Slashdot Mirror
Kneber Botnet Strikes, Targets Gov't Agencies
Batblue writes "A botnet fingered for stealing a treasure trove of information last year has struck again, harvesting sensitive documents from dozens of government agencies and contractors, according to a pair of security experts. The botnet, dubbed 'Kneber' by Alex Cox, principal research analyst at NetWitness, was behind a campaign of fake Christmas e-mails waged two weeks ago against government workers. NetWitness deals in advanced threat detection technologies, and conducts post mortem network forensics for firms that have been hit with attacks or data breaches."
Isn't a bit early to already dupe this story? You're supposed to wait at least a week or two before duping something, Taco.
This just in! The weakest link in the information security chain is the user! More at Eleven!
I'll meet you at the intersection of "Should be" and "Reality"
Yes, the same people that run our government are the same noobs who click fake eCards and run random .exe files attached to emails. Can ANYONE still wonder why our government is so screwed up, especially when it comes to technology and the laws/policies surrounding it?
"I hope you know how very lucky you are to know me, because I am so incredibly incredible."
I really have to ask this, but why the fuck do governments run any iteration of windows? seriously there are more secure OS's out there that than cope with anything the Gov needs, OSX, Linux, BSD. I've notice that in the world of operating systems, you get more the less u pay :D
http://chimpbox.us
...when you feel the need to interject information twice with commas it gets confusing.
This one sentence will make your head explode.
Blank until
Taco and batblue are nerds, not writers. Not that one can't be both...
Free Martian Whores!
The fact that you're proposing to run the world's business and decisions over the Internet, in reply to an article about people and computers on the Internet getting pwned via botnet, is especially funny.
This one sentence will make your head explode.
Do something the Queen doesn't like and suffer the consequences ?
Slipping shoelaces ?
The article isn't about the Internet getting owned, it is about government agencies (controlled by politicians, managed by bureaucrats, maintained by hapless government workers and contractors) getting owned.
Politicians, bureaucrats, government workers, and government contractors are the problem, not just a random sideshow.
Government should run locked-down machines and give their users orders to conform to proper security standards.
We should remember that Federal employment is desirable, that anyone who has a job is fortunate, and that if they don't like their marching ORDERS they can get the fuck out.
The UCMJ provides for punishment for military personnel, and IMO we should run ALL Federal employees under a military-style chain of command and under military regulations. Don't like to serve the public as a professional?
We should force all government users to run secure operating systems in a secure manner, hammer the shit out of those who don't.
Federal employee unions would be an obstacle, so government should be structured to weaken collective bargaining by outsourcing. Just as military contractors are now required to obey the UCMJ in some theaters of war, Federal contract employees could be both held accountable yet outsourced so they can be shitcanned.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
The article isn't about the Internet getting owned, it is about government agencies
I never said 'the internet getting owned', but rather people. The same people who would be involved in any decision made, be it in a city council office or over the internet. You know...regular people.
No, the "something" and consequences are quite specific, and it's not just Mrs Betty Windsor (if it helps, she doesn't like being called that, but I'm in no danger of being arrested for just typing it). The shortest summary I can think of is five words, or three and a number.
Blank until
Further evidence that computer security is a myth.
Your ability to protect information from unauthorized consumption will always be inversely proportional to the desire of determined individuals to know that information.
If you really want to protect files, keep them unconnected to the internet. The only way to win is not to play.
If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
Your ideas sound like a great way to drive the truly competent government employees into the private sector.
You'll end up with a work force that matches the military population:
10% devastatingly clear-headed people
10% fantastically apathetic people
80% angry drunks
Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
We've had viruses and malware since *at least* the 16 bit days, and probably even longer than that.
If I remember a book I read about twenty years ago correctly (and I probably don't), the first virus was written on a mainframe sometime around 1970 as a programming exercise.
Malware makes the damn *headline story* on the BBC and CNN on a regular basis. You pretty much have to be willfully ignorant to not be aware that it exists.
People are ignorant and apathetic. That computer at work? Who cares, it's not my computer, and it's IT's job to keep viruses out. Home computer? Who cares if it sends spam?
They truly don't realise the consequences, because we have been ineffective in teaching them. It's OUR fault.
Free Martian Whores!
If we get the same efficiency as the military, I'd gladly take the trade.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
The US military lost track of ~2.3 trillion US $.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTwCRuwJc34
Now data is going too due to an addiction to MS via 75,000 computers.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Only if you advocate use of force as a means of achieving it. Advocating it via legislative process is perfectly legal, and in fact Australia had a referendum on the matter in 1999 (the process was gamed by a monarchist prime minister, so we ended up with a proposed government model so odious not even the hard core republic supporters wanted to touch it).
The odd part about the monarchy in Australia is that the Queen is basically a rubber stamp, the duties are actually performed by the Governor General. There's an excellent article about this and the implications of an Australian republic here if you're interested.
Blank until