China at it again

[PsyOps]

Cyberattack compromises government workers

First person that comes to mind for me....................................................................... Edward Snowden

Oh wait......... China isn't our enemy.

 

[LibertyBeacon]

Yea, I am sure Snowden gave China (and Russia) the admin passwords to these sites.



You're sounding more kooky than normal.

 

[This_person]

Yea, I am sure Snowden gave China (and Russia) the admin passwords to these sites.



You're sounding more kooky than normal.

Wow, that's what you took from that?

 

[Hijinx]

With Obama in the White House China and Russia can do pretty much anything they want.

Obama is always screaming about the environment and letting his EPA make regulations to take over the water, and China is building whole Islands and putting weapons on them, and not one word from the bama boy.

 

[PsyOps]

Wow, that's what you took from that?

And he questions other's abilities to understand the English language.

 

[PsyOps]

Yea, I am sure Snowden gave China (and Russia) the admin passwords to these sites.



You're sounding more kooky than normal.

I suggest you first look up what hacking is. Start with 'Brute Force Attack' and 'Dictionary Attack'. Then try to comprehend the possible plethora of IP addresses and domains Snowden had in his possession to hand over to the Chinese.

Or you can just sit back and play your stupid little "everyone is a kook" game and do no homework whatsoever.

 

[b23hqb]

Hopefully, only those with specific security clearances need to be worried:

"Collins, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said the breach was "yet another indication of a foreign power probing successfully and focusing on what appears to be data that would identify people with security clearances."

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ma...-every-federal-agency/ar-BBkIES8?ocid=DELLDHP

There appears to be a few alphabet agencies that need to be very worried.

 

[b23hqb]

I suggest you first look up what hacking is. Start with 'Brute Force Attack' and 'Dictionary Attack'. Then try to comprehend the possible plethora of IP addresses and domains Snowden had in his possession to hand over to the Chinese.

Or you can just sit back and play your stupid little "everyone is a kook" game and do no homework whatsoever.

The homework is what LB is still struggling with to obtain it's highly sought after sixth grade education.......

 

[Amused_despair]

Last two Presidents have knuckled under when China has attacked us. Bush did nothing when China forced our plane down in their territory, Obama does nothing as they hack our computers. I hope we are at least hacking them right back.

 

[LibertyBeacon]

I suggest you first look up what hacking is. Start with 'Brute Force Attack' and 'Dictionary Attack'. Then try to comprehend the possible plethora of IP addresses and domains Snowden had in his possession to hand over to the Chinese.

Gigglesnort. I'm well aware of brute forcing and dictionary attacks. What, did you finish reading Playskool's My First Cyber Security Book or something? Providing network security consulting for commercial companies is what I occasionally still do for a living, when I feel like working, what being semi-retired and all.

The Chinese privateers don't use these sorts of techniques. They have much, much better luck with phishing attacks and making people click on links they wouldn't otherwise be inclined to click on which contain payloads that hide out on networks, often undetected for months. You should read the paper by Mandiant on the Chinese Advanced Persistent Threat, you might learn something. And they don't bother with these sorts of script kiddie activities like stealing encrypted passwords, there's not the pay off there once was.

Besides, you do know that "IP addresses and domains" are generally the easiest things to get about a target from afar, yes? Pretty damn close to public information, like a street address.

And from your article:

On June 12, Snowden showed The South China Morning Post (SCMP) an unknown number of documents revealing "operational details of specific [NSA] attacks on [Chinese] computers, including internet protocol (IP) addresses, dates of attacks, and whether a computer was still being monitored remotely."

This looks like he showed the SCMP IP addresses that are Chinese assets which were under attack by the NSA.

Reading comprehension -- not so much, eh?

 

[PsyOps]

Gigglesnort. I'm well aware of brute forcing and dictionary attacks. What, did you finish reading Playskool's My First Cyber Security Book or something? Providing network security consulting for commercial companies is what I occasionally still do for a living, when I feel like working, what being semi-retired and all.

The Chinese privateers don't use these sorts of techniques. They have much, much better luck with phishing attacks and making people click on links they wouldn't otherwise be inclined to click on which contain payloads that hide out on networks, often undetected for months. You should read the paper by Mandiant on the Chinese Advanced Persistent Threat, you might learn something. And they don't bother with these sorts of script kiddie activities like stealing encrypted passwords, there's not the pay off there once was.

Besides, you do know that "IP addresses and domains" are generally the easiest things to get about a target from afar, yes? Pretty damn close to public information, like a street address.

And from your article:



This looks like he showed the SCMP IP addresses that are Chinese assets which were under attack by the NSA.

Reading comprehension -- not so much, eh?

Brute Force and Dictionary is only one tier of getting in, not sole sources. Sell your resume to someone else; it served no purpose here in your attempt to deny that China is THE TOP hacker into American network (both private and government). Phishing is only effective on a few willing ignorant users. In order to obtain 4 million accounts, Phishing wouldn’t be an effective tool for this. They needed a way into the server/s holding the personnel database – which means they would have had to penetrate firewalls, IDSs/IPSs, have access to SSH encryption and hashing algorithms or secure RDP, then hack the administrative username and password of the server. Then, assuming these databases were encrypted, they would require those encryption algorithms/hashes. The number of layers that were needed to get this information wasn’t just a matter of knowing IP addresses and some simple methods of hacking. It would require information that was provided to them. My ASSERTION is it came from Snowden. Don’t bother asking me to prove it, because I can’t. It’s my intuition. It’s too coincidental that they were able to obtain THE LARGEST amount of personnel information in the history of hacking.

 

[LibertyBeacon]

Brute Force and Dictionary is only one tier of getting in, not sole sources. Sell your resume to someone else; it served no purpose here in your attempt to deny that China is THE TOP hacker into American network (both private and government).

sst: You're projecting again.

I'm pretty sure I didn't deny anything of the sort. In fact the reference I provided you will state just that if you bother to read it. I deal with commercial clients, I know precisely where attacks are coming from.

Phishing is only effective on a few willing ignorant users. In order to obtain 4 million accounts, Phishing wouldn’t be an effective tool for this. They needed a way into the server/s holding the personnel database – which means they would have had to penetrate firewalls, IDSs/IPSs, have access to SSH encryption and hashing algorithms or secure RDP, then hack the administrative username and password of the server. Then, assuming these databases were encrypted, they would require those encryption algorithms/hashes. The number of layers that were needed to get this information wasn’t just a matter of knowing IP addresses and some simple methods of hacking. It would require information that was provided to them.

One successful phish is all that is needed to drop a payload in place. The data are not purloined through the phish alone, the phish is usually one very small part of a larger plan. Or just one person with the right credentials is all that's needed. And if there's a web server in front of that database there are probably hundreds of ways to cause the database to dump its contents. You don't need a "way into the server".

Carry on young fella. You're in over your head.

 

[PsyOps]

Carry on young fella. You're in over your head.

Time for me to sell you my resume............ I've been in IT (network engineer) for about 20 years, working electronic comm for about 30 years. Since you already know I work for the government I am well aware of the various hacking techniques and have first-hand experience into what it looks like and the methods that are used. I've not once seen a phishing attempt by Chinese entities. As with any government network, such traffic would get flagged by several layers of boundary protection devices, IDSs and sniffing devices. What I've seen most often from outside 'attack's are brute force. I am on the front line of responding to TCNOs and malicious traffic alerts, and locking down our security devices like firewalls in response to these attacks.

We're going to find this attack from China was a result of gaining insider information. Someone gave them something to get this far into the network and steal 4 million private accounts on people.

So you know what you can do with your "you're in over your head" BS. It's what I do for a living.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

The agency did not possess an inventory of all the computer servers and devices with access to its networks, and did not require anyone gaining access to information from the outside to use the kind of basic authentication techniques that most Americans use for online banking. It did not regularly scan for vulnerabilities in the system, and found that 11 of the 47 computer systems that were supposed to be certified as safe for use last year were not “operating with a valid authorization.”

The problems were so severe for two systems that hosted the databases used by the Federal Investigative Service, which is responsible for the background investigations for officials and contractors who are issued security clearances, that the inspector general argued for temporarily shutting them down because the security flaws “could potentially have national security implications.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/06/us/chinese-hackers-may-be-behind-anthem-premera-attacks.html

It just sucks when the tables get turned.

Good thing Snowden told China that the NSA hacked Huawei 5 years ago. In fact, the NSA "currently have good access and so much data that we don't know what to do with it".

And.

"Many of our targets communicate over Huawei-produced products," the NSA document read, according to the Times.

"We want to make sure that we know how to exploit these products," the document read, to "gain access to networks of interest" around the world.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/ameri...-telco-huawei-snowden-201432345639453828.html

Of course, the US wants to paint China as this big, bad, hacking machine, while ignoring they've been doing this same thing to China for some time now.

Snowden said that according to unverified documents seen by the Post, the NSA had been hacking computers in Hong Kong and on the mainland since 2009. None of the documents revealed any information about Chinese military systems, he said

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/...vernment-has-been-hacking-hong-kong-and-china

Here's an entire article on what we know about the US hacking China.
http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1259175/inside-nsas-ultra-secret-china-hacking-group

 

[This_person]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/06/us/chinese-hackers-may-be-behind-anthem-premera-attacks.html

It just sucks when the tables get turned.

Good thing Snowden told China that the NSA hacked Huawei 5 years ago. In fact, the NSA "currently have good access and so much data that we don't know what to do with it".

And.

"Many of our targets communicate over Huawei-produced products," the NSA document read, according to the Times.

"We want to make sure that we know how to exploit these products," the document read, to "gain access to networks of interest" around the world.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/ameri...-telco-huawei-snowden-201432345639453828.html

Of course, the US wants to paint China as this big, bad, hacking machine, while ignoring they've been doing this same thing to China for some time now.


http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/...vernment-has-been-hacking-hong-kong-and-china

Here's an entire article on what we know about the US hacking China.
http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1259175/inside-nsas-ultra-secret-china-hacking-group

So, two wrongs DO make a right?

 

[Chris0nllyn]

So, two wrongs DO make a right?

No, but we shouldn't be surprised when the United States' cyber security is akin to saying "open sesame" at the local speakeasy and the Us has been hacking China for quiet some time.

I just find it funny that the first thing some people think of is "Snowden". I'm sure the govt. will be right along to say the same thing, rather than blame their own sub-par security.

 

[This_person]

No, but we shouldn't be surprised when the United States' cyber security is akin to saying "open sesame" at the local speakeasy and the Us has been hacking China for quiet some time.

I just find it funny that the first thing some people think of is "Snowden". I'm sure the govt. will be right along to say the same thing, rather than blame their own sub-par security.

The Snowden angle to this is two-fold: one is that the leaking of classified information to the Chinese certainly weakened our security posture, and the other is that people have questioned whether China is friend or foe. Clearly to any casual observer they are foe, but some can't see it.

 

[LibertyBeacon]

No, but we shouldn't be surprised when the United States' cyber security is akin to saying "open sesame" at the local speakeasy and the Us has been hacking China for quiet some time.

I just find it funny that the first thing some people think of is "Snowden". I'm sure the govt. will be right along to say the same thing, rather than blame their own sub-par security.

Exactly. OPM hit twice in a year and Who? is everyone's first question. Given the OPM was hit last year as well, my first question would be: Is this the same vector? In other words, have we actually learned anything from the last breach? Or are there systemic problems that can't be identified, contained, and fixed with our existing cyber security apparatus (DHS)?

The reason your point is relevant, IMO, is a bit more meta than we do it to them, so they do it to us. It is current U.S. doctrine that any sovereign who cyber attacks us, will feel the full force of U.S. retaliation, not just a return cyber attack in-kind, but up to and including a conventional military response. If we have this doctrine, why wouldn't anyone else?

 

[Gilligan]

Funny as ...well...nothing. And are we hearing squat about this from the MSM?...of course not.

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/357280.php

 

[GURPS]

Funny as ...well...nothing. And are we hearing squat about this from the MSM?...of course not.

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/357280.php

tie this in with the Adult Friend Finder hack ....