Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Security The Internet United States

Government Cyber Storm Ends 124

Posted by CmdrTaco from the guess-who-is-to-blame dept.
Bemmu writes "Mainichi Daily News and BBC News are reporting that the 'Cyber Storm' operation, for testing how prepared America is for fending off cyber attacks, has now concluded. Apparently they even used bloggers as part of the operation, as relayers of misinformation!"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Government Cyber Storm Ends More

Government Cyber Storm Ends

Comments Filter:

  • Misinformation? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Winlin ( 42941 ) on Sunday February 12, 2006 @12:11PM (#14700351)
    Are you trying to tell me bloggers aren't reliable??? My whole worldview has come crashing down.

    • Re:Misinformation? (Score:2, Interesting)

      by nazsco ( 695026 )
      the gov don't want you getting information off the oficial channels. stick to your tv and leave the internet alone.

      • Re:Misinformation? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Zeinfeld ( 263942 ) on Sunday February 12, 2006 @01:20PM (#14700650) Homepage
        the gov don't want you getting information off the oficial channels. stick to your tv and leave the internet alone.

        This lot don't want people to take information from anywhere else than themselves, Fox News and the Washington Times.

        But I suspect that the reason Blogs were in the simulation was because of their speed of reaction rather than anything else.

        The biggest cyberwar effect being seen today is freebooting groups of partisans launching unofficial (and possibly sometimes official) actions. A big concern in the intel community is that these unofficial actors my tip an international incident into a crisis.

        Take the current spate of attacks by Islamist hackers attacking targets in Denmark. Imagine if Denmark was a crazy-actor like Libya or Iran and a cyberattack by one of those unofficial freebooters took out a major infrastructure. Or imagine what might happen if Iranian hackers attacked Denmark, took out a major infrastructure and Danish hackers retaliated in kind.

        Add freebooter hackers into an environment where diplomats are doing everything they can to avoid escalation and the potential for disaster is large.

        • an environment where diplomats are doing everything they can to avoid escalation
          What if you have an environment where diplomats are doing everything they can to encourage escalation so they look "strong" to the people in their respective countries? It takes more than a few cartoons in a right wing Christian newspaper in September to stir up riots overnight (it's been four months!).

        • Re:Misinformation? (Score:3, Interesting)

          by HiThere ( 15173 ) *
          Where do you find a world where the diplomats are trying to discourage escalation...or don't you count elected officials as diplomats?
      • Some fans of the mainstream media obviously have mod points, and are misusing them instead of responding. Good thing there is meta-maoderation. The mainstream corporate media report what gets ratings and sells papers, the truth be damned! They also have sucked up to Bush and parroted his lies from day one to get access. That's no troll, it's the truth.
    • First they tell me that mysterious attachments from my friends are unsafe, and now this.

      I can't take it anymore!
    • He's telling you that for a short period of time, the government was frankly admitting that it was spreading misinformation. Now we will return to your regularly scheduled disinformation.
    • The cats [google.com] - they are not truly Tabby [google.com]! They are all Maine Coon [slashdot.org]!
    • I'm reliable, I update everyday! :-)

  • Lies! (Score:5, Funny)

    by elleomea ( 749084 ) on Sunday February 12, 2006 @12:13PM (#14700356) Homepage
    Clearly it han't ended and slashdot is just being used for misinformation!

  • Internet attack? (Score:5, Funny)

    by xxxJonBoyxxx ( 565205 ) on Sunday February 12, 2006 @12:14PM (#14700364)
    "It was carried out on secure computers in the basement of the Secret Service in Washington DC."

    Sounds realistic...

  • "Apparently they even used bloggers..." (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 12, 2006 @12:15PM (#14700368)
    Man, I am so linking to this.

  • Press Release (Score:2, Funny)

    by iphayd ( 170761 )
    We are not wiretapping without warrants, this was just "misinformation" that was leaked to America to see how "gullible" they are. Of course, this official press release is completely legitamate and not consisting of misinformation.

    - Emperor Bush

    • Re:Press Release (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Max Threshold ( 540114 ) on Sunday February 12, 2006 @01:28PM (#14700686)
      Seriously, though... I think the do this all the time. They've been testing the public and the media for decades to see who calls bullshit. Their lies and obfuscation have slowly gotten more outrageous, and people have been conditioned to think nothing of scandals that just a generation or two ago would have resulted in civil war.

  • Uh oh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rwebb ( 732790 ) on Sunday February 12, 2006 @12:18PM (#14700378)
    If the exercise Hurricane Pam [federaltimes.com] is to Hurricane Katrina as Cyberstorm is to an actual cyber attack, then we're in deep doodoo. No smiley.

    • Re:Uh oh (Score:5, Insightful)

      by carpe_noctem ( 457178 ) on Sunday February 12, 2006 @12:58PM (#14700574) Homepage Journal
      Hey, that's a rather unfair comparison. The Hurricane Pam exercise accurately pointed out everything bad that would happen in case of a category-5 hurricane, and it also outlined the government's areas where they were not prepared (well, up until the point when the exercise was cancelled, that is). The exercise itself could have been very useful, had the government actually used information from this exercise. However, gross amounts of miscommunication (which seems to be the norm in the US government these days) led to the katrina disaster.

  • Cyber-BS (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Rosco P. Coltrane ( 209368 ) on Sunday February 12, 2006 @12:18PM (#14700381)
    The exercise had given the US "an excellent opportunity to enhance our nation's cyber security," the US said.

    What? they finally told Microsoft to release a secure OS or else...?

    Seriously, most "cyber-attacks" are as much the result of criminals, professional spammers and teenage virus writers as it is the result of the single shoddy OS they target. Both are needed for an attack to work. The rest can easily be taken care of by training IT professionals better and by selecting more secure OSes.

    And no, before you ask, I'm not trying to push *nix or MacOS against Windows: while I do believe Windows is badly designed at core and will always be insecure one way or the other, if Microsoft could make it secure, it would most certainly give a lot less headaches to the DHS folks.

    • Re:Cyber-BS (Score:3, Interesting)

      by RiotXIX ( 230569 )
      I'm fairly confident that whenever we see reports like this publicizing how 'tests show the US internet is hacker proof!' it's just media garbage: real tests are confidentially held (maybe in basements!), and the public sure as heck are told of the results. I don't know why they bother handing out bits of information like to feed the public.

      Articles like this [bbc.co.uk] are the ones that we need to be worried about.
      • Worry about this article - just don't base your worry on the writer's assessment. He/she makes an erroneous logical leap that an attack capability against "any" information system is the same as an ability to attack "all" information systems. Few militaries desire to do that sort of thing kinetically, what would be the military value of doing it in the information space?

  • CYBER STORM LOL (Score:2, Interesting)

    by MikeSty ( 890569 )
    Cyber Storm took place on computers isolated from the net

    Right... This way they're not actually vulnerable to anything, such as BotNet attacks by little script kiddies who want ad revenue. Or maybe they just were afraid of Windows Update.
    • Just so you know, most targets for this sort of thing are called SCADA systems and they tend to be located on isolated networks. The isolation is actually a realistic thing...
      • Well, seeing as you know much more than I do (truthfully), how does one attack a said "isolated" network? I would expect a government network that would undergo such testing for cyber security would not be isolated..?
      • In these modern days the big corporations want SCADA systems, PLCs and DCS's to also connect to their internal IT network. That way you can make really cool reports and overview with the live-data as base. And ofcourse the IT networks are also connected to the internet. The days that the industrial network, which controls everything from a 1 arm robot upto a complete hydrocracker, are running in splendid isolation are long gone.

        • Re:CYBER STORM LOL (Score:3, Insightful)

          by AB3A ( 192265 )
          Most hackers would have a hard time doing that where I work. It is TRULY isolated. Granted, in many utilities, the IT department has taken over things like DCS systems and SCADA systems. This is a very BAD thing. IT may be really good with computers, but they often don't know anything about how industrial control systems work. It is not "just another data source" or "just another network". Screw up on projects like these, and there may not be anything left to reboot. It is wise to cultivate a few eng

  • This just in... (Score:5, Funny)

    by coastin ( 780654 ) * on Sunday February 12, 2006 @12:21PM (#14700402) Homepage
    After thinking that the Internet had doged a bullet from the Cyber Storm of the century, reports are now coming in that several cyber levys have been breeched and the internet is filling with spam.

  • Bloggers eh? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by damneinstien ( 939730 )
    I have to wonder how much MySpace, [slashdot.org] LiveJournal [slashdot.org] and other blogsites were effected by this. Did the Cyber Storms use any of these vulnerabilities to test the infrastructure?

    • Re:Bloggers eh? (Score:2, Informative)

      by schmu_20mol ( 806069 )
      From TFA (BBC):

      It was carried out on secure computers in the basement of the Secret Service in Washington DC.

      There was no effect on the internet.

      ... read: they played in a sandbox far away from the real deal.
      • I suppose I should have clarified. Did they use these vulnerabilities on their testing? Meaning, did they carry over these vulnerabilities in their sandbox for simulation purposes? I did RTFA
      • What...you expected them to ACTUALLY work...like in the REAL world! What are you MAD! That would be Dangerous...They might brake a Nail!

  • Crack (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 12, 2006 @12:33PM (#14700470)
    I wonder what happens when they use crackers instead of hackers.

  • Mock attack = Mock results (Score:5, Insightful)

    by t7 ( 591821 ) on Sunday February 12, 2006 @12:35PM (#14700475) Homepage
    "The war game drew in 115 agencies from the FBI and CIA to the Red Cross, the Department of Homeland Security said."

    "IT companies and state and foreign governments also played a role in responding to the mock attacks."

    These "simulated" attacks are all well and good, but they are being performed by entities meant to keep the system secure. Isn't that only attacking from one angle? Did these groups attack the systems like scriptkiddies would? Like seasoned professionals not skewed or influenced by "standard corporate security measures"? Did they take into account social engineering and attacks from the inside?
    • > Did these groups attack the systems like scriptkiddies would? Like seasoned professionals not skewed or influenced by "standard corporate security measures"? Did they take into account social engineering and attacks from the inside?

      Take it easy. they're public servents.
    • Not just all that, but you wonder if they ignored the physical factor...like setting off a small EMP generator (most likely a very small nuke) inside or near certain data centers. There are SO many more factors to cyberwarfare than just crackers.
      • The question is really, "is a multiple EMP attack really a high probability threat?" Just as your parent post posted a bunch of the very common attacks we would expect to try and prepare for, it doesn't make a lot of sense to spend a lot of resources to prepare for an uncommon one. (Why use an EMP anyway. There are tons more ways to physically disable computers. Water sprinkler systems in computer rooms, axes. backhoes, etc, etc.)
        • Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of disrupting power flow to data centers in any way, but things like backhoes are protected against because most commercial data centers (think Rackspace) have huge, redundant generators...and if you can find a data center that uses water-based fire suppression systems instead of Halon (or an equivalent), you can be certain they're a fly-by-night operation.

          Besides..."EMP" is too cool to pass up. ;)

    • Re:Mock attack = Mock results (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      These "simulated" attacks are all well and good, but they are being performed by entities meant to keep the system secure. blah. blah. blah.

      Ya gotta start somewhere.

      Ya gotta make sure your doors and windows are locked before you install an alarm system. Ya gotta make sure your alarm system works before you install surveillance cameras. Ya gotta make sure your surveillance cameras work before you hire armed guards.

      This may become an annual or biannual event. Maybe they're only at the stage of making sure the
    • Assuming they had DoD participation they probably did. The war machine has always been concious that its threats are not always just the guy in the trenches on the other side of the battle field.
    • Speaking from experience, security audits from the feds have been much deeper and uncomfortable than any big four (or however many there are today) accounting/risk firms. "Some" feds are true wizards and may be the same "black hat" irc buddy you are in awe of. Script kiddies are called that for a reason. Anyone remotely experienced with IT Security better know Nessus and NMAP. Anyone selling "expertise" had better provide more than a report based solely on those two tools. In terms of using a test environ
  • Apparently they even used bloggers as part of the operation, as relayers of misinformation!"

    That would explain the "Nude Paris Hilton demonstrates latest version of FireFox while denouncing Bush administration" links that mysteriously went to the Bonneville Power Administration.

  • It will be interesting to see what comes out of this. There is much work needed to be done to improve computer security and perhaps events like this will raise public profile (and funding).

    People truly rely on the internet now. Perhaps it is not as important as the telephone system, at least in terms of preserving life and limb, but the economic damage from a sustained, widespread internet outage would be tremendous.

    On the plus side, if the internet was unavailable, I think many people would at leas
    • On the plus side, if the internet was unavailable, I think many people would at least temporarily rediscover the real world.

      I was going to joke about me not knowing about the real world and ask you to point me to a wikipedia article or website which explains it, but I was foiled by the article on real world [wikipedia.org].
      • If the internet werent so free, and filled with information, people would not spend so much time on it. In the real world, no library or public place has this much information. In the real world there are thousands of laws. In the real world it is much more difficult to organize hundreds of people into one place and get them to socialize.

    • The real world involves pain and suffering. And that's just the fun stuff.

      The only thing I want fom the RealWorld is a few electrons, and a continuous supply of caffeine.

      And maybe a little less light.

      Now let me get back to my LCD Tan...

  • They apparently forgot ..... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 12, 2006 @12:50PM (#14700543)
    .... that all known US Military / NATO et al. intelligence compromises have been
    perpatrated by their own employees, for former disgruntled employees.

    The Cyber Storm exercise appears yet again a vender dog and pony show to
    impress the current check signing crowd to buying more worthless stuff.

    Some years ago MS tried to wire-and-run a crusier off the Virginia coast in
    a test of Windows NT at ship control with a minimal crew. NT crashed about
    30 minutes into the test and the ship had to be towed back to port.

    Toodles!

    • Re:They apparently forgot ..... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by jimicus ( 737525 ) on Sunday February 12, 2006 @01:19PM (#14700647)
      It's worse than that.

      I can't provide references off the top of my head, bu IIRC some estimates suggest that up to 70% of "attacks" come from within - disgruntled or corrupt employees being the most obvious example.

      Naturally, most companies aren't too keen to issue a press release saying "Yeah, this chap we employed walked out the door with a couple of thousand customer records when we sacked him last week", so these estimates are little more than educated guesses. But even so, if there's only the tiniest grain of truth to them it demonstrates how important it is to consider both internal and external security.
      • When it comes to utilities, yes, we're very concerned about what the employees know and what they can do. The percentage figure is misleading because there are actually very few documented cases of such attacks.

        I hate to put cold water on this parade, but cyber attacks aren't nearly as effective as good old infrastructure attacks. Most of the control systems used for distribution networks are designed with an awful lot of fail-safe behavior. You can damage things, but doing it in a way that will bring th
      • We've had some security audits done and they generally come back to the same point: one can make a system secure against most threats, but the easiest means of entry is always the human angle.

        People divulge their passwords/access tokens easily in comparison to spending days/weeks cracking a system.

        There's an article here about http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/04/11/give_your_ password_to_complete/ [theregister.co.uk] people willing to hand over their passwords.

        You should also be careful of where you are- for example, people q
        • People divulge their passwords/access tokens easily in comparison to spending days/weeks cracking a system.

          True, but you don't often see a botnet bribing people in exchange for specific passwords. (I'm excluding phishing at this point and thinking about corporate espionage rather than bank fraud).

          If someone's hanging around your offices offering people brown envelopes in exchange for passwords, they've gone to some trouble and they're clearly determined to attack you in particular. There's probably not a
    • So you're saying that all known intelligence compromises have been committed by their own employees, i.e. people who have access to that information?! Thanks for spelling that one out for me.
    • The fact is that while everyone knows there is an insider threat, you have to trust someone w/ something. The goal is simply to never trust 1 person with everything.
  • "It was carried out on secure computers in the basement of the Secret Service in Washington DC."
    How many bloggers can be crammed into the basement of the Secret Service in Washington?

  • Quick - someone save the internet (Score:5, Funny)

    by MECC ( 8478 ) on Sunday February 12, 2006 @12:59PM (#14700581)
    "The Internet survived, even against fictional abuses against the world's computers."

    I've got this picture of DHS undercover agents running around screaming "the sky is falling, the sky is falling!", and then making chicken-clucking noises. Nobody panics, and they proclaim "Right then, all is well".

    My tax dollars hard at work...

  • Why then... (Score:3, Funny)

    by audioinfektion ( 849134 ) on Sunday February 12, 2006 @01:03PM (#14700595)
    Is the data light on my internet connection still pegged.. Was not before this thing started...
  • Apparently they even used bloggers as part of the operation, as relayers of misinformation!

    But, but, but... Like, it so HAS to be true! I mean, like, 20 people on my Livejournal friends list linked to it just today.

  • I like how the article ends:
    There was no effect on the internet.

    The exercise was the latest in a series of simulated attacks, including a gas attack on the New York subway.

    ------------
    New York Subway, Interior
    A loud booming noise, followed by the sound of escaping gas is heard. People fall on ground, writhing in agony. Two gas-masked figures enter.

    OFFICER ONE: Remain calm, people! I am with the ATF, and this subway gassing was just a test of our nation's emergency contingency plans! Please resume what yo
    • Why am I reminded, by reading this post, of the Bush admin response to Katrina?

      An amazing similarity. In either scenario, the bodies on the ground weren't consulted as to whether or not the problem was serious.

      As for recovery in New Orleans and that general area, it will be a very long time if ever coming. Why? Even to me, sitting in front of a monitor a thousand miles away, its extremely obvious that the only recovery the feds are interested in is just enough to the port itself to get the oil flowing ag
  • Apparently they even used bloggers as part of the operation, as relayers of misinformation!

    Astroturfers are terroristss.

  • Slashdot Headlines (Score:3, Funny)

    by DavidD_CA ( 750156 ) on Sunday February 12, 2006 @01:34PM (#14700707) Homepage
    they even used bloggers as part of the operation, as relayers of misinformation

    Well, that explains most of the recent Slashdot headlines.

  • Harbinger of bad news? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by zappepcs ( 820751 ) on Sunday February 12, 2006 @01:34PM (#14700711) Journal
    IANACE (I am not a computer expert) but I have to say that Science Fiction, poor as some of the plots are, has already taken this game to a level that that US, or any government, cannot even imagine. The plot in The Terminator and The Matrix is only going a little further than what reality is probably already producing.

    What the world knows of virus and malware programs is only what has been discovered AND disclosed to the public. It is quite probable that there are malicious programs out there that are stealthily eating away at personal and business data or waiting till the right moment to do so, or worse, transmitting small bits and pieces of it back to the 'boss' on a regular basis. The latter has already been shown to be effective.

    Any exercise done to improve or test computer security is farsical in comparison to what the imagination of any geek can dream up. No, I don't have the program sheet for the tests done, but I do know that they cannot have tested for security against what I can dream up... and trust me, if I can dream it up, its probably already being done.

    Imagine a program that replicates itself, is small, does not trigger AV software, is executed by the computer user, does no damage, but propels itself across the networks until it finds itself on the computer of some user whose first name is Bill, and belongs to the domain microsoft.com. Now, every time that Bill lets his screen saver run, or recalculates some values in MS Excel, the program looks to see what the oldest file on the computer is, and queues it for transmission to another host when such transmission is likely to be unnoticed. (you figure out when that would be). Its not so hard to see such a program working, and going undetected by AV software. Yes, yes, I'm sure you could figure out how to catch it, but the time from zero-day to erradication would be a long time indeed.

    The selectivity of this program would make it very difficult to identify and get rid of. Especially if it is passing data from one infected machine to another so that final destination is impossible to find. I hate to say it, but Tor and BT could be used for impossibly complex industrial and government spying.

    The only way to stop malware is to disconnect the network cables, or very strictly control what passes over them to your computer or network. That gets difficult when such programs can mutate and then try tunneling via http etc. An http post request would be difficult to defend against if you are running an http server?

    Now, to get modded down: Didn't the US government think they were prepared for natural disasters? I'm sure that people in charge of such things do all they think reasonable to be prepared, but that force5 program is just waiting for them....
    • The plot in The Terminator and The Matrix is only going a little further than what reality is probably already producing.

      I think I get what you mean, but in the interest of humor: when was the last time a porno site popup killed you? For a more realistic bridge between far out sf and reality, read Peter Watts. The first two books in his Rifters trilogy are scheduled for reprint in 2007, and until then , he has made them available for download in PDF format on his website under the CC licencse http://rifters [rifters.com]
    • I am a computer expert.

      If the program can actually think, I'll be impressed. The only algorithms humans have been able to come up with would take far more than the combined processing power available on the planet to simulate anything approaching a human consciousness.

      And, if the program doesn't have a human consciousness, it can't mutate as you describe:

      That gets difficult when such programs can mutate and then try tunneling via http etc.

      No program is smart enough to "mutate", wholly on its own, to try tu
  • Using bloggers to relay misinformation is another blunder by the government. It only stands to reason that since most of them can't get things straight, they'll actually end up relaying correct information.

    Naturally I'm one of the bloggers for whom that does not apply.

  • Slashdot CyberSecurity Consulting (Score:4, Insightful)

    by tritab ( 249395 ) on Sunday February 12, 2006 @01:58PM (#14700815) Homepage
    How many comments do we need asking "what if this", "what about that", "why don't they make Microsoft fix their insecure OS", etc? I for one, am excited that the government even attempted this exercise. The smart folks who were involved with this definitely learned valuable lessons. Likely, as was seen with hurricane Katrina, communication was the biggest obstacle. Even the PHB's will notice the major problems. Please keep in mind that the government is a large bureaucracy and as such, is large and hard to change.

    Also keep in mind that the information security profession is still very immature. Remember that doctors and lawyers "practice" their professions. Do we "practice" information security? Engineers are legally required to submit their designs for peer review for all municipal projects. Is that same level of review required for information security for government efforts?

    We still have quite a way to go, but we are making steps forward.
    • /*Likely, as was seen with hurricane Katrina, communication was the biggest obstacle.*/

      Regarding Katrina, there was an exercise conducted beforehand called Hurricane "Pam" that forecast many of the problems that were encountered while providing relief to Katrina victims. If the government is unable to integrate the results of disaster management exercises, what guarantee is there that the lessons of *this* drill will be integrated before the nex cyberattack.

      In many ways this situation is worse.
      • Ya, a communications problem. When you don't make a call (or 50), or know what to do to mitigate the problems that are popping up, that's incompetence, not a communication problem.

        Say I make the kid down the block, who happens to be good with computers, the head of security at a very large company. He's secured a few machines with Linksys routers, and maybe installed Zone Alarm. Then the company gets hit with a large attack and he crumbles under the stress of trying to deal with it. That's incompetence,
        • The issue isn't that the government had "no idea" that the disaster was going to be as bad as it was. The "Hurricane Pam" drill solved that. The problem was that the government *knew* what the potential problems were and *still* failed to address them.

          I fear the same thing will occur due to this cybersecurity drill. The drill will point out problems, but the entire exercise will be treated like Cassandra and will be forgotten about until the actual disaster hits. Then everyone will r
          • I guess my point is that Bush put a useless tool in charge that couldn't do the job. FEMA has done a great job in the past, it just obviously had no real direction or sense of urgency from the top this time around, and a distinct lack of coordination throughout. And, I have no doubt, they took a "Let's hope it isn't as bad as the info we have says it might be" attitude.

            The hope is that the same mistake doesn't get repeated for whoever has the lead on dealing with the cyberwar stuff.
            • /*The hope is that the same mistake doesn't get repeated for whoever has the lead on dealing with the cyberwar stuff.*/

              We have someone in charge of cyberwar?  I know that there was some sort of cybersecurity coordination post created by Clinton, but I lost track of it in the huge shuffle that followed the consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security.
  • WTF...

    Considering the massive digital leakage that has been being reported (information leaking from all sorts of places, includintg the IRS - the real reason they dropped teletax).... and the most popular OS being one produced by what is primarily a marketing company, not even a secondary technology company, but a legal firm and buyout company (Microsoft)...where their own anti-spyware disables third part anti-virus software (Symantec - a cpu and resource hog)...

    Lets get real here. Stop wasting Tax payer m

  • So.... My blogs can be censored? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ShyGuy91284 ( 701108 ) on Sunday February 12, 2006 @02:39PM (#14700990)
    I can't think of any way they could really fight misinformation from blogs successfully other then forcing the "wrong" blogs down, since most might not be so trusting of a politician saying "I'm not bad. I'm good. I'd never do anything crooked".
  • What I want to know is how exactly one would go about simulating a "cyber attack". Or more precisely, what exactly is a "cyber attack"? Quite frankly, I have never been a fan of the whole "cyberterrorism" thing. To me, the "threat" seems abstract, ill-defined, and reeks too much of Y2K-style overreaction-through-misunderstanding. For starters, I wonder how a "cyber attack" be different from the kinds of attacks that we see day in and day out, like the literally hundreds of attempts by zombie machines to
    • It's a complicated, 7 step process.

      1. Employees of the NSA sign in to computers in a sealed lab with a secured, high-speed connection to the internet.
      2. They begin to surf Russian porn sites, skipping the innocuous Playboy knockoffs and looking for hardcore fetish sites, usually along the lines of http://goatse.ragingfist.net/ [ragingfist.net] . Warez sites are also checked with the following top-secret search terms: "OMG BF2 TRAINER LOL".
      3. All viruses and portscans are logged from above activity.
      4. After 36 hours of non
  • Missionforce bad, but Cyberstorm 2: Corporate Wars was terrible.
  • From TFA:

    Some mock attacks were aimed at causing a "significant cyber disruption" that could seriously damage energy, transportation and health care industries and undermine public confidence, said George Foresman, an undersecretary at the Homeland Security Department.

    Then why are they on the pulic internet amd not their own private one? I guess cost is one factor.

    qz

  • Apparently they even used bloggers as part of the operation, as relayers of misinformation!

    That one's gotta hurt! Expecting some awesome replies to that one.
    • Apparently they even used bloggers as part of the operation, as relayers of misinformation!

      What, Hannity and colmes aren't good enough anymore?

  • My question: which blogs and what misinformation? I'm curious...
    • Maybe that's the misinformation... perfect countermeasure to any blogsters "too close to the truth" posting. Even better, this is a nice "blogs are bad" meme to inject in as a side benefit.
  • This is one of those projects that the taxpayers payed about 20 million dollars for, but could have been done by the taxpayers for free. Reminds me of the 300,000 dollar toilet
  • Apparently they even used bloggers as part of the operation, as relayers of misinformation!"

    In Russia... ... nevermind, I got nuthin'
  • "Apparently they even used bloggers as part of the operation, as relayers of misinformation!"

    *Whew!* I knew it! I knew that there was no way that they would have let Bush be President. I told my friends "I think that it's some sort of misinformation campaign, maybe they're just testing us!", and I was right! So now that it's over, do we get to find out who the real guy in charge is?

Slashdot Top Deals

Business is a good game -- lots of competition and minimum of rules. You keep score with money. -- Nolan Bushnell, founder of Atari

Close