Cyber attacks on the USA (catch all)

[carl]

For those who are knowledgeable about this kind of thing, do you think somebody was running some kind of test in preparation for bigger things? What was the purpose of the attack? Also, why does a local water utility have to be connected to the internet?

[bourbon]

For those who are knowledgeable about this kind of thing, do you think somebody was running some kind of test in preparation for bigger things? What was the purpose of the attack? Also, why does a local water utility have to be connected to the internet?

Carl,

I think the rules of the road for cyberwarfare are being written as we speak; but generally speaking, just as every weapon needs to be tested before it can see the battlefield – so too will every cyberwarfare capability.

The difference being there really isn’t cyberwar proving grounds. This means that enemy infrastructure networks need to be regularly penetrated and I imagine occasionally fooked with – just to ensure you still have the capability.

Why does a water utility need to be connected to the internet? Remote access brings efficiency and cost savings -- one group of SCADA engineers can control multiple sites remotely, instead of having to have SCADA engineers at every site 24/7.

[AdamG]

Hacking is becoming a growing problem on Earth. It may seem strange to mention Earth, as there’s not much to hack outside of our planet’s atmosphere unless you count satellites. Even then, how feasible would it be to gain access to the systems running such devices?

Well, China not only has people working on such things, it has been discovered they actually managed to take control of two NASA satellites for more than 11 minutes.

The successful attacks occurred in 2007 and 2008. The more serious of the two happened in ’08 when NASA had control of the Terra EOS earth observation system satellite disrupted for 2 minutes in June, and then a further 9 minutes in October. During that time, whoever took control had full access to the satellites’ systems, but chose to do nothing with it.

http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-pi...utes-20111119/

[Backwards Observer]

UPDATE1-US commander cannot pin down satellite anomaly

The command responsible for U.S. military space operations lacks enough data to determine who interfered with two U.S. government satellites, anomalies behind perhaps the most explosive charge in a report on China sent to the U.S. Congress on Wednesday.

"What I have seen is inconclusive," General Robert Kehler, commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, said in a teleconference from Omaha, Nebraska, home to the military outfit that conducts U.S. space and cyberspace operations.

[...]

China's military is a prime suspect, the bipartisan, 12-member commission made clear, though it added that the events in question had not actually been traced to China.

US Commander cannot pin down satellite anomaly - Reuters - Nov 16, 2011.

How does the excerpt in bold translate to the geek.com headline of "Chinese hackers took control of NASA satellite for 11 minutes"? Are they saying that the USAF General in charge of US Strategic Command is engaging in 'political correctness', incompetent, or worse, lying? Or is geek.com part of the re-activated Grill Flame program?

I did enjoy this comment on the geek.com article, however:

You have obviously never been to china...they will eat each other before they become a "super power"

[davidbfpo]

Not my field, but I think some clues and understanding is found here:http://www.schneier.com/blog/archive....html#comments

[carl]

Are they saying that the USAF General in charge of US Strategic Command is engaging in 'political correctness', incompetent, or worse, lying?

After watching other Generals and high ranking State and Defense Dept. people pretend that what is isn't for the past decade in various parts of the world, I think it very plausible that the USAF General in question is doing all three at the same time.

[Backwards Observer]

After watching other Generals and high ranking State and Defense Dept. people pretend that what is isn't for the past decade in various parts of the world, I think it very plausible that the USAF General in question is doing all three at the same time.

Dang, and I thought I was cynical.

[carl]

When you think about it, you would expect politically correct, incompetent and dishonest to all run together.

[selil]

It looks to me as if there is a significant and distinct lack of understanding in the world of cyber of how to conduct an investigation. I am continually surprised as I run across "cyber" experts who haven't got clue one of basic police investigative procedure down. The entirety of this incident and several that are not being reported could have been less "flash" and more "bang" if simple specific principles of investigation were followed.

When asked on this and other similar stories to comment by the media I say, "Sorry but we need more details and information before suggesting even an opinion" So, I don't end up on the front page, I don't get invited to all the big parties, but I also don't end up looking like a fool.

THe principles of police procedure are not specific to any domain. The forensic processes are not "special" because it has bits and bytes. The whole thing smacks of the debacle of the polygraph. The fusion center screwed up, the investigators screwed up, heck even DHS with their rebuttal of the facts screwed up. Nobody knows for sure what happened because nobody actually investigated the incident in a full and correct manner.

The entire escapade is simple bull pucky.

[Backwards Observer]

Chinese hackers perfect mind-control of US scientific community; evolution, fluoride to blame:

Hacked Satellites?: USCC Makes Claims It Can’t Support

[...]

These suspicious incidents may or may not have been caused by hacking. They appear to have involved computers operated by a commercial service provider—not by the US government. No commands were issued to the satellites, nor were any data manipulated or stolen. The satellites involved were nonstrategic, low-resolution environmental monitoring satellites. There is no evidence presented linking these events to the Chinese government; the USCC includes these incidents in their report to Congress on China on the basis of claims by a “marginal figure” in China that China is interested in such pursuits.

This doesn’t mean China is not capable of or interested in the ability to control U.S. satellites. But the evidence presented to Congress by the USCC makes an extremely poor case for it.

Hacked satellites - USCC makes claims it can't support - All Things Nuclear - Dec 1, 2011.

[AdamG]

No sh1t.

America's critical infrastructure security response system is broken
Possible cyberattack on SCADA system at small Illinois water plant highlights weakness in U.S. system of "Fusion Centers"

http://www.networkworld.com/news/201...da-253659.html

[Fuchs]

News in a reputable computer-related news portal in Germany is that the hacker attack was a hoax.

Now could please a mod change the thread title to reflect this?