The recent use of distributed denial of service attacks by supporters of WikiLeaks protesting the arrest and prosecution of the founder Julian Assange has raised disturbing questions. Using the denial of service attack to express ones decent and dissatisfaction is no different than throwing bombs in public places to protest the policies of a government.
At the end of the day, it is the average man on the street who suffers the most. This is probably the reason why the organization itself was at pains to clarify that it had no role to play in the attack. Simply put, a distributed denial of service attack trying to prevent any legitimate service provider from doing business normally is an illegal act.
It has been outlawed in America and Britain and is culpable under most civilized legal systems. Further, such an attack is specifically prohibited under the fair usage practices of most internet service providers.
Hence, throwing a stone into a shop to protest the policies of the government and setting up a distributed denial of service attack-there is no difference between the two except for the fact that the former is in the real world and the latter is in the virtual world.
What complicates matters is that the tools used to orchestrate such an attack are easily available on the internet. These are very simple tools that are used for legitimate purposes. Just as it is not possible to outlaw the sale of kitchen knives to protect people from knife attacks, it is not possible to outlaw the use of such tools just to protect people from such attacks.
At the end of the day, a sense of maturity in society combined with strong punishments for those who violate these rules is the best way of tackling the issue. In the long run, it must be treated at par with the worst enemies of civilized society to ensure order is maintained on the internet.