US Admits CyberWarfare against Yugoslavia 123
Anonymous Coward sent us a piece of cyberwarefare news. The US Military has said that during the conflict in Yugoslavia "cyber" war was used - although refused to get any more details. In related news, the the United States Space Command has been given the responsibilty to better guard the military computer systems against infiltration.
Re:DUH! (Score:2)
nit-pick (Score:1)
Re:Iraq (Score:1)
"In wars of the future, China will face the enemy's more complete information technology with incomplete information technology. Because sometimes superior tactics can make up for inferior technology, China will still carry out its traditional warfare method of "you fight your way, I'll fight my way," and use its strengths to attack the enemy's weaknesses and adhere to an active role in warfare. To do this, it appears that we must pay even more attention to:
- Fully utilizing the advantages of national territory and front information facilities to carry out reconnaissance on the enemy's situation and protect ourselves and attack the enemy
- Developing, improving, and utilizing China's information weapons in a concentrated way to carry out raids on enemy operation platforms and bases and damage and foil the enemy's offensive
- Emphasizing mobile war in the context of information warfare
- Conscientiously organizing sabotage operations by the Army, Navy, and Air Force, grasp exploitable opportunities, and make continuous raids to exhaust and wear down the enemy
- Organizing specialized combined special warfare troops and equip these with information technology weapons to carry out powerful special warfare.
In summary, our warfare methods must adapt to the needs of information warfare. We must use all types, forms, and methods of force, and especially make more use of nonlinear warfare and many types of information warfare methods which combine native and Western elements to use our strengths in order to attack the enemy's weaknesses, avoid being reactive, and strive for being active. In this way, it will be entirely possible for China to achieve comprehensive victory over the enemy even under the conditions of inferiority in information technology."Re:Childish? (Score:2)
I wouldn't assume that this was a DoS attack against Slobodan's Military C&C NT server at www.babykillers.com or some such nonsense. As was pointed out, what real damage could you do? What critical assets are going to be accessible over the public network?
When I read it I got more the impression that it was some sort of attack against closed networks that might have involved a more direct form of sabotage (HERF, jammers, seal teams, etc). Ah dunno, it was pretty sketchy on details so its anybody's guess.
Another story surfaced too... (Score:1)
For the life of me, I can't find the link to it, but Yesterday's Seattle Times newspaper ran a front page story on "Foriegn Hackers attack Pentagon and military targets". The reporter cited a senate subcommitte's report on a code name project that was just made public by the Pentagon. I guess there is an extensive investigation going on where they (Pentagon) has traced back intrusions from Russian computers.
They claim "vast" amounts of information, most unclassified, was stolen from various departments. NASA is included in one of the attacks. This was done over a long period of time with out detection. It claimed they have no idea who is behind the attacks and don't know of any identities of attackers.
If you know anything about this, I'd love to hear more. I can't find any links out there that refer to this. All I have is a newspaper (which I'm not going to retype, sorry). Not even the Seattle Times [seattletimes.com] website has a reference to it, even though it was their story.(?).
Anyway, thought this was relavant to the story above, except in reverse.
-colin.s-
Re:Cyberwar as a replacement for real war... (Score:1)
"The number of suckers born each minute doubles every 18 months."
Re:EMP (Score:1)
Some show on the discovery channel like a few months back, some guy with a pickup-truck mounted microwave transmitter totally zapped a car so the engine stalled, and wouldn't start. They had to enclose the TV camera in a faraday cage to protect it.
"The number of suckers born each minute doubles every 18 months."
I wonder if I would have to .... (Score:1)
Re:EMP (Score:1)
Re:Surprise, surprise (Score:2)
Re:Reality Check. (Score:1)
Re:Surprise, surprise (Score:1)
The wonderful thing is, it does this without killing anyone. Disabling a state's communications grid is not a big deal at all, compared to getting blown to pieces. Personally, if war is ever fought on U.S. soil, I'd much rather have my power and phone shut off than have my house destroyed.
Re:Cyberwarfare, and the next World War (Score:1)
I guess the next wave of mil-sci-fi books ("Honor Harrington", "Miles Vorkosigan" and the like) will be about this type of hacker to hacker warfare. Somewhere between "Ender's Game" and "Crimson Tide".
io'b The Submarine paradigm would probably suit this sort of warfare. You sit in a steel box and work completely by instruments. I wonder is it a coincidence that the US Navy seem to really have a handle on some of this type of making extrapolations from signals seen on the Internet.
Re:Ummm.... (Score:1)
the dogs of war (Score:1)
but apart from preprogramming them with some standard attacks, how could you ensure they would win? you would have to get into online war gaming to be sure your 'bot had the best strategies ... maybe using learning strategies or Genetic Algorithms to grow or modify from some basic strategies.
now that does sound like an appropriate use for beowulf clusters. spread the clusters widely across the internet so as to use the actual infrastructure as part of the physics model. whoever captures the most flags by reducing the functionality or compromising the integrity of your opponent's wins.
sounds a little like the current cracker environment on the 'Net to me ...
Re:EMP (oh, fer chrissakes) (Score:1)
No, EMP does not consist of alpha particles. Alpha particles are simply helium atoms stripped of their electrons. They have a range of a couple inches in air before they strike another atom or molecule and lose their energy, becoming plain old helium.
EMP is just high intensity broadband electromagnetic radiation, like the static you hear on the radio when lightning strikes-- only much stronger.
They're produced by a _high altitude_ nuclear burst, wherein the gammas produced by the device as it detonates cause the creation of a large amount of electrons in the upper atmosphere as they collide with air molecules. Lower level bursts result in a far more localized, but similar, effect.
God forbid you should want to try to inform yourself, but you could just go to google (www.google.com, duh) and search for 'electromagnetic pulse'.
By the way, yes, you can produce EMP without a nuclear weapon. Check www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/kopp/ap
Re:How critical is the internet? (Score:2)
When reading this type of article most of us picture top secret NSA types sitting in front of their monitors and cracking systems. This assumption is incorrect in that it provides unreliable results especially considering during the bombing campaign the the cities where blacked out and there is a good chance that F16 or other aircraft are bombing communication centers (you can't crack a site if you can't connect to it).
It is more likely and i've heard rumors about this from several military contacts that conventional electromagnetic pulse bombs where used. These weopons are generally based on the Northrop GAM Mk.84 bomb kits and can be fitted to a wide variety of aircraft. The use of such a weapon reduces the cost in human lives because it is specificly designed to fry electronic equipment.
Just because it's information warfare doesn't mean the Internet is involved.
FooGoo
Cyberwar as a replacement for real war... (Score:1)
I hope the US continues to use this well into the future.
Re:nit-pick (Score:1)
Re:Recruiting (Score:1)
It's probably less prevalent now, since the average perp they catch is likely a 12 year old with BO2K and a bag of scripts. Not exactly spook material.
Re:Ummm.... (Score:1)
Re:Think, people, THINK! (Score:2)
Command is staffed by officers who are trained to handle that risk. The average hacker, on the other hand, is not.
Cyberwarfare (Score:1)
Hot air this... (Score:1)
I have serious doubts that any of the info released/implied so far, on the subject of Cyber-war against Yugoslavia shoud be taken seriously.
I am Bosnian Serb and as such have lots of friends and family in Yugoslavia. I have lived there until 7 years ago and I've stayed in touch with most of my 'nerdy' friends there, so I believe that I have decent picture of technology and electronic infrastructure there. I have been 'on-line' during the war, constantly exchanging news and 'I am still OK' messages.
There simply isn't anything worth trashing in Yugoslavia that is accessible via Internet except news sites. And that would be way too easy, and as far as I know it didn't happen (not to mention that that would be media war and not cyber war per se).
There were though, warnings on www.beograd.com (Beograd=Belgrade) and other sites of imminent danger that those sites will be 'switched off'. I think this is also more to do with the fact that most Yugoslavian information/news sites are hosted in US, Canada and W Europe. They just couldn't afford bills when their traffic shot trough the roof during the war (they were probably paying for up to xxxxx hits per day).
As far as non-Internet networks and information systems are concerned, I think that customs and tax office has the best network there of all state owned companies/government agencies. And it's not much cop either... Telco (yes, one) is owned by Italians and is being rebuilt but is still 'shot'.
Jane's Defence analysts were forever telling us on Sky News that YU Air-Force had very good fully integrated radar system (unlike Iraq for example). By integrated they meant, optic fiber between sites, all owned and made for Air Force (believe me in 'Old' Yugoslavia we could afford to dig up half of the country side and lay cable for army/air force, and Belgrade only got it's subway 2 years ago). There is/was great number of mobile (Czech and Russian made) radars in YU AF. These are pig to hack into due to their 'sophisticated' design. Anyway, it is irrelevant now - it is well known fact that YU air force kept them switched off for the most of the time to avoid detection by USAF airplanes with radar seeking missiles. Yes this was done at the great danger to human life - sirens were very erratic throughout the war. But Slobodan's (can I call him The Pig on
Only coordinated efforts by Yugoslavians on the Net were two-fold: 1) sites like www.belgrade.com were posting info on Air raids as quickly as they could. But this was too open and so difficult to verify, sometimes obviously exaggerated that no one could take it seriously. ICQ was used to the same effect (dissemination of info/propaganda) and 2) YU, Russian and other hackers sympathetic to YU coordinated some half-decent attacks on western media's and some military web sites, mail flooding of the same and thorough trashing of some unofficial Albanian sites. There is little evidence that US agencies or hackers took these guys on in an organized effort. It is interesting that at the time Sky News, CNN et al reported on 'Captain Dragan' (allegedly ex-Foreign Legion and veteran of war in Croatia '91-'92) and his 'crackers' saturating western media and NATO sites with ping/mail attacks. They had interviewed them on TV and all. Some clandestine operation...
I should also mention that I was in Bosnia just after the war in Yugoslavia, to see some friends and family (some who ran away from Belgrade) and heard horror stories about ISP's there. I had to get something of the Web and asked friend if I could use his account. He told me I could use anyone's account in Bosnia... His kid brother and his mates were cracking main ISP and using other people's ID's and passwords to avoid paying online charges, including ID belonging to one government minister. Two words: Windows NT. Get it?
I think that due to the issues of availability of technology and inflexibility of YU/Russian/etc. defense forces (but probably not intelligence services), US & NATO cyber war efforts will be focusing on defending and prevention of attack from rogue individuals and foreign intelligence service sponsored crackers rather then attacking 'installations' as such. Or taking broader definition of cyber war into account intelligence missions could be/have been conducted in cyberspace in the recent conflicts. I simply don't accept putting up agit-prop web site as a cyber warfare, that would be simplistic view of Sky News and co.
I think that recent 'slips' on the subject of cyber warfare are more to do with counter-acting stories of Russian intelligence and crackers getting into US Defense computers then some serious cyber battles in the very recent time.
*I should probably mention now that I am both strongly anti-war AND anti-Milosevic so I consider my opinions posted on this subject fairly un-biased. I hope that you understand why I am posting this as Anon. Coward ('caus I am a coward
(Apologies for the length of this message)
...and back to reality (Score:2)
S: "Command?"
S: "Command?"
Private: "Sir, they're coming. What should we do? Where's the rendevous? Is the airstrike coming? When?"
S: "Lock and load, son, we stand here."
(multiply by X units in the field)
Information is power, we know that. Controlling it and limiting it for the enemy will be a key to W.A.R. (We Are Right) in the 21st, and any other, century. Not that the above post wasn't funny, it was, but this looked like a good place for my $.02. (BTW: if CmdrTaco had
(~Singing)"Back to life, back to re-al-it-y(/~S)
Re:Childish? (Score:1)
It is somewhat amusing to think of the US engaging in 'cyber warfare'. But the serious part is not so funny. By disrupting the communication channels of the enemy, you leave them more vulnerable to conventional weapons. It might be better to screw up their phone system (for example) than to nuke them. But what if screwing up their phone system prevented a town from telling the rest of the world they were under attack and needed reinforcements?
It's very similar to the situation with non-lethal military weapons. Things like that sticky gunk they spray on people. It is very funny to watch, but if you think about it you start to wonder what happens to the people that get stuck. How hard it is to shoot someone who can't move?
Disrupting electricity is another example. You could argue that disrupting their electricity is better than lethal force. But if you need electricity to detect and defend against attacks, it suddenly becomes a more important issue. Disrupting their electricity could cause as many fatalities as traditional weapons.
Non-lethal weapons can be every bit as scary as guns and nukes.
Be careful... (Score:1)
Army guy#1 "Huh, huh... I, like, ping-of-death'ed him."
Army guy#2 "Dammit! L0phtcrack won't download their pa55w0rdz!!!111!1!1"
But then the spaceship people will come... (Score:1)
But then the spacemen will come and destroy our euthanasia machines to re-aquaint us with the horrors of war that we had long forgotten, having played the war simulation game for generations.
Cyberwarfare is more then just the network. (Score:3)
I work for a company that produces electrical utility relays. For those who don't know a relay in this instance isn't just a little box that you apply power too and it flips a switch that allows greater amounts of power to flow through another circuit. Power relays are complicated microprocessor systems that monitor power lines for trouble, they then trip large breakers that will cut power.
Anyways back to the topic. The power industry is currently moving towards a standardized protocol called UCA. UCA is an application layer protocol that sits ontop of either TCP or a seven layer OSI stack. Within the protocol are things called GOMSFEE objects.
GOMSFEE objects are a standardized way of naming values the relays can report back to whoever has a UCA master station, they also have a standardized way of naming the controls that a relay can accept. Such as 'Trip breaker on feeder to Iraqi command post'. No there isn't a command that is called this exactly that's just an example.
With a standardized way of naming controls, and information, it makes it easier for utilities to control their equipment. And it makes it easier for utilities to figure out what a device is telling them without having to look up a points list. But this also makes it easier for everyone else to as well.
UCA runs over TCP, which means it can run over ethernet and over the internet. If a cyberwarrior knew where a UCA enabled relay was in the world, he could hack his way through the network and then tell it to turn off power to whatever site, and in some cases in such a way that the large UPSes won't kick in. The smaller APC UPSes will always kick in. But if the relay that cuts off main power to a system, also controls the bus transfer to the site UPS, the cyberwarrior can completely shut down a site.
I don't know the UCA protocol as much as I should, but I don't think there are securities built into it like encrypted master/slave authentication. And I really don't think this would matter if it did. I'm pretty sure that a large national defense department will have the legal leverage to foce the equipment manufactures to hand over the keys to let them into the control equipment.
This is only one case of how our connected world makes it easier for the armies/terrorists of the world to do some truely dangerous things. It may be hard to kill a person accross the internet. But if you shut down the bus transfer relays in a hospital that the person is on life support in....
BTW these are my view alone, not my employers. I only deal with UCA from the outskirts at most, so I may be wrong with how it works. But I'm pretty sure I have the basic points of it.
Re:Here's what sort of "cyber warfare" it was. (Score:1)
My memories of FidoNet link back to one vulnerability - just call the sysop's mom and tell her to make her son use the computer for homework instead of those silly BBSes.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
Re:Check your perspective (Score:2)
Re:Recruiting (Score:1)
member for 4 years(ending last week, thank god).
I guarantee you that it was all done by a couple
of otherwise ignorant Airmen and 1LTs who just
downloaded all the new scripts from whatever
site it is you get scripts from nowadays.
While there I was being considered for just this
job, but couldn't get the security clearance due
to my checkered past as a juvenile deliquent.
Had the Yugoslavian gov't been smart enough to apply security patches(maybe ZDNet does their security auditing), the US wouldn't have succeeded.
Hey! (Score:1)
Either way glad the story made it.
We'll get enlisted! (Score:1)
The word "woman" is no longer politically correct.
Surprise, surprise (Score:4)
Well... (Score:1)
Reality Check. (Score:3)
Sure they used "cyber-warfare." Hacking doesn't blow shit up!
This actually has a lot more to do with the Jane's article then is first apparent. Consensus on
I certainly hope that our world will progress to the point that cyber-enabled warfare is a possibility. It may end war as we know it.
But I think we should also remeber that Gatling (of the large spinning machine gun fame) and Nobel (father of blowing things up and inventor of TNT) both thought the same thing of their inventions.
How critical is the internet? (Score:5)
If the net was down for a day due to a dumptruck backing into the air conditioner system letting the computers overheat, satellite was down, someone cut the cable, or whatever, life went on. It was never made into a federal case. Someone may have got a talking to or wrists got slapped. The worst case when the VAX was rooted. The person in charge was fired over the incident and the student was later in school.
Now, it seems people are taking the internet more seriously by putting all their eggs in this basket, but understanding less about what happens to that traffic. The net these days seems to have connotations of Al Gore, Microsoft, AOL, the FBI, and child molesters, and terrorism.
Few people think about the community of people that make this information network happen. Its about people hooking up hardware and writing the software to make it all happen. Money seems to distort the fun nature of all this into corruption.
Al Gore created the internet? Bullshit. Microsoft innovate the internet and the road ahead? Big Lie. FBI and the NSA need to watch it? Keep their Goddamn hands out of it! AOL the internet? They provide many people now, but started off badly.
Iraq (Score:1)
I haven't seen any mention of this type of warfare against Iraq but perhaps that is because the US govt. is still in a 'conflict' state with them, even if it doesn't make a lot of headlines these days.
I don't see any comments about the US's 'cyberstance' against China, either. I would imagine they are just in a monitoring state with China(see Echelon), I can't imagine them releasing Computer virii or doing full scale computer cracks on Chinese networks.
Re:We'll get enlisted! (Score:1)
The word "woman" is no longer politically correct.
Ummm.... (Score:1)
AdamL.
http://sprawl.net
you'd think they wouldn't want to throw stones (Score:1)
Maybe the vulnerability is a ruse. Some old server that the pentagon lets people trash so the real stuff is left alone.
Sneaky bastards.
Recruiting (Score:2)
Are there secret cracker training grounds near Langley, VA?
Or perhaps they get them the "Stainless Steel Rat" way, by asking the crackers that they catch if they'd like to join up and actually get paid to do the things that they do so well?
-Vel
What sort of 'cyber warfare' was it? (Score:1)
So what did the US do? EMP? HERF? Trained rats that chew through the wires?
I can just imagine commando teams of SEALS and Rangers secretly digging thru dumpsters in Belgrade, looking for l337 inph0z. *g*
babelfish doesn't help, need serbia translations (Score:5)
George
(Network Security == Rocket Science) yay : nay (Score:2)
This might be my opportunity to send Mir crashing down onto the AntiOnline servers...
Seriously though, I rather like the fact that these two are now related fields.
Lots from Jar Jar land.. (Score:1)
I like
We attempted something like this... (Score:1)
...against the Iraqis during the Gulf conflict, hoping to disrupt their communications so radar sites couldn't be used in a coordinated manner. I don't think it succeeded, but it was a good first shot at offensive information-warfare operations.
Re:Think, people, THINK! (Score:1)
Cyberwarfare, and the next World War (Score:4)
"Sir, we've got incoming!"
"Lieutenant, keep that firewall up, damnit!"
"Ach! ICMP everywhere! I canna take it anymore!"
"Get me a line to the Pentagon."
"PTPP link established. Using 1024-bit encryption. Go ahead, sir."
[Typed: Colonel Johnson requesting permission to use the secret weapon.]
...
"Crap! They're e-mailing us porn!"
"Damnit! Shut down the routers!"
"Sir, we've got Back Orifice, trying to get in through that last NT server."
"Ahh! Why didn't that get switched to BSD?!?"
"Too much red tape, sir."
"Unplug it. We won't need to worry about rebooting anyway."
"Aye, sir."
"Status on the Linux boxes?"
"They're under a lot of stress, but they are taking it well."
"Good."
"Sir, you know that inefficent router we have? Well, I just found out it's M$ based. We can't shut it off. We're going to have to wait for the porn to finish."
"Damn. I hope HQ gets back to us soon."
...[Incoming message from the Pentagon: Permission granted. Give 'em hell, Colonel.]
"Yes! We have permission! Get ready to launch the secret weapon."
"SMTP online, preparing to send."
"Set it up for HTML plus plain text. I want both mime and UUEncoding. Let's get ready. Images will be 32 bit RGBA. Text is to be as follows: 'Buy! Buy! Buy! *LOW* prices on your favorite collectable items!
...
[Bad Text to Speech Synthesis] "S.P.A.M. launcher ready. Please enter authorization code."
...
"FIRE!"
...
"150 billion spam messages sent. They're falling back! They have offered to surrender!"
Yeah, okay. So, it's kind of long, but I was in the mood to write a dumb story about 'cyberwarfare'.
Re:Surprise, surprise (Score:2)
Re:Cyberwar as a replacement for real war... (Score:1)
Re:you'd think they wouldn't want to throw stones (Score:1)
Re:DUH! (Score:1)
On the other hand when Milosevic tries to use the Internet to push his propaganda, he's out in the cracker's home territory and they can keep him from getting his message out. That's where I would expect the cyberwarfare to have its impact, not on the ground in a relatively backward country. Turning off the lights takes an airplane dropping a carbon-fiber mesh net, not a guy sitting at a keyboard.
Well, that's warfare for you. No matter how fancy the weapons get, sooner or later someone has to put their ass on the line and do some real work.
--
Deja Moo: The feeling that
Re:Stupid and Counterproductive (Score:1)
Not to mention the Serbian Orthodox Church [spc.org.yu] which seems to be pretty heavily wired. They've been vociferously anti-Milosevic.
Re:Stupid and Counterproductive (Score:1)
The article didn't actually say that, but the official sources weren't saying an awful lot. There's plenty of room for speculation.
Check your perspective (Score:1)
I assure you - no one can tell the difference between the guys working in personnel who shuffle papers all day, the guys working in Aircraft maintenance who constantly bitch about funds because they've got 4+ F-16s that just sit in a hanger all day and get scavenged for parts, and the hackers, who sit in front of the computer all day. The hackers hired by the military are normal personnel, from the outside perspective. Do you really think that the military will get so desperate for hackers that they will allow someone to not go to boot camp, not get their hair chopped, and not wear a standard uniform to work every day?
Military hackers are just people, doing their job. The vast majority of these folks are just kids - doing their stint in the service, and just waiting to get out, because - you said it, and so did I - the pay sucks. There are enlisted personnel on base with wives and kids who are forced to live off food stamps, because the military cannot pay them enough to support their families. It's ridiculous, when you stop to think about it. Military service used to be an badge of honor, worn proudly. Nowadays, it seems as if it's a last resort. Kids without too many other options resort to it. Can't get a job that pays well out of high school? Go into the military! They'll take care of you. That's where these military hackers come from. They're kids who don't have any other options.
Do you rememeber that article [slashdot.org] in Rolling Stone by Katz? Those two kids, Jesse and Eric were geeks, but they were stuck in dead-end jobs in a dead-end town. Those are your military hackers. And do you know the worst thing? The military's not a career, not for those types - the private sector is too inviting. The best talent goes to the private sector, leaving our country's information in the hands of the next set of kids that are just using the service as a means to an end.
Re:Moderate up, please (Score:1)
Military wise, it probably would not have been difficult for NATO forces to invade Kosovo. A diversionary strike against Vojvodina probably wouldn't be very costly, either. In Vojvodina, the plains are perfect for tank warfare, and since the plains spread into Hungary, there would be few natural obstacles. A tank battle between NATO M1A2 and Leopard tanks against Russian T-80's would probably be in favor of NATO. In Kosovo, troops on the ground would increase the hit rate exponentially. One other thing that isn't mentioned in the news very often, is that the majority of successful hits on Yugoslav forces were called in by the KLA (indirectly). Air attacks against mobile ground targets is not very effective unless you have a spotter on the ground to call in close air support. Ground forces also decrease the worry of AA, since the ground that is controlled by ground forces is (supposedly) free of enemy AA.
Yugoslav comapnies selling weapons probably isn't a great idea to get an idea of the capabilities of the JNA, since many weapons were supplied by Russia (of course, Yugoslav companies could be offering surplus Russian weaponry, too). But yeah, the JNA was in better shape than the Iraqi army, and in a better defensive position. Of course, it things got too dirty, we could of just given the Ko
sovars heavy weapons and let them do the dirty work.
Cyberwar in Serbia took the form of killing TV stations, radio stations, power subsystems, etc. The primary weapon for taking out power stations was a carbon-fiber bomb. The carbon fiber would drift in the equipment, causing shorts everywhere. Non-destructive, but it takes time to correct. It disables it for the enemy, causing discomfort to the civilian population, but is easy to repair when reconstructing the country. Other uses would be extensions of old tactics like disinformation and propaganda.
Overall, perhaps not as effective as hoped, but Milosevic did effectively lose Kosovo, and Serbia's infrastructure isn't exactly in great shape.
Re:Surprise, surprise (Score:1)
Besides, how is it different from bombing a bridge? It may be chiefly used by citizens, but if the military needs it, too, then I don't see a problem with keeping them from using it.
Comment from Yugoslavia (Score:1)
Best regards from Belgrade...
A-ha! (Score:1)
Them boys in Washington sure are clever.
you misspelled it (Score:1)
Uh Oh... (Score:2)
*KLAXONS, RED FLASHING LIGHTS*
"What is it, lieutenant? Inbound ICBM?"
"No sir. Inbound pingflood from some 3l33t high school jerk."
"Ah, OK. Standard response. But use the 350 Kiloton yield for being stupid enough not to change the source IP."
"Yes sir!"
Do we really want an office where it's your JOB to overreact to be in charge of electronic security?
Just a thought...
Stupid and Counterproductive (Score:1)
Think, people, THINK! (Score:4)
Military pay sucks, and your skills are in demand, so you blow off suggestions that you go through boot camp (who needs that, right?). In another world, the army would respond by offering you huge pay if only you agree to go to boot camp and an officer training course. But there's hardly enough budget to get you even to look at the armed forces, and they need you.
And then a war starts. From the comfort of your office in a military base you set out to root machines on the other side of the front, you're having the time of your life. But, guess what:
you're a fair target for the enemy now. Look sharp, soldier! On the bounce! Forget about going to your favorite net cafe until the end of the war. Don't show your face in public. You don't know who might be waiting to shoot you in the back of the head.
Think about. If you're engaging in efforts to disrupt an enemy's infrastructure, why should he not try to find you and shoot you? Why should you be regarded as a civilian?
So, I don't know uder what terms the military hired its current crop of crackers, but I do have to wonder..
An admittal! (Score:1)
A note to all foreign governments and companies: Grab a copy of *BSD or Linux, and secure it. Not only do you have to fear the local SK's; the US has formally entered the hack business. No longer can you count on the hacked box as some kind of sport; it may be Uncle Sam, stealing your production figures for dissemination to US companies or snagging important defense information.
On the lighter side of things, I'm going to give a call over to the USSC tomorrow and see if I can drum up a job. I've spent too much time hacking my own boxen and not getting paid.
Re:DUH! (Score:1)
--
Deja Moo: The feeling that
Re:you'd think they wouldn't want to throw stones (Score:1)
It's no coincidence that Pentagon and other "break-ins" happen in such close proximity to budget cycles. Go back and look through your Congressional record - you can practically set your clock by it, it's so regular.
Recipe for inflating your budget: put some moderately secured machines on the Internet, allow them to be compromised, express some outrage, wait for a while (but not so long that people forget), and then - presto! [govexec.com] - money falls from the sky!
The military/industrial complex does this all of the time. In theory, a perfect example of this is Area 51 - if I'm the U.S. Government and I have alien technology, I've got plenty of incentive to fake the establishment of a military base for studying that technology, do a half-assed job of covering it up, and then leak it's existence to the press. That way, no one looks for the place I'm stashing the *real* alien hardware.
EMP (Score:1)
Re:Childish? (Score:1)
A lot of the power in having lots of nuclear weapons is the sheer intimidation factor. The actual details of the weapons were closely guarded secrets. All the public knew was that they might be vaporised from 12,000 miles away, with only 20 minutes warning if you're lucky enough to detect the launch. Both the US and CCCP openly admitted having weapons. They even bragged about how _many_ they had.
Bragging about 'cyber-war' without divulging any facts seems like a simliar tactic.
The problem in this case is that unlike the cold war, the US does not have a monopoly on the weapon.
Re:Think, people, THINK! (Score:1)
the recesses of [redacted] wearing a T-shirt that
says "I took out the Serbian Power Grid today!"?
No. Nor would you expect them to log into foreign
systems with their real name and social security
number. If the Enemy is already in your hometown
and shooting people, then it seems to me that
on a military base, surrounded by marines with
really nifty weapons, is a pretty good place
to be; you've got worse problems to worry about.
Re:Recruiting (Score:1)
AFAIK the NSA will put you through college, set you up with equipment and give you a job when you graduate -- maybe sooner.
Re:Recruiting (Score:1)
Re:Recruiting (Score:1)
All located in the friendly town of Tysons Corner, VA
Re:Reality Check. (Score:1)
Re:We'll get enlisted! (Score:1)
"The number of suckers born each minute doubles every 18 months."
Re:Stupid and Counterproductive (Score:2)
I do seem to remember an official using the phrase "diddle with Milosevic's bank accounts" or something like that. {shrug}
Of course, it could be disinformation.
* It _may_ get some reporters off your back -- those who'd be saying "No? Then why not?" if the DOD denied trying it.
* It might concern the Belgrade regime, who are left to wonder if they really *can* trust their systems.
Dear Slobodan, wanna make a million? (Score:1)
Re:Surprise, surprise (Score:1)
The moral: use the approach that works best for the situation. In this case, the military decision was to disrupt communications and services. Not a real surprise, since the primary objective was political, not military.
--
How will "national security" apply here? (Score:2)
Next thing you know, open source will be considered munitions.
---
Re:Think, people, THINK! (Score:1)