Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
United States

US-DOD confirms "cyber-attacks" 52

It's been surfacing throughout the news, but a current article confirms that the Department of Defense computer network has been under attack for the last few months. This came on the heels of another report which supposdly traced the attacks to coming from within Russia-this is an update from one of our prior stories. I can see Tom Clancy salivating now.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US-DOD confirms "cyber-attacks"

Comments Filter:
  • Posted by Tr0ll3r:

    See above.
  • Posted by Tr0ll3r:

    And yet some people will -still- respond with
    page long flames. Its quite good fun.
  • DEFCON 3 my ass....DEFCON refers to the defense posture of all US forces. Raising the DEFCON over an attack on a non-classified network is bullshit - would never happen.

    Plus this goob is violating the rule of thumb of discussing his work publicly. Moron.
  • Heh.. An admitted troll..

    Well, at least they're easy to spot.
  • The article says nothing to distinguish this new attack from random scanning with nmap.
  • come on, even the American military can't possibly be dumb enough to tie sensitive information to the internet with millions of happy hackers out there who could earn millions of dollars selling that information to, say, Iraqi, or Russians, or even French...

    the Gods have a sense of humor,
  • The CNN article is a little vague, to say the least. Antionline [] has a few more details that imply whatever's going on seems at least somewhat above and beyond normal.

    Oh, and BTW (as I submitted Friday, evidently to no avail) they're also reporting that the normally-public-domain NASA tracking data for that UK Defense satellite (Skynet 4D) that was supposedly hacked a couple of weeks back was pulled for the time period in question. Check it out.

    (I'd link directly, but the links don't seem to be working right. Oh well -- they're available from the front page.)

    (Remove "x"'s from

  • Is there a problem I should be aware of regarding Antionline? I've generally found their information to be pretty accurate -- even if you don't like everyone who seems to hang around there.

    (Remove "x"'s from
  • his department is "detecting 80 to 100 [potential hacking] events daily."
    80 to 100 fourteen-year-old script kiddies take potshots at the Pentagon WWW site and this makes news?

    Mark Fassler
    fassler at frii dot com
  • What you fail to understand, is that there are certain pieces of information that a government (or any large organization which has competition,) must keep secret from all parties, including its constituants. T'would be quite horrible if Saddam Hussein were to know US troop movements in advance, or if a group of terrorists learned the location of, then access codes to, a stockpile of US biological weapons? Please, let's not debate whether or not the US does, or even should have, such weapons. The point is, there are certain things that need to be kept secret.
  • (shrug)
  • Check out [] -- great entertainment esp. re: antionline kiddies
  • If the Defense Department is willing to
    admit that they're experiencing "cyberattacks"
    it means that the attacks (a) have not been
    successful and (b) they're planning on hitting up
    congress for lots of cash to defend our cyberspace. Watch out for the soon-to-be announced Hacker Gap.

  • Let's all hope they aren't using NT servers to protect our national defense secrets or control any weapons. Remember the naval "smart ship"? :-)

    On another note, I always wondered what intrusion detection systems were like at high security government agencies. It would be interesting to actually see an incident response team in action, along with any custom software they've developed...
  • I am sure I read that all computers containing sensitive defence information are prohibited from being networked. In fact it was written that the DoD employees got their news on tape in the early days.

    The level of security was so tight that an expert was rumoured to say a security breach would mean a breach of trust. In short treason.

    Has this changed or are these attacks on admin computers, and thus of less significance. Did the DoD relax its security in the face of increasing hacker activity or is this just media hype ??!
  • If the Y2K was even close to as big of a problem as was hyped, then we should already be seeing a large amount of problems.

    Things won't magically stop working at 00:00:01 01/01/2000. The closer we get the more problems we should encounter because a lot of programs which use dates also look forward in time for predictions & scheduling. A few articles commented on this around Jan 1, 99. They said how amazingly smooth the last new year was and there were a lot fewer Y2K problems encountered than anyone expected.

    I've talked with reps from my local power company. He can says that they are ready. The telephone company says the same thing. I've talked to a gasoline company and they say the exact same thing. If I remember correctly, Wall Street did a Y2K test and it passed. And don't withdrawl your money from the banks. For one thing, banks are insured so you'll get your money and for another, I think I remember reading financial institutions have had to prove their Y2K compliant months ago or face serious fines from the US government.

    And IF we loose power, how long does anyone believe it will be out? Power outages happen all of the time (car accidents, storms, & brown-outs) and nobody freaks out.

    The major stuff will keep working and the minor stuff will probably just be an annoyance. The really interesting thing will be how many small companies go belly-up from not being prepared.

    After all, it's just ones & zeros.
  • One thing that is interesting is that the US Military has over 300,000 installations of Microsoft software and is using IE4 as it's browser. Just the fact that these systems are so widespread (and people could find leaks that they don't report to MS) makes it a security risk.
    ----- [] (Submit your Links)
  • a breach of trust can be something like not following proper procedures (passwords, logging off, not working on stuff at home, etc.)

    they are trained and instructed, and are "trusted" to follow the rules, and not do stupid stuff.


"If you lived today as if it were your last, you'd buy up a box of rockets and fire them all off, wouldn't you?" -- Garrison Keillor