Governments, IOC and UN Hit By Massive Cyber Attack

fysdt writes "IT security firm McAfee claims to have uncovered one of the largest ever series of cyber attacks. It lists 72 different organisations that were targeted over five years, including the International Olympic Committee, the UN and security firms. McAfee will not say who it thinks is responsible, but there is speculation that China may be behind the attacks. Beijing has always denied any state involvement in cyber-attacks, calling such accusations 'groundless.'"

Re:"Groundless"

[Nidi62]

Also, what reason does China have to attack the olympics?

Well, there were all of the accusations of the Chinese gymnastics team horribly under-age(10, 11 years old). We know the soviets cheated in the Olympics (lots of steroids), and if the Chinese were cheating in gymnastics, odds are they were probably cheating in other sports as well. It's possible that they would hack into the IOC to see if there were any allegations or investigations being circulated/planned for, so that they could prepare for them (changing evidence and all that).

Assuming It Is China

[cosm]

Assume it is China. Why is it that when transnational attacks occur on a scale this large against our nations infrastructure, financial sectors, and defense systems the politicians shrug it off or turn a blind eye, but when citizen schmoe downloads some files or leaks some dox the entire system goes full assault on their asses with ICE raids, take down notices, special committees on intellectual property, etc. etc.

If they were concerned about national security, they would denounce the culprit (they know what country they're coming from), and work on hardening security. But it is not about national security. It is about corporate security and defending the status quo. That is why the US seeks to extradite file sharers, hell, link sharers, from other countries, but when massive ddos attacks are directed at us by governments that we trade with, nothing is generally done.

Oh, and this entire rant uses the word cyber once; in this sentence.

Re:Assuming It Is China

[Registered Coward v2]

Assume it is China. Why is it that when transnational attacks occur on a scale this large against our nations infrastructure, financial sectors, and defense systems the politicians shrug it off or turn a blind eye, but when citizen schmoe downloads some files or leaks some dox the entire system goes full assault on their asses with ICE raids, take down notices, special committees on intellectual property, etc. etc.

Simple - Citizen Schmoe doesn't control minerals, oil, access to SLOCs, etc that you need - so you play the diplomacy game since both sides don't really want to alienate the other; they just want an upper hand. OTOH, you have nothing to lose by smacking Citizen Schmoe to deter others so they don't drain resources while you play the diplomacy game.

Remember - today's enemy may be tomorrow's friend, because countries have permanent interests, not permanent friends or enemies.

If they were concerned about national security, they would denounce the culprit (they know what country they're coming from), and work on hardening security. But it is not about national security. It is about corporate security and defending the status quo. That is why the US seeks to extradite file sharers, hell, link sharers, from other countries, but when massive ddos attacks are directed at us by governments that we trade with, nothing is generally done.

Denouncing does nothing but cause a public fight. Instead, you harden your networks and work behind the scenes to let them know you are pissed off. In addition, watching what they do gains insights into hat the are doing and want; as well as the opportunity to plant information as well. Or, why not let them give you to add selected payloads as part of the info they d/l to make it easier to tap their systems? Plus, if they think their current tools are effective they may not try to develop better ones. If you let your enemy think they are smarter than they are and you are dumber than you really are you can win a lot of battles or make a whole lot of money.

Re:"Groundless"

[Xest]

I wonder the same but from a different perspective.

Time and time again security firms like Sophos and McAfee make these grand claims - "MASSIVE STATE ATTACK ON US DOD" or whatever, yet do they ever release any evidence?

Of the ones I've bothered to read TFA for so far they seem to be little more than claims, we never see any evidence, just speculation or arbitrary bullshit like they follow a "profile" - the profile probably being nothing more than the attacks were carried out on the internet or something stupid like that.

If anything it seems to be more a case of security firms loving the fact that all they have to do is come up with some sensationalist wankfest and all of a sudden their firm is advertised right across every section of the media across the globe.

I'm getting tired of it. Security firms- either publish all your relevant data to prove your claims, or shut the fuck up. Otherwise I'll just assume the best your firm can do is conjure up marketing stories, because you certainly can't produce trustworthy virus scanners.

Re:"Groundless"

[FhnuZoag]

The claim that 'I am talking culture' is without foundation. How is painting people living in a region the size of Europe, with vast differences from West to East (even in terms of language, Han Chinese speaking the traditional accent from NW China would scarcely be intelligible to NE Chinese), who possess little similarity beside their specifically pointed out racial subtype, a cultural observation? How is talking about 'paranoid' and 'having a screw loose' a cultural observation? Observe that stargoat's first instinct was to jump to anti-Japanese racial slurs. And then, on revelation of my ethnicity, he decided to make 'cultural criticism' of me. In what way is culture distinguished from race here? When it's inescapable through education and upbringing, applied in blanket form along strict ethnic lines, and comes with no attempt to understand the source and context of certain attitudes and behaviours your culture is merely a politically sanitised way of selling the old racism. This the sort of 'cultural criticism' that led to islamophobes to attack a fellow islamophobe because he looked arabic.