I read this article as shared by u/Metalheads4Trump
https://greatawakening.win/p/12hkmSsiA8/x/c/4DyMHIKgVFZ
After reading this article, I think that taking down or hiding the GN site code George News is not the objective of this fire, especially given the scale of the losses. The GN website was only an aggregator with probably not a whole lot of traffic, and wasn't even well-maintained by the GN team, who spend a lot more of their time, effort and content on Telegram and YouTube. They continue to post on Telegram as if their main site never existed in the first place.
And really, the site wasn't even that interesting. If it were a tracking and data harvesting honeypot then it would make for a very lazy attempt at being one.
I think that more important objectives would have existed among the millions of websites affected. For example, the game RUST was affected majorly with total permanent data losses: this is a game that sold over 5 million copies. Other major players were also affected:
The list of impacted clients includes cyber threat intelligence company Bad Packets, provider of free chess server Lichess.org, videogame maker Rust, cryptocurrency exchange Deribit's blog and docs sites, telecom company AFR-IX, encryption utility VeraCrypt, news outlet eeNews Europe, the art building complex Centre Pompidou, and many others.
Deribit has clarified to BleepingComputer that the outage only impacted their docs and blog sites and that the exchange was never down.
For videogame maker Rust, the incident has led to a total data loss leaving no way for recovery.
"We've confirmed a total loss of the affected EU servers during the OVH data centre fire. We're now exploring replacing the affected servers. Data will be unable to be restored," the game developer tweeted.
If this were arson, it would be more plausible to say that this was large-scale economic sabotage than to say that it was a reaction to what some anons on GAW uncovered over GN. Like they could have simply taken the server or just the site offline and not incur all these other economic losses, otherwise it would be like using a jack-hammer to hammer in a nail.
Data centres have all kinds of preventative measures against fire. Mainly Argon gas sytems for dealing with electrical fires. Also, there's not much in the way of combustible materials in a DC: Metal chassis, PCB's and wire cabling not much else, has to be deliberate seeing the photos.
The bigger threat is a lithium fire- which many systems contain, albeit in small amounts (Battery-backed RAID, for instance), but many of the newer large-scale UPS systems are using massive banks of lithium batteries in place of the older lead-acid batteries.
"Green" Argon-containing suppression systems like Inergen work primarily by rapidly removing heat from the fire, but have been proven to be pretty much useless at extinguishing lithium. Once lithium goes runaway, a gas system simply doesn't have enough mass to sink that amount of heat.
That's just one reason FM-200 is still king in the US and people that still have Halon (which interrupts the oxidizing reaction) keep their mouths shut and DCs safe. If they were using anything other than FM-200, I'd chalk this one up as yet another example of "When environmental policy bites you in the ass, again".
Data centers do still catch on fire tho. And catastrophically. Rare, but does happen.
It doesnt "have to be deliberate"