Slashdot Mirror


Hacked Companies Fight Back With Controversial Steps

PatPending writes with this report on companies taking aggressive steps to deal with electronic attacks: "Known in the cyber security industry as "active defense" or "strike-back" technology, the reprisals range from modest steps to distract and delay a hacker to more controversial measures. Security experts say they even know of some cases where companies have taken action that could violate laws in the United States or other countries, such as hiring contractors to hack the assailant's own systems. Other security experts say a more aggressive posture is unlikely to have a significant impact in the near term in the overall fight against cybercriminals and Internet espionage. Veteran government and private officials warn that much of the activity is too risky to make sense, citing the chances for escalation and collateral damage." If you've been involved in such an action, how did it work out for you?

41 of 320 comments (clear)

  1. Asking you to break the law? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just remember, if a company asks you to break the law then you deserve what's coming to you when you get caught.

    1. Re:Asking you to break the law? by FutureDomain · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Any way we can "strike back" and demolish this MCPC crap? Some slashdotter who finally gets fed up and trashes their servers would be a nice punishment.

      --
      Hydraulic pizza oven!! Guided missile! Herring sandwich! Styrofoam! Jayne Mansfield! Aluminum siding! Borax!
    2. Re:Asking you to break the law? by sociocapitalist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just remember, if a company asks you to break the law then you deserve what's coming to you when you get caught.

      Well..if the US government (stuxnet for example) can do it (with no declaration of war), then it mustn't be illegal right? /ironyoff

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    3. Re:Asking you to break the law? by non-plus · · Score: 5, Interesting

      once, we had a less-than-skilled attack on a company i was network admining at. I traced the source down to an ISP in a South American country and ISP and I contacted them stating that such-and-such IP on their network was engaging in an attack on my company. I asked them to look into this and block the user from hitting us thru the routes I provided. They said there was nothing they could do. I asked them what other recourse I had. They told me there was nothing I could do but shut down our systems and hope it went away. I asked them if I could take action to stop it and could I get and e-mail statement to that effect. They sent me an e-mail stating there is nothing they could do and I could do whatever I needed to correct the situation.

      I ran it by the legal guys. got a thumbs up. put on a darker hat.

      moved a bit of traffic off the oc-12 we had and proceeded to clobber the offending IP address and the nodes at the far end (ISP equipment). I got a very polite call after about an hour telling me that the offender has been pulled off-line and asking if I would be so kind as to stop defending myself as it was killing their network. I stopped my defense and was given a few names with contact info to call in the future should the needs arise.

      a good result.

  2. I do the following by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I simply drive to the GeoIP location with my illegal police baton and smack the head of whoever happens to be there at the time when I arrive. I've been doing this for a few years now.

    1. Re:I do the following by JTsyo · · Score: 5, Funny

      This explains the concussion I received at Starbucks last month.

  3. Stupid by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What are you going to do, DDOS some script-kiddie's computer?

    The only time I've ever heard of something like this working out, it was when someone actually went to the effort to find out who was hacking them, and then turned the case over to the police. There was a story like that covered here on Slashdot several years ago.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:Stupid by Wolfling1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      A couple of months ago, when I ws selling my motorbike, I received a few of those 'I'm on an offshore oilrig and I want to buy your bike' spams. I was curious, so I constructed a honeypot to see if I could gather some intel on the perps before going to the police.

      Sure enough, within a day, I had IP addresses and was able to resolve to the attackers location. He was stupid enough to not be using a proxy, and stupid enough to leave some vulnerabilities open on his PC - that made it very easy to be certain that he was the attacker.

      I collated my data, and presented it to the Feds. They weren't interested. Couldn't even care less.

      So I contacted the attacker independently (through my own proxies), and let them know that they should get better at what they're doing, or get out of the game. They didn't try to contact me again.

      I can understand why people would be tempted to undertake their own vigilante actions.

    2. Re:Stupid by SuricouRaven · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The law is only for those who commit really serious crimes, like copyright infringement.

  4. Worked out quite well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I got the location of the punks house and nailed his mom while he was in the basement.

    Feeding time came around and mom did not bring down the hot pockets according the regular schedule and he peeked his head above ground.

    Said, "Hi. I'm from the company you were trying to hack. By the way your Mom is quite talented. Going to be around more often"

  5. Re:Not true that fighting back doesn't work. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    95% of the time your "retaliation" isn't being targeted at the actual attacker, you are far more likely to be attacking some 3rd party's legitimate, vulnerable server that is acting as a re-director for the attacker. Now the 3rd party is going to be pissed that you're harming their business.

  6. Strike Back tech by GremlinInExile · · Score: 4, Funny
  7. Look out for the ICE! by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 5, Funny

    Obviously, they're in the process of developing Gibson's black ICE!
    We should be afraid.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  8. Not even his computer. by khasim · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If the script-kiddie knows anything at all he'll be attacking from a zombie he's already "owned".

    I think this is more sensationalism than fact.

  9. Re:Not true that fighting back doesn't work. by smileygladhands · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I was doing due diligence on a computer security firm once who had be subject to a DDoS blackmail attack, you know, give us $5,000 or will we will keep your web site down. Well they back traced the control to some cyber cafe in eastern Europe and worked with the State Department to actually get the local police to go in and arrest the people involved.

    If someone is actively hacking you then hacking them back isn't a crime (or it shouldn't be) its just self defense. And if you have to hire some firm to do it I don't see how it is any different than hiring armed security guards or private detectives.

    If the law says you can't defend yourself from someone trying to ruin your business then the law is an ass.

    Equal to "If someone breaks into your home, you should be able to break into their home."

  10. Best defense.... by gstrickler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1. Never put sensitive data on a computer connected to the internet, unless it absolutely must be there.
    2. Never keep sensitive data that you don't need, overwrite it, then delete.
    3. Never put confidential data into any computer system, networked or not. If you must, do so only if it's encrypted and secured by strong authentication at all times.
    4. Use all practical forms of security, firewalls, strong authentication, multiple networks with isolation, IDS, AV/anti-malware, no running as Admin/root, separate accounts for every user with appropriate access restrictions, including separate accounts for any services running on your servers, whole disk encryption, etc.

    The first 3 are what I call the "Mr Miyagi" approach, "Best defense, no be there." Item 4 is what most companies focus on, but it's not nearly as useful if you haven't used 1-3.

    --
    make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    1. Re:Best defense.... by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Never put sensitive data on a computer connected to the internet, unless it absolutely must be there.

      o_O Not very realistic when we live in an "always on / always connected" world. Everything is merging into the network and stand alone devices are a minority.

      Never keep sensitive data that you don't need, overwrite it, then delete.

      Also, you should burn all the clothes you haven't worn in over a week (you obviously don't need that many clothes), not have a junk drawer, and while you're at it, delete any data on your system with an access time older than 3 months. Also, delete sarcasm.sys ...

      Never put confidential data into any computer system, networked or not. If you must, do so only if it's encrypted and secured by strong authentication at all times.

      Confidential, defined: Everything that isn't out on the curb with a big sign that says "Free" on it. Also, you should stop using the internet since most of it isn't secured and uses strong authentication... there's never a reason to use plain-text data exchanges. I mean, I don't even leave the house without my PGP key, and when I hangout with my friends, we use finger signs that are one-way encrypted... because otherwise someone might understand us and that would be bad.

      Use all practical forms of security, firewalls, strong authentication, multiple networks with isolation, IDS, AV/anti-malware, no running as Admin/root, separate accounts for every user with appropriate access restrictions, including separate accounts for any services running on your servers, whole disk encryption, etc.

      Basically, throw everything you can at the problem and hope something stops the attacker, and if you frustrate everyone who has to use the system because it requires 30 character long passwords rotated every 15 minutes, 9 levels of encryption, and a sample of hair, blood, finger print scan, iris scan, and ass cheek measurements... it might not be secure enough to protect grandma's secret goolash recipe.

      The first 3 are what I call the "Mr Miyagi" approach, "Best defense, no be there." Item 4 is what most companies focus on, but it's not nearly as useful if you haven't used 1-3.

      I take a somewhat simpler approach to security: Build it so that breaking it costs more than the value of what you're protecting. There is no perfect security. All of it can be hacked. Your only responsibility, professionally, ethically, morally, is to make it cost them as much or more to break through than whatever is being guarded. Criminals are just as rational as anyone else: They go for the low hanging fruit, the most gain for the least effort. I call it the "Mr. Bear Grylls" approach, 'You only have to run faster than the guy next to you when escaping a lion."

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
  11. Re:Not true that fighting back doesn't work. by bky1701 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind, especially when the guy who just got poked in his good eye opens fire on everybody else.

    To me, tracking them down (let me guess, you can do a traceroute?) isn't exactly hacking by any means. Finding the person and telling law enforcement is not hacking, it is arguably the antithesis of hacking (not to say you got the right person, but that's aside the point). That makes your later claim that this is somehow like having someone holding a gun to your head, thus justifying "self defense," all the more confusing.

  12. Companies are known to strike back by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There are companies that I know, who employed "private contractors" to do things that they can not legally do, to "make things right"

    One of those companies, when its refinery was damaged by some African guerillas, got its own "private contractors" to hit back, and they hit back very very hard

    So, I am not surprise of what they will do on the Cyberwar front - the "private contractors" can do anything for you, so long as you pay them

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Companies are known to strike back by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 5, Funny

      Might one contact such "private contractors" via Soldier Of Fortune magazine?

      You want the best, right? A few years ago a crack commando unit was sent to prison by a military court for a crime they didn't commit. These men promptly escaped from a maximum security stockade to the Los Angeles underground. Today, still wanted by the government, they survive as soldiers of fortune. If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire them.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    2. Re:Companies are known to strike back by Sir_Sri · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In that situation you should pay off the local government police and or military forces. If you can't pay them more than the local militias or criminals, you shouldn't do business there.

      That is, in effect, what happens in civilized countries. You pay taxes for police services, if the services aren't up to the task you pay (technically 'lobby') politicians to write laws for you that will get the police up to the task or out of the way.

      cyber security is a different matter. There's no one you can pay unless you're a huge multinational, and even then you may not have a presence wherever the problem initiated from. If you're hacked domestically you have the same recourse as physical security, call the police, if there aren't laws that will cover you, pay politicians to write some. But if you get hacked from a foreign country there's really nothing you can do except build hardened systems in the first place. Counter hacking doesn't seem like a good idea, because they, being criminals, are somewhat less hindered by morals and laws than you are, and can retaliate thusly. I suppose if you're really big you pay politicians in both countries to write treaties for you. But that would just serve to make counter hacking illegal.

    3. Re:Companies are known to strike back by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Companies hell, I've had cops come up to me in the shop that wanted obviously illegal stuff done, frankly i think they had seen too many episodes of CSI and actually thought you could hack a network with a VB GUI.

      But honestly this kind of shit surprises me not in the least, anyone who has read some of the stuff that has been dumped onto Wikileaks knows that you can buy pretty much anything if the money is good enough. Personally I'm waiting for a cyber version of the Pinkertons, a little private army you can hire to do whatever dirty little thing you need done in cyberspace. After all thanks to many otherwise pretty damned lawless countries having Internet access in a way its like the wild west only the criminals don't have to physically come over the border to do their raiding before heading back to their personal hole in the wall. So to see the corps fighting back when the law itself can't really do shit thanks to countries that don't play by the same rules? Really not surprising.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    4. Re:Companies are known to strike back by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ... i think they had seen too many episodes of CSI and actually thought you could hack a network with a VB GUI.

      I cringed as much as the next nerd when I heard that line, but if you think about it it actually make sense. The fact that the terms are inaccurate is immaterial. She could have told them she fired up Backtrack 5 and used a known buffer overflow vulnerability in $PerimiterSwitchSoftware to get access to the internal network, and a remote code execution attack to enable directory traversal and and run w3svc as Admin, giving her free reign over the network. Would they have understood any more?

      You're thinking of it as the actress saying lines for your amusement. She's not. She's telling a colleague, who wouldn't understand anyway, a bunch of buzzwords and jargon to dissuade them from getting too involved in something which will only confuse them, and distract them from their own involvement in the situation.

      If Finance ask you about backups, do you tell them about cron jobs and the difference between differential and full backups? No, you tell them it's daily and hosted off site, and they should worry more about getting your pay cheque ready for the last Friday of the month.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  13. Indeedy by obarthelemy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've been in contact about a job with a French cybersecurity company that has subsidiaries in 3 countries to be able to be able to offer 24x7 service, and, avowedly, do stuff (counter-attack for ex.) that would be illegal in France.

    I don't have a big issue with counter-attacks existing, and being nasty (let's face it, if you beat on me, I'm gonna beat on you). I do have an issue with the potential for counter-attack evolving into spying and pro-active stuff. I'm sure they're doing it already.

    --
    The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
  14. Honeypots, misinformation by Dan+East · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I would think lots of honeypots, dead ends, and misinformation would be effective. It would be difficult for the hacker to know when they have accessed legitimate machines or information. That's one of the problems with typical security is that it typically provides confirmation when an access attempt has failed. If instead of indicating failed access, you instead direct them to bogus data, it would make the hacker's life rather miserable.

    --
    Better known as 318230.
  15. Re:Not true that fighting back doesn't work. by girlintraining · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If someone is actively hacking you then hacking them back isn't a crime (or it shouldn't be) its just self defense. And if you have to hire some firm to do it I don't see how it is any different than hiring armed security guards or private detectives.

    Real world thinking doesn't apply here. In the real world, if someone attacks you, you can beat them up and claim self-defense because you know it was them. In the digital world, very likely the person you are targeting is innocent. If a computer DDoS' your network, you don't DDoS them back, you block that IP address -- because criminals don't use their own computers to conduct attacks, and neither do they sign every packet with their name, address, and phone number. So when you unload on who you think is attacking you, then (by your own logic) they have every right to retaliate against you! At that point you've created the digital equivalent of a bar room brawl, but with weapons of mass destruction. And with every response by either party comes the increased risk of drawing another person into the conflict.

    If everyone, or even a substantial minority, follows this logic it leads to the internet becoming lawless war zone where business simply cannot be conducted anymore because the network's reliability has been shot to hell. And let me be clear: You're not above screwing up. Even major name security researchers from businesses that specialize in this routinely get the names of the people involved wrong. Often. Open wifi, proxies, bot nets, the number of ways you can appear to be someone other than yourself is dizzying. Hell, I'm posting this through Tor... good luck even finding out who I am. Criminals have access to much better security than that... what do you think the odds are of figuring out who they are if you can't even figure out who I am when I'm making no special effort to hide my real identity?

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
  16. What if it was a hospital? by khasim · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If your system is compromised you do not have the right to have it keep running and attacking people. That is the responsibility any node on the network holds inherently.

    That's a great idea right up until it is a server in a hospital that is being used for the attack.

    More like, if someone is assaulting you you should be able to punch back just as hard, or hard enough to make them stop.

    No. I'm going to have to go with the other post:

    Equal to "If someone breaks into your home, you should be able to break into their home."

    And not just that but also a house you THINK belongs to the attacker when it is just one that the attacker is using.

    1. Re:What if it was a hospital? by NormalVisual · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Might as well bring down that server - if there happened to be patients died as a result, it's not your fault either, it's the fault of the hospital IT staff that let their server to be compromised

      I'm guessing the court probably won't feel the same way when you're sued for everything you've got by the dead patient's family and the hospital, especially when an expert witness testifies that all you'd have to have done to stop the attack was insert a couple of firewall rules or null route the target IP for a little while.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    2. Re:What if it was a hospital? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Might as well bring down that server - if there happened to be patients died as a result, it's not your fault either, it's the fault of the hospital IT staff that let their server to be compromised

      Yeah, well, that's your opinion. The law disagrees. A server of ACME Inc. was used by Black Hat to attack your server, which means Black Hat broke the law and, if caught, will be in trouble. The problem is that you, too, attacked ACME Inc.'s servers, and now you're in trouble too. In fact, you're in more trouble than Mr. Black Hat since he used 7 proxies while you or your contractor didn't.

      And in military parlance, it's called "collateral damage"

      Correct. But you and what army is going to convince the judge that you're free to kill innocents too?

  17. Re:Not true that fighting back doesn't work. by bky1701 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Denial of Service is difficult to defend against, but it is impossible to retaliate against, since it universally uses botnets. It is not "hacking," either. You basically have no recourse of any kind in that situation other than some not-so-useful technical stopgaps to mitigate damage. If you go after people who "attacked you," you're simply further hurting innocent civilians, and deserve to be slapped with the same jail time as the original attackers.

    In the case of actual hacking, I have no sympathy. Use proper security and you will not need to worry about it. Unlike denial of service, most commonly exploited security holes are easily fixed - especially if you know they exist (which extortion implies.) Trying to hack back while you have security holes still present in your systems is asking for serious trouble.

  18. Re:Got him back good by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 5, Funny

    You had logs and were still penetrated? What OS has logs and gets penetrated?

    Well, if you're talking back doors, penetration, and encountering logs,you're probably talking OSX!

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  19. Good luck with that. by khasim · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Might as well bring down that server - if there happened to be patients died as a result, it's not your fault either, it's the fault of the hospital IT staff that let their server to be compromised

    Good luck with that in court. I'm sure the judge and jury will completely understand your need to risk the lives of patients because you wanted to.

    After all, if you were competent then you'd be able to block the attacks or at the very least mitigate/ameliorate any possible damage from them.

    You mean, the attacker using a server in the hospital to attack you is okay, but it's not okay when you retaliate ?

    I mean that if a patient dies because of the cracker then it isn't your concern.

    But if a patient dies because YOU decided to take out that server ... enjoy your stay at the Federal Pound Me In The Ass Prison.

    1. Re:Good luck with that. by cold+fjord · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No court system in the world has any jurisdiction over "private contractors", or they won't be "private contractors"

      Either you are trolling or there is a huge gap between your understanding of the law and what the situation actually is. I suggest you talk to a lawyer before you test your theory in real life.

      I hope you aren't mixed up in this nonsense: Sovereign Citizens: Radicals Exercising 'God-Given Rights' or Fueling Domestic Terrorism?
      That would be unlikely to end well. Sovereign Citizens - A Growing Domestic Threat to Law Enforcement

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  20. Re:Not true that fighting back doesn't work. by mysidia · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Equal to "If someone breaks into your home, you should be able to break into their home."

    It's more like "If someone breaks into your home, you catch their license plate number. You should be able to break into whatever house the license plate is registered to, and see if you can find your stuff."

    No you don't. Investigating the crime is law enforcement's job.

  21. Re:Got him back good by blueg3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You had logs and were still penetrated? What OS has logs and gets penetrated?

    All of them.

  22. Slashdot is Toast by DougReed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've just about had it. Slashdot used to be news for Nerds. Now it's almost entirely mindless bullshit, and the last straw is when spammers are permitted to confiscate the site, and Slashdot management allows it. As if it's my job to waste my mod points to mark this crap as Troll.

    I am logging off, and deleting Slashdot from my home page. Have at it trolls. All yours now.

  23. Re:Not true that fighting back doesn't work. by rtaylor · · Score: 5, Informative

    Many botnet clients apply security patches to prevent others from taking the machine.

    --
    Rod Taylor
  24. Re:Not true that fighting back doesn't work. by lightknight · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, theoretically, if one were so obsessively inclined, it is possible to spelunk your way upstream, router by router, to track down the offending computers, even when the attacker is using forged IP addresses. Although, I imagine that even the cozy relationship that the various law / intelligence agencies and the various network providers normally enjoy would immediately become rather frosty if they found you doing that.

    Once you have one member of the offending botnet, you find out how it has been compromised. A quick port scan can be telling here, but compromising the machine by other methods can be done, if necessary. Then you'd probably copy the botnet software to a VM for some dissection. Then you'd probably create some software of your own, to silently log any future connections to that machine, while trying to figure out how the botnet is being controlled. Eventually, you'll be able to track down the original (command) computer (even if they're using an IRC channel, or website, or relaying a command from one machine to the next ala Whisper Down the Alley style), and then the fun starts...botnet operators HATE IT when you compromise their command machines, and use the built-in webcam to take a picture of them. They really hate it when you record video. They're even more surprised when they're running Ubuntu, and think Linux would somehow prevent them from being hacked...

    But yes, the obvious answer to an attacker on your network is to run to the comms room, and physically remove the network cables. As for the above, well, it's hard to find a programmer that's been angered deeply enough to engage in that kind of investigating.

    --
    I am John Hurt.
  25. Re:Not true that fighting back doesn't work. by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's a common misconception in many countries, I *highly* recommend you verify that information for your geographic area.

  26. Re:It's up to /. by drkim · · Score: 4, Funny

    Perhaps we could use something called "active defense" or "strike-back" technology to fight these MCPC floods?

    Ooops. Sorry guys, that put us accidentally back on-topic.

    Carry on...

  27. Re:Revision by TFAFalcon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So what happens when people start faking attacks on their server, so they have an excuse to attack their competition?