Russia and Georgia Engaged In a Cyberwar 276
doctorfaustus writes "I first picked this up in bits and pieces last week off Daily Rotation. A more in-depth story is available at ZDNet, which reports 'a week's worth of speculations around Russian Internet forums have finally materialized into a coordinated cyber attack against Georgia's Internet infrastructure. The attacks have already managed to compromise several government web sites, with continuing DDoS attacks against numerous other Georgian government sites, prompting the government to switch to hosting locations to the US, with Georgia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs undertaking a desperate step in order to disseminate real-time information by moving to a Blogspot account.' There is a question whether the computer work is being done by the Russian military or others. ZDNet's story offers further analysis of the attacks themselves and their origins. Some pretty good reporting." And reader redbu11 contributes the news that Georgia seems to be censoring access to all Russian websites, as confirmed by a Georgian looking glass/nslookup tool. The access is blocked on DNS level (Italy censored the Pirate Bay in the same way). Here are a couple of screenshots (in a language other than English) as of Aug 12th 5:40 pm: www.linux.ru nslookup — FAIL, www.cnn.com nslookup — OK.
ComputerWorld guy CWmike adds "In an intriguing cyberalliance, two Estonian computer experts are heading to Georgia to keep the country's networks running amid an intense military confrontation with Russia. Poland has lent space on its president's Web page for Georgia to post updates on its ongoing conflict with Russia. Estonia is also now hosting Georgia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs Web site."
ComputerWorld guy CWmike adds "In an intriguing cyberalliance, two Estonian computer experts are heading to Georgia to keep the country's networks running amid an intense military confrontation with Russia. Poland has lent space on its president's Web page for Georgia to post updates on its ongoing conflict with Russia. Estonia is also now hosting Georgia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs Web site."
Propaganda? (Score:4, Insightful)
It seems perfectly reasonable to me for one country at war with another to stop information flowing in from the enemy to the local populace.
Re:Propaganda? (Score:5, Insightful)
But since we invaded them, I would say it is absolutely reasonable for them to block our sites from their citizens.
Re:Propaganda? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Propaganda? (Score:5, Insightful)
It seems perfectly reasonable to me for one country at war with another to stop information flowing in from the enemy to the local populace.
If one country (Georgia) moves their websites to some other country (the USA) and the aggressor (Russia) continues the cyber attack, is the aggressor committing an act of war against the "other country"?
If it isn't an act of war, what should the "other country" do about the attack on their infrastructure/website.
Re:Well, that's a relief (Score:5, Insightful)
This was not started by Russia.
Rather than getting into the "he did this, oh yeah, well he did this first" thing that will have us talking about Attila the Hun in short order... I'd just like to point out that Russia's latest response was pretty over-the-top.
Re:let it loose! (Score:5, Insightful)
Define "legally" in a war...
Seriously, black hat, white hat, grey hat or technicolor hat, it kinda loses meaning when legality itself isn't really applicable anymore.
This is not government-conducted (Score:1, Insightful)
How come most people think that the government/military actually unleash those DDoS (or other) attacks? They gain close to nothing by doing so, and the money/skill that is needed for this can be employed better. Everything is much more simple - the government launches heavy media propaganda, and one of its results is that there are suddenly a lot of people who want to do this kind of thing for nothing at all. It was like this during the Russian-Estonian tension - people just consolidated on different boards to DDoS or hack sites (mainly DDoS, since it doesn't take very much skill). Of course, censoring access to sites on a country level is a whole different thing, it clearly shows a government involvement.
Putin picks up his ringing phone... (Score:1, Insightful)
Hu Jintao: Hello, Putin? Its me, Hu. Yeah, I'm fine, how are you? Listen, we need something strong to divert the public eyes from tibet issue during olympics.....
Re:Well, that's a relief (Score:2, Insightful)
From what I hear (in the UK), it sounds like Georgia was testing, toying with the Russians, and got the shock of their life.
But I don't know about the history of the region, so I don't know how accurate that impression is.
It's quite interesting sometimes to read the "Have Your Say" on news.bbc.co.uk [bbc.co.uk] - it's interesting to read a:, what people are saying, and b:, what the masses recommend (mod up).
Recently, there have been a lot of Russians complaining of the EU, Nato, and the US's double standards - supporting Kosovan independence from Serbia, but then they side with the Georgians against the mainly Russian South Ossestia.
Re:Propaganda? (Score:2, Insightful)
But different from NATO bombing the Chinese embassy in Belgrade?
Re:Uh? People? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:let it loose! (Score:3, Insightful)
Define "legally" in a war... when legality itself isn't really applicable anymore.
Now that's just a bit too cynical. War itself involves a lot of actions where the combantants will disagree about legality, but it is meaningful to call some of them "illegal" as a bystander.
For example, if a Georgian troop goes into Russia and kills a Russian troop by firing at him with a rifle, Russia would certainly love to characterize that as "murdering" (i.e. illegal killing of) a Russian citizen. But it's not (in and of itself) a "war crime".
There exist widely respected protocols for what a well-intentioned nation can do to conduct a war, such as the Geneva Conventions and U.N. mandates. They never ban ALL killing of people, and for good reason: if it were to say, "to conduct a just war, you must kill no one", then no nation would respect the authority of that enumeration of norms, and they'd just go back to whatever they were doing before, which could include targeting of civilians, torture, disguising as aid workers, etc.
Re:let it loose! (Score:3, Insightful)
Define "legally" in a war...
See Conventions, Geneva.
Re:Well, that's a relief (Score:5, Insightful)
Though to be fair, if you go and kick a big, tough, strongman in the shins, you can't complain that he reacted disproportionally, and you're now in hospital.
Oh, no question there. Georgia was definitely reckless here.
but then they side with the Georgians against the mainly Russian South Ossestia.
I'm new to this as well and am still catching up on history. But I think that the Russians are more interested in control than they are in the welfare of 70,000 people in South Ossetia. They stuck their nose into a civil war, and then complain when their "peacekeepers" (who actually seem to run the government) get killed in the process. And then granting South Ossetians Russian citizenship when they are still part of Georgia? Well, that's pretty brazen. Even more brazen is claiming that now "Russians" are being killed in South Ossetia. They have effectively annexed South Ossetia... and now are grabbing even more of Georgia to "protect" it.
Re:let it loose! (Score:4, Insightful)
Isn't "causing harm" the idea behind a war? I mean, if I don't want to hurt you, your country, your economy, why bother going to war in the first place? So I can shoot people legally?
So is the attacking hacker a "black hat" and the defending hacker a "white hat"? I guess Russia would disagree.
Re:let it loose! (Score:3, Insightful)
You mean the stuff you'll be tried for in Den Hague when you break it, unless you have bigger guns than the rest of the planet so they don't dare to pull you to the court?
Yeah, I'm sure Russia is afraid of that.
Re:Propaganda? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Well, that's a relief (Score:4, Insightful)
Georgia never gave any Russians permission to act as "peacekeepers" in South Ossetia. If there were any armed Russian "peacekeepers" in South Ossetia they were operating illegally within another country's borders.
Georgia is _entirely_ within its rights to police any province within its borders. None of the allegations of genocide etc have even remotely been substantiated. Russia invaded Georgian territory, that's all there is to it.
South Ossetia is basically a tiny place, ie nowhere near the size of Kosova. If my town (Colchester, which has about the same population as South Ossetia) had a referendum, we might vote for independence from the UK. We wouldn't get it though.
Re:Propaganda? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, that's a nice, logical, disinterested way to look at it. However it IS pertinent in that someday this is going to happen to us. Someone is going to attack on a large, coordinated scale and we had better be more prepared than what we've seen in the recent past. We do have a larger structure. Unless of course they are taking the electrical grids down (a likely target) which would cut off all mass communication in the area along with taking down our economy.
It should be somewhat alarming to those of us in the US (although, not surprising) that Pootie-Poot [bbc.co.uk] is trying to overthrow the leader of a sovereign nation that is pro-Western. We should be concerned that Russians are moving back into their old nation-building ways and back-tracking on freedoms that seemed to be coming to their people. They are not our friends, nor have they been even remotely in several years, if ever. This is one of the countries that was going around the UN embargo of Iraq to supply them with weapons and enriching themselves under the "oil-for-food" [washingtonpost.com] debacle.
Re:You know what's great about Soviet Georgia? (Score:3, Insightful)
Not as many niggers as US Georgia.
In Soviet Georgia, Blacks lynch you.
Yes, you specifically.
Re:Russian members, explain this shit please (Score:1, Insightful)
Nice troll, looks like you are not even realizing you are trolling.
What freedom and liberty are you talking about when two countries are in a state of war?
As for brainliess russian government, they are brainless indeed, but I'd say not more than Mr Dubya.
I don't like this war a single bit, but the person I dislike the most is Mr. Saakashvilli. How moral it is to coincide full scale attack with Olympic games? How bright it is not to expect a counter actions from Russia?
Too bad nice, hospital, friendly georgians have him as a president. I hope next one would be a bit better. Georgia really deserves a better future than being a lackey to some master, be it Russia or US.
Re:Hear from the security team defending the websi (Score:3, Insightful)
Why are you calling Russians bastards?
On the night of August 7th/8th, Saakashvili launched an operation to "restore constitutional order" in South Ossetia. He started by bombing the crap out of Tskhinvali using Grad rocket launchers, resulting in hundreds of dead Ossetian civilians (1500 according to Ossetian and Russian numbers). Why wasn't there an outcry over their deaths in the western media? Whenever the Ossetian death toll was called it was qualified as unconfirmed. However, when a Russian plane missed a military target on August 9th and 5 Georgian civilians died in Gori it was all over the news.
Perhaps it's best to avoid name calling, and re-evaluate the reasoning behind your prejudiced attitude towards Russians. They aren't the bad guys every time you know.
Re:Propaganda? (Score:3, Insightful)
Probably false, and certainly stupid.
Real Life Examples:
When a German vessel docked in a neutral port, Buenos Aires, the British could/did demand that Argentina either (1) expel the Graf Spee within 24 hours after immediate danger (from damage received) to the crew had passed, or (2) intern the ship and its crew for the duration. They did NOT attack Argentina, though.
Only if the neutral port was being used for German military purposes (as they did with Goa) could the port be attacked as a belligerent, and even then the British tried to have plausible deniability and to damage only the German ships, since the Portuguese may not have realized that they were passing signals to local U-boat packs (or wanted to claim that), and you do not want to force them onto the enemy's side.
Back To Theory:
In your case, attacking the Ukraine for letting a Russian (especially civilian) ship dock to take on needed supplies, medical assistance, etc., is an Act Of War against Ukraine. Only if Ukraine is obviously letting the Russian military use their ports freely and blocking you is it grounds for war.
Is Poland a full member of NATO, yet? Maybe Russians don't want to invite the Wehrmacht (Bundeswehr, same thing) to attack them, especially for non-military servers, given the damages left the last time. Especially, since this time, the Germans will NOT be classing the other Eastern Europeans as subhuman trash to be reduced to slavery, thus driving them into the Bear's arms. We will leave aside the USA forces, as they will have been busy before the tragic Russian mistake. Afterwards, target priorities may change.
A DDoS attack against the relocated Georgian servers, OTOH, is just a good idea, especially for the Foreign Ministry one. Killing the Polish sysadms, however, is a bit too extreme for politeness.
Poor Georgia...living under the Russian boot... (Score:3, Insightful)
The WSJ editorial board wrote, "No matter who fired the first shot last week in the breakaway Georgian region of South Ossetia, Moscow is using the separatist issue as an excuse to demolish Georgia's military and, if possible, depose its democratically elected government. Russian forces moved ever deeper into Georgia proper Monday. They launched a second front in the west from another breakaway province, Abkhazia, and took the central city of Gori, which lies 40 miles from the Georgian capital of Tbilisi. These moves slice the country in half and isolate its ports, most of which Russia has bombed or blockaded. Moscow dismissed a cease-fire drawn up by European nations and signed by Georgia.
Russian bombers have also hit residential and industrial areas, making a mockery of Moscow's charge that Georgia is the party indiscriminately killing civilians. Russian claims of Georgian ethnic cleansing now look like well-rehearsed propaganda lines to justify a well-prepared invasion. Thousands of soldiers and hundreds of tanks, ships and warplanes were waiting for Mr. Putin's command."
Re:You know what's great about Soviet Georgia? (Score:4, Insightful)
because the USSR spent 70 years building a large economy out of those little states, and they moved a lot of people around to keep the piece. Then the 1990's hit, the wall fell and the USSR was carved up into little ethnic groups while NATO held a gun to Russia's head. Now that the US is over-committed it's a good time for Putin to grab some home points and get some wayward "states" back.