Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

State-Sponsored CyberAttacks Expected To Rise

Posted by Soulskill on from the nowhere-to-go-but-up dept.

wiredmikey writes "According to a report released today, IT security professionals will see a rise in State-sponsored attacks, like the Stuxnet worm, that will build on concepts and techniques from the commercial hacker industry to create more powerful 'Advanced Persistent Threats.' The researchers also expect an increase in compromised mobile devices leading to data theft or loss as a result of lagging security measures, and that next year will bring the first major data breaches as a result of compromised devices. The biggest potential impact will be caused by the proliferation of sophisticated mobile devices interacting with corporate networks."

4 of 33 comments (clear)

  1. A rise? by dropadrop · · Score: 4, Insightful

    To know there is a rise you would need to have some kind of baseline on the current situation. I don't think anyone knows how much state sponsored cyber attacks are currently going around, but I would imagine quite a bit. Most states will have quite a high level of technology and far more motivation to keep things secret then your average cyber criminal. Maybe one (kind of) exception is Russia where the cyber criminals are state friendly to a level where they will (with or without actual concent) do cyber attacks for the states benefit (look at ddos attacks at estonia as an example).

    1. Re:A rise? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Insightful
      "Boy, that's one mean piece of software. Hottest thing since sliced bread. That goddamn thing is invisible. I just rented twenty seconds on that little pink box, just left of the T-A ice; had a look at what we look like. We don't. We're not there."

      Neuromancer, William Gibson. 1984.

      Truth - stranger than fiction, if lagging a bit in time.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:A rise? by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You do? If it rains for a week straight I can make a prediction that the river level will rise over the course of that week without knowing what the level of the river was before it started raining. It could be a dry creek bed or it could be an inch from bursting it's banks, that information doesn't necessarily factor into my prediction of a rise.

      Is that an accurate prediction?

      What if the week before it was raining more, like a monsoon, and the week after it was hit with tidal wave?

      Point is, the fact that you know its happening doesn't actually mean it's going up. You need to know what it was like before for it to have any meaning.

      Your whole point was based on the assumption that it wasn't raining before your week started, thus, you knew the existing preconditions.

  2. weeeeeeee by kaoshin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Company that sells security solutions predicts need for more security. The surprises just keep coming.