British Attack Anonymous... Using Anonymous' Tactics?

Yet another scandal has had the lid blown off by Edward Snowden with the revelation that the GCHQ used a DDoS attack on the hacktivist group Anonymous and LulzSec, originally reported on by NBC news. This time, the attack against Anonymous used the same tactics used by some Anonymous activist, that have since sent them to jail. But as a GCHQ spokesperson claimed, "all of GCHQ's work is carried out in accordance with a strict legal and policy framework." 

So, when Anonymous performs a DDoS, it's illegal. When GCHQ does it, it's completely legal.

DDoS diagram

DDoS is distributed denial of service, which basically uses the tactic of scaring people off from using, in this case, mainly chat sites that Anonymous users are known to use, by shutting down the network that provides service to the target website. To put it in laymen terms, it is used to suspend services of a site or host that is connected to the internet essentially blocking the users' ability to connect to the site. 

The attack was carried out by the Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group (JTRIG), which is a part of the GCHQ used to counter hacktivist "terrorism." Operation Rolling Thunder is believed to be in response to the DDoS attack on PayPal, performed by Anonymous in 2011. 

The attack by Anonymous was in retaliation for the arrest and prosecution of Chelsea Manning for leaking information to WikiLeaks.

While this operation dispersed 80% of the users in the IRC chat rooms and eventually lead to the arrest of  GZero, who stole 8 million identities through Paypal, it also affected thousands of Anonymous supporters who were not breaking any laws. It also could have also possibly affected services that had nothing to do with Anonymous, but used the same server. Once again, giving a clear image of overreach and blunt use of spy tools, affecting countless people, to get at a handful of law breakers by government spy agencies. 

GCHQ

Another tactic JTRIG are accused of using was to pose as a hacktivist and used a link to a BBC article, entitled "Who loves the Hacktivists?" to bypass the security measures of a hacker named P0ke, to discover his identity. He was never charged or even contacted by any government officials.

What's unsettling about this new report is that the GCHQ used the same tactics as those they deem illegal and used by hackivists, to find said hacker's identities and potentially, and in some cases, arrest them for those actions. 

Where is the line drawn between legal and illegal when spy agencies claim the ability to use illegal tactics to catch people using the same tactics they are using? 

Once again, governmental hypocrisy at its finest.