by Jim Emerson
“For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.” –Sun Tzu
The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) have a group of highly trained hackers (Hēikè) whose sole purpose is to attack American companies in order to steal information to enhance the Chinese Military. (1) This hacking group is working with the full knowledge and blessing of the Communist’s Government leadership. (3) It’s time America acknowledges that the Chinese are conducting a full-scale cyber war against the west.
Prepare For The Coming Cyber Wars: US Government To Launch Pre-Emptive Cyber Strikes
February 5th, 2013
Off Grid Survival
For years we have warned our readers about the dangers that a full scale cyber-attack could have on our infrastructure; now those dangers are even higher as the Federal Government prepares to launch Pre-emptive cyber strikes against rogue nations.
According to the New York Times, President Barack Obama has just concluded a secret legal review of the administration’s new cyber war guidelines. The guidelines give President Obama the power to order pre-emptive cyber strikes to protect national security interests. This news comes as a number of financial institutions have recently admitted to being hacked by foreign hackers.
After his eponymously-named lab discovered Flame, “the most sophisticated cyber weapon yet unleashed,” Eugene Kaspersky believes that the evolving threat of “cyber terrorism” could spell the end of life on Earth as we know it.
In addition to kidnapping Americans and tossing them into Camp Gitmo without recourse or trial, the draconian NDAA bill passed in the House yesterday contains language that will allow the Pentagon to wage cyberwar on domestic enemies of the state.
NDAA Gives Pentagon Green Light to Wage Internet War cyber
The following language is in the final “reconciled” bill that will now travel to the Senate and ultimately Obama’s desk where it will be signed into law despite earlier assertions that he would veto the legislation:
Criminals who commit offences online and cyber bullies will be banned from the internet as part of the Government’s new cyber security strategy, announced today.
It calls for police and courts to make more use of existing “cyber sanctions” to restrict access to the social networks and instant messaging services in cases of hacking, fraud and online bullying. Sex offenders and those convicted of harrassment or anti-social behaviour also face more internet restrictions under the new strategy.
The Washington Post is reporting that recent damage to an Illinois water treatment plant was a cyber attack by foreign hackers, “Foreign hackers caused a pump at an Illinois water plant to fail last week, according to a preliminary state report.”
The narrative of the attack is that a Russian-based hacker created minor “glitches” in the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System (SCADA) which, according to Krebs on Security, is “designed to monitor and control complex industrial networks.” Apparently, it caused the system to turn on and off, resulting in the burnout of a water pump.
Reuters ^ | 11/15/11 | David Alexander
Posted on Tuesday, November 15, 2011 8:20:29 PM by Winstons Julia
“When warranted, we will respond to hostile attacks in cyberspace as we would to any other threat to our country,” the report said. “We reserve the right to use all necessary means – diplomatic, informational, military and economic – to defend our nation, our allies, our partners and our interests.” Cyberspace is a particularly challenging domain for the Pentagon. Defense Department employees operate more than 15,000 computer networks with 7 million computers at hundreds of locations around the world. Their networks are probed millions of times a day and penetrations have caused the loss of thousands of files.
A new computer virus using “nearly identical” parts of the cyber superweapon Stuxnet has been detected on computer systems in Europe and is believed to be a precursor to a new Stuxnet-like attack, a major U.S.-based cyber security company said today.
Stuxnet was a highly sophisticated computer worm that was discovered last year and was thought to have successfully targeted and disrupted systems at a nuclear enrichment plant in Iran. At the time, U.S. officials said the worm’s unprecedented complexity and potential ability tophysically sabotage industrial control systems — which run everything from water plants to the power grid in the U.S. and in many countries around the world — marked a new era in cyber warfare.
Though no group claimed responsibility for the Stuxnet worm, several cyber security experts have said it is likely a nation-state created it and that the U.S. and Israel were on a short list of possible culprits.
Whoever it was, the same group may be at it again, researchers said, as the authors of the new virus apparently had access to original Stuxnet code that was never made public.
Full article here
The problem with being anonymous is nobody knows if you’re for real.
Last week the hacker activist group Anonymous purportedly released a statement declaring it would cyber attack firms on Wall Street in response to mass arrests and the Ministry of Homeland Security set off alarm bells.
Now Anonymous – or somebody who claims to be Anonymous – says the threat was fake and they are not responsible. They released the following:
We are Anonymous!……………
We have someone working on the problem now, but it will take many hours to repair the damage done by, most likely, Obama’s attack squad.
If the trojan or Malware was planted by one of them, it shows that we……………..
Prison Planet.com » Government Increases Hysteria Over Cyber Attacks in Push to Crack Down on Internet
“The only way to move comprehensive cyber security legislation forward swiftly is to have committee chairmen and ranking members step away from preserving their own committees’ jurisdiction … (and) develop a bill that serves the national security needs of all Americans,” McCain said.
As if on cue, the Pentagon announced two previously unpublicized attacks following McCain’s call for a bipartisan action.
Lynn said the Defense Industrial Base Cyber Pilot was established to work with the private sector in the battle against cyber foes.
“Our success in cyberspace depends on a robust public-private partnership,” said Lynn. “The defense of the military will matter little unless our civilian critical infrastructure is also able to withstand attacks.”
Lynn cranked up the paranoia in February when he speculated that al-Qaeda might get its hands on the Stuxnet virus. He said “it is possible for a terrorist group to develop cyberattack tools on their own or to buy them on the black market.”
The highly sophisticated malware virus was engineered by the United States and with Israeli Mossad assistance placed on an Iranian industrial computer network in order to undermine the country’s nuclear energy program.
In 2009, Obama made a major speech on the threat posed by hackers and other evil doers.
The fact that this was again barely more than a fizzle firework doesn’t even matter – the hysterical media will waste no time in inflating it as another ominous sign that domestic terrorists are everywhere and that Americans need to be treated like prisoners everywhere they go for their own safety.
Posted: 06 Oct 2010 11:41 PM PDT
The Pentagon is rapidly preparing for cyberwar in the face of alarming and growing threats, say senior defense officials, who add that sophisticated attacks have prompted them to take the striking step of investigating the feasibility of expanding NATO’s collective defense tenet to include cyberspace.
But as such planning intensifies, the military is struggling with some basics of warfare – including how to define exactly what, for starters, constitutes an attack, and what level of cyberattack warrants a cyber-reprisal.
“I mean, clearly if you take down significant portions of our economy we would probably consider that an attack,” William Lynn, the deputy secretary of defense, said recently. “But an intrusion stealing data, on the other hand, probably isn’t an attack. And there are [an] enormous number of steps in between those two.”
Today, one of the challenges facing Pentagon strategists is “deciding at what threshold do you consider something an attack,” Mr. Lynn said. “I think the policy community both inside and outside the government is wrestling with that, and I don’t think we’ve wrestled it to the ground yet.”
Equally tricky, defense officials say, is how to pinpoint who is doing the attacking. And this raises further complications that go to the heart of the Pentagon’s mission. “If you don’t know who to attribute an attack to, you can’t retaliate against that attack,” noted Lynn in a recent discussion at the Council on Foreign Relations.
As a result, “You can’t deter through punishment, you can’t deter by retaliating against the attack.” He lamented the complexities that make cyberwar so different from, say, “nuclear missiles, which of course come with a return address.”
How to pinpoint the source of a cyberattack is a subject being discussed by Pentagon officials with their counterparts in Britain, Canada, and Australia, among others, in advance of the upcoming NATO summit in Lisbon in November, at which cyberwarfare is an item on the agenda. Officials from NATO member states are also discussing such fundamental issues as how to share information and exchange related technologies, illustrating that the concept of a collective cyberwarfare defense is still in its infancy.
Lynn is among those working to develop the Pentagon’s new cyberstrategy, which is focusing both on how to defend the military’s classified networks as well as how to protect the Internet itself.
This upending of some key tenets of military doctrine is prompting the Pentagon to look to some surprising new places for strategic models of cyberdefense, including public health. “A public health model has some interesting applications,” Lynn said. “Can we use the kinds of techniques we use to prevent diseases? Could those be applied to the Internet?”
To that end, the Pentagon is now researching means of introducing internal defenses to the Internet so that it acts more like a human organism. When it’s hit with a virus, for example, it might mutate to fend it off. Such strategies are meant to “shift the advantage much more to the defender and away from the attacker,” Lynn said.
The problem is that the Internet currently has very few natural defenses. And sophisticated crafted viruses like Stuxnet are even tougher to fend off. Indeed, the Web “was not developed with security in mind,” he added. “It was developed with transparency in mind; it was developed with ease of technological innovation.” Those same attributes do not lend themselves to good security. Among the potential targets for cyberattack frequently mentioned by cybersecurity experts are the nation’s powergrid and financial system.
It was in 2008 that a cyberattack on Pentagon networks – an attack attributed to an unnamed “foreign intelligence service” – served as a wake-up call for US defense leadership. “To that point, we did not think our classified networks could be penetrated, so it was – it was a fairly shocking development,” said Lynn, adding that it was a “seminal moment” in a new military frontier.
News Link • Internet
Unisys survey: President Should Have ‘Kill Switch’ For Internet, Most Americans Say
11-14-2010 • www.darkreading.com
As for the “kill switch” support, respondents could be interpreting what that might entail in different ways. “They might not be thinking about what the implications would mean .. they might be thinking of him blocking a particular cou
While proponents of cybersecurity continually emphasize the necessity of passing legislation that will hand the Obama administration the power to shut down the Internet in the name of defending critical infrastructure, every indication suggests that cybersecurity is nothing less than an offensive agenda to enable the US government to launch its own attacks against other groups and countries.This fact is underscored again with a newly released Air Force manual that describes one aspect of the cybersecurity objective as “shutting down electrical power to key power grids of enemy leadership.
”So if an extremist group shuts down the US power grid, it’s a terrorist attack. If another country does it, it’s an act of war. But when the Air Force does it to someone else, it’s merely part of cybersecurity.“Noah Shachtman, a contributing editor to Wired magazine and a fellow at the Brookings Institute think tank, said even the limited mention of offensive operations in the manual surprised him,” reports the Washington Post.“That’s usually not the kind of thing we talk about doing to others,” Shachtman said. “The offensive stuff is supersecret.”We’re constantly being told that the threat of cyber warfare is so grave that the government needs to be empowered to close down parts of the world wide web on a whim with no congressional approval.And yet every notable act of cyber warfare has been launched by the United States government or its allies.ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOWCyberwarfare: US Seeks To Shut Down Enemy Power Grids 150709banner2Take the Stuxnet malware attack for example – which was specifically crafted to attack Iran’s Iran’s Bushehr nuclear reactor – we’re told that this is an ominous sign that deadly cyber warfare has begun and that cybersecurity legislation must be urgently passed to defend the US and its allies against such threats.And yet every indication suggests that Israel itself launched the attack to derail Iran’s nuclear energy program.After analyzing the coding behind Stuxnet in detail, Symantec’s Liam O’Murchu concluded that the most likely culprit behind the attack was Israel.“As for suggestions that Israeli intelligence may have authored the virus, O’Murchu noted that researchers had uncovered the reference to an obscure date in the worm’s code, May 9, 1979, which, he noted, was the date on which a prominent Iranian Jew, Habib Elghanian, who was executed by the new Islamic government shortly after the revolution,” reports Threat Post.
In addition, the recent attacks on…
Establishment Tea Party Moneybomb Hit by Denial of service Attack service Establishment Tea Party Moneybomb Hit by Denial of service Attack onepixel One week after Alex Jones’ Infowars Moneybomb, Fox News host Glenn Beck shilled a moneybomb for the establishment Tea Party organization FreedomWorks.
It was hit by a cyber attack on Thursday.“The attack crippled the site at about 9:45 a.m. just when the fund-raising drive was publicized on the radio by conservative talk show host Glenn Beck. The group estimates it lost about $80,000 in potential donations as it struggled to bring its site back online,” the Wall Street Journal reported.“The precisely timed denial-of-service attack sowed chaos, snarling the organization’s Web traffic and setting off a flood of calls from frustrated radio listeners who were unable to access the site to make their donations. The group estimates the attack cost over $40,000 in lost donations alone,” Newsmax explained.“We think the idea was to take our site down until after the election,” said Kara Pally, web developer for FreedomWorks. “This was politically motivated.”
The Wall Street Journal refers to FreedomWorks as “a clearinghouse for the diffuse tea party movement.” Rather, it should be considered an establishment clearinghouse to weed out Libertarians and other elements unacceptable to the Republicans.
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration has adopted new procedures for using the Defense Department’s vast array of cyberwarfare capabilities in case of an attack on vital computer networks inside the United States, delicately navigating historic rules that restrict military action on American soil.
The system would mirror that used when the military is called on in natural disasters like hurricanes or wildfires. A presidential order dispatches the military forces, working under the control of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.Under the new rules, the president would approve the use of the military’s expertise in computer-network warfare, and the Department of Homeland Security would direct the work.
Officials involved in drafting the rules said the goal was to ensure a rapid response to a cyberthreat while balancing concerns that civil liberties might be at risk should the military take over such domestic operations.
Full article here