U.S. Warns of Possible Cyber Biz Attack

mikesd81 writes "The AP has an article about a possible attack against the New York Stock Exchange via the internet by a radical muslim group. The notice was issued to the U.S. cybersecurity industry after officials saw a posting on a 'Jihadist Web site' calling for an attack on U.S. Internet-based stock market and banking sites in December, said Homeland Security Department spokesman Russ Knocke. Knocke has said: 'There is no information corroborating the threat and that the alert was issued as a routine matter and out of an abundance of caution.' There is no immediate threat to our homeland at this time. The attacks were to be conducted in December, 'until the infidel new year,' the site said, according to a U.S. government translation. It called for attackers to use viruses that can penetrate Internet sites and destroy data stored there. Spokespeople for the New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq declined to comment on the cyber-terror threat."

Comments

about time for another one

[WolfMansDad]

Warning, that is. Don't you know we're at war! Americans aren't that good at hate, so we have to be given something to fear. Keeps the govt in business.

Not all systems on the internet

[truthsearch]

The largest banks, plus the stock exchange, still use a wide array of platforms. The stock exchange web site, for example, is not directly hitting the actual stock exchange servers. Most of your bank transactions still go through mainframes. A typical setup is for central transaction servers to push data files to data warehouse servers for reporting purposes. Most systems then run off of these reporting servers.

Between the variety of systems and the layers of security between each it's very unlikely that a virus could bring down the stock exchanges. Or your bank. It's far more likely that their web sites and corporate desktops would go down. The "money" in the wires is far safer.

the thread which caused the alert...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm posting as AC because I have this CERT alert in my inbox, denoted as FOUO (like it wouldn't get leaked anyway)

Google can translate it for you: http://www.alfirdaws.org/vb/showthread.php?t=21091

That's Funny

[eno2001]

I don't EVER remember living in the "homeland" until the Bushista regime seized power. I still like to call this America myself. Former land of the free and brave. Now home of the politically blind and cowardly.

Re:Advertising attacks?

[belligerent0001]

I think you missed my point, Sir. There were 2 main points I was bringing up. First, that as soon as there is an attack, people, typically liberals, suggest that someone should have done somethign to prevent it, But whenever someone does something, such as issue a warning or try to apprehend potential aggressors, those issuing the warnings or apprehending agress are call fear mongers or jack booted thugs or whatever term you wish to accept by they same a-holes that complain that nothing was done shoudl there ever be a success attack. Don't believe me...look at everything that has happened from 9/10 until now. Second, I was trying to illustrate in simple terms (obviously not simple enough) that you either accept the actions of an agressor or you fight back with ALL means at your disposal. Once you commit to one or the other, you have to be prepared to continue to do the same until the threat is eliminated. Waffling on your decision will only encourage an agressor to continue and invite others to follow suit. It's not about being macho. It's about making a stand, which libs tend not to be able to do with effect very often. I am surprised that a slashdotter doesn't believe in 1's and 0's, ons and offs, black and white. Everything can be boiled down into binary terms. I also find it interesting that you have taken this so personally...how my opinions effect you is beyond me.