This seems to me as though the phrase "denial-of-service attack" is being used loosely here. Firesheep is not a service being extended by a central server to many users. You're blocking the individual user (or users) of firesheep with this. This won't disrupt the users of web services that are legitimately trying to use a site. IANAL, but I think this could be argued to be different from the kind of DoS that would land you in prison for several years in at least the US and UK.
That said, a DoS attack against firesheep users, if convicted, would probably have more repercussions than what ever identity fraud the firesheep users could be prosecuted for (per case). This is a great example of where someone trying to benefit society (preventing possible identity fraud) could be labeled a terrorist. I fear the day that the FBI starts going after "terrorists" to protect identity thieves.
Comments
This seems to me as though the phrase "denial-of-service attack" is being used loosely here. Firesheep is not a service being extended by a central server to many users. You're blocking the individual user (or users) of firesheep with this. This won't disrupt the users of web services that are legitimately trying to use a site. IANAL, but I think this could be argued to be different from the kind of DoS that would land you in prison for several years in at least the US and UK.
That said, a DoS attack against firesheep users, if convicted, would probably have more repercussions than what ever identity fraud the firesheep users could be prosecuted for (per case). This is a great example of where someone trying to benefit society (preventing possible identity fraud) could be labeled a terrorist. I fear the day that the FBI starts going after "terrorists" to protect identity thieves.