US State Department Can't Get Rid of Email Hackers 86
An anonymous reader sends this quote from a Wall Street Journal report:
Three months after the State Department confirmed hackers breached its unclassified email system, the government still hasn't been able to evict them from the network, say three people familiar with the investigation. Government officials, assisted by outside contractors and the National Security Agency, have repeatedly scanned the network and taken some systems offline. But investigators still see signs of the hackers on State Department computers, the people familiar with the matter said. Each time investigators find a hacker tool and block it, these people said, the intruders tweak it slightly to attempt to sneak past defenses. It isn't clear how much data the hackers have taken, the people said. They reaffirmed what the State Department said in November: that the hackers appear to have access only to unclassified email. Still, unclassified material can contain sensitive intelligence.
It probably IS the NSA (Score:5, Informative)
Isn't asking the NSA to secure your system like asking the fox to check the barbed wire fence around the henhouse?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
The National Security Agency (NSA) is a United States intelligence agency responsible for global monitoring, collection, decoding, translation and analysis of information and data for foreign intelligence and counterintelligence purposes - a discipline known as Signals intelligence (SIGINT). NSA is also charged with protection of U.S. government communications and information systems against penetration and network warfare. The agency is authorized to accomplish its mission through clandestine means, among
Re: (Score:1)
Well, that explains why the NSA hacked into computers belonging to congress! They were "protecting U.S. government communications and information systems," obviously.
With a reputation like that, I can't see why anyone would even consider it a possibility that they also were responsible for this.
Re:It probably IS the NSA (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
In all actuality, Congress was a part of a democracy, to put a finger on Congress would be like the pot calling the kettle black. What we have is a first world problem and they don't run a democracy. There cannot be a single order over the entire world with respect to individuality or culture.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Yes but all the fox does is record all the clucks between chickens and run cluck search algorithms to make sure none of the chickens are actually terrorists chickens. The fox apparently did nothing about the chicken outside the henhouse clucking.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Because a programmer that replaces something... must not know how it works?
Uh.....
I know you wanted to spew some hate, but I don't think you really thought that one through. If my SysV init scripts needed "checking," and I had Mr Poettering in my employ, he would be a fine person to "check" them because he is a talented programmer who understands shell scripting.
BTW, it is SysV init, not sysVinit. It just means the style of init script that AT&T had in their System V UNIX from the 80s, which replaced th
Re: (Score:3)
To make the current hate-spewing-fad even funnier in its ignorance, Slackware Linux doesn't even use SysV-style init, they use BSD-style.
Last I checked, slackware did use sysvinit for its init process, just without SysV-style init scripts. Let's see, hmm, there is actually support for SysV init scripts [slackware.com], and it sure looks to me like there's a sysvinit package [utah.edu].
And Gentoo doesn't use either.
Uh no. Guess what? OpenRC doesn't replace your init. Gentoo does use sysvinit, with OpenRC.
roflcopter!
I guess what makes the roflcopter go around and around is that you're laughably ignorant, and complaining that others are ignorant about the very things about which you're currently displaying your
Re: (Score:2)
Quoting from the file you linked:
# something goes wrong. For this reason, Slackware has always
# used the traditional BSD style init script layout.
In the 70s there was BSD style init.
In the 80s came AT&T style init, later to be known only as SysV-style.
(crickets)
(more crickets)
In the `10s came systemd, and those remotely managing large numbers of systems rejoiced in the virtual streets, briefly until bands of ruffians got their neckbeards bunched and started throwing rotten fruit.
You're saying I'm ignorant because I think slackware uses BSD-style init. But Slackware agrees with me. And according to their own compat
Re: (Score:2)
The part where you fell on your face was when you missed the word "style" when I said, "Slackware Linux doesn't even use SysV-style init, they use BSD-style."
But you were wrong.
So then you conflated the actual init process. But when people are talking about [BSD|SysV]-style, they're talking about the scripts.
Yes, and slackware will use both BSD-style init scripts, and sysvinit-style. Which is why I didn't fall down, and you are now just talking out of your ass to try to make what you said correct, when it isn't.
You are free to install sysvinit scripts for every single daemon you ever install on your slackware box. It's left up to the individual.
You are ignorant, and you're also a disingenuous douchebag.
Re: (Score:2)
You say I[sic] was wrong, but you're accusing slackware of not knowing what system they use. BSD-style is a real thing. You can't tell the difference, but they can. And AT&T could. And people that can't tell the difference probably shouldn't be pining for software that is over 30 years old. Figure out what it is first.
Or do you think, because they allow you to use a different one, that changes which one "slackware uses?" That would be daft, because Fedora still "lets" a person use SysV crap. So then all
Re: (Score:2)
Clearly these hackers just need jobs!!! (Score:3)
... or is that 'too nuanced’ [nationalreview.com] of an explanation?
Maybe we just can't clean our way out of these attacks?
Re:Clearly these hackers just need jobs!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Mr. Laden didn't carry out the attacks himself: he got grunts to it.
Yeah, he conned a bunch of uneducated, down-on-their-luck grunts into abandoning their personal sense of decency and agreeing to kill thousands of people - not because their religious convictions told them it was the right thing to do, but because ... they just couldn't find work?
... that the guys doing that are doing so because they're not happy with the local employment prospects ... that would be really funny if it weren't so dark and just plain evil. Not enough schools? Of course not! These are the people who are dragging the teachers out into the street and shooting them in the head before they burn down the schools. The problem isn't lack of foreign investment, it's cultural rot in the form of their local religion crashing headlong into the rest of the world's more contemporary ways of life. These guys don't want modern jobs, they want medieval jobs.
That must have been the case with "grunts" like Mohamed Atta, right? Totally uneducated. Well, except for going to college to study architecture, and spending time at the Technical University of Hamburg. You know where he met with other poor grunts who could only afford to do things like fly back and forth between Germany and various middle eastern destinations, spend time training in Afghanistan, and so on. He traveled to Spain for some meetings, then - the poor, uneducated, desperate guy! - flew to Maryland, where he met up with fellow grunt Hani Hanjour, then off to other destinations where the fellow grunts were living in various states of perfectly comfortable. They didn't just round up some scruffy guys from some poverty-stricken village in the desert and talk them into this because they had no options. These were people who were dedicated to the world view preached by Bin Laden and their intellectual fellows in the Taliban. Focusing on the leaders IS important, because it's what they say and stand for that thousands and thousands of their compatriots - including those living comfortably in western nations, where they've been educated and employed - find agreeable enough to follow.
This whole notion that the guys running, say, the media production facilities, newsletter operations, and logistics for groups like ISIS as they line up insufficiently hardline Muslims and of course western hostages out of whom they can't squeeze enough cash, and lop off their heads or burn them alive
Re: (Score:1)
Those with college degrees rarely seem to do the dangerous parts themselves. Managing is a lot more fun than blowing your brains out in a market.
Anyhow, without reliable surveys on the profile of the average terrorist or extremist, it's just speculation or thumbnail estimates from reporters either way, and probably not worth arguing about.
Re: (Score:2)
Your continued attempts at deflection continue to amaze. First you attack the source I cited (I could have picked one of many, NRO seemed the least controversial. Clearly though you didn't click on it as it has a YouTube video from CNN where the quote I was mocking was uttered), now you speak about 'surveys' and call comments like the above just 'speculation or thumbnail estimates'... why don't you try doing what ScentCone did above... offer some specifics?
Allow me, lets consider the terrorists who hijacked
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, deflection.
A point is raised and you poo poo it by attempting to divert attention rather than argue something substantive.
An additive point is raised and you poo poo it again by again attempting to divert attention rather than argue something substantive.
A valid premise which you still reject is expanded upon... and all you can do is poo poo it without citing A SINGLE THING while still trying to divert attention to something else.
You had 3 chances, you struck out.
Re: (Score:1)
He shows nothing about the AVERAGE, especially over multiple nations. I cannot make it any simpler than that. If you don't understand averages, I can't help you.
Not about just 911 (Score:2)
I was not just talking 911, but also Bin Laden's followers in Afghanistan and elsewhere. I feel my position has been twisted to be mostly about 911, when in fact 911 is a drop in the bucket. The education visa issue probably tilts "immigrant" terrorist statistics, as mentioned in a nearby message.
Information on the education and goals of TYPICAL terrorists and extremists is still fuzzy, at least as given here. The above is merely speculation based on an insufficient sample size (including lack of samples fr
Re: (Score:1)
People generally don't know they are ignorant until AFTER they are educated. You think those in the middle ages knew they were ignorant while they were doing medieval things?
Re: (Score:2)
People generally don't know they are ignorant until AFTER they are educated. You think those in the middle ages knew they were ignorant while they were doing medieval things?
Which has what to do with Islamist groups that seek out and destroy schools and educators because they are schools and educators? If your point is that they can't help themselves because they are ignorant, then you're indirectly also saying that they must be forced to overcome that ignorance (since they act, aggressively, to destroy the institutions that would gladly educate them if they showed up wanting an education). And forcing them to be educated means ... using force. It means physically protecting
Re: (Score:1)
It's a gradual process. A 30-year-old thug is probably a lost cause. Focus on his children.
'Unclassified' (Score:2)
Does 'Unclassified' is this context mean not yet given a class, or is it the same as 'declassified'?
Re: (Score:1)
No, unclassified means that it has never been classified. It may still be "sensitive" material though.
Re: (Score:2)
No, unclassified information is NOT necessarily public. There is a lot of stuff US government agencies don't reveal that isn't "classified" as Secret, Top Secret, Confidential or other. Like for example, Privacy Act information (government employees SSNs are one) is NOT public and is NOT classified.
If you can't figure out... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
This.
Is the goddam US government competent or not?
They let Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden walk off with the goods and now they can't handle a breach from outsiders.
Bunch of fucking Keystone cops.
Re: If you can't figure out... (Score:2)
Yeah, they should contract out to Sony or Target instead.
Re:Blacklist (Score:4, Interesting)
The security hole is likely end users. The software being "tweaked" is probably Word documents pushing Dyreza malware. The issue they face is that if they want to allow Office documents with embedded VBA macros (this is probably heavily embedded in their office workflows), it doesn't matter that they've identified the security hole, they can't close it without making massive changes to how they do business (or significantly change their IT security policies for desktop endpoint use).
Based on the mincemeat the Office macro payloads have been making of everyone's security lately, this is probably all it is. There's probably no targeted hacking going on at all; just a failure to keep up with the latest generic malware attacks, like with almost everyone else. Of course, since the attackers probably realize by this point where they've gotten into, they're going to ensure they stay there by using the same methods.
That said, it could be just about anyone else employing APT methods too -- wouldn't be all that difficult; just more difficult than deploying the already common crimeware packages you can get on the darknet at a discount.
Re: (Score:2)
cyber-war (Score:1)
The US may have to allow more immigrants in order to be competitive with China and perhaps other populous countries in a potential cyber-war. It's more or less a game of man-power. Either that, you siphon techies off of other fields. Maybe the "secret plan" is to send all non-military IT work to India, freeing the rest to be cyber warriors? Our trade deficit will be Jupiter-sized, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You gotta start somewhere.
No, because ... (Score:2)
... Manning and Snowden.
Chicken coming home to roost? (Score:3)
Hellooooooooo NSA! Do you like having a taste of your own medicine?
This is the future, people. Hack and counter-hack. Ad infinitum. In other words, bleak and without hope.
Re: (Score:2)
News Flash: The NSA isn't part of the US State Department. They are part of the US Department of Defense.
Generally those are departments are considered to be substantially at odds; one is in charge of diplomacy, the other is in charge of blowing things up. They have different wants and needs, and generally would not feel each others pain.
If you hate something but don't understand it, what do you really hate? Answer: You really hate yourself, because without understanding you must be hating a thing that exis
Re: (Score:2)
> News Flash: The NSA isn't part of the US State Department. They are part of the US Department of Defense. /sarcasm Glad we got that cleared right up. I was worried about who was hacking who.
Re: (Score:2)
whom.
Re: (Score:2)
I had a ROFLCOPTERBBQ and it wasn't just words. The burns are real, bro, the burns are real.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
[trolling]No, they should bulldoze everything and then install Linux.[/trolling]
Re: (Score:3)
replace all your servers with new ones and decommission the old ones.
Nope. Keep the old ones running as honeypots.
Problem is: it's not just the servers. Some of the employees' PCs have probably been pwned. And when they connect to the new servers it starts all over.
Re: (Score:3)
OR ...
We could make user's desktop computers much, much smarter than the user.
"We're sorry, but our predictive algorithms, which run a shitload of scenarios well into the future, indicate that the action you just chose, like clicking on a link or attachment, is contraindicated and your computer is locked, air-gapped, and nonfunctional in an operative sense and will remain so until IT, who has already been contacted, so there's no need to call, arrives at your location to reinforce your prior security trai
Okaaaaay.... Lemme take a couple guesses here... (Score:3, Interesting)
Assuming its not actually one of their own employees/consultants helping re-infect the systems maybe one or more of these fairly common situations applies:
* Using Cisco routers with default configurations and firmware that hasn't been updated in years...
* Using unencrypted, plain text authentication for systems instead of public key auth...
* No password strength standards (some employees predictably using "911" or "123456" for their passwords)
* Employees allowed to re-use the same passwords after the supposed "clean sweep"
* Windows filesharing services
* Wireless networking at all, or possibly using WEP or even completely open
* Microsoft office documents from outside sources
* HP printers, or really any network/wifi enabled printers
* That one old Windows XP box nobody is allowed to reformat clean because its "mission critical"
* Employees are allowed to bring in their own laptops/cellphones and other usb/bluetooth/wifi enabled devices
Did I miss anything? Anyone else seen this crap enough times to know the intrusion vector is probably nothing highly advanced or original?
Re: (Score:3)
Did I miss anything?
The massive slashdot paradox in this thread? - In other stories the NSA are seen as omnipotent hackers who know more about me than my closest friends, but in this thread they suddenly don't know their arse from their elbow?
Re: (Score:2)
I think its more accurate to say "The left hand does not know what the right hand is doing."
No paradox. (Score:2)
There's no paradox.
When you have a budget of millions of dollars AND practically unrestricted access to everyone's Internet transmissions then it is a lot easier to appear to be "omnipotent" in your ATTACKS.
But DEFENSE is a lot more difficult.
Re: (Score:2)
The NSA is not charged with defending the government from hackers.
The NSA is fucked up already ... let's not give them more stuff to fuck up.
Re: (Score:2)
Presumption (Score:1)
This article and the PR folks for the government presume or falsely claim there is a different system for unclassified email as classified email. If so, why doesn't the government use the classified methodology for unclassified messages starting tomorrow?
The fact is even the classified system uses about the same hardware and services. It might have some additional encryption, that as we all know have already been breached by "five eyes". Based on what we have seen there are at least six.
"The enemy is us" (Pogo) (Score:2)
Run Exchange (Score:2)
And we trust the gubment w. health care data? (Score:1)
This is the same government we trust with our healthcare data which on the black market is worth much more than verified usable credit card data?
I'm no conspiricay theorist, but as many in government have said "Let no crisis go to waste". I suspect they will use this and other examples to advocate more government control over the internet in the name of "national security". Because regulation will do so much more than hiring people who know how to properly secure a network...
Yeah right (Score:1)