Slashdot Log In
U.S. Warns of Possible Cyber Biz Attack
Posted by
Zonk
on Fri Dec 01, 2006 12:50 PM
from the rather-that-not-happen dept.
from the rather-that-not-happen dept.
mikesd81 writes "The AP has an article about a possible attack against the New York Stock Exchange via the internet by a radical muslim group. The notice was issued to the U.S. cybersecurity industry after officials saw a posting on a 'Jihadist Web site' calling for an attack on U.S. Internet-based stock market and banking sites in December, said Homeland Security Department spokesman Russ Knocke. Knocke has said: 'There is no information corroborating the threat and that the alert was issued as a routine matter and out of an abundance of caution.' There is no immediate threat to our homeland at this time. The attacks were to be conducted in December, 'until the infidel new year,' the site said, according to a U.S. government translation. It called for attackers to use viruses that can penetrate Internet sites and destroy data stored there. Spokespeople for the New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq declined to comment on the cyber-terror threat."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
blame the muslims (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Well if some of the radical muslim websites did indeed post information saying they wanted to carry out attacks like these then I think it is reasonable to keep an eye out for it. It is not like it is completely unfounded.
If a KKK website posted threats that they were going to group up in say Jackson, Mississippi and lynch some darkies this december would you think it would be stupid to beef up police forces and keep a close watch on what is going on for a while?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Advertising attacks? (Score:4, Interesting)
Sheesh, and the media just have to take it up. They even contradict themselves in the same paragraph!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Besides don't you think there could be a certain amount of l33t points (or some kind of jihad alternative) for saying your going to do an attack and them still being un-able to stop you... I'm assuming this
Re:Advertising attacks? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Basically, I agree. But maybe they do want to do it aswell.
Re: (Score:2)
Congratulations. You have been successfully terrorized.
Have a nice day.
Re:Advertising attacks? (Score:4, Insightful)
Bullshit. The world is not black and white and neither are your options.
Got punched in the face? Analyze the situation, figure out why you got punched in the face and take a-p-r-o-p-r-i-a-t-e action to reduce the chance of it happening again to an acceptable level. Maybe that means killing the guy punching you. Maybe it means using a different swing on the playground. Maybe it just means kicking the guy in the nads. Maybe it means calling your older brother over to intimidate the guy.
Whatever the case, your simplistic analogy has no place in the real world.
Make your choice, stick by it, and shut the hell up.
Yeah, because changing your mind in response to new information is just not macho. Grow up pequito.
Parent
Re:Advertising attacks? (Score:5, Funny)
If they were really serious they'd submit an article about taking down the stock exchange, and include a link to the stock exchanges webserver to have it Slashdotted...
It looks to me like mikesd81 is trying to take down excite.com. (why do you hate our freedom?)
Parent
Not a chance (Score:4, Insightful)
If these "hackers" really had a chance to impact the exchanges, it means they've found a vulnerability that the exchanges don't know about. Any smart (but malicious) hacker wouldn't tip their hand to such a find, they'd wait until D-day to launch their attack. Obviously the security folks at the exchanges should take the threat seriously and evaluate their systems for holes, but it would be bordering on the ridiculous for the rest of us to be worried.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What makes you think they have "sophomoric computer skills"?
Indicates nothing. (Score:3, Insightful)
I think you're leaving out a major psychological motivator: the terrorists in large par
Re: (Score:2)
This is just like when people fly into a tizzy because some nobody halfway around the world says he'd like to establish a global caliphate and subject Europe and America to shariah (Muslim law). Whoopdi
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I think this quote from Sneakers [imdb.com] sums it up nicely:
Cosmo: Posit: People think a bank might be financially shaky.
Martin Bishop: Consequence: People start to withdraw their money.
Cosmo: Result: Pretty soon it is financially shaky.
Martin Bishop: Conclusion: You can make banks fail.
Cosmo: Bzzt. I've already done that. Maybe you've heard about a few? Think bigger.
Martin Bishop: Stock market?
Cosmo: Yes.
Martin Bishop: Curr
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The title of TFA is "U.S. Warns of Possible Cyber Biz Attack" but the article is full of back tracking and spin. There will come a point when they issue so many warning that people tune out and the valid warnings will lose value, I recall a fable about a boy and wolf. 9/11 didn't happen because someone didn't act on a couple m
Infidel New Year? (Score:4, Funny)
-m
Up next, nano-virus threat to create mutants! (Score:5, Insightful)
What happens when the same joker posts a call for nano-viruses to be released into our water supply to create a generation of flesh eating mutants from our own children?!?
Seriously, you deal with terrorism by NOT being afraid.
You do NOT deal with it by hyping every single fantasy that they can post.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But you don't get re-elected by ignoring the threat. You get re-elected by trumpeting the threats loudly and then touting the lack of successful attacks. Fortunately, this last set of elections proved that fear-mongering by itself isn't enough; or that it can last only so long.
Re:Up next, nano-virus threat to create mutants! (Score:5, Insightful)
Heh! Not really. This last election was all about fear mongering. The dems gained seats in the legislature entirely by talking about how people should be afraid of the other party being in control. They certainly didn't win seats by actually spelling out contstructive, real-world things they'd actually, successfully do that would actually be helpful in any way. In fact, just yesterday they made it clear they were already going to break one of their loudest campaign promises (to implement all of the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission). Fear is exactly what it's all about, but they just played it differently ("the republicans want to starve your baby!" "the republicans want to make sure your social security money is wasted on dot-com investments!" "the republicans like to see our soldiers die!" "the republicans work for scary corporations that want to hurt you!"). Say you don't know exactly what I mean.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
The dems gained seats in the legislature entirely by talking about how people should be afraid of the other party being in control.
LOL! You really must be drinking a LOT of the republican kool-aid. The Republicans lost because they've not done anything about the Iraq war, and people are tired of it. They also lost because they've increased spending by a LOT. Combine that with all the scandals hitting the Republican party, and it's pretty obvious that they've dug their own grave. The Democrats are reall
Re: (Score:2)
You're missing the point! They didn't win by offering anything constructive, they won by saying "they suck, and we're not them!"
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think you are being 100% honest in saying the Democrats didn't present anything they planned to do. Pelosi had a rather prominent and pub
Re:Up next, nano-virus threat to create mutants! (Score:5, Funny)
I buy the movie rights!
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Remember the short-lived slashdot meme '... in Japan'?
There seems to exist a disturbing real-life parallel: '... by Muslim terrorists'.
Any threat automagically gains newsworthy status if this phrase is tacked onto it.
Re: (Score:2)
Is making the public aware the same as fear? I don't think so. Fear among the public would likely be worse if they didn't know and it happened.
You do NOT deal with it by hyping every single fantasy that they can post.
The more they make threats they don't follow through on, the more they look weak, the more they look weak, the less recruits they will get. Or didn't you read that whole NIE that was released?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. Absolutely. The only way to beat terrorists is to live a normal life. If the NYSE or banks are vulnerable to attack right now without having to add extra defenses and protections, then we must all ask them exactly why our money is not safe already. It's not just terrorists out there, it's mafia botnets and mischievous teenagers and all manner of other black hats. I think we all need a very clear answer as to why any financial institution needs to
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, what would you do? You've been accused plenty of not "putting together the pieces" of a looming threat. Arabs taking flying lessons? Nah, that's benign, etc. Then something ghastly happens and it's your fault for not shouting to the rooftops that there's a risk of people crashing airplanes into buildings, etc.
What if there was a bot-net-powered DoS attack on a couple of popular exchange-related sites/services? No big deal in the real scheme of things, bu
Yawn (Score:3, Interesting)
ok, so if serious breakin attempts go up 10%, and there's a small number of successful breakins every month, that's *punchpunchpunchding* a very small number of additional successful breakins.
The bottom line - your bank's web site may be a little slower to respond, and you may get a little more spam-email "from your bank" this month. Otherwise, business as usual.
Happy shopping everyone.
Re:Yawn (Score:4, Interesting)
Fortunately
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
From what the article describes, it seems they're bent on destroying data... and as everyone knows, all major financial institutions keep all (one and only one copy of) their most critical data on one web-server connected directly to the internet with a publically accessible website. Get access to that box, and the whole economy is in ruins.
Interesting.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Save for the one slashdot finds and posts..
Not gonna happen (Score:5, Interesting)
The best these groups could do are take down the websites of discount brokerages (E*Trade, Ameritrade, etc.), but that won't have one bit of impact on the financial markets. Even if those websites go down, the brokerages will still have their direct connections to the exchanges, so if you can call your broker, you'll still get your trade through.
I wish them the best of luck, because their attack is an exercise in futility.
We're all so smart (Score:2, Insightful)
Let's stop underestimating the Enemy and thinking the DHS is just a bunch of foolish baboons, OK? Maybe they know something we don't, eh?
This group would definitely need somebody working on the inside to do any real damage.
This seems neither unlikely nor improbable given Al Qu'e'da's facination with Wall Street and the amount of time since the attack on the World Trade Center.
Re: (Score:2)
Even their sources say there is no credible threat, but the mainstream media sensationalizes it anyway. And the average joe FOX/Oprah/MTV viewer gets another dose of anxiety-inducing semiotics.
That is why "warnings" like this have their desired effect. FUD.
about time for another one (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
"Hey, Osama, it's for you. Some guy, says his name is Emmanuel Goldstein, says you're stealing his routine."
FEAR Fear fear (Score:2)
Not all systems on the internet (Score:3, Informative)
Between the variety of systems and the layers of security between each it's very unlikely that a virus could bring down the stock exchanges. Or your bank. It's far more likely that their web sites and corporate desktops would go down. The "money" in the wires is far safer.
Best part is (Score:2, Funny)
Rob wrote (Score:2)
The worst thing they cold do (Score:3, Funny)
The cost to the US could be crippling! Think what would happen if these emails ceased!
Like I said, this is the *worst* thing they could do.
Tom Clancy BS (Score:5, Insightful)
Just like his ridiculous plot where terrorists hijack an airliner and crash it into the Capitol building. What a retard. That never happened.
I think the hackers disrupting the stock market came from "Debt of Honor" but I'm not sure.
Its funny that the U.S. government is about 15 years behind Tom Clancy.
And by "funny" I mean "incredibly frightening."
One Whole Post (Score:3, Funny)
Coming up next - Homeland Security issues alert after cousin's roommate's girlfriend heard from friend that man with turban was spotted in New York.
Bomb threats beg for publicity (Score:2)
That's Funny (Score:4, Informative)
Homeland? (Score:3, Funny)
It makes me feel all warm and paranoid inside.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
While I realize you are trying to make a point, your ignorance keeps you from doing so. Ever hear of John Doe #2 at OKC? The guy they never caught? Funny how he looks like Jose Padilla [greatdreams.com]. Even if he isn't Padilla, he was described as middle eastern looking by multiple witnesses even if Jose himself wasn't middle eastern.
not to mention the ira,
The guys that used to call in their bomb threats so they wouldn't kill any innocents? lol.
As for why
Re: (Score:2)
Because various U.S. government agencies got wind of an impending attack in August of 2001. However they had no real evidence to support it besides some "intelligence chatter". The rest is history. People are covering their asses this time.