Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Security Politics IT

Politically Motivated Cyber Attacks 78

Orome1 writes "According to a new report, 53 percent of critical infrastructure providers report that their networks have experienced what they perceived as politically motivated cyber attacks. Participants of the Symantec survey claimed to have experienced such an attack on an average of 10 times in the past five years, incurring an average cost of $850,000 during a period of five years to their businesses. Participants from the energy industry reported that they were best prepared for such an attack, while participants from the communications industry reported that they were the least prepared."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Politically Motivated Cyber Attacks

Comments Filter:
  • by Dunbal ( 464142 ) * on Wednesday October 06, 2010 @09:36AM (#33807292)

    I don't see any problems when a company that sells "security" releases data about the bad terrible things that can happen to you if you don't have the appropriate "security".

    And when Merck says Vioxx is safe, we must trust them.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by postbigbang ( 761081 )

      There's a difference between observation, criticism, and DDoS. Concerted efforts to stifle information-- no matter what the information is-- are onerous attacks on everyone who wants the same right to voice their own.

    • Yes and even if it were true in concept one can be sure that they do the accounting in the most generous fashion. Still one can probably assume the relative ranking of various industries is useful.

      Here is something I wonder about. Why do any employers connect their emplyees to the internet? Would it not be a much better idea to have nearly all computers connect to a private intra-net. That way the business functions can all get done. No personal e-mails or outside web paged pretty much means no trojans

    • Re: (Score:1, Redundant)

      by srussia ( 884021 )

      I don't see any problems when a company that sells "security" releases data about the bad terrible things that can happen to you if you don't have the appropriate "security".

      -1 Offtopic.

      We're not talking about the US Government here.

  • by AnonymousClown ( 1788472 ) on Wednesday October 06, 2010 @09:41AM (#33807360)

    Critical infrastructure providers represent industries that are of such importance either to a nation’s economy or society that if their cyber networks were successfully attacked and damaged, the result would threaten national security.

    WTF are "critical infrastructure providers" doing by connecting their critical systems to the internet?

    If they need to connect plants or other things, leased lines aren't an option?

    • That might make sense for things like the Energy Industry (which is better prepared supposedly) but not so much for Communications, since their business IS the internet. Sometimes total quarantine just isn't an option. And many of the so-called "critical infrastructure" industries are legally required to be on monitoring networks, so that if one site etc goes down others can pick up the slack (again Energy fits this as the national power grid needs such redundancy). Now you could say that they just ma
      • by mlts ( 1038732 ) *

        There is the fallacy of "this isn't a 100% solution, so why bother?"

        If it were up to me, I'd probably implement a solution that went into one place I worked at. They had a private network (only accessible to the dedicated machines, and the corporate network. To bridge the two, they had one machine on the private network which grabbed data from the controllers, then turned it into XML, and pushed it through a serial connection that physically only allowed Tx (Rx was cut) to another machine. The machine on

  • This is almost not news. There's been a de facto cyber-war with the Chinese going on for years now; just neither side talks much about it openly.
  • by Even on Slashdot FOE ( 1870208 ) on Wednesday October 06, 2010 @09:49AM (#33807478)

    Politically motivated cyber attack reports are spun into support for new laws bringing the US up to speed with the most draconian technology laws in the world - provide your password or go to jail forever, prove that the drawing is of an adult, and even prove that you have never interacted with anyone who has committed these cyber-crimes or go to jail by association!

    • If somebody is a politically motivated cyber terrorists, the law isn't going to make a difference as they aren't the kind of person who would respect the law to begin with.

      So those laws would mainly affect us and leave them free to hack us and do anything to us basically. The only real solution is for spy agencies and military to train it's own group of cyber warriors or whatever we want to call these people to conduct cyber warfare. This combined with the current laws should be enough.

      The law usually creat

  • How come there's no mention of the objective of these attacks? What could it be, why would you take out energy or communication companies?

  • by elucido ( 870205 ) * on Wednesday October 06, 2010 @09:58AM (#33807584)

    It's a war. This is not new. Just look at whats going on with Cryptome being hacked in the name of Bradley Manning. I would say ideology is a strong motivator for hacking.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    DOSS attacks could be the new form of protests. They could have the same protections as regular protests. They would have to be announced and could last for a limited number of hours per day.

    Regular protest cause financial loss anyway, so there's no difference there. But unlike the regular protests people from around the world could participate easily. The media would cover the protest just like any other, so you'd get attention to the issue as well.

    It's what anonymous already does in a way - they announce

  • Stuxnet for sinking their battleship!

No extensible language will be universal. -- T. Cheatham