Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Security United Kingdom IT

Iran Blamed For Major Cyberattack On BBC 194

Qedward writes "Iran is privately being blamed for a major cyberattack on the BBC that blocked access to its popular Persian TV service and disrupted the Corporation's IT using a denial-of-service attack. The multi-pronged March 2 attack took down much of the BBC's email, overloaded its telephone switchboard with automatic phone calls, and blocked a satellite feed for the BBC Persian station. BBC servers were also on the receiving end of a DDoS. In an unprecedented tactic, the BBC has trailed a speech to be given this week to the Royal Television Society in which Director General Mark Thompson will mention the attacks in some detail while stopping short of formally naming Iran as the perpetrator."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Iran Blamed For Major Cyberattack On BBC

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 14, 2012 @02:33PM (#39355775)

    The use of the word 'overt' is very important here. Iran trained Iraqi insurgents. Iran funds Hezbollah and Hamas, who have both fired rockets on Israeli civilians. Hamas has done so as recently as this weekend.

  • Re:Pure propaganda. (Score:3, Informative)

    by daveschroeder ( 516195 ) * on Wednesday March 14, 2012 @02:42PM (#39355893)

    Yeah, it's not like the IAEA "declared its latest inspection visit to Iran a failure, with the regime blocking access to a key site suspected of hosting covert nuclear weapon research" [guardian.co.uk], or that "satellite images of an Iranian military facility appear to show trucks and earth-moving vehicles at the site, indicating an attempted cleanup of radioactive traces possibly left by tests of a nuclear-weapon trigger" [usatoday.com], or that there are six binding and currently in-force UN Security Council resolutions imposing sanctions on Iran, five of which invoke Chapter VII of the UN Charter, which authorizes force to compel compliance [wikipedia.org].

    It's all pretty much just "propaganda". (And before you go spewing ignorance about how this is "just the same as Iraq", read this [slashdot.org].)

    If it makes you feel better to believe that the US and/or the West are what's wrong with the world, and that regimes like Iran are really innocent and have just been unfairly targeted by some evil cabal, then I really hope you get the world you wish for: a world where principles of liberal democracy and freedom are not projected and protected — even if imperfectly and with too many mistakes to count — and you'd then see what oppression and "propaganda" really are.

  • Re:Pure propaganda. (Score:5, Informative)

    by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Wednesday March 14, 2012 @02:43PM (#39355917) Homepage Journal

    And it's not like we are doing far worse - assassinations and overt spying with drones, plus at least two targeted computer viruses.

    This could just be the Iranian equivalent of Anonymous, just because the attacks appear to come from Iran doesn't mean "Iran" did it.

  • by cpu6502 ( 1960974 ) on Wednesday March 14, 2012 @03:08PM (#39356303)

    The U.S. during the Cold War overthrew more countries than I can keep track of (or propped-up tyrants like Saddam Hussein).

    But since this topic is about Iran..... we overthrew their democratically-elected government in the 1950s and replaced it with a dictator (or king but that's the same difference). Why? We wanted their oil and a puppet to ensure we'd have it. Those old enough to remember the hell of living under that dictator have hated us ever since. And I don't blame them one bit.

    Oh and yes we started Desert Storm. We encouraged our long-time friend Saddam to invade Kuwait (document revealed by wikileaks & read on the floor by Congressman Paul). And then we acted surprised and attacked Saddam. We set it up. We executed it.

    Same way we set-up Libya.
    And Syria (we have troops there now).
    Time to wake up.
    Do some research on Senator McCain and his pals.

  • by cpu6502 ( 1960974 ) on Wednesday March 14, 2012 @03:15PM (#39356389)

    >>>Fixing banks with less regulation is like fixing Lindsay Lohan with more cocaine.

    I agree. But the truth is the number of regulations during the Bush era increased from 110,000 to 150,000 pages. To say he "deregulated", or that it caused the housing bubble, is so far from the truth it's ridiculous.

    BTW most of those regulations are god-awful stupid, like saying a banana must have at least 15 degrees of curvature or else it must be destroyed. And labeling water bottles with, "Drinking water does not cure dehydration."

    I'm not against regulations (especially the top regulations like the Constittuion and Bill of rights which block the government from harming us). I'm against stupid regulations that drive small business owners into bankruptcy and favor the consolidation of megacorp' power. That's what Congress has been busy passing these last several years.

  • by SplashMyBandit ( 1543257 ) on Wednesday March 14, 2012 @03:17PM (#39356427)
    The US backed the 'Northern Alliance' and other Mujahideen to fight the Soviets (just as the Soviets backed the North Vietnamese and North Koreans in those conflicts - even going so far as for Soviet crews to fly and man missile batteries against US forces). The US did not create the Taliban, the Pakistani ISI did (and the Taliban are still supported by the ISI - which pisses the US off no end considering the degree of financial support given by the US to Pakistan).
  • by SplashMyBandit ( 1543257 ) on Wednesday March 14, 2012 @03:26PM (#39356519)
    So the US overthrew the democratically elected Mohammad Mosaddeq. Big deal. Who they were really trying to stop is the Tudeh (the communist party of Iran) - who had a growing influense over Mosaddeq. At the height of the Cold War this made sense at the time. Yes, it would be lovely for the US to stick to its stated principles about democracy, but if the Tudeh got in power (backed by the Soviets) then the resulting 'democracy' would be meaningless. Just as the democracy is essentially meaningless under the ayatollahs. This was 'realpolitk' at its ugliest - sh!t like this was done so the West could win against the Soviet empire. If you know anything about the historical reality of the Soviet empire you'll also understand its a damn sight better that the West won (despite its own flaws) than the Soviets did. So, stop living in the utopian dream and come to the real world, you'll get a good perspective on why things were done. The US is bad (and getting worse), but they pale compared to the Soviets or the ayatollahs on the badness scale.
  • by Jeremiah Cornelius ( 137 ) on Wednesday March 14, 2012 @04:11PM (#39357087) Homepage Journal

    The engine of American foreign policy has been fueled not by a devotion to any kind of morality, but rather by the necessity to serve other imperatives, which can be summarized as follows:
    * making the world safe for American corporations;
    * enhancing the financial statements of defense contractors at home who have contributed generously to members of congress;
    * preventing the rise of any society that might serve as a successful example of an alternative to the capitalist model;
    * extending political and economic hegemony over as wide an area as possible, as befits a "great power."
    This in the name of fighting a supposed moral crusade against what cold warriors convinced themselves, and the American people, was the existence of an evil International Communist Conspiracy, which in fact never existed, evil or not.

    The United States carried out extremely serious interventions into more than 70 nations in this period.

    China, 1945-49:
    Intervened in a civil war, taking the side of Chiang Kai-shek against the Communists, even though the latter had been a much closer ally of the United States in the world war. The U.S. used defeated Japanese soldiers to fight for its side. The Communists forced Chiang to flee to Taiwan in 1949.

    Italy, 1947-48:
    Using every trick in the book, the U.S. interfered in the elections to prevent the Communist Party from coming to power legally and fairly. This perversion of democracy was done in the name of "saving democracy" in Italy. The Communists lost. For the next few decades, the CIA, along with American corporations, continued to intervene in Italian elections, pouring in hundreds of millions of dollars and much psychological warfare to block the specter that was haunting Europe.

    Greece, 1947-49:
    Intervened in a civil war, taking the side of the neo-fascists against the Greek left which had fought the Nazis courageously. The neo-fascists won and instituted a highly brutal regime, for which the CIA created a new internal security agency, KYP. Before long, KYP was carrying out all the endearing practices of secret police everywhere, including systematic torture.

    Philippines, 1945-53:
    U.S. military fought against leftist forces (Huks) even while the Huks were still fighting against the Japanese invaders. After the war, the U. S. continued its fight against the Huks, defeating them, and then installing a series of puppets as president, culminating in the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos.

    South Korea, 1945-53:
    After World War II, the United States suppressed the popular progressive forces in favor of the conservatives who had collaborated with the Japanese. This led to a long era of corrupt, reactionary, and brutal governments.

    Albania, 1949-53:
    The U.S. and Britain tried unsuccessfully to overthrow the communist government and install a new one that would have been pro-Western and composed largely of monarchists and collaborators with Italian fascists and Nazis.

    Germany, 1950s:
    The CIA orchestrated a wide-ranging campaign of sabotage, terrorism, dirty tricks, and psychological warfare against East Germany. This was one of the factors which led to the building of the Berlin Wall in 1961.

    Iran, 1953:
    Prime Minister Mossadegh was overthrown in a joint U.S./British operation. Mossadegh had been elected to his position by a large majority of parliament, but he had made the fateful mistake of spearheading the movement to nationalize a British-owned oil company, the sole oil company operating in Iran. The coup restored the Shah to absolute power and began a period of 25 years of repression and torture, with the oil industry being restored to foreign ownership, as follows: Britain and the U.S., each 40 percent, other nations 20 percent.

    Guatemala, 1953-1990s:
    A CIA-organized coup overthrew the democratically-elected and progressive government of Jacobo Arbenz, initiating 40 years of death-squads, torture, disappearances, mass executions, and unimaginable cruelty, totaling well over 100,000 victims -indis

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 14, 2012 @05:40PM (#39358069)

    US funded them through Pakistan. Where the hell do you think the money went? To bin Laden. To all the "foreign fighters" that were streaming to Afghanistan. You know, the "free world fighting the evil commies" mantra, or payback for Vietnam, or however the heck you want to phrase it.

    Stating that US did not fund Taliban (later split off Al Quida) is like stating that CIA never were involved in drug trafficking. I guess you can never link them directly as gov't policy, but there is no question where the money was going.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_drug_trafficking [wikipedia.org]

2.4 statute miles of surgical tubing at Yale U. = 1 I.V.League

Working...