Someone in the CIA is looking for funding...
Just my 2�.
-Al
Gosh, oh golly-gee, do you really think that they would do something like that (planting a story)?
--Steve
Is it really hard to believe that the Chinese government would actively fund
cyberterrorism?
Deepak Jain
AiNET
Once upon a time, Deepak Jain <deepak@ai.net> said:
Is it really hard to believe that the Chinese government would actively fund
cyberterrorism?
Why not? Our government does, although they don't call it that: they
call it Microsoft. 
The ratio of useful traffic to spam/attacks from APNIC space is already so
low as to be nearly non-existent. A little active help from a governmental
body couldn't make it much worse than it already is.
I put nothing past them, of course theyre not alone, as we all must assume by now.
Theyve threatened to nuke LA if we interfere with their plans to take Tiawan by force, and smile and say, kill 300 million of us, do us a favor. Kinda hard to deal with an enemy like that.
Rounding up 1 significant figure would reduce their combat effectiveness
measurably.
The threat to LA is the best available because I don't think they have a
missle delivery vehicle capable of reaching any East Coast cities.
We're off-topic, but I'd say that cyberterrorismis far less expensive to
create than invasion or nuclear weapons.
Deepak Jain
AiNET
Rounding up 1 significant figure would reduce their combat effectiveness
measurably.The threat to LA is the best available because I don't think they have a
missle delivery vehicle capable of reaching any East Coast cities.
The Chinese had the shenzhou 2 capsule in orbit for 7 months in 2001...
more recently shenzhou 3 went up with and safely returned nine eggs after
108 orbits...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1948000/1948317.stm
One would suspect that that they're far more interested in launching 12-14
ton commercial payloads with the long-march 2ea, then they are in blowing
up the US.
No harder than it is to believe that the US Govt would actively fund
[cyber]terrorism...
We're off-topic, but I'd say that cyberterrorismis far less expensive
to
create than invasion or nuclear weapons.
Deepak Jain
AiNET
(At the risk of sounding corny)
A communications disruption could mean only one thing: invasion.
- James
How many PC's and components are 'Made in China'?
In the dark ages, I worked for Williams Electronics. We made Arcade Games
*blush*. Once we found our custom chip was reverse engineered in Taiwan, and
they were shipping knockoffs six weeks after we started shipping the real
product.
If true, these are not script kiddie type threats. I hate to say it, but 911
is an example that the unthinkable isn't.
Bruce Williams
"A healthy paranoia is the beginning of sound operations policy"
Gosh, oh golly-gee, do you really think that they would do something
like that (planting a story)?
Well, officially, we've decided that we don't do disinformation:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/02/dod022602.html
Of course, the tinfoil helmet brigade, and most even-more-reasonable
people, would note that "we're closing down our Office of Disinformation"
would be the last we'd hear of it......
You know, "we" all my be the first to see and understand that such a attack is in progress...attacks against critical targets can come from anywhere with distributed computing. Even IF we detected it happening, the question is, who would you tell, and more importantly, "do you trust YOUR government" with that information? With whats gone on to neutralize the Constitution since 9.11, its hard to say just who IS the enemy. I know the whole process of turning the US into a police-state is un-nerving to say the least. But I digress....
That whole article thats in the LA times is a rehash of the article that was on C4I.org back when the US spy plane was held in China. Interesting to see some reporter dug it up and made it frontpage again. Why?
Has anyone noticed how the stories about insiders trading and selling airline and insurance company stocks short just before 9.11 disappeared real quick. Someone had plenty notice it seems.
If true, these are not script kiddie type threats. I hate to say it, but 911
is an example that the unthinkable isn't.
I'm waiting for the first worm that erases kernal32.dll and krnl32.exe and installs some other operating system...with my luck, it'll be cobol or fortran.
heh..
First of all: Does it matter if the Chinese Govt' is launching the attack
or the kid next door?
Personally, I would think if the Chinese Govt' has any sense at all, they
surely look into cyberwar. Which respectable government doesn't ?
In my opinion the real problem/story is the uphauling state of internet
security. I am running DShield.org and regularly try to talk to people
that show up as 'top attackers' in our list personally on the phone.
Just a quote from a guy that identified himself as "MIS Department" for a
public interest group (from memory, not word by word):
Me: "I think your PC with the IP address xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx is infected
with the Nimda virus and also used as an IRC proxy"
MIS-Dept: "Are there any more number to an IP address or is this it?"
(later he kind of suspected that his boss's desktop may be infected.
It is still scanning nicely so far.)
Other identified Nimda infections included a little mortage broker/bank
and an office from a large tax preparation company.
And thats just Nimda, which is pretty much 'in your face' as it scans
quite actively. Don't get me started on all the home PCs used for botnet,
ircs proxies or whatever the backdoor d'jeur is.
I don't think a government effort will change anything. Somehow,
the 'net' has to find a mechanism to deal with this. The problem is
way too international. I am experimenting with a 'block list'
lately of netblocks that are very active scanners.
(if anybody is interested: http://feeds.dshield.org/block.txt).
It kind of shows the problem. Next to the all-time favorite CN networks,
there is your usual mix of AT&T Broadband, Chello NL, and two
german universities.
Anyway... How many systems are 'backdoored' at any time?
My personal guess is 1 out of 1000. maybe 5000.
(and thats before I had my coffee).
> Gosh, oh golly-gee, do you really think that they would do something
> like that (planting a story)?Well, officially, we've decided that we don't do disinformation:
Sorry, I just had to comment on this pic from the article you pointed us to...
http://www.fas.org/nuke/hew/Usa/Tests/Cshrimp.jpg
In this picture of one of the most explosive nuclear bombs in US history, we
find a small sign at the bottom: "DANGER -- NO SMOKING" :-/