US would lose cyberwar, says security chief

[LoungeMachine]

Sorry. :0

s'aight.

6,000 miles of land borders, 3,000 miles of ocean borders, 100's of thousands of containers coming into ports each day, and a National Guard that is busy guarding oil interests overseas........

Anybody who thinks we're remotely "safe" from any sort of "terrorism" is a fool.

We're going to get hit again.

[LoungeMachine]

Says who, you ??

You're misinformed...as usual...

Oh, please set us straight, oh wise one.....



she could outsmart you on her worst day

[Unchainme]

Yup. The internet was a product of the Pentagon.

Ah yes, as a way to communicate about a nuclear threat during the cold war, if I'm not mistaken?

[jhale667]

Oh, please set us straight, oh wise one.....



she could outsmart you on her worst day

...With one lobe of her brain tied behind her back...

[chefcraig]

Ah yes, as a way to communicate about a nuclear threat during the cold war, if I'm not mistaken?

I wouldn't be surprised. The only reason we have a series of superhighways and interstates crisscrossing the nation is to advance troop movement during wartime, as per Dwight D. Eisenhower.

[kwame k]

Hardly "cyberterrorism" targets (exception being possibly the nuke plants). How can you really fuck with food and water supply facilities themselves with computer hacking unless your disrupted the way in which they are distributed to populations? Most cyberterrorists would go for military/chemical, nuclear and weapons storage sites rather than water or food. These people would rather wipe out large percentages of people in one swoop rather than wear them down by attrition of starvation - not to say that can't be easily done but that would be more of an act of psychological terrorism if anything.

Isn't the psychological aspect the definition of terrorism? Sure, they want to get the most bang for their buck but hitting a relatively small amount of people accomplishes the goal...striking terror into a population.

Funny you should mention the water supply, I have been thinking about Manitou's water supply and since it's distribution center is on The Ute Pass Trail, I walk by it at least once a week.

This is purely a general statement and depending on the age or upgrades that have been done to the water distribution center, depends on how much "hacking" can be done.......you could, in theory, confuse the system's senors into think there is too much or not enough water flowing through. Therefore, increasing or shutting off the water supply to a community.....increasing it to a point, in theory, could burst the pipes, flood the reservoir or completely shut off the water supply.

Are people actively trying to hack into say....Manitou's water supply, no. Would it be easy to do? Maybe.

The water distribution/monitoring center, while it's fenced off and does have security cameras, the weakness is it uses a widely available wireless internet carrier.....you don't need to trespass or be James Bond to see where the satellite dish is, it's on the side of the building with the company's logo on it. Now just doing a Google search on that company's services you can find the weakness that other people have found and generic hacks. Get a sniffer type program, sit on the trail, pickup the wireless signal and try to hack into it.

Now I don't see anyone trying to do this and I would never risk my job and freedom to do this but it can be done. It's not a major threat but if Manitou's water system is monitored by a wireless system, I have to imagine many others are....it makes sense because the cost of hard wiring a system is too prohibitive. The same is true for the electrical grid, traffic lights and vital services. It's a known fact that our electrical grid was hacked and there was embedded programs uploaded into those systems.

When I worked for Concast hacking into or infecting a personnel computer is fucking child's play. Their other weakness and a dirty little secret is Concast scabs out it's IT, billing, and customer services to subcontractors in some areas and their employees work from home. Most of the hacks that have been done to Concast were done by these people.....not maliciously but because they were not properly trained or careless with their sensitive information, getting a password for say the billing program is really simple.

Scabbing people's wireless connection was the biggest complaint and when you see they didn't even WEP or WPA their wireless routers, sitting outside someone's house will get you a connection. This has nothing to do with National Security but it does cost millions of dollars to replace, reformat or loss of information. Concast uses publicly available wireless router and doing a Google search on how to recover a WEP or WPA key is available from those manufactures.

Corporate security and sabotage is where the action is.....most people are fucking lazy and passwords are a joke as a means of securing a network or data. When cost comes down you'll see fingerprint or other means of accessing data/networks.

One of my mentors showed me the easiest way to hack a computer system is going into that company's offices. Very easy to do and once inside you'll find passwords under keyboards, in unlocked drawers or easy to find or guess. Birth dates, anniversaries, names of pets or children's information.......people are creatures of habit and hanging out at the companies local watering hole will get you tons of information, while small bits, it adds pieces to the overall puzzle. Corporate security usually includes poorly paid/trained security guards and millions spent on securing their networks and data but most fail to realize that if I can get into your building, I'm at ground zero. Most companies pay lip service to security but they are very complacent when it comes to inside their buildings.

[PETE'S BROTHER]

I wouldn't be surprised. The only reason we have a series of superhighways and interstates crisscrossing the nation is to advance troop movement during wartime, as per Dwight D. Eisenhower.

i thought it was for easier evacuations in case of attack. probably a combination of both.

[Kristy]

Isn't the psychological aspect the definition of terrorism? Sure, they want to get the most bang for their buck but hitting a relatively small amount of people accomplishes the goal...striking terror into a population.

It's all about the scale in which you do it. Maybe the lines between "cyber crime" and "cyber terrorism" have become blurred. Shutting down a power grid and screwing up street lights patterns will have little effect upon a population other than panic and chaos (if it happened during rush hour) instead of being in grave danger. Now would the police be able to handle that on a large scale? Probably not. On the other hand, if you can hack into military or governmental communications and get them to send false information and intelligence back and forth to each other where the military might attack civilian targets is a completely different matter. "Cyber crime" seems to be directed at financial or economic infrastructure rather than a municipality populace. One would involve local or government law enforcement as opposed to military firepower that could devastate populations on a lager scale. All the cyber terrorists would have to do in that is sit back and watch. It's a scary scenario either way just that I'm looking upon it as one being way more severe than the other.

[Kristy]

"Concast" Heh, I just got that. Their crappy "Triple Play" package is financial terrorism right there for what they charge and the inept service you get.

[Blackflag]

I couldn't possibly give less of a shit about "cyberterrorism." But I'm sure we're going to throw a few trillion dollars at this boogeyman.

I'm sure the companies with something to sell the government are the ones who keep beating this drum.

Cunts.

[Nickdfresh]

My father once worked for what has become Niagara Mohawk (electric). During the "great blackout" in the late 1960s, it was rumored to have been a precursor to a Soviet attack.

Disrupting major utilities could have an impact in event of war, but I seriously doubt a major conflict would just come out of the blue and that it would take years of belligerent lead up to a major conflict with a country such as China. I think the article is a bit alarmist, but does have a point that the US is more dependent, and thusly more vulnerable, to an attack on technological infrastructure. However, it should be stated that the NSA is rumored to have some techno-smack bombs of their own that could fry anyone's grid (power, internetz, telephone exchanges, etc.) in the lead up to open conflict. In fact, they've been used ever since the First Gulf War, and certainly in the Second one.

As far as terrorists, I'm not sure cyber-terrorism is really "sexy" enough for them. After all, al Qaida's whole point of bringing down the Towers was to cripple the U.S. financial sector, and even that scale of disaster has a relatively minimal impact on the economy. Killing lots of people around a transportation hub seems to be a lot more their cup of tea, and it seems the CIA/FBI/military intelligences have turned much of their internet activities against them..

[Nitro Express]

I travel quite a bit and the only country in the world who wants war right now is the United States. I don't see China wanting war. They only have one child per family and they are doing fine economically without war and they certainly don't want to send their only child off to get killed. Europe doesn't want war. Russia doesn't want war. Sure you always have little squables in the third world but no major power wants war but the US. If we continue what we are doing we may piss ourselves into World War III but the world doesn't want that.

[Nitro Express]

The only thing China wants from us is natural resources and they are getting our coal, oil, and food and our technology which we are giving them. So what is there to go to war over?

[LoungeMachine]

The only thing China wants from us is natural resources and they are getting our coal, oil, and food and our technology which we are giving them. So what is there to go to war over?

I knew some of Alaskan oil goes to Japan.

But China?

And it seems we import more food from China than export

Would make no sense to attack the country you rely on to buy your junk and borrow your cash.....

[Nitro Express]

The main thing you hit with cyber terrorism is the banks. If you erase or freeze up people's money everything grids to a halt.