MadtownPremium
join:2008-04-26
Madera, CA | US warning reflects fears of Iranian cyberattack »news.yahoo.com/us-warning-reflec···-;_ylv=3
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's pointed warning that the U.S. will strike back against a cyberattack underscores the Obama administration's growing concern that Iran could be the first country to unleash cyberterrorism … More |
|
| Same old story we have been hearing for years. Cyber Pearl Harbor and all of that exaggerated stuff.
One of these days, the power companies will wise up and take their SCADA systems off the Internet.
--
Getting people to stop using windows is more or less the same as trying to get people to stop smoking tobacco products. They dont want to change; they are happy with slowly dying inside. -- munky99999 |
|
| reply to Madtown
said by Madtown:Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's pointed warning that the U.S. will strike back against a cyberattack underscores the Obama administration's growing concern that Iran could be the first country to unleash cyberterrorism … More
Various countries and organizations as well as rogue individuals have been conducting cyberterrorism against the United States and other countries for many years. |
|
 jaykaykay4 Ever YoungPremium,MVM
join:2000-04-13
Scottsdale, AZ
kudos:22 | reply to Madtown
We ought to be concerned about many kinds of attacks, not just this one, which has been done many times thus far. Iran and other countries just might unleash many more terrorism attacks on what used to be a peaceful, strong country. What can be attacked will be, one way and another.
Yes. I am wearing my tin foil hat!  |
|
 chrisretusnRetiredPremium
join:2007-08-13
Philippines
kudos:1 | reply to Madtown
This is election year junk, that is all it is.
--
Chris
Living in Paradise!! |
|
|
|
|
And the US does not harm anyone else either. Sheesh.
|
|
Reviews:
 ·TekSavvy DSL
| reply to Madtown
said by Madtown:Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's pointed warning that the U.S. will strike back against a cyberattack underscores the Obama administration's growing concern that Iran could be the first country to unleash cyberterrorism ... More My cynical assessment is that this is the latest version of "WMD" (Weapons of Mass Destruction). GWB lied to rationalize an invasion of Iraq, and now Obama is lying to rationalize an invasion of Iran. |
|
 JuggernautIrreverent or irrelevant?Premium
join:2006-09-05
Kelowna, BC
kudos:2 | That rationale is at odds with reality. A cyber attack can take place from anywhere in the world. Attacking Iran physically would be futile, as the attacker(s) could be on a beach somewhere having a bevvy.
--
Better to have it and not need it, then need it and not have it. |
|
| reply to Madtown
Political chest-thumping by Mr. Panetta.
The US didn't react to the murders of 4 Americans in Libya and didn't take the threats to their security seriously for political reasons. Now we're talking tough about threats of cyber attacks, when those have been ongoing from a number of directions, not just Iran.
This isn't aimed at Iran at all, it's aimed at the American voter. |
|
 Noah VailSon made my AvatarPremium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:2
 ·Bright House
| reply to Madtown
Reprinting the news as if it were truth quote:
US Press becomes DoD Mouthpiece for a day
In a stunning display of solidarity, every news outlet in the United States breathlessly reprinted US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's press release; with no analysis whatsoever.
To best help the DefSec's pre-election spread of Internet FUD, not a single journalist thought to question any part Secretary Panetta's effort to twist everyday factors into a historical global threat.
Among the questions journalists conspicuously left off the table were:
• Since most SCADA systems aren't designed to be connected to the inherently risky Internet; wouldn't it be wisest (and least expensive) to disconnect them?
• Since Data Sharing is a two way process, how soon can we expect US Cyber Command and DHS's Threat/Risk Analysis Center to publish their threat data in Real-Time?
• We notice that Eugene Kaspersky has been clubbing with the White House lately and that the McAfee crew is increasingly tight with the DoD.
Could that be due to an effort to influence Government Policy - so that major A/V+NetSec vendors never have to publish their carefully hoarded Threat Data to a fully open Real-Time database?
• Is the US Gov concerned that Americans will discover that NetSec Experts could already provide the best possible Cyber Protection - if only they had access to hoarded threat data?
• Likewise how would you react if Americans came to learn that 100% of proposed CyberSec laws are primarily about
1) Cashing in on Americans' compiled data
2) Future methods of manipulating Americans so that Government can be less accountable and
3) Political posturing to frighten Americans into blindly accepting #'s 1&2?
• The US Governments only real purpose in Cyber Security would be in maintaining and securing the Public Threat Database.
That's not a very Cyber-Sexy role for the Gov to play, is it?
--
Campaign contributions influence laws through a process called bribery. |
|
| said by Noah Vail: quote:
• The US Governments only real purpose in Cyber Security would be in maintaining and securing the Public Threat Database.
That's not a very Cyber-Sexy role for the Gov to play, is it?
What exactly is a "public threat database?" Sounds like a foolish method to hang your security hat on. We see how well AV software has done over the years.
--
Getting people to stop using windows is more or less the same as trying to get people to stop smoking tobacco products. They dont want to change; they are happy with slowly dying inside. -- munky99999 |
|
JuggernautIrreverent or irrelevant?Premium
join:2006-09-05
Kelowna, BC
kudos:2 | said by KodiacZiller:We see how well the no-fly list has done over the years. Had to be fixed. I'm sure a couple of other 'lists' is on that list as well.
--
Better to have it and not need it, then need it and not have it. |
|
Noah VailSon made my AvatarPremium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Bright House
| reply to KodiacZiller
said by KodiacZiller:What exactly is a "public threat database?" A PTD is pretty much what it sounds like.
It's a live central repository of IPs that distribute spam, distribute malware, are zombies, perform attacks, probe for exploits, etc.
It would also contain malicious urls and/or specific threat signatures.
The data it contains would be based on what dynamic firewalls need to defend end users.
Being completely open, anyone could check on the integrity of the data at any time.
said by KodiacZiller:Sounds like a foolish method to hang your security hat on. We see how well AV software has done over the years. It's every bit as foolish as the databases that feed any dynamically updating edge-security-device.
--
Campaign contributions influence laws through a process called bribery. |
|
| reply to Madtown
Re: US warning reflects fears of Iranian cyberattack Buy Kaspersky products.. they have the inside scoop on what the Russians are up to.
Oh, yeah, they will also sell your personal details to the mafia down the street in Moscow.
--
The official Norton Forum from Symantec: »community.norton.com/norton/
You are safer with IE Protected Mode »msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library···85).aspx |
|
|
Info to back up those statements?
|
|
| reply to Noah Vail
Re: Reprinting the news as if it were truth said by Noah Vail:said by KodiacZiller:Sounds like a foolish method to hang your security hat on. We see how well AV software has done over the years. It's every bit as foolish as the databases that feed any dynamically updating edge-security-device. It's still a blacklist and blacklists = security fail. Hackers will always be ahead of your databases. Seriously, how long does it take to generate a new attack URL or to expand a botnet?
--
Getting people to stop using windows is more or less the same as trying to get people to stop smoking tobacco products. They dont want to change; they are happy with slowly dying inside. -- munky99999 |
|
Noah VailSon made my AvatarPremium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Bright House
| said by KodiacZiller:It's still a blacklist and blacklists = security fail. Nope. Unless by fail you mean preventing malware infections.
said by KodiacZiller:Hackers will always be ahead of your databases. You might be thinking of your threat lists. Mine repel hundreds of pens/day from known dodgy IPs.
One location I installed them went from 30 infections over 6 months to zero.
said by KodiacZiller:Seriously, how long does it take to generate a new attack URL or to expand a botnet? Which is the entire point of a public database continuously fed live info gathered by Gov + AV Vendors + Security Researchers and NetSec admins.
An attacker may adapt but protection against him would roll out world wide in a matter of minutes.
--
Campaign contributions influence laws through a process called bribery. |
|
