Slashdot Mirror
Targeted Attacks Focus On Economic Cyberterrorism
Orome1 writes "When it comes to dangerous Web threats, the only constant is change and gone are the days of predictable attack vectors. Instead, modern blended threats such as Aurora, Stuxnet, and Zeus infiltrate organizations through a variety of coordinated tactics, usually a combination of two or more. Phishing, compromised websites, and social networking are carefully coordinated to steal confidential data, because in the world of cybercrime, content equals cash. And, as a new Websense report illustrates, the latest tactics have now moved to a political and nationalistic stage. Cybercriminals and their blended attacks are having a field day taking advantage of security gaps left open by legacy technologies like firewalls, anti-virus, and simple URL blockers."
Cybercriminals and their blended attacks are having a field day taking advantage of security gaps left open by legacy technologies like firewalls, anti-virus, and simple URL blockers."
Calling something legacy implies that there's something better to replace those technologies with. Those technologies have not been replaced by some revolutionary new technology that does all that and holds your d--- while you piss too. And they were never intended to be a pancea -- they are intended to augment information security, not act as a substitute for it.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
Maybe its time to work on better out of band authentication and confirmation devices.
Take the IBM ZTIC that plugs into a USB port, and communicates encrypted from the device itself to the bank, just using the computer as a passthrough. This is what needs to be worked on, and maybe banks should start handing these out to customers. This way, even if an end user's computer is infected, their bank account couldn't be logged into without the device, and even if someone was to gain access upon logging on, all bank transfers would have to be confirmed on the ZTIC, so a quick transfer of funds would be caught and denied.
Applying this to MMOs, maybe the ZTIC device to confirm character transfers or deletion, as well as be needed to confirm logging on.
The advantage of using the ZTIC device over a cellphone for this is that the ZTIC device is simple -- it isn't a full fledged computer like a cell phone, and only does one task. Of course, exploits might be found, but the attack surface for this device is a lot smaller than a general purpose machine.
Why do we still have nation-states? What good do they serve?
They help to make sure that even though millions of people want to live under Sharia law, I don't have to. Yet.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Why do we still have nation-states? What good do they serve?
Nations are an emergent phenomena. It all starts with small tribes of people that are small enough that the leaders know everybody, and then grows as the technology and institutions grow to be able to keep more people under its umbrella. Once the group of nations grow large enough, they then have the choice of either attempting to dominate one another until no others remain or cooperating. The eventual result of either of these paths would probably be one singular world government, assuming that either ultimate victory or complete peaceful cooperation are even possible. If they're not, then we're all just wasting a hell of a lot of time trying.
But really, in answer to your question: You have to start with Nations, and long before they become obsolete they become an entrenched middle-man. Doing away with them is a lot like trying to eliminate any middle-man who wants to keep their job.
Were cyberbombs detonated on a cybertrain?
Hey I bet Websense will sell you the solution to the problems cited in the report who wants to take a bet.
I think any sensible definition of "terrorism" has to involve violence -- people in meatspace getting killed or at least hurt. I read TFA and the only connection it had to terrorism was in the headline. Skimming credit card numbers is not terrorism (though it could be used to finance terrorist activities). Spreading malware through Facebook is not terrorism (though a botnet could be used in conjunction with a terrorist attack, maybe).
I am not aware of terrorists ever having made a "cyber terror attack." Most extremist groups are looking for a bigger shock value than they can get by knocking out Google's Web server or even bringing down the electric grid in half the United States (either of which could be accomplished by a misplaced backhoe or a freak thunderstorm). Actually they would much rather blow up a school bus or something. A lone gunman can create more of a scare and get more PR for the cause than could a group of crack cyber-terrorists who managed to reproduce the U.S. blackout of 2005.
To label any and all malicious activity is disingenuous. It grabs some attention and helps you sell something in the short run, but in the long run, crying wolf is a disservice to the public and it doesn't pay off.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
Nations help oppress people, not keep them free
No. Nations that don't have a constitutional framework founded in liberty (freedom of speech, assembly, etc) might fit that description, but not all nations. Nations are either subject to the rule of law (as backed up by their founding documents) or they are just mob rule (or a fuedal society). A nation that doesn't prevent thugs from telling you what to do isn't keeping people free. A nation that is constititionally chartered around the idea of keeping thugs (individual or governmental) in check is, in fact, a preserver of liberty.
That doesn't mean that it always goes well, but that's the general idea. You seem to be suggesting that ALL nations are oppressive because some nations are oppressive to thugs. Denying liberty to those who seek to deny liberty to others is not oppression. It's the opposite.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Countries and organizations are going to have to realize that connecting their in-house network to "the internet" securely is HARD and sometimes the best thing to do is to have an "ip gap" or better yet an "air gap" between their in-house data and the outside world. Oh, and turn off of those USB ports or at least treat them as untrustworthy. This isn't easy either, so there is a trade-off.
Many governments already do this for their sensitive networks.
This won't stop inside jobs and it won't stop the most determined invader but it will make it much more expensive to succeed.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
I'd like to see a much more hostile internet to coerce better security practices. People in general won't care about such things unless and until it is forced upon them by events.
If they won't change unless someone "breaks their shit", then that needs to happen.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."