL THEATER
SCHEDULE" THAT LISTED DATES FOR FUTURE FLOODNET ACTIONS FOR THE
REST OF THE YEAR. WITH ALL THIS, THE ELECTRONIC DISTURBANCE
THEATER WAS BORN.

IT IS INTERESTING TO NOTE THE "RESULTS" AND THE INITIAL REACTION TO
OUR FIRST DRESS REHEARSAL. ON APRIL 10 WE HAD EIGHT THOUSAND
ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY ONE SEPARATE HITS ON THE ZAPATISTA
FLOODNET BROWSER AIMED AT ZEDILLO'S WEB SITE. WE ARE FAIRLY
CERTAIN WE DID NOT SHUT DOWN THIS WEB SITE, ALTHOUGH WE DID
RECEIVE A MESSAGE THAT READ, "I THINK THE MEX SERVER JUST
CRASHED." WE THINK THIS MESSAGE REFLECTS THE FACT THERE WERE
SPORADIC MOMENTS WHEN ACCESS TO THE SITE WAS SLOWED DOWN
OR EVEN BLOCKED.

IN THIS REGARD, I AGREE WITH DAVID RONFELDT'S ASSESSMENT OF
FLOODNET IN A RECENT ACTICLE IN THE GLOBE AND MAIL, IN WHICH HE
SAID THAT FLOODNET WAS MORE OF A NUISANCE THAN A SERIOUS THREAT
TO "IMPORTANT SYSTEMS." FROM THAT COMMENT, I TAKE IT
THAT RONFELDT UNDERSTANDS ONE OF THE BASIC PREMISES OF OUR
GROUP, WHICH IS THAT WE ARE MORE INTERESTED IN FOCUSING
ATTENTION ON THE ZAPATISTAS' STRUGGLE IN MEXICO, THAN WE ARE IN
DOING SERIOUS SYSTEM DAMAGE. HOWEVER, MORE NOTEWORTHY THAN
THE ACTUAL IMPACT ON THE MEXICAN SERVER, WAS THE IMPACT WE
BEGAN TO MAKE IN ARTIST AND ACTIVIST CIRCLES AND IN THE MEDIA
SPHERE.

FROM APRIL TO SEPTEMBER OF 1998, WE CONTINUED WITH OUR
INTERVENTIONS. BY THIS I MEAN WE ORGANIZED MORE FLOODNET ACTIONS,
WE ENGAGED IN DIALOGUE AND DEBATE WITH PEOPLE IN THE
ART, ACTIVIST, AND HACKER COMMUNITIES, BOTH ONLINE AND OFF,
AND WE PRODUCED MORE THEORETICAL WRITINGS, PUSHING THE
DISCOURSE OF ECD AND HACKTIVISM FURTHER ALONG.

ON MAY 10, MOTHER'S DAY, WE DIRECTED FLOODNET AGAINST THE WEB SITE
OF THE CLINTON WHITE HOUSE. ON JUNE 10, THE ANNIVERSAY OF THE
SECOND DECLARATION OF LA REALIDAD, WE FOCUSED AGAIN ON A
MEXICAN GOVERNMENT SITE, THE PAGE FOR GOBERNACION - MEXICO'S
INTERIOR MINISTRY. ON JUNE 28, THE ANNIVERSARY OF A MASSACRE OF
17 BY STATE POLICE IN GUERRERO, MEXICO, WE AGAIN TARGETED
GOBERNACION. ON JULY 3, WE USED FLOODNET AGAINST THE SITE FOR
MEXICO'S EMBASSY IN THE U-K. ON AUGUST 7, WE CELEBRATED VEMILIANO ZAPATA'S BIRTHDAY WITH ANOTHER FLOODNET ACTION AGAINST
PRESIDENT ZEDILLO'S WEB SITE.

DURING THIS PERIOD OUR GREATEST ADMIRERS WERE AMONG DIGITAL
ARTISTS, WHILE OUR HARSHEST CRITICS WERE WITHIN THE LEFT. MOST
DIGITAL ARTISTS WERE ABLE TO SEE IMMEDIATELY, ALMOST
INTUITIVELY, THE VALUE OF OUR WORK. BUT LEFTISTS RAISED AGE-OLD
QUESTIONS ABOUT EFFECTIVENESS AND RESPONSIBILITY, WHILE
HACKERS THOUGHT THAT WE WERE TOO SOFT. THROUGH QUITE A NUMBER OF
EMAIL LISTSERVS, WE PROVOKED DISCUSSION AMONG A RANGE OF
PEOPLE. CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHAT WE DID AND SAID RIPPLED OUT
WAY BEYOND OUR SMALL GROUP OF FOUR.

WE REMAINED PROFILIC WRITERS AND SPEAKERS DURING THIS PERIOD. I
PRESENTED PAPERS AT SEVERAL CONFERENCES THAT SUMMER. THE WRITINGS
OF DELEUZE AND GUATTARI, ESPECIALLY THEIR JOINT WORK "A
THOUSAND PLATEAUS," NOTABLY THE SECTIONS ON RHIZOMATICS AND
NOMADOLOGY, HAVE BEEN A COMMON INTEREST AND INFLUENCE UPON
OUR
IDEAS. I WROTE: "RHIZOMES, NOMADS, AND RESISTANT
INTERNET USE"; "PARIS SALON OR BOSTON TEA PARTY: RECASTING
ELECTRONIC DEMOCRACY"; AND "BOTTOM UP INFORMATION WARFARE."
RICARDO WROTE "THE ANTE-CHAMBER OF REVOLUTION: A PRELUDE TO A
THEORY OF RESISTANCE AND MAPS." MOST NOTABLY, THOUGH, AT LEAST
FOR PURPOSES OF WHAT IS TO FOLLOW NEXT IN THIS PRESENTATION, IS
RICARDO'S "SWARM" PROPOSAL, CRAFTED IN THE LATE SPRING OF LAST YEAR.

THE "SWARM" PROPOSAL FIRST CIRCULATED AMONG THE ELECTRONIC

DISTURBANCE THEATER IN THE MIDDLE OF MAY. IT WAS A THEORETICAL DESCRIPTION OF OUR PROJECT FOR THE ARS ELECTRONICA
FESTIVAL HELD AT THE BEGINNING OF SEPTEMBER, IN LINZ, AUSTRIA.
LAST YEAR, INFOWAR WAS THE FOCUS.

THE PROPOSAL IDENTIFIED THE FACT THAT INTERNATIONAL ZAPATISTA
NETWORKS HAVE BEEN ABLE TO "SPREAD INFORMATION ABOUT THE
SITUATION IN CHIAPAS ON A MASS SCALE." IN DOING
SO, THEY HAVE HELPED TO RECONFIGURE STANDARD NOTIONS OF INFORMATION
WARFARE DOCTRINE, FOR EXAMPLE, "BY CONCENTRATING ON REPLACING
THE INFOWAR DOCTRINE OF CYBERTERRORISM BY PUSHING
ELECTRONIC CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE TO THE FOREFRONT OF MASS MEDIA DISCUSSION."

THE DOCUMENT CALLED FOR "ALL INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS TO PARTICIPATE
IN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF NEW METHODS OF
ELECTRONIC CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE" AND SPECIFICALLY SUGGESTED THAT
"THIS INVESTIGATION SHOULD FOCUS ON NON-VIOLENT ELECTRONIC
PULSE SYSTEMS THAT FUNCTION BEYOND THE TACTICAL FLOODNETS."

T THE END OF AUGUST LAST YEAR, THE ELECTRONIC DISTURBANCE THEATER
ISSUED ITS FIRST BULLETIN ABOUT THE UPCOMING SWARM
ACTION ON SEPTEMBER 9, ALONG WITH A CALL FOR A FALL CAMPAIGN OF
HYBRID ACTIONS COMBINING THE REAL AND VIRTUAL. IN THIS
BULLETIN
WE ANNOUNCED INTENT TO DEMONSTRATE OUR CAPACITY
FOR SIMULTANEOUS GLOBAL ELECTRONIC ACTIONS AND TO EMPHASIZE THE
MULTIPLE NATURE OF OUR OPPONENTS. WITH THAT, WE SAID WE WOULD
DIRECT FLOODNET AGAINST THREE WEB SITES: THAT OF MEXICAN
PRESIDENT ERNESTO ZEDILLO, THAT OF THE FRANKFURT STOCK
EXCHANGE, AND THAT OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.

ZEDILLO'S WEB SITE WAS TARGETTED FOR OBVIOUS REASONS AS HE IS THE
HEAD OF GOVERNMENT IN MEXICO. THE FRANKFURT STOCK EXCHANGE WAS
CHOSEN BECAUSE, FOR ONE, WE WANTED A EUROPEAN SITE, AND FOR
TWO, WE WANTED A FINANCIAL SITE THAT SYMBOLIZED A SIGNIFICANT
FORCE IN THE GLOBAL ECONOMY. FINALLY, THE PENTAGON WAS SELECTED
BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THE U.S. MILITARY AND INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY
HAS BEEN DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN SUPPORTING THE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT
AND MILITARY IN ITS CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE ZAPATISTAS.

AT A MINIMUM, THE U.S. MILITARY HAS HELPED TO BUILD-UP MEXICO'S
ARMED FORCES IN THIS DECADE. WHILE THIS MILITARY ASSISTANCE, IN
THE FORM OF TRAINING, EQUIPMENT, AND ADVISORS, HAS BEEN
DELIVERED PRIMARILY UNDER THE GUISE OF THE WAR ON DRUGS, IT IS
NO SECRET THAT THIS RENEWED CAPABILITY ON THE PART OF MEXICAN
ARMED FORCES CAN AND HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST GROUPS LIKE THE
ZAPATISTAS. BUT ABOVE AND BEYOND THIS LEVEL OF MILITARY
SUPPORT, WE ALSO BELIEVE THAT THE U.S. HAS HELPED THE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT WITH SURVEILLANCE, ESPECIALLY IN THE AREA OF OVERFLIGHT
PLANE AND SATELLITE SURVEILLANCE AND MAPPING OF SOUTHERN
MEXICO. THERE IS LITTLE DOUBT THAT U.S.-MEXICO INTEGRATION
EXISTS ON THREE LEVELS: THE ECONOMIC, THE POLITICAL, AND THE
MILITARY.

ON SEPTEMBER 4, I ARRIVED IN LINZ, AUSTRIA. THE NEXT DAY I CRAFTED
A NEW ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT THE SEPTEMBER 9 SWARM ACTION
AND LATER THAT NIGHT DISTRIBUTED IT MASSIVELY THROUGH A RANGE
OF EMAIL LISTSERVS. RICARDO ARRIVED ON SEPTEMBER 6 AFTER A FIVE
DAY TRAIN JOURNEY FROM MANCHESTER, ENGLAND, WHERE HE HAD
PRESENTED A WORKSHOP ON ELECTRONIC CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE AT
"REVOLTING," AN EVENT THAT WAS PART OF ISEA 98 - ISEA BEING THE
INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON ELECTRONIC ART. BY SEPTEMBER 7, THE
ELECTRONIC DISTURBANCE THEATER'S "SWARM" INSTALLATION AT ARS
ELECTRONIC WAS COMPLETE. BY INSTALLATION, I MEAN THAT WE HAD
BASICALLY ESTABLISHED OUR COMMAND CENTER WITHIN THE OPEN X
EXHIBIT. WE EACH HAD A COMPUTER WITH A RELATIVELY FAST LINK TO
THE NET.

OVER THE NEXT DAYS WE CONTINUED TO HAGGLE WITH SOME WITHIN THE
EUROPEAN HACKER COMMUNITY, PARTICULARLY THE DUTCH HACKERS, OVER
THE EFFICACY OF FLOODNET AND RELATED TOOLS. THIS DISCUSSION IS
PART OF AN ONGOING DEBATE THAT CONTINUES TO THIS DAY. THE
HACKERS, STILL UNABLE TO COMPLETELY GRASP THE SYMBOLIC AND
SIMULATED NATURE OF OUR ENDEAVORS, WERE LOOKING FOR MORE HARD
CORE RESULTS. THEY BOASTED THEY COULD EASILY TAKE DOWN A SERVER
AND THAT WE WERE WASTING OUR TIME. A FEW WENT SO FAR AS TO CALL
FLOODNET "PURE EVIL" AND AN EXAMPLE OF "UNACCEPTABLE"
NETWORK ABUSE.

SEPTEMBER 9 STARTED ON A VERY CURIOUS NOTE THAT WAS FOLLOWED BY
INTRIGUE THROUGH THE REST OF THE DAY. AT AROUND 7:30 AM, RICARDO
RECEIVED AN UNUSUAL PHONE CALL IN HIS HOTEL ROOM. HE LATER TOLD
US THAT WHEN HE PICKED UP THE PHONE, A VOICE IN VERY CLEAR
MEXICAN SPANISH SAID: "WE KNOW WHO YOU ARE. WE KNOW WHERE YOU
ARE AT. WE KNOW WHERE YOUR FAMILY IS. WE ARE WATCHING YOU. DO
NOT GO DOWNSTAIRS. DO NOT MAKE YOUR PRESENTATION, BECAUSE YOU
KNOW WHAT THE SITUATION IS. THIS IS NOT A GAME." ARS
ELECTRONICA ORGANIZERS WERE INFORMED OF THE INCIDENT, AS WERE
THE LINZ POLICE, BUT NOTHING MORE HAPPENED.

THE SWARM ACTION COMMENCED AT 11:00 AM. FOR AWHILE EVERYTHING WAS
GOING ACCORDING TO PLAN. A THREE-PRONGED FLOODNET AGAINST THE
WEB SITES OF ZEDILLO, THE FRANKFURT STOCKEXCHANGE, AND THE
PENTAGON WAS UNDERWAY. IN ADDITION TO OUR SWARM ONLINE, WE WERE
INUNDATED WITH A SWARM OF MEDIA ATTENTION. I THINK WHAT DREW
MEDIA INTEREST TOWARD US WAS THE FACT THAT WE WERE PROBABLY THE
ONLY GROUP THERE EXPERIMENTING WITH A FORM OF INFOWAR. THE
SYMPOSIUM ATTRACTED NUMEROUS LUMINARIES WHO PONTIFICATED AT
LENGTH ABOUT THEORETICAL INFOWAR, BUT WE WERE ACTUALLY TRYING
SOMETHING. (AS AN ASIDE, I DON'T MEAN TO DENIGRATE
THEORETICAL WORK ON INFOWAR, ESPECIALLY THAT WHICH TAKES THE
SUBJECT AND RECASTS IT FROM THE POINT-OF-VIEW OF ART AND
ACTIVISM.)

AT SOME POINT BETWEEN 11:00 AM AND 1:00 PM - WHEN RICARDO AND I
DELIVERED A PRESENTATION ABOUT ECD AND FLOODNET - SOMETHING ODD
BEGAN TO HAPPEN TO COMPUTERS WITH BROWSERS POINTED TOWARD THE
FLOODNET U-R-L. I LOOKED AT MY DESKTOP AND NOTICED A STRING OF
JAVA ICONS - LITTLE COFFEE CUPS - STREAMING ACROSS THE
BOTTOM OF THE SCREEN. AND THEN FLOODNET JUST FROZE. I SAW THIS
HAPPEN ON SEVERAL MACHINES. AT FIRST I THOUGHT PERHAPS IT
WAS AN INTERNAL HACK, THAT MAYBE ONE OF THE FRIENDLY
NEIGHBORHOOD HACKERS HAD DECIDED TO PLAY A TRICK ON US. BUT
THEN WE STARTED TO RECEIVE EMAIL NOTIFICATION FROM OTHERS
EXPERIENCING SIMILAR DIFFICULTY. ONE PERSON LATER WROTE,
"COUNTERMEASURES EFFECTIVELY KEPT ME FROM PARTICIPATING THIS
MORNING." ANOTHER SAID, "WHAT'S UP? SEEMS WE STILL GET THE JAVA
ATTACK. ANY NEWS?" AT THIS STAGE WE HAD NO CLUE WHAT HAD
HAPPENED.

IN THE LATE AFTERNOON, THERE WAS ANOTHER ODD TWIST TO THE DAY THAT
WOULDN'T BE REALLY UNDERSTOOD UNTIL MANY DAYS AFTER.
I RECEIVED AN EMAIL MESSAGE FROM STEPHEN TIHOR, THE SENIOR SYSTEM
MANAGER OF THE SYSTEM AND NETWORK SECURITY GROUP AT NEW YORK
UNIVERSITY, WHICH SAID, "MR. WRAY, WE HAVE RECEIVED A RECENT
COMPLAINT FROM SOMEONE WITHIN D-I-S-A OF THE D-O-D
REGARDING THE E-C-D WEB SITE YOU ARE MAINTAINING ON YOUR PAGE.
AS YOU KNOW, FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS A VITAL PART OF THE
ACADEMIC PROCESS AND IS ONE TO WHICH WE ARE DEDICATED JUST AS
WE ARE TO INSURE THAT NYU IS A GOOD NETWORK CITIZEN." TIHOR
ALERTED ME THAT THE UNIVERSITY WANTED TO DISCUSS MY WEB SITE AS
SOON AS POSSIBLE. I HAD BEEN USING MY N-Y-U WEB SITE AS A
SITE FOR THE ELECTRONIC DISTURBANCE THEATER.

THROUGHOUT THE DAY I ALERTED OTHERS ELSEWHERE AS TO WHAT WAS
HAPPENING, NOTABLY THAT SOME SORT OF COUNTERMEASURE HAD BEEN
IMPLEMENTED AND THAT THE D-O-D HAD CONTACTED NYU.
PARTICULARLY, WE NOTIFIED BRETT STALBAUM - WHO AS MENTIONED IS
ANOTHER IN OUR GROUP - SO THAT HE COULD INVESTIGATE THE
COUNTERMEASURE AND TRY TO AVERT IT. BY EVENING, BRETT TOLD US
THE COUNTERMEASURE HAD STOPPED. HE WROTE THAT, "SOMEONE HAD
AUTHORED AN APPLET CALLED 'HOSTILE APPLET'" WHICH COULD NOT BE
TURNED OFF. HE SAID THE HOSTILE APPLET WAS SIMILAR TO THE FLOODNET APPLET.

ALSO LATER THAT EVENING, NIALL MCKAY, A JOURNALIST FOR WIRED DOT
COM, SAID IN AN EMAIL MESSAGE, "I PRESUME THAT YOUR ATTACK WAS
UNSUCCESSFUL SINCE THE SITES SEEM TO BE UP AND RUNNING." WE
TOLD HIM ABOUT THE COUNTERMEASURE. THE NEXT MORNING MCKAY
INFORMED US HE HAD CONTACTED A PENTAGON SPOKESPERSON AND THAT
FROM THIS CONVERSATION CONCLUDED THAT THE COUNTERMEASURE, THE
HOSTILE APPLET, HAD ORIGINATED SOMEWHERE FROM WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.

AFTER ARRIVING BACK IN NEW YORK, I HAD TO MEET WITH VARIOUS NEW
YORK UNIVERSITY ADMINISTRATORS TO DISCUSS THE CONTENT OF MY WEB
SITE. THE END RESULT: I WAS TO REMOVE ANY STATEMENTS ADVOCATING
THE USE OF FLOODNET, BUT I COULD RETAIN THEORETICAL
PIECES AND HISTORIES. BY SEPTEMBER 21 RICARDO AND I MOVED THE E-
C-D SITE FROM MY HOMEPAGE TO THE SERVER AT THING.NET.

ON SEPTEMBER 24, I FINALLY RECEIVED AN ANSWER FROM N-Y-U COMPUTER
SECURITY WITH DETAILS ABOUT THEIR CONTACT WITH D-I-S-A. THEY
FORWARDED ME THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE FROM D-I-S-A'S AUTOMATED
SYSTEMS SECURITY INCIDENT SUPPORT TEAM, ALSO KNOWN AS ASSIST.
THE MESSAGE, SIGNED BY A BRIAN DUNPHY, READ: "THE U-R-L IN
QUESTION IS HTTP://WWW.NYU.EDU/PROJECTS/WRAY/ECD.HTML. IN
PARTICULAR, THE WEB SITE IS ADVOCATING FLOODING A NUMBER OF
PUBLIC WEB SERVERS INCLUDING HTTP://WWW.DEFENSELINK.MIL. THE
WEB SITE IN QUESTION IS THE COORDINATING SITE FOR THIS HOSTILE
ACTION. I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT NYU REMOVE THIS SITE.
ISSUES OF LIABILITY SHOULD BE SERIOUSLY CONSIDERED ON YOUR
PART. THANKS FOR YOUR COOPERATION." THIS MESSAGE WAS DELIVERED
TO NYU SECURITY ON SEPTEMBER 8, THE DAY BEFORE THE SWARM ACTION.

ACCORDING TO ITS WEB SITE, THE MISSION OF ASSIST - THE ORIGINATOR
OF THE ABOVE MESSAGE TO NYU SECURITY - IS "TO IDENTIFY,
ANALYZE, ACCESS AND RESOLVE ALL INFOSEC VULNERABILITIES AND
EXPLOITATIONS IN THE DEFENCE INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE IN SUPPORT
OF THE DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY'S (DISA) INFORMATION
ASSURANCE MISSION."

DUNPHY COPIED HIS MESSSAGE TO ANOTHER ASSIST EMAIL ADDRESS AND TO
AN ADDRESS AT NCIS.NAVY.MIL, THE IP ADDRESS FOR THE NAVAL
CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIVE SERVICE. NCIS'S WEB SITE DESCRIBES IT AS
"A WORLDWIDE ORGANIZATION RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDUCTING CRIMINAL
INVESTIGATIONS AND COUNTERINTELLIGENCE FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
THE NAVY AND FOR MANAGING NAVAL SECURITY PROGRAMS."

AT THIS POINT SEVERAL THINGS WERE CLEAR TO US. FIRST, D-O-D
COMPUTER SECURITY AND COUNTERINTELLIGENCE WAS AWARE OF THE
SEPTEMBER 9 SWARM ACTION WELL BEFORE IT OCCURRED. THIS WAS, OF
COURSE, NO SURPRISE GIVEN THAT WE WERE QUITE PUBLIC ABOUT OUR
ACTIVITIES. SECOND, ELEMENTS WITHIN THE D-O-D TRIED TO
INFLUENCE THE COURSE OF EVENTS PRIOR TO THE SEPTEMBER 9 SWARM
ACTION. AT A MINIMUM WE KNOW THEY CONTACTED N-Y-U COMPUTER
SECURITY ABOUT THE E-C-D WEB SITE, ENCOURAGING THAT SITE'S
REMOVAL. THIRD, WE HAD VERY GOOD REASON TO BELIEVE THAT A
COUNTERMEASURE AGAINST FLOODNET, A HOSTILE APPLET, ORIGINATED
SOMEWHERE WITHIN THE D-O-D. FOURTH, THE DEFENSE INFORMATION
SYSTEMS AGENCY WAS CENTRAL IN ALL OF THIS.

IN ADDITION, WE KNEW FROM CHECKING THING DOT NET'S SERVER LOGS THAT
IMMEDIATELY BEFORE, DURING, AND AFTER THE SEPTEMBER 9 SWARM
ACTION OTHER DOT MIL ENTITIES HAD BEEN SNOOPING AROUND. THESE
INCLUDED AUTOMATED SYSTEMS SECURITY INCIDENT SUPPORT TEAM
IN NORMANDY, THE ARMY'S COMPUTER EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM,
AIRFORCE HEADQUARTERS, THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, THE ARMY'S
LOGISTIC SUPPORT ACTIVITY, AND ANOTHER UNIDENTIFIABLE NAVY
ADDRESS - SPFWALL.SSP.NAVY.MIL

WHAT WE DID NOT KNOW THEN, OR WHAT WE HAD YET TO IDENTIFY, WAS THAT
THE PENTAGON'S ACTIONS MAY WELL HAVE BEEN AMONG THE FIRST
INSTANCES OF OFFENSIVE INFORMATION WARFARE DIRECTED AGAINST A
DOMESTIC U.S. TARGET AND THAT THIS HAD FAR REACHING
IMPLICATIONS WELL BEYOND WHAT WE HAD CONSIDERED.

ON SEPTEMBER 25, I SPOKE TO GEORGE SEFFERS, A JOURNALIST FOR
DEFENSE NEWS, WHO SAID HE HAD TALKED TO A SPOKESPERSON FOR THE
DEFENSE TECHNICAL INFORMATION CENTER, THE DESIGNER OF THE
DEFENSELINK WEB SITE. LIKE ASSIST, D-T-I-C IS A SUBDIVISION OF
D-I-S-A. ALTHOUGH SEFFERS SAID THE SPOKESPERSON WOULD NOT
EXPLAIN EXACTLY THE NATURE OF THE D-O-D ACTION AGAINST
FLOODNET, THERE WAS CONFIRMATION THAT SOME TYPE OF
COUNTERMEASURE HAD BEEN TAKEN.

SHORTLY THEREAFTER, SEFFER'S DEFENSE NEWS STORY APPEARED IN WHICH
HE QUOTED PENTAGON SPOKESWOMAN, SUSAN HANSEN, AS SAYING THE D-T-
I-C HAD LAUNCHED A COUNTERMEASURE, BUT WHO SAID "I CAN'T TELL
YOU WHAT THOSE COUNTERMEASURES WERE BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THIS
GROUP PLANS FUTURE ATTACKS, AND WE DON'T TIP OUR HAND."

SEFFERS WENT ON TO SAY, "AT ISSUE IS WHETHER, IN FIGHTING BACK
AGAINST THE HACKERS," REFERING TO US AS HACKERS - SOMETHING WE
CONTEST - "THE PENTAGON CROSSED THE LINE INTO SO-CALLED
OFFENSIVE INFORMATION WARFARE, AND PERHAPS VIOLATED U.S. LAWS
THAT PROHIBIT ANYONE FROM COVERTLY ACCESSING ANOTHER'S
COMPUTER." SEFFERS QUOTED ROBERT CLYDE OF AXENT TECHNOLOGIES,
AN INFORMATION SECURITY COMPANY, WHO SAID, "WHEN YOU ASK IF
THIS IS AN OFFENSIVE INFORMATION WARFARE WEAPON, THE ANSWER, TO
ME, WOULD DEFINITELY BE A 'YES.'"

SEFFER WAS NOT ALONE IN SUGGESTING THAT PERHAPS SOME SERIOUS ISSUES
WERE AT STAKE. IN DECEMBER, ADAM PENENBERG, A FORBES DOT
COM COLUMNIST, CALLED THE PENTAGON'S COUNTERMEASURE AGAINST
FLOODNET "THE FIRST ELECTRONIC ATTACK AGAINST A TARGET ON
AMERICAN SOIL." PENENBERG WROTE: "THIS NET-BASED COUNTERATTACK,
ALTHOUGH MINOR IN SCOPE, RAISES IMPORTANT NATIONAL SECURITY
ISSUES. SINCE THE AMERICAN MILITARY IS NOT SUPPOSED TO ACT
WITHIN THE NATION'S BORDERS UNLESS SPECIFICALLY DIRECTED, DOES
THE PENTAGON HAVE THE RIGHT TO COUNTER ANY OF THE HUNDREDS OF HACK ATTACKS IT RECEIVED EVERY DAY WITH CYBERATTACKS OF ITS OWN? IF
SO, WILL IT BE ALLOWED TO TARGET SITES IN THE U.S., AS WELL AS
ABROAD? WHAT LIMITATIONS SHOULD BE PLACED ON OUR MILITARY WHEN
IT COMES TO IDENTIFYING AND ACTING ON TARGETS IN CYBERSPACE?
WILL WE AS A NATION HAVE TO REDEFINE THE ROLE OF THE MILITARY
IN THE COMING DIGITAL YEARS?"

AND IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR, WINN SCHWARTAU WROTE AN ARTICLE CALLED
"CYBER-VIGILANTES HUNT DOWN HACKERS." IN AN ATTEMPT TO ADDRESS
THE MORE FAR-REACHING NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUES, SCHWARTAU
RAISED THE QUESTION: "WHEN YOU DETECT A BREAK-IN, SHOULD YOU
LAUNCH A COUNTERATTACK IN ORDER TO PROTECT YOUR NETWORK?" IT
SEEMS MOST OF THE PEOPLE INTERVIEWED SUPPORTED THE PRACTICE OF
COUNTERATTACKS, BUT JOESPH BROGHAMER OF THE U.S. NAVY'S OFFICE
OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER, WAS QUOTED AS SAYING,
"OFFENSIVE INFORMATION WARFARE IS NOT A GOOD THING. . . PERIOD.
YOU WANT TO BLOCK, NOT PUNISH." HE WENT ON TO SAY "THERE IS NO
TECHNICAL REASON TO REACT OFFENSIVELY TO A HACKER ATTACK."

FINALLY, ON MARCH 29 THIS YEAR, ANOTHER ARTICLE BY GEORGE SEFFERS
MADE REFERENCE TO THE D-O-D COUNTERMEASURE. THE DEFENSE
NEWS PIECE WAS AN INTERVIEW WITH MAJ. GEN. JOHN
CAMPBELL - OUR KEYNOTE SPEAKER FROM THIS MORNING. IN MAKING A
STATEMENT THAT HE THOUGHT THE PENTAGON COUNTERMEASURE WAS NOT
AN EXAMPLE OF OFFENSIVE INFORMATION WARFARE, CAMPBELL WAS EFFECTIVELY ADMITTING A COUNTERMEASURE HAD BEEN INITIATED. TO
ILLUSTRATE THIS, IT IS WORTH READING A PORTION OF THIS
INTERVIEW.

SEFFERS ASKED CAMPBELL: "WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE BETWEEN
OFFENSIVE AND DEFENSIVE COUNTERMEASURES?"

CAMPBELL ANSWERED: "THE JTF IS STRICTLY DEFENSIVE -- THAT IS IN OUR
CHARTER. IN THE BIG SCHEME OF THINGS, THERE ARE SOME THINGS
THAT ARE CLEARLY OFFENSIVE AND SOME THINGS THAT ARE CLEARLY
NONOFFENSIVE, AND THERE ARE SOME GRAY AREAS. THOSE GRAY AREAS
WILL NEED TO BE WORKED ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS TO DEVELOP
ACTIONS THAT ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW."

SEFFERS THEN ASKED: "DO YOU HAVE ENOUGH CLEARLY DEFENSIVE MEASURES
IN THE ARSENAL THAT YOU CAN STEER CLEAR OF THOSE GRAY AREAS?"

TO WHICH CAMPBELL ANSWERED: "NO, I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE CASE.
THERE WILL ALWAYS BE CASES WHERE THE USE OF ACTIVE MEASURES
WOULD BE BENEFICIAL. A GOOD EXAMPLE OF A GRAY AREA IS THE
(DEFENSE TECHNICAL INFORMATION CENTER) ACTIVITY. PERSONALLY, I
THINIK IT WAS NOT ON THE OFFENSIVE SIDE. … THAT'S ONE OF THE
AREAS OPEN TO DEBATE."

SEFFERS, IN WANTING TO CLARIFY THAT CAMPBELL WAS TALKING ABOUT THE
SEPTEMBER 9 SWARM ACTION, ASKED HIM: "YOU MEAN WHEN DOD
ALLEGEDLY LAUNCHED A JAVA APPLET TO SHUT DOWN THE ATTACKERS'
COMPUTERS?"

CAMPBELL'S ANSWER WAS: "THAT'S THE INCIDENT I'M REFERRING TO, YES."

THE ISSUES OF WHETHER THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ENGAGED IN
OFFENSIVE INFORMATION WARFARE AGAINST THE ELECTRONIC
DISTURBANCE THEATER, OF WHETHER IT MADE A SIGNIFICANT DEPARTURE
FROM ACCEPTED U.S. MILITARY DOCTRINE IN THE DOMESTIC SPHERE,
AND OF WHETHER IT BROKE THE LAW, REMAIN UNANSWERED. IN THE END,
WE MAY NOT FIND A SPECIFIC ANSWER TO THESE QUESTIONS AS IT IS
UNLIKELY OUR GROUP WILL TAKE ANY SORT OF LEGAL ACTION TO FORCE
A RULING ON THE MATTER. BUT CLEARLY, WE HAVE RAISED QUESTIONS
THAT WILL REQUIRE CLOSE ATTENTION, WHEN THEY ARE REVISITED, AS
I'M SURE THEY WILL BE.

I HAVE SPENT CONSIDERABLE TIME OUTLINING WHAT PRECEDED AND WHAT
CAME AFTER THE SEPTEMBER 9 SWARM ACTION, BOTH BECAUSE THIS
ACTION'S AFTERMATH IS SIGNIFICANT AND ALSO BECAUSE THE ISSUES
RAISED SEEM TO BE OF PARTICULAR INTEREST TO THIS AUDIENCE. THAT
SAID, THERE ARE STILL A FEW OTHER POINTS I'D LIKE TO MENTION.

BESIDE THE ATTENTION FROM THE PENTAGON A YEAR AGO, WE ALSO RECEIVED
CONSIDERABLE MENTION IN THE MEDIA AROUND THAT SAME TIME,
CULMINATING IN A FRONT PAGE NEW YORK TIMES STORY ABOUT US ON
OCTOBER 31, 1998. MEDIA INTEREST WAS AT FIRST SPORADIC AND
CONFINED TO ONLINE JOURNALISTIC VENUES. THE FIRST ARTICLE ABOUT
US APPEARED IN MAY OF LAST YEAR IN THE CYBERTIMES, AN ONLINE
PRODUCT OF THE NEW YORK TIMES. THIS PIECE FOCUSED PRIMARILY ON
SOME OF THE LEGAL ANGLES OF FLOODNET. IT CAME ON THE HEELS OF
OUR FIRST ACTION ON APRIL 10.

THROUGH THAT SUMMER OTHER STORIES APPEARED IN ONLINE VERSIONS OF
THE SAN FRANCISO EXAMINER AND LESSER KNOWN PUBLICATIONS. IT WAS
THE SWARM ACTION THAT PUSHED US CLOSER TO THE MEDIA'S SPOT
LIGHT. DURING ARS ELECTRONICA NUMEROUS EUROPEAN MEDIA OUTLETS
OF ALL FORMS - PRINT, RADIO, AND TELEVISION - INTERVIEWED US.
IT WAS THIS EXPOSURE IN EUROPE, I BELIEVE, THAT ATTRACTED
INTEREST FROM U.S. MEDIA WHEN WE RETURNED. MORE THAN ANYTHING
ELSE, IT WAS PROBABLY THE COVERAGE IN WIRED.COM THAT GAINED US
ACCESS TO SOME OF THE MORE MAINSTREAM PAPERS. PARTICULARLY
THE NEW YORK TIMES REPORTER HAD BEEN RESEARCING HACKTIVISM AND
FOUND OUR GROUP AND OUR NAMES. ONCE THE PIECE APPEARED IN
THE NEW YORK TIMES WE REGULARLY ENTERTAINED QUESTIONS FROM
JOURNALISTS, BOTH DOMESTICALLY AS WELL AS FROM CANADA AND THE U-
K.

OVERALL I WOULD HAVE TO SAY THAT THE MEDIA COVERAGE, AND
INTERPRETATION OF THE REALITY WE WERE ENDEAVORING TO PUT FORTH,
WAS POSITIVE. WE WERE NOT DEMONIZED. TO THE CONTRARY,
JOURNALISTS SEEMED TO BE INTRIGUED BY OUR APPROACH AND THEY -
TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE WITHIN JOURNALISTIC CONVENTIONS -
CONVEYED THIS INTRIGUE TO THEIR AUDIENCES. OF COURSE, WE TAKE
ISSUE WITH SOME OF THE WAYS IN WHICH MEDIA OUTLETS HAVE
REPRESENTED OUR WORK. FOR EXAMPLE, SOME JOURNALISTS COULDN'T
GET AWAY FROM CALLING US "HACKERS" WHICH IS RIDICULOUS
BECAUSE BY MOST HACKERS STANDARDS WE WOULD FAIL MISERABLY. A
FRIEND RECENTLY AND JOKINGLY TOLD ME THAT I COULDN'T HACK MY
WAY OUT OF A PAPER BAG.

AFTER THE SWARM ACTION, WE STILL HAD A NUMBER OF FLOODNET
PERFORMANCES BEFORE US. I WON'T GO OVER EACH AND EVERY ONE, BUT
IT IS WORTH NOTING TWO. THE ELECTRONIC ACTION COINCIDING
WITH THE PHYSICAL PROTEST AT THE SCHOOL OF THE AMERICAS AT THE
END OF NOVEMEMBER AND OUR FINAL ACT OF 1998, WHICH WAS TO
RELEASE THE FLOODNET CODE, MAKING IT PUBLICLY AVAILABLE FOR ANY
AND ALL TO USE.

AS I AM SURE MANY OF YOU ARE AWARE, EACH YEAR THERE HAS BEEN A
PUBLIC PROTEST ACCOMPANIED BY CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE AT THE
HEADQUARTERS OF THE SCHOOL OF THE AMERICAS. IT WAS OUR
INTENTION EARLY ON TO JOIN THIS PHYSICAL ACTION BY CALLING FOR
SIMULTANEOUS ELECTRONIC CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE. IN MILITARY
TERMS, YOU MIGHT CALL THIS A FORCE MULTIPLIER. WE REFER TO IT
AS A HYBRID ACTION. I MENTION THIS BECAUSE THE HYBRID ACTION,
DEFINED AS A JOINT REAL AND VIRTUAL CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE,

ILLUSTRATES POINTEDLY WHY WHAT WE ARE DOING IS NOT
CYBERTERRORISM - AS SOME MAY BE APT TO CALL IT - BUT THAT IN
FACT WE ARE AND HAVE BEEN ENGAGED IN LEGITIMATE POLITICAL
PROTEST ALBEIT IN A VIRTUAL FORUM. MANY PEOPLE WHO WEREN'T ABLE
TO PHYSICALLY GO TO THE SCHOOL OF THE AMERICAS PROTEST,
BUT WHO WANTED THEIR VOICE HEARD, WERE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN
THE VIRTUAL SIT-IN. THE REASON I STATE THIS IS BECAUSE, ONE,
IT IS CLEARLY RECOGNIZED THAT THE S-O-A PROTESTERS ON THE
GROUND ARE DOING SO WITH THE COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING THAT
THERE ACTIONS FALL WITHIN HISTORICALLY PROSCRIBED OR ACCEPTED
AVENUES OF DISSENT, AND, TWO, NO ONE CONSIDERS ANY ASPECT OF
WHAT THEY ARE DOING TO BE TERRORISTIC IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR
FORM.

OUR VIRTUAL SIT-IN WHICH TOOK PLACE SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE
PHYSICAL SIT-IN NEEDS TO BE ALSO CONSIDERED TO BE PART OF THE
CONTINUUM OF NONVIOLENT CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE IN THIS COUNTRY AND
THAT WHAT WE HAVE DONE CAN IN NO WAY BE CONSTRUED AS
CYBERTERRORISM. ALMOST ALL ACCEPTABLE DEFINITIONS OF TERRORISM
INCLUDE SOME MENTION OF THE FACT THAT VIOLENCE IS
INVOLVED, THAT THERE IS BLOODSHED, THAT PEOPLE DIE. THERE IS NO
WAY THAT ANY OF THE DIGITAL ACTIONS WE HAVE BEEN INVOLVED
WITH OR THAT WE HAVE KNOWN ABOUT OVER THE COURSE OF THE PAST
YEAR INVOLVED VIOLENCE. AND HENCE, THEY ARE NOT TERRORISTIC.

OUR FINAL ACT FOR 1998, REALLY HAPPENED DURING THE FIRST MINUTES OF
1999. WE DEVELOPED A PUBLIC VERSION OF FLOODNET AND MADE
THIS AVAILABLE AS DOWNLOADABLE FREEWARE FILES ON SEVERAL
COOPERATIVE WEB SITES. WE DECIDED TO MAKE FLOODNET PUBLICLY
AVAILABLE FOR SEVERAL REASONS. FIRST WAS THAT PEOPLE HAD
REGULARLY ASKED US TO HELP THEM BY DEVISING A FLOODNET ACTION
FOR THEM AND SO WE FIGURED, BETTER YET, MAKE THE SOFTWARE
FREELY AVAILABLE. THE SECOND IS THAT AFTER ENGAGING IN THESE
FLOODNET ACTIONS CONSISTENTLY SINCE MARCH WE WERE READY
TO TRY SOMETHING ELSE.

WE OFFICIALLY ENDED OUR 1998 TACTICAL SEASON AND BEGAN WRITING A
BOOK ON HACKTIVISM THAT IS STILL IN THE WORKS. IN JANUARY,
RICARDO AND CARMIN PARTICIPATED IN A NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON
CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE HELD HERE IN WASHINGTON. WE WERE ONCE AGAIN
ABLE TO ENGAGE THE TRADITIONAL CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE COMMUNITY IN
A DIALOGUE ABOUT ELECTRONIC CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE. AS MENTIONED
EARLIER, THE TRADITIONAL LEFT HAS BEEN SOMEWHAT WARY
ABOUT E-C-D OR HACKTIVISM. YET WE BELIEVE THAT THIS SKEPTICISM
WILL DISSIPATE AS MORE ACTIVISTS BECOME FAMILIAR WITH THE USE
OF COMPUTERS. IN MARCH FLOODNET WAS ON THE AGENDA OF THE "NEXT
FIVE MINUTES," A TACTICAL MEDIA CONFERENCE IN AMSTERDAM THAT
INVOLVED SOME OF THE SAME ACTORS WHO HAD BEEN PART OF THE
DISSENTING VOICE AT ARS ELECTRONICA LAST YEAR AND SO THERE WERE
OPINIONS EXPRESSED THAT QUESTIONED THE USE OF FLOODNET.
FINALLY, IN TERMS OF EVENTS IN WHICH OUR WORK HAS BEEN
SHOWCASED, I WAS PART OF A PANEL ON HACKTIVISM AT THIS SPRING'S
SOUTH BY SOUTHWEST FESTIVAL IN AUSTIN, TEXAS, ALONG WITH BRUCE
STERLING, R.U. SIRIUS, AND RTMARK.

FOR THE FIRST HALF OF THIS YEAR WE HAVE BEEN IN A PERIOD OF
REFLECTION, CONCENTRATING MORE ON IDEAS THAN ON NEW PRACTICE. THIS vCHANGED IN JUNE WHEN WE JOINED A GLOBAL ACTION, ONCE AGAIN USING
FLOODNET. A GROUP IN ENGLAND CALLED FOR SOMETHING IT COINED
"RECLAIM THE STREETS" TO TAKE PLACE ON JUNE 18, COINCIDING WITH
THE G-8 MEETING IN GERMANY. THE PHYSICAL ACTIONS INVOLVED
STREET PROTESTS IN CITIES ALL OVER THE WORLD. WE JOINED WITH A
VIRTUAL ACTION, ANOTHER FLOODNET SIT-IN DIRECTED AT THE WEB
SITE OF THE MEXICAN EMBASSY IN THE U-K. ON JUNE 18, EIGHTEEN
THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED AND FIFTEEN UNIQUE REQUESTS FOR THE
FLOODNET BROWSER CAME FROM FORTY-SIX COUNTRIES.

OUR LAST ACT TO DATE WAS "STORM 99" WHICH LASTED FOR A TWENTY-FOUR
HOUR PERIOD BEGINNING AT NOON ON AUGUST 26. "STORM 99" WAS A
RESPONSE TO A RECENT ESCALATION OF THE CONFLICT IN CHIAPAS ON
THE PART OF THE MEXICAN MILITARY AND A CALL FROM ZAPATISTA
COMMUNITIES FOR PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD TO TAKE ACTION. IN
ADDITION TO ANOTHER APPEARANCE OF FLOODNET, THE ELECTRONIC
DISTURBANCE THEATER CALLED ON ACTIVISTS TO RUN PORT SCANS ON
THE WEB SITE OF MEXICAN PRESIDENT ZEDILLO AND DISTRIBUTED
INSTRUCTIONS AS TO WHERE TO FIND FREE DOWNLOADABLE PORT
SCANNING SOFTWARE.

NOW I WANT TO RETURN TO WHAT I STARTED TO ADDRESS AT THE BEGINNING
OF THIS PRESENTATION, A NOTE ABOUT HOW WE ATTRIBUTE MEANING TO
ACTIONS, OR MORE SO, ABOUT WHAT MEANING WE ATTRIBUTE. I TOUCHED
ON THIS BRIEFLY IN THE ABOVE STATEMENTS ABOUT
"CYBERTERRORISM." THIS IS CLEARLY AN EXAMPLE OF A WORD THAT
SUFFERS FROM A LACK OF SERIOUS INTERROGATION. BUT IT IS NOT THE
ONLY ONE. AND THERE ARE MORE SUBTLE MISNOMERS AND GLITCHES. FOR
EXAMPLE, WHETHER BY ACCIDENT OR DESIGN, THE WEB SITE DESCRIBING
THIS CONFERENCE WAS CALLING THE "ELECTRONIC
DISTURBANCE THEATER" THE "ELECTRONIC DISRUPTION THEATER."

YOU MAY SAY THIS IS A FINE POINT, BUT I THINK THIS FREUDIAN SLIP,
IF YOU WILL, OF USING THE WORD "DISRUPTION" VERSUS
"DISTURBANCE" IS INDICATIVE OF THE LARGER MINDSET WITH WHICH WE
ARE DEALING. A MINDSET THAT IS QUICK TO PIN DOWN AND CATEGORIZE
USING MORE FORCEFUL AND LOADED LANGUAGE. THE SAME WEB SITE
ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT THIS PRESENTATION I AM HELPING TO DELIVER
TODAY ALSO CALLED THE ZAPATISTAS "A REPRESSED SECT." IT DIDN'T
EVEN MENTION THE ZAPATISTAS IN THE DESCRIPTION WHATSOEVER. I'VE
NEVER HEARD ANYONE CALL THE ZAPATISTAS A "SECT." I DON'T KNOW
WHETHER THIS IS STATE-DEPARTMENT-SPEAK OR WHAT. BUT IN THE SAME
BREATH BOTH THE NAME OF OUR GROUP WAS ALTERED AND THE PEOPLE IN
MEXICO WHO HAVE INSPIRED US TO ACT HAVE BEEN REDUCED TO A SECT.
EITHER THIS RENDITION WAS THE FAULT OF SOME INTERN OR IT
WAS AN ATTEMPT TO RECATEGORIZE WHO WE ARE INTO A FRAMEWORK THAT
IS UNDERSTANDABLE TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY MINDSET.

I MUST ADMIT THAT WHEN I FIRST ENCOUNTERED THE LITERATURE ON
INFORMATION WARFARE, I WAS DRAWN IN BY THE LANGUAGE OF CYBERWAR
AND NETWAR. BUT INCREASINGLY I'VE COME TO SEE THAT THESE TERMS
ARE INACCURATE AND DON'T DESCRIBE WHAT WE ARE DOING, NOR WHAT
OTHER HACKTIVISTS ARE DOING TODAY. THERE IS NO WAR INVOLVED IN
DIGITAL SPACE. WAR, BY DEFINITION, BRINGS ABOUT DEATH OF PEOPLE
AND DESTRUCTION OF REAL THINGS. NO ONE DIES IN A CYBERWAR OR A
NETWAR AND NO REAL THINGS ARE DESTROYED.

IN THE END, OUR COMMON GROUND MAY BE A SHARED INTEREST IN
SIMULATION: SIMULATED WARFARE; WAR WITH NO DEATH; THE ILLUSION
OF WAR; FAKE WAR SCENARIOS AND VIRTUAL WARFARE GAME
ROOMS. THE ELECTRONIC DISTURBANCE THEATER IS KEENLY INTERESTED
IN SIMULATION, IN FAKENESS, IN VIRTUALITY. WE HAVE
EFFECTIVELY LEVERAGED OUR SIMULATED ASSAULTS ON WEB SITES
TO PUT FORTH OUR POLITICAL AND ARTISTIC POSITIONS. WE SEE
THE MILITARY TOO BEING QUITE TAKEN WITH SIMULATION. THE
ARMY IS SET ON ESTABLISHING A CLOSER RELATIONSHIP WITH THE
ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY BECAUSE OF A MUTUAL INTEREST IN SIMULATION TECHNOLOGY.