With the recently leaked Anonymous distribution of Linux being filled with trojans, is the movement beginning to send mixed messages without its ruling class?
The hackvitist legion known as Anonymous, often crowding under the banner of the anti-sec movement, has gone through a lot of upheaval in recent weeks. With it being revealed that Lulzsec head Sabu had been a government informant for months, leading to the arrests of several high ranking members of the anon offshoot, has this left somewhat of a power vacuum?
Was there any power to begin with? It seems hard to argue against the idea that there might have been some stature to certain anons, even if they weren't considered leaders. The fact that many knew who Sabu was and was described by some as very vocal and angry suggests he held some sway. But what about the majority?
The movement, group, however you designate it, has stumbled between public messages, with a mixture of anarchic "for the lulz" culture stirred up with a more focused anti-sec, anti-big brother, anti-oppression ideal. The fact that the recently unveiled Anonymous Linux distribution is "wrapped in trojans", suggests that the former aim of its membership is still going strong. But what about the latter?
Some would argue that we're looking at a downwards spiral for Anonymous. Now that the head has been cut from the snake, will the body wither away?
Anonymous Twitter accounts would have you think otherwise. The quite popular AnonymousIRC account has it that "It feels good to be headless. @LulzSec."
Time will tell if Anonymous will now wallow in lulz inducing practices, often making those attempting to jump on the bandwagon look silly, or if some of the inspiring hacks and moves it's made will continue unabated. Anonymous is all about an idea, a movement. The important part is whether the great ideas endure, or if they are just one of many in a "sea" of fail.