Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Is China Creating the World's Largest Botnet Army?

Posted by timothy on from the economies-of-scale dept.

david_a_eaves writes "The Chinese government is mandating that all computers sold in China come with Internet blocking software. Rob Cottingham writes an excellent piece noting how the censorship application of this software should be the least of our concerns. This new software may create an opportunity for the Chinese Government to appropriate these computers and use them to create the worlds largest botnet army." Update: 06/11 21:26 GMT by T : J. Alex Halderman writes "My students and I have been examining the Green Dam censorware software. We've found serious vulnerabilities that can be exploited by any web site a user visits with the software installed. We also found that some of the blacklists seems to have been taken from the American-made filtering program CyberSitter. We've posted a report and demo."

11 of 195 comments (clear)

  1. Correct me if I am wrong... by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Would it be easier to just sever the undersea fibre cable to China if it's really such a grave threat?

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
    1. Re:Correct me if I am wrong... by phantomcircuit · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is economic warfare. The question is which is worth more economically to the US, a connection to China which opens Chinese citizens to the world's press or severing the connection and avoiding any potential complications.

      So the question is which one is worth more? Personally im willing to bet that being connected to them is worth more to the US than it is to China.

  2. Re:It is a problem by OverlordQ · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For the sake of argument, lets assume the transit providers drop China's interconnects. 0% CPU overhead.

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
  3. Or just block their IP space by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only reason botnets are so effective is they are distributed. When they come from all over the place, you have to do a ton of individual blocks. If they are all from the same IP space, ok just black hole China's space and that's it. Wouldn't take a block from very many top level providers and they'd be doing nothing at all.

  4. Re:It is a problem by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

    To be able to block, at the very least the packet header has to be examined. If remote attacker can generate packets faster than you can examine and drop them, you've just been DoS'ed.

    You also have to look at the packet header in the course of regular routing decisions. Would it really take more CPU to look at the packet header and drop it into /dev/null than it does to look at the packet header and send it out a different network interface?

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  5. Re:It is a problem by caladine · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You also have to look at the packet header in the course of regular routing decisions. Would it really take more CPU to look at the packet header and drop it into /dev/null than it does to look at the packet header and send it out a different network interface?

    That's not what really causes the extra CPU usage. It's the sheer volume of the packets you now have to handle. It's not as if these botnet computers are generating traffic like the would during a normal transaction. They're transmitting as fast as they can.

  6. Re:It is a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Really, we need to rethink being so close to our adversaries online. I mean, isn't that obvious?
    It's like we're waiting for the cyber-911 (god that's terrible) before we have the mandate to act.

    They have to come over the same sets of pipes. You can't get around that.
    At some point, you can shut off mega.undersea.cable01 and all traffic stops.
    Cut the ties that bind the C&C with the bots, and monitor what happens next.

    If sh!t hit hit the fan, the USAF/NSA/??? would step in and do this. The question is,
    under what circumstances, and what good does that do us in the long term?

    You can't disconnect CN forever. This problem will remain as long as we're tied to them.
    If we treat our enemies as trusted friends and get screwed, whose fault is it? Exactly.
    I think there's a word for this in Cantonese, but my pronunciation suffers.

  7. Re:while of course this is fud by Drake42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    TRUST NO ONE!

    DO NOT TRUST THE CHINESE! (But eat their food, wear their clothes, use their electronics)
    DO NOT TRUST THE USA! (But obey their laws, enjoy their movies, work for their money)
    DO NOT TRUST THE IRANIANS (But ignore their democratic progress and ignore their people's work for peace)

    Here's the real answer:
    DO NOT TRUST YOURSELF, because you're an idiot.

    Distrust is for the weak. Optimistic skepticism and honest effort are for the strong.

  8. Re:while of course this is fud by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Good advice. I'll trust no one. I don't trust you. Horrible advice. I'll trust everyone.

    --
    Not a sentence!
  9. Re:It is a problem by ZigiSamblak · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Right. Aren't we supposed to be the experts at that here at slashdot?

  10. Did Japan already do this? by Kineel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This reminds me of the 60's when there were actually people who believed that all of those little Japanese cars were programmed to fall apart when a signal came from Tokyo. We'd be stuck with no transportation and Japan would finally win the war.

    I'm not saying this couldn't be done with computer software today. But obviously paranoia isn't limited by technology.

    --
    -- Should there be smoke coming out of my CPU?