Re: [iwar] what next? DDoS and then?


From: MAGLAN 1
From: m1@maglan-lab.com
To: iwar@egroups.com

Fri, 15 Dec 2000 14:13:21 +0200


fc  Fri Dec 15 04:15:08 2000
Received: from 207.222.214.225
	by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.1.0)
	for fc@localhost (single-drop); Fri, 15 Dec 2000 04:15:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: by multi33.netcomi.com for fc
 (with Netcom Interactive pop3d (v1.21.1 1998/05/07) Fri Dec 15 12:10:48 2000)
X-From_: m1@maglan-lab.com  Fri Dec 15 06:10:40 2000
Received: from hn.egroups.com (hn.egroups.com [208.50.99.199]) by multi33.netcomi.com (8.8.5/8.7.4) with SMTP id GAA18854 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 06:10:38 -0600
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-811-976882495-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com
Received: from [10.1.4.55] by hn.egroups.com with NNFMP; 15 Dec 2000 12:14:56 -0000
X-Sender: m1@maglan-lab.com
X-Apparently-To: iwar@egroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 12:14:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 12646 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 12:14:54 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 12:14:54 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO freya.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.14) by mta3 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 13:15:59 -0000
Received: from fox ([213.8.240.144]) by freya.inter.net.il (Mirapoint) with SMTP id AGH55522; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 14:14:03 +0200 (IST)
Message-ID: <004d01c06690$81e583c0$0100000a@fox>
To: 
References: <4.2.2.20001214133849.00bae450@poptop.llnl.gov>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
From: "MAGLAN 1" 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: list iwar@egroups.com; contact iwar-owner@egroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@egroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: 
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 14:13:21 +0200
Reply-To: iwar@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [iwar] what next? DDoS and then?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

The Cyber Conflict over the Middle East absolutely can not be named
Information War but can not be named as well as Cyber Graffiti. I do not
know if a clear and satisfying definition can be found, except Cyber
Conflict or the official name as we named it: "The First Cyber Conflict over
the Middle East".

The word "conflict" represents various type of attacks that were (and are)
recorded in the last ~3 month.
Denial of Services (DoS) attacks, were mainly executed at the first part of
the conflict and slowly were rotate to web defacements (low level hacking to
kids fun). Although the List of the attacks recorder is a bit "more
impressive" and for the first time I will schematically draw it below:

- Web and Mail Forgery
- Virus and Vandals implant
- Remote Sniffing
- Intrusion to Internal Networks
- Intrusion to organizational Internet Networks (DMZ hacking)
- Extensive Infrastructures Scanning
- Social Engineering
- Denial of Service

Once again, this impotent to note down that approximately 95% (statistical
tests no yet completed) of the attack's recorded and observed over the
Middle East Cyber Conflict were simply DoS that were rotate to web
defacements.

What's next ?

------------------------------ :)
SB,
MAGLAN - Information Warfare Research Lab.



----- Original Message -----
From: Tony Bartoletti 
To: 
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2000 12:08 AM
Subject: Re: [iwar] what next? DDoS and then?


> At 08:19 PM 12/14/00 +0000, Wanja Eric Naef \(IWS\) wrote:
>
> >Will the future malicious hackers / crackers move on to attack more high
> >value targets (NII, DII, safety critical systems)?
> >And might their campaigns be joined by terrorists who will also wage
> >'digital-to-digital' attacks?
>
> I think it will be valuable trying to characterize just what the future
> "high value targets" will be.  They may not be what we are prepared for.
>
> Certainly, the more "Critical/Secured" facilities of NII/DII are of less
> concern - very difficult to attack "closed-net" systems.  Because of their
> "concentrated, hardened" nature, we tend to think first of these systems
> when we consider "high (strategic) value."  Consequently, we consider the
> mass of "end-user" systems to be "low-value", even though collectively
> those end-user systems support the greatest value in CPU, Storage, and
> transactions.
>
> But the "wireless future" promoted by many in industry would have every
> PDA/cell-phone "on" 24/7, addressable by companies that will be aware of
> your physical location, ready to offer you a $2 discount coupon at the
> drugstore the very moment you pass by.  They see $$$ and only grudgingly
> admit that "some abuses" of this technology may occur.  Might a concerted
> infowar attack somehow leverage this "we-know-where-you-go" capability?
> (At least, it could take "cyber-stalking" to an entirely new level.)
>
> What other potential "cyber-conveniences" are waiting in the wings, how
> "valuable/indispensable" might they become, and what would be the costs
> of their subversion/disruption once reliance upon them became entrenched?
>
> What if future "automobile information/navigation" systems were to be
> given erroneous reports of freeway accidents?  "Please use alternative
> routes."  Traffic could be tied into knots.
>
> Could a hack into FedEx or Airborne produce a massive miss-delivery of
> packages, or cancellation of valid orders?
>
> Will the future offer "Internet Voting"?  Imagine the abuses if this is
> done poorly.
>
> Just some thoughts about tomorrow's "high-value targets".
>
> ___tony___
>
> Tony Bartoletti 925-422-3881 
> Information Operations, Warfare and Assurance Center
> Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
> Livermore, CA 94551-9900
>
>
>
> ------------------
> http://all.net/
>
>


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/595019/_/976882495/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

------------------
http://all.net/