Keylogging Used To Catch Bank Crackers 190
An anonymous reader writes "BBC News is reporting that the British police National High Tech Crime Unit has foiled an attempted fraud by hackers using keylogging software. The London branch of the Sumitomo Mitsui bank of Japan was the target, and a person has been arrested in Israel after being identified as the recipient of an attempted electronic transfer of UKP13.9m."
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Even the submitter didn't read the article!! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Even the submitter didn't read the article!! (Score:1, Redundant)
Re:Even the submitter didn't read the article!! (Score:2, Troll)
Nah, the TV goes on before the Internet each morning. It was the breaking news story before that tanker caught on fire on the M4.
The TV version actually had an Internet expert talking about how the keylogger was probably installed. He talked about pop-up advert distribution, email distribution and malicious websites. The TV version gave away more information than the website version.
Look Mum! I know HTML too!
Don't waste mod points on crap posts like this.
Re:Even the submitter didn't read the article!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Even the submitter didn't read the article!! (Score:1)
Plausible Deniability. [wikipedia.org]
Re:Even the submitter didn't read the article!! (Score:1)
National High Tech Crime Unit has foiled an attempted fraud by (hackers using keylogging software).
Remember kids, always use parenthesis when describing ambiguous terms
Re:Even the submitter didn't read the article!! (Score:1)
Re:Even the submitter didn't read the article!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Even the submitter didn't read the article!! (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:Even the submitter didn't read the article!! (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re:Even the submitter didn't read the article!! (Score:1)
Re:Even the submitter didn't read the article!! (Score:2, Offtopic)
The actual writeup seems to pretty clearly say that it was the hackers using the keyloggers, the headline says the opposite. Probably an editorial mistake.
Re:Even the submitter didn't read the article!! (Score:2)
Re:Even the submitter didn't read the article!! (Score:2)
Of course, the sad thing is the underline from the URL has effectively made this ...
...
has foiled an attempted fraud by hackers using keylogging software.
into this
has foiled an attempted fraud by hackers using keylogging software.
Strange that we now have to start treating the underline of an URL as additional punctuation.
Re:Even the submitter didn't read the article!! (Score:1)
Re:Even the submitter didn't read the article!! (Score:1)
British police National High Tech Crime Unit has foiled an attempted fraud by "hackers using keylogging software".
He just didn't understand it and hence the misleading title
Re:Even the submitter didn't read the article!! (Score:2)
Too much (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Too much (Score:3, Interesting)
Kinda like Enron right?
Re:Too much (Score:5, Informative)
Ever heard of "laundering" money? What you have to do is open a legit company and make it profitable with the money you have stashed somewhere. Tricky, yes. But possibly doable.
However you are right about drawing suspicion. You can never become as rich as $400 million, because being as rich as that will make you automatically famous. If you stay below a limit, which I assume to be about up to $10 million if done right, you might be able to have a comfortable life without getting caught.
But all this is theory. In practice, I can't recall any heist above $1 million where the perps got away. It may take some time, even years, but you will be caught in the end. You may be much smarter than the cops, but once the thing is done, they have all the time until you die to catch you. No, even if you manage to escape, you'll never have a quiet moment without worry. Anyone contemplating a big robbery should google ronald biggs train robbery if they think escaping to a far away country is an option.
Re:Too much (Score:2)
If a person is capable of stealing 400 million w/o getting caught in the act - they are also capable of keeping it and not getting caught - but it would require a lifetime of looking over your shoulder...more importantly, not drawing attention to
Re:Too much (Score:2)
"they have all the time until you die" (Score:2)
what about the statute of limitations?
Re:"they have all the time until you die" (Score:2)
Re:"they have all the time until you die" (Score:2)
btw the other bank robbers were indicted just before the statute of limitations ran out. so they didn't evade it either.
Re:"they have all the time until you die" (Score:2)
Nazis (Score:2)
What about the billions Saddam Hussein stole from Iraq? Most never recoved. There were a few billion withdrawn in *cash* from the national bank in Iraq before the latest war.
Re:Too much (Score:2)
If you try to process sum larger that that, it will be verified by a person in bank before it gets transferred to the target account, so there's delay of couple days in the transfer, if it gets accepted.
Re:Too much (Score:2)
Slashdot story incorrect (Score:5, Informative)
From the article it links to:
They managed to infiltrate the system with keylogging software that would have enabled them to track every button pressed on computer keyboards.
The hackers were attempting to use keylogging software.. there's nothing in the bbc article whatsoever about how the police caught them, let alone if they were caught using keylogging software (which is what the synopsis says).
Apparantly, not even the editors read slashdot stories
Re:Slashdot story incorrect (Score:1)
Precedence rules. (Score:5, Informative)
It's a matter of operator precedence being poorly defined in English, leading to the ambiguity known as a 'dangling modifier'.
Parentheses could have solved the problem: But parentheses aren't used like that in natural language. In English the right way to do it would be more like this: The 'who' strongly binds the entity before it to the entity after it, indicating that 'using keyloggers' is a predicate of 'hackers'. Thus the modifier, now tightly bound, dangles no more.
Re:Precedence rules. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Precedence rules. (Score:2)
"Police folied hackers who were using keyboards" is the preferred construction. The use of the Passive Voice is generally discouraged, as this feature has been deprecated in favor of the Active Voice, and is provided only for compatiblility with previous versions of the English language, and may
Re:Precedence rules. (Score:2, Informative)
Or maybe, just maybe, the article title means "Keylogging Used To Catch Bank Crackers": as in it used to, but it doesn't any more.
Re:Precedence rules. (Score:2)
Maybe you've cracked the means for improving the grammar on Slashdot. There's a book in there; "English Grammar for Coders".
How would they do this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Is this more examples of social engineering, or would this have required physical access to the computers? [ I'm assuming here that the general bank computers aren't all on the interweb ]
Scary as hell that someone (almost) managed to do this.
Re:How would they do this? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How would they do this? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:How would they do this? (Score:2, Informative)
THE ARTICLE IS CORRECT... (Score:2, Informative)
"BBC News is reporting that the British police National High Tech Crime Unit has foiled an attempted fraud by hackers using keylogging software." - This means the hackers are using keylogging software
Note the addition of commas: "BBC News is reporting that the British police National High Tech Crime Unit has foiled an attempted fraud, by hackers, using keylogging software." - This means the police are using keylogging software
The editor of the article is CORRECT!
Re:THE ARTICLE IS CORRECT... (Score:2)
Re:THE ARTICLE IS CORRECT... (Score:1)
It took two reads to make sure of who the subject was.
The editor should read The Economist Style Guide [economist.com]. It details how to write clear and consise articles.
NO, THE ARTICLE IS INCORRECT... (Score:4, Insightful)
guess again... (Score:2)
Keylogging Used To Catch Bank Crackers = WRONG (Score:2, Insightful)
The title "Keylogging Used To Catch Bank Crackers" is indisputably wrong, no matter how you parse it.
Furthermore, you have introduced your own parsing bias in the first non-comma sentence. The fact is the non-comma sentence does not have one difinitive meaning, and you are just telling us what it means through your assumed meaning.
The fact is you cannot indisputably say that the word "using" applies to the hackers and not the Crime Unit - the only thing supp
Re:Keylogging Used To Catch Bank Crackers = WRONG (Score:2)
Actually it does. When one uses a modifying phrase, one must use commas to alter the phrase it modifies. Otherwise it modifies the closest phrase.
Witness:
The sentences above have a single meaning each. The prefered soluti
Re:Keylogging Used To Catch Bank Crackers = WRONG (Score:2)
Re:THE ARTICLE IS CORRECT... (Score:2)
UKP? (Score:2, Informative)
Or did you mean GBP? [wikipedia.org]
Re:UKP? (Score:1)
Oh, you old ISO4217 purist you. The country isn't called 'Great Britain', you know.
It's the 'United Kingdom'. Presumably this is meant sarcastically.
Re:UKP? (Score:2)
Well, they do have different pounds in Northern Ireland, so GBP does actually work. Then again, the also have different pounds in Scotland. Of course they are all worth the same, in theory, but in practice trying to spend a Scottish note in London can be tricky
Blinks behind the mask (Score:5, Insightful)
Now it's obvious: Slashdot submission approvers (staff "authors" who vet the submission queue, to approve stories for publication) just read the text, and decide whether the story is interesting. They don't click the links, they don't think about whether anything makes sense. It really looks like Slashdot's submitters are higher quality than the editors who decide what to publish. And even worse, the editors seem to have the quality of a lower tier of Slashdot readers: grab the most inflammatory interpretation of a post, and run with it - without regard to the facts, or even just the story itself.
For all Slashdot's championing of the "open" community, we know very little of how the editorial process works. How many editors? Do they know each other? See each other, or work remotely? Is there an editorial policy, written or by "rolling consensus"? Are their criteria? What's the process like? With the published Slashcode so old, there's no way to know details about the queue process even by looking at "the" software. So what goes on there behind the curtain?
Looks for the $ (Score:2)
Which means more page views, therefore more advertising revenue.
yes, we call that (Score:2)
Re:yes, we call that (Score:2)
He's infringing on my fictional patent on generating flamewars to boost ad revenues? The bastard!
Re:Blinks behind the mask (Score:1)
I have never seen how this person becomes an editor. There really isn't much about the back process of this site. I know CowboyNeal posts a journal about thoughts that may one day in the future become a change, but besides that we don't know anything about our great Overloads.
Re:Blinks behind the mask (Score:2)
I never get any impression of passion from them.
Re:Blinks behind the mask (Score:2)
International Law/Crime (Score:2)
The plan was to steal £220m ($423m) from the London offices of the Japanese bank Sumitomo Mitsui.
and looks like they only got 13.9 mil out but was were busted trying to get in in Israel
A man has been arrested by police in Israel after the plot was uncovered by the National Hi-Tech Crime Unit. Unit members worked closely with Israeli police.
So bad guys try to rob london office of japanese bank, by moving money to israel. This is a great example of an international crime, I almost ex
Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)
Phew! (Score:5, Funny)
Once I get the millions in cash I've been promised, I'll be sure to keep it away from any keyboards.
Re:Phew! (Score:2)
Realizing your concern in our confident trade we assure you of our mutual plans to make profit from the war-torn country of Nigeria. Please be sure to send us your savings account number, as your bank did not want us to place 44,500,212.23$ (US Dollars) in your checking account.
Since you have been inconvenienced we will kindly have you notice that we will raise our gratuity to 85% plus 5% fees.
Your quick reply will start you and me on our way to fortune so I can rule my poor Nigeria
WTF is wrong with our Slashdot editors? (Score:1, Interesting)
This is just getting too embarrasing and it's damaging Slashdot's reputation.
And yes I must be new here.
Doesn't make it any less true.
I fail to understand (Score:4, Insightful)
For example, if someone gets my bank account user/pass and logs into my bank account, transferring all my money into his account. When I see this, I will sure call my bank saying that this was an unauthorized transaction, and this transaction should be void, no? Besides, the thief reveal himself by specifying the destination account, no?
Re:I fail to understand (Score:2)
I was thinking the same thing, but came to the idea that if you had access to one account number, you could potentially have access to multiple account numbers.
The alleged could have split the money and bounced it around between accounts. Many small transactions between many accounts would make
Re:I fail to understand (Score:3, Informative)
Of course, the thief would reveal his account number, which can be tied to an identity (or at least a contact) but the difficult issue is leaning on the bank to give up that information.
Re:I fail to understand (Score:3, Insightful)
Where's the proof that it was unauthorized? Only you had access to your account, and only you had rights to transfer the money. So, unless you can prove the account had be compromised, no, there's no recourse. And even if there's proof, the money is gone, there's no "voiding" the transaction. The only thing you might be able to do is sue the bank to try to recover the money.
Re:I fail to understand (Score:2)
Re:I fail to understand (Score:2)
Remember, the world doesn't have to be fair or even nice.
Oh well (Score:2)
Re:Oh well (Score:2)
Since the person comitting the crime is checking up on his/her account frequently waiting for the funds to hit (to probably transfer to another account) by the time you find out and get things done it will be too late.
as for your bank getting you your money - well assuming the receiving bank cares en
Abbreviation correction (Score:5, Informative)
attempted electronic transfer of UKP13.9m
Sorry if this is in any way pedantic - just FYI since I used to work in a capital markets trading environment...
The abbreviation in most currency markets is not UKP, it's GBP, for Great Britain Pounds.
To quote from a handy refernce page:
ISO 4217 (Codes for the Representation of Currencies and Funds) defines three-letter abbreviations for world currencies. The general principle used to construct these abbreviations is to take the two-letter abbreviations defined in ISO 3166 (Codes for the Representation of Names of Countries) and append the first letter of the currency name (e.g., USD for the United States Dollar).
A non-official site's list is at: http://www.jhall.demon.co.uk/currency/by_country [demon.co.uk].
The official 4217 list of currency codes is at http://www.iso.ch/iso/en/prods-services/popstds/c [www.iso.ch]
The official ISO 3166 Country codes list is at:
http://www.iso.ch/iso/en/prods-services/iso3166ma [www.iso.ch]
Re:Abbreviation correction (Score:3, Insightful)
The official 4217 list of currency codes is at here [www.iso.ch]
The official ISO 3166 Country codes list is at:
here. [www.iso.ch]
Re:Abbreviation correction (Score:3, Informative)
The thing is there is no such legal entity as Great Britain and there has not been since 1801. Great Britain existed as a country for less than 100 years, and has not existed for over 200 now. If the
Re:Abbreviation correction (Score:1)
Re:Abbreviation correction (Score:3, Informative)
Also, the SI unit abbreviation for million is M, not m. m is Meter, M is million (mega), so a mM is a million meters (a thousand Km), but Mm, MM or mm don't make any sense at all, nor mGBP.
It doesn't have to make sense... (Score:2)
Re:It doesn't have to make sense... (Score:2)
Thanks, I just forgot the initial minor m is mili, or a thousandth. So the error in question is still worse, because isolated it should mean Meter but as a quantifier it should mean a thousandth.
Just that it is not a word. The real reason
In USD... (Score:3, Informative)
In IKR (Score:3, Funny)
Now let's hear hear from everyone else!
Re:In IKR (Score:2)
They managed all of this (Score:5, Funny)
Keylogging Catches Suspects (Score:1)
Wow.. (Score:2)
Re:Wow.. (Score:2)
Question about Key Logging software (Score:5, Interesting)
diowengiw03821-13kd98password8990830209keivli
Would key-logging software be able to find my password if I cut and paste the relevant data into the appropriate field when I want to enter the password?
Basically, where does the key-logging software sniff the bits? Is it off the bus from the keyboard to the processor, or does it sniff it off the processor?
Just curious
Re:Question about Key Logging software (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Question about Key Logging software (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Question about Key Logging software (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Question about Key Logging software (Score:2, Insightful)
Tee hee (Score:2, Funny)
Shockwave only. (Score:2)
I'm going to eat some peanuts.
GBP not UKP (Score:3, Informative)
Same for CAD for Canadian dollars, but it's frequently listed (incorrectly) as
Cdn $
Re:can you imagine the look (Score:1)
Re:Amusing..... or not. (Score:1)
Re:Getting caught (Score:2)
Re:Questions Remain (Score:2)
It sounds to me like they discovered the break-in in October. Knowing you have an unsavory element aboard however, is not the same as knowing WHO that person is. Likely, they had to wait for the bad guys to expose themselves. Complex puzzles require time and effort to solve. This is real life, not a cop show.
Re:Questions Remain (Score:2)