Internet Based Attacks in a Physical World

scubacuda writes "In light of the /. backlash against Spam King, Alan Ralsky, (in which /.ers published his info online--including an overhead shot of his house--and signed him up for junk) Simon Beyers, Aviel Rubin, and David Kormann have written a report entitled Defending Against an Internetbased Attack on the Physical World. Bruce Schneier notes that there's no easy defence against such an attack, largely because companies want to make it easy for consumers to get their promotional information:'Subscribing someone to magazines and signing them up for embarrassing catalogs is an old trick, but it has limitations because it's physically difficult to do it on a large scale. But this attack exploits the automation properties of the Internet, the Web availability of catalog request forms, and the paper world of the post office and catalog mailings. All the pieces (that) are required for the attack to work.' But as Rubin and his colleagues point out, there's a real danger in this ploy, one that few people have likely thought about. 'A scenario could be imagined where an attacker would do this to delay the arrival of an important letter, to wreak havoc on the postal system for political reasons, or even worse, to serve as a diversion for a terrorist act, such as the mailing of a contaminated letter.'"

Comments

I'm a victim.

[Seth Finklestein]

Frankly, I'm surprised that Slashdot didn't come to me, internationally known cybersecurity activist Seth Finklestein, for advice on the matter. I have been abused like a tattered rag doll by Slashdot's own editor, Michael Sims.

Ever since Michael Sims' message "The Censorware Project is Closed," I have been kept awake at night by persistent phone calls and very loud e-mails sent by Michael. Mr. Sims has called me, my wife, my five internationally acclaimed children, and even my wife with vague threats against me.

I did absolutely nothing wrong at any point in my life. I am a shining beacon in a godless, hateful world. Please help me. I'm a victim.

Re:The Economist

[Acidic_Diarrhea]

But don't you see that the target of the current attack isn't always going to be the same. There is no reason that this DoS attack must be directed at spammers and spammers only. And the reason the spammer has brought this attack on himself is by upsetting a great number of people. Now, as the article mentions, a script which would simulate the large number of people could be written so that one person could launch the attack and sign a single person up for a huge amount of junk mail. So, basically - if you, as a non-spammer, upset someone with a modest amount of technical saavy, it could lead to the same type of DoS attack that this spammer is enduring.

There is no reason that only a spammer could be attacked in such a manner.