Destructive Hacks Strike Saudi Arabia, Posing Challenge to Trump (bloomberg.com) 184
State-sponsored hackers have conducted a series of destructive attacks on Saudi Arabia over the last two weeks, erasing data and wreaking havoc in the computer banks of the agency running the country's airports and hitting five additional targets, according to two people familiar with an investigation into the breach. From a report on Bloomberg: Saudi Arabia said after inquiries from Bloomberg News that "several" government agencies were targeted in attacks that came from outside the kingdom, according to state media. Although a probe by Saudi authorities is still in its early stages, the people said digital evidence suggests the attacks emanated from Iran. That could present President-elect Donald Trump with a major national security challenge as he steps into the Oval Office. The use of offensive cyber weapons by a nation is relatively rare and the scale of the latest attacks could trigger a tit-for-tat cyber war in a region where capabilities have mushroomed ever since an attack on Saudi Aramco in 2012.
Why would this concern Trump? (Score:5, Insightful)
He campaigned on a platform of isolationism. Why would he care if two countries on the other side of the world are hacking each other?
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Why would this concern Trump? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
https://my2bucks.files.wordpre... [wordpress.com]
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pini... [pinimg.com]
http://presentationsunplugged.... [presentati...lugged.com]
https://devoutinfidel.files.wo... [wordpress.com]
Re:Why would this concern Trump? (Score:4, Insightful)
https://www.google.com.au/sear... [google.com.au]
What I am talking about is real hard bribe money from a dictatorship that hates gays and restricts women's rights in the last election donating to a left leaning democratic party.
http://www.independent.co.uk/n... [independent.co.uk]
Re: (Score:2)
This is fun. We should make a slide show
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
So we're back to the "Obama is really a Muslim..."
Re: (Score:2)
So we're back to the "Obama is really a Muslim..."
We never left! They really can't stop fucking that chicken. It's kind of funny and kind of sad at the same time.
Re: (Score:2)
Surely?
Re: (Score:2)
And you are really a faggot.
This is why no one respects you. Just saying.
Re: (Score:1)
You just broke my ignorance-o-meter. I will sue you for a replacement. It's going to be yuuge!
Try critical thinking for a change instead of believing all the bs you read on your favorite alt-right trash site.
Re: Why would this concern Trump? (Score:1)
Children go where there parents tell them, but Obama went to Santo Fransiskus Asisi, a Catholic School, then SDN Besuki , an Indonesian state-run school. After that, he went back to Hawaii to attend Punahou School.
Now his Stepfather was ostensibly a Muslim, but likely not a devout one, he probably had little to impart to Obama on the subject, if anything, he was reported as more Western oriented.
Doubtful that the Persian/Arabian conflicts made much of an impact.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Out there, not being religious is considered different from actually apostatizing, which is punishable by death. Atheism particularly is particularly harshly targeted. Even in Europe, a Muslim who apostatizes would be a target of an honor killing
Re: (Score:2)
I do believe that he's not a Muslim now, but as a kid, he did go to a Quran school while in Indonesia. One only did that if one was Muslim.
So, why does this matter now?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why would this concern Trump? (Score:5, Funny)
Don't worry, Barron is on it. He's really good with the cyber.
Re: (Score:2)
I know this is targeted at Donald Trump, but let me take this opportunity before things go any further to say: let's leave the kid out of it.
Re: (Score:2)
That wouldn't fix the problem. It'd just get rid of the camouflage for us 400lb nerds who were smart enough to move out of our mothers basement
Re:Why would this concern Trump? (Score:4, Interesting)
Better question (Score:2)
He campaigned on a platform of isolationism. Why would he care if two countries on the other side of the world are hacking each other?
I have a better question:
Why does this concern *us*?
Is there an actual tech issue here, or is it just another chance to get a dig in on Trump?
Are we to consider how Trump would react to every small and subtle world news item until he takes office?
Could we at least wait until he makes some sort of statement?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You don't consider large-scale state-sponsored hacking against another state to be "news for nerds"?
Question the Trump angle all you like, but the actual news here is one of the relative few stories that really does belong on Slashdot.
Re: (Score:2)
You're right. We need to keep an eye on his Twitter account.
Trump has not held a press conference and answered any questions since July 27, so Twitter and 8chan are our best bet.
Re: (Score:2)
You're right. We need to keep an eye on his Twitter account.
Trump has not held a press conference and answered any questions since July 27, so Twitter and 8chan are our best bet.
Don't worry, I already tweeted at him that he should switch to the more Presidential WEAs instead of twitter - that way, you wont miss his postings.
Proves Iran has capability to hurt the US with cyb (Score:2)
We've known for years that Iran's leadership is all about "death to America". The attack on Saudi Arabia shows that they CAN perform significant cyber* attacks. They can do damage though cyber, and they want to attack the USA. Means and motive. We've damn sure given them the opportunity - our IT security is crap.
Additionally, with Iran (and China) actively using these as offensive weapons, the odds are very good that other countries will rush to improve and enlarge each of their cyberwarfare capabilities
Re: (Score:2)
Additionally, with Iran (and China) actively using these as offensive weapons, the odds are very good that other countries will rush to improve and enlarge each of their cyberwarfare capabilities.
I would expect countries started doing that after the US and Israel used Stuxnet against Iran five years ago, if not before.
Re: (Score:2)
The deluded ass hat monarchs of Saudi Arabia have been committing extraordinarily destructive socio-religious hacks of the terrorist variety across the entire planet and their civil suit and criminal prosecution comeuppance is coming so, hmm, how exactly to put this, fuck em.
Re: (Score:2)
There is the very slim possibility that he will ally himself with Putin and Assad and finally take an active role in actually fighting back against ISIS and the radical Islamic movement that has come to dominate the region since the "Arab Spring." I'd give it a 10-15% chance, tops.
Other than this slim hope, I suspect it will be more of the same. He'll continue to suck up to countries like Saudi Arabia and they'll keep funneling the oil money we give them to movements that want to destroy Western civilizatio
Re: (Score:1)
ISIS is a dead man walking. Trump will be declaring victory on a war that Obama already largely won. But that's hardly the first time that has happened.
Re: (Score:2)
ISIS is a dead man walking. Trump will be declaring victory on a war that Obama already largely won. But that's hardly the first time that has happened.
Guess that's why you can find them operating in 15 countries now including South and Central America. Very dead, much walking.
Re:Why would this concern Trump? (Score:5, Insightful)
And fighting our current allies in Syria that we were backing against Assad.
It's a huge win for Putin and a huge stain on our reputation if he can trick Trump into doing that backstab. Trump is a babe in the woods who treats everything like a game and Putin is a professional spy turned gangster turned Tsar who will eat Trump for breakfast.
I put the possibility at a lot more than slim.
On the rest I agree with every word.
Re:Why would this concern Trump? (Score:4, Interesting)
You have absolutely NOTHING to base your claim on that Trump has any support for Saudi Arabia. In fact, in the past, Saudi Arabia was one of the countries he would criticize, along w/ Japan. When Saudi Arabia executed Nimr al-Nimr, he was critical of them in a debate. In fact, in the GOP debates, while others like Rubio and Fiorina would describe Saudi Arabia as an ally, Trump would not, taking Russia's side in this.
Trump's foreign policy stances are well known, except to stupid Democrats who conflate his positions w/ age old Bushisms. He was critical of the ouster of both Mubarak and Gadaffi, stating that removing them just resulted in replacements that turned out to be worse. And he was right - in the case of Egypt, there was a brief Muslim Brotherhood regime before the army took over and redid the election, and got Gen Sisi to power. And the NATO bombardment of Libya resulting in the lynching of Gadaffi resulted in Cyrenaica - their oil rich province - becoming ISIS territory.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why would this concern Trump? (Score:4, Insightful)
He campaigned on a platform of isolationism. Why would he care if two countries on the other side of the world are hacking each other?
Not just that, unlike previous Republican administrations, he takes a dim view of all of Islam: he doesn't view Sunnis as better than Shias or vice versa or any of that. His whole stance of allying w/ the Russians in Syria is based on that: that militias that are financed by the Saudis, Turks or Qatar are just not reliable at best, and Jihadists at worst. That's why he's taken a position that's completely heterodox to the Republicans, if not downright heretical.
On Iran, what he has to do is pull the plug on that deal, and make it clear to Iran's trading partners that they can choose to trade either w/ the US or Iran, but not both. If European countries are so enamored w/ trading w/ Iran, that's fine: just don't expect to do any business w/ the US.
But as far as the Saudis go, we have no dog in the fight b/w Iran and Saudi Arabia. Both are our enemies, and the 2 of them fighting each other is an alien vs predator situation, to paraphrase Debbie Schlussel. Or like the 2 cats of Kilkinney. If they can fight each other and wipe each other out, then praise be to allah - nothing like it!
Re:Why would this concern Trump? (Score:5, Interesting)
Because the most powerful leader in the world should have a world view utterly devoid of nuance.
Ignorance is strength, I suppose.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why would this concern Trump? (Score:4, Informative)
No, nuance, as in that thing that allowed Nixon and Kissinger to sort out that there isn't just one big monolithic thing called "Communists". Nuance, whereby Churchill happily made common cause with Stalin, despite knowing that Stalin was one of the vilest mass murderers in history (the British government knew about the Katyn Massacre, for instance).
I realize we've entered an age where ignorance is worn proudly, but never have I seen it in more evidence than here, where people who actually spend more than fifteen seconds thinking about the complexities of the real world are regarded as inferior to people whose whole world view is just one big knee jerk response.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is what is called a strategic alliance, just like the US and British alliance with Stalin during WWII. Is it moral, no, not really, but considering the vast wealth sitting below the House of Saud's feet, it's much better to have them in your corner than, say, being toppled by some sort of Jihadi regime. Whether you like it or not, Realpolitik is a real thing, and it is ultimately what drives alliances, and breaks them. Go look at the shifting loyalties of Alexander I during the Napoleonic Wars for how th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
An alliance is only needed when 2 powers are compatible. Like there was no way that the allies could have ousted Stalin and installed a puppet regime. In the case of Saudi Arabia, the US - particularly after 9/11 - could have occupied that country and seized their oil. That would have resolved any strategic interests. If Muslims started bitching about Infidels being in the land of the 2 holy cities, the next step could have just been to seize those 2 cities and suspend the haj until they come to their senses.
Team America World Police was supposed to be a satire, not an instruction manual.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, feel free to explain why Saudi Arabia is more of an ally than Iran. Or vice versa. Doesn't matter to me, but since you insist...
Saudi Arabia buys a shit load of military equipment from the West. Iran doesn't.
Re: (Score:3)
To say the 1979 Revolution had nothing to do with the overthrow of Mossadegh is like saying the US Civil War had nothing to do with the New England states abolishing slavery. In reality, it's a lot closer than that. Mossadegh was ousted in 1953, and the Revolution was just 26 years later, and almost certainly the huge amount of anti-American sentiment that typified the Revolution stemmed from the perception (not all that mistaken) that the US had helped the Shah overthrow a legitimate government and then ha
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I suggest you look at Cromwell's treatment of Catholics. The Roundheads were extremely anti Catholic. Cromwell's Ireland campaign is evidence of that.
To be a Catholic in 17th century England was hardly a walk in the park.
Re: (Score:3)
He campaigned on a platform of isolationism. Why would he care if two countries on the other side of the world are hacking each other?
Not just that, unlike previous Republican administrations, he takes a dim view of all of Islam: he doesn't view Sunnis as better than Shias or vice versa or any of that. His whole stance of allying w/ the Russians in Syria is based on that: that militias that are financed by the Saudis, Turks or Qatar are just not reliable at best, and Jihadists at worst. That's why he's taken a position that's completely heterodox to the Republicans, if not downright heretical.
On Iran, what he has to do is pull the plug on that deal, and make it clear to Iran's trading partners that they can choose to trade either w/ the US or Iran, but not both. If European countries are so enamored w/ trading w/ Iran, that's fine: just don't expect to do any business w/ the US.
But as far as the Saudis go, we have no dog in the fight b/w Iran and Saudi Arabia. Both are our enemies, and the 2 of them fighting each other is an alien vs predator situation, to paraphrase Debbie Schlussel. Or like the 2 cats of Kilkinney. If they can fight each other and wipe each other out, then praise be to allah - nothing like it!
Wars have a habit of spilling their effects across borders. For a time, I was reading every day's front page of the Canberra Times [nla.gov.au] starting in October 1938. The problem of international refugees appeared again and again, and I had to stop in February 1939 because I got busy with work. The war had only just begun at that point.
65 million people [unhcr.org] were displaced at the end of 2015. This problem is not just Saudi Arabia and Iran's problem. A lot of the costs of their "not so cold" war are externalized o
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The "no deal with Iran" thing is just a pointless way to draw a difference between Democrats and Republicans. Now that the election is over we can ignore something that has not mattered ever since Carter was President.
Re: (Score:2)
One of these is not like the others. In the case of Russia, the Soviet Union came unraveled, and Yeltsin, who the West was favorably disposed towards, became the head of the replacement Russian government. In the case of Libya, after Saddam was overthrown, Gadaffi got scared and started a series of moves aimed at rapprochement towards the West. Included things like paying compensation to the victims of the Lockerbie bombing, ending his WMD program, and pretty much doing everything that the West wanted.
Re: (Score:2)
Only if you follow Party Dogma like a good little Communist would elsewhere instead of facts. Ghaddafi didn't change right up until the day he was killed. All that changed is that he was accepted.
Should I mention Reagan dealing with Iran again? Will that cure the Dogma driven fake imbecility?
Re: (Score:2)
Again, Reagan was not the one who approved that deal: it was a rogue operation by Ollie North. And even that deal was a better one than the one Obama pulled off, where he gave away the store.
Gadaffi may not have changed as far as the internals of his own country went, and in that manner, he was no different from Mubarak, the Sauds, Ben Ali or any other Arab leader. The West stupidly believed that making Libya democratic would be good, and that's what led to ISIS owning Cyrenaica. You allow those Arab
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
On of several later deals did have included a Bible signed by Reagan which is apparently on display in Tehran (how weird is that?) but despite that being an almost certain sign of Reagan being involved I was not referring to that deal.
Re: Why would this concern Trump? (Score:2)
In today's global economy you can't just threaten to cut off trade with anyone. If China wants to trade with Iran then there is nothing Trump can do to stop it. The same goes for Canada or Mexico and half of Europe and East Asia. Cutting of trade to those countries hurts us just as much as them. You seem to share Trump's dangerous view of the world where everyone is subordinate to the U.S. while we don't depend on anyone.
Re:Why would this concern Trump? (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, I thought Obama was still the President. This happened on Obama's watch. It will be Trump's problem when he is sworn in, but right now it's in Obama's lap.
Seems like a lot of /. stories lately have "Trump" in the title for little or no reason.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This happened on Obama's watch. It will be Trump's problem when he is sworn in,
Hey! We've had seven and a half years of "it's Bush's fault", so it's kind of refreshing to start hearing "it's Trump's fault", even if he hasn't been sworn in or implemented one policy yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why would this concern Trump? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
More like 8% [npr.org]
Indeed, and even that is rapidly declining. About 80% of the oil used in America comes from ... America. Much of the rest comes from Canada and Mexico.
Saudi oil goes mostly to Europe and China.
Re: Why would this concern Trump? (Score:1)
CHI-NA
FTFY
Re: (Score:3)
You must be an American because either your history or geography is completely confused. Most Saudi Oil currently goes to Europe. If the Sauds shut down production it would upset the EU big time and then the US as collateral damage to some degree. The increase in oil prices actually would HELP a number of foreign countries like Alaska and Russia.
But you have to remember that Saudi Arabia really doesn't have all that much else to offer the world. Being annoyed at Iran and starting proxy
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
speak American, for goodness sakes! [youtube.com]
Re: Why would this concern Trump? (Score:4, Insightful)
Why, indeed. Attacks allegedly "emanating from Iran" are not attacks by the Iranian state in the first place.
Indeed. It is likely that this is just some disgruntled individuals, or even some rogue elements inside the government. Most Iranians dislike Arabs in general, and Saudis in particular. Iran also has plenty of people pissed off at the nuclear deal, and hoping to sabotage it by stirring up trouble. Ironically, the Saudis also hate the deal, but for different reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
TFS says state sponsored.
That is based on conjecture, not evidence.
That indicates it's more sophisticated then a few disgruntled Iranian hackers
Or it indicates that someone is trying to push an agenda.
Challenge to *TRUMP*!?!?!?! (Score:1)
So Obama's already quit?
Re: (Score:2)
Obama who?
Oooooo Baaaaa Maaaaa Self... [cheezburger.com]
Hah (Score:1)
Computer banks XD
All blinking lights, booping sounds, and spinning reel to reel tape drives no doubt.
Slashdot Trolling? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Slashdot Trolling? (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't know if this is Slashdot trolling but these Trump articles need to stop, its getting ridiculous. A better headline would be "Saudi and Iran in cyber shitfight". Trying to shoehorn this into a Donald angle is an overreach.
I'd mod you up, but you're already +5
Re:Slashdot Trolling? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, I don't really see that this is a Trump trolling. It's a genuine news story, and it is an interesting question what the new administration will do about it -- if anything. Especially as Trump's proposed Secretary of Defense (Jim Mathis) really, really wants to contain Iran, and Iran's cyberwarfare is one of the issues he's mentioned. Mathis is aggressive and sometimes impolitic, but he doesn't come across as a fool.
On the other hand the Secretary of State position is up in the air. Currently in th
lame (Score:5, Insightful)
You mean posing a challenge for Obama? (Score:5, Insightful)
This should read "Posing a challenge to Obama." You know, the guy who's still President?
Sorry, but this has zero to do with Trump or USA (Score:2, Insightful)
There's simply nothing there to concern the USA or Trump. The Saudis and the Iranians are always bickering, and neither side is even moderately civilized. When two sets of primitive stoneage barbarians bicker, there's simply no reason for civilization to intervene from over the horizon. About the most productive thing the west could do here is grab the men who lead both countries, give them sex change operations, and parachute them into some Taliban ruled areas where they could enjoy the true joys of the pu
Re: (Score:2)
Should really be "President Elect Trump" or... (Score:1)
Should really be "President Elect Trump" or "Mr. Trump" at this point.
I'm a liberal who voted against Trump but respect the office.
Re: (Score:2)
Hippo Crates (Score:1, Insightful)
US pulled stuxnet on Iran, and so has little room to lecture them on such.
Nothing to do with weapons or Trump (Score:2)
What the hell is a cyber weapon? Are they using some laptop that any other hacker can't use because it's so big or expensive only a government can afford it? And what does Trump have to do with this story, unless the Saudi's recently got annexed by the US without anyone knowing about it, last thing I knew they were the ones funding Bin Laden.
Re: (Score:2)
What the hell is a cyber weapon? Are they using some laptop that any other hacker can't use because it's so big or expensive only a government can afford it?
That is probably an excellent question, or at least and interesting one. A laptop, probably not. A server farm? Much more likely. Software created by paid coders. Even more likely. An install vector that was gained via intelligence apparatus run by a government? I think that would certainly help and be something that any other hacker could not use but wouldn't really qualify it for a weapon. Another thing that any other hacker wouldn't have is shielding from discovery. For hacking against the US against us
Re: (Score:2)
The thing is, server farms and bonnets can be rented by the hour these days and are much larger than what any government agency feasibly can have under their control. Mirai is an example of this, they can take out 100Gbps+, it's still not a weapon, it doesn't do any permanent structural damage to the Internet or kill anyone.
Sure there are state sponsored hackers but there are corporate (both criminal and regular types) hackers that are much bigger and better than what I've seen any government agency wield.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not so sure I'd limit it just to permanent structural damage or killing people as a requirement as a weapon. Any damage, even temporary would probably be just as useful for such a term. Psychological weapons exist but do not necessarily cause permanent damage for example. Cyber weapons would be the same. Disruption of communications, damage to files, or even corruption of software requiring it to be reloaded would suffice. Then there is economic damage caused by such attacks. I think that generally thin
"Computer Banks" (Score:2)
"Computer Banks"
Quick! Someone call the Vulcan Science Academy!
Why help them? (Score:2)
They've been running a price war to deliberately drive US small oil producers out of business and the ideals of that Kingdom are even more opposed to those of the USA than what the Iranians have.
Not to mention that 9/11 was due to people who were pissed off about US involvement in Saudi Arabia.
We are getting nothing but pain from that Kingdom.
Having 9/11 flashbacks (Score:2)
"But NO ONE ever imagined they'd use a PROXY to launch a cyber attack..."
"We don't want the smoking gun to be the MUSHROOM STYLE of news management..."
"They hate us for our weak default passwords..."
"Numerous sources tell us that the Iranians are moving, not just documents and hard drives, but WEAPONS OF MASS DELUSION to keep them from being found by people who aren't even looking..."
"'We're too great a nation to allow the EVILDOERS to be the SOLE REASON for launching the Project for the New American Centur
I call cyberbullshit on this report (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The entire Middle East is full of deplorables, including the land-swiping nation that starts with an "i". Is there something in the soil? Does oil, camels, sun, and/or sand trigger insanity?
The US tries to divide the regional players into "good guys" and "bad guys", but it seems there are no "good guys", just bad guys taking a break.
Iran is actually "stable" by the standards of the M.E. Most miss Saddam also. When it comes to the M.E., if it's only half-brok
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Trump announces that Linux w/o systemd to be basis of cyber platform
Trump demands the removal of telemetry from Windows 10
Trump offers LGBT benefits to Apple in lieu of iPhones being manufactured in the US
Trump announces that Extreme Vetting will end only after GNU HURD is in production release
Re: (Score:2)