Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Botnet Security The Internet Technology IT

Iranian Cyber Army Moves Into Botnet Renting 63

Posted by Soulskill
from the god-help-you-if-you-dent-the-drywall dept.
angry tapir writes "A group of malicious hackers who attacked Twitter and the Chinese search engine Baidu are also apparently running a for-rent botnet, according to new research from Seculert. The so-called Iranian Cyber Army also took credit last month for an attack on TechCrunch's European website. In that incident, the group installed a page on TechCrunch's site that redirected visitors to a server that bombarded their PCs with exploits in an attempt to install malicious software."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Iranian Cyber Army Moves Into Botnet Renting

Comments Filter:
  • by explosivejared (1186049) * <hagan,jared&gmail,com> on Tuesday October 26, 2010 @08:17AM (#34023178)
    It seems [reuters.com] that there is no real connection between this group and Tehran. It's important to remember that when there is real discussion [theatlantic.com] going on about conflict with Iran. That being said, this group does seem to be motivated by some sort of Iranian nationalism. It's just a further reminder of how small groups and individuals can inflame international imbroglios, leaving state actors in a bind. Think the Netanyahu and Obama administrations' paralysis over how to handle the settlers in the West Bank.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by zrbyte (1666979)
      Yes. Welcome to the 21st century, where more and more power can be concentrated in the hands of smaller and smaller groups of people. For better and for worse.
      • Interestingly enough, this model you speak of, will only force governments to start enforcing more and more older or new policies amongst people, think of it like someone that has a pilot's license....they can fly a plane into a building, before 9-11, we would not have imagined people doing this, but it takes one to change things and improve policies, now not just anyone can fly planes, and trust me, the security checks to learn how to fly big airplanes are ridiculous now (whether effective is another matte

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          If the ISPs are forced to lock down botnets and shut down suspected botnet traffic, they will also shut down anything they think are copyright or patent violations too. Friend point out a new song on YouTube and you go listen to it? Next thing you know the ISP has chopped your pipe and you are looking at sitting through 30 hours of mandatory "copyright compliance reeducation" classes which is a loop of the "don't copy that floppy" from the 80s.

          Don't forget patents. With the combination of app stores and

        • by maxume (22995)

          In 1996 Tom Clancy wrote some fiction about an angry pilot flying a 747 into the Capital building during the State of the Union.

          He needed to get Jack Ryan into the presidency without being any more preposterous than usual.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by DigiShaman (671371)

        You can blame national media and the speed of light. For better and for worse.

        Thought experiment: You thought WWII would have been won with all that coverage in hi-def bloody detail for all the public to see? I would say not. I would also say that's why we lost in Vietnam. Being that war will and is always nasty. The only way to win one is to not provide media coverage to the public.

        • Irrelevant (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Kupfernigk (1190345)
          The example of WW2 is totally irrelevant. With current levels of surveillance and sigint, Germany would have been stopped long before they invaded Austria. The "hi-def coverage" of Kristallnacht and other Nazi atrocities would have let everybody know what was going on, before Hitler could re-arm Germany. Hitler was reassured by his American contacts that the US was at least neutral and possibly pro-German up until well into 1940. A German Wikileaks would have ensured that did not happen.

          I expect to get mode

          • Freedom/Democracy = American = bad!???

            Clearly there's a level of miscommunication going on. But if you could poll people individually, what citizens of a 3rd world nation wouldn't want to be an American, or Europian for that matter. Oh hell, the influx in immigration is proof alone.

            Illogical. Your answer does not compute.

             

            • But if you could poll people individually, what citizens of a 3rd world nation wouldn't want to be an American, or Europian for that matter. Oh hell, the influx in immigration is proof alone.

              While the average citizen WOULD jump at the opportunity to move to Europe or the USofA ... that does NOT mean that the average citizen would NOT fight against the USofA should the USofA invade his country.

              It's a simple difference between friendly and hostile.

              • by sjames (1099)

                Or they are well aware that they will NOT become the 51st state (or a full member of the EU) that way, but instead will be saddled with a corrupt puppet government that will oppress them even worse for the sake of foreign corporate interests.

            • I don't think it is a matter of becoming more Free and Democratic, as it is losing National/Cultural Identity in the process.
            • There is definitely some miscommunication going on. For instance you didn't finish the middle sentence in the above comment. Instead, realising that you had no data to back up your assertions, you waved it away and pointed at immigration, as if that proves something.

              You seem to be saying that if some people from another country migrate to yours then it follows that all the people in that country (even people that may have had the chance to move but decided instead to stay where they are) would rather live i

              • You seem to be saying that if some people from another country migrate to yours then it follows that all the people in that country (even people that may have had the chance to move but decided instead to stay where they are) would rather live in your country than their own.

                Not all, but look at the numbers of human migration to western nations. America being one of them.

                His point - which, incidentally, you appear to be reinforcing nicely despite apparently trying to refute - was that some Americans appear t

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by c6gunner (950153)

            The example of WW2 is totally irrelevant. With current levels of surveillance and sigint, Germany would have been stopped long before they invaded Austria. The "hi-def coverage" of Kristallnacht and other Nazi atrocities would have let everybody know what was going on, before Hitler could re-arm Germany.

            Um. Kristallnacht happened months AFTER Austria was under the rule of Germany, so I'm not sure how coverage of it would have stopped the invasion of Austria.

            A German Wikileaks would have ensured that did not happen.

            If a German Wikileaks were allowed to exist, Germany wouldn't have been a problem in the first place. The thing is, sites like wikileaks are GREAT at stopping liberal democracies, while they tend to be pretty powerless against oppressive dictatorships.

            despite their awful Governments, both the Russians and the Vietnamese preferred their awful Governments to the alternative. The American inability to understand that not everybody wants to be American is itself a cause of war.

            That is, of course, complete nonsense. In Russia you had a single faction fighting under one governm

            • The thing is, sites like wikileaks are GREAT at stopping liberal democracies, while they tend to be pretty powerless against oppressive dictatorships.

              And your evidence for that is?

              And you’d have to be a complete moron to suggest that the US actually wanted to turn the Vietnamese into Americans.

              Do you know what a straw man argument is? Because you use it.

              You seem, if I may say so, to have a minor anger management problem. Using terms like "moron" does not strengthen your assertions; you clearly think

              • by c6gunner (950153)

                And your evidence for that is?

                You're joking, right?

                Do you know what a straw man argument is? Because you use it.

                Yes, I do, and no, I don't, respectively.

                You stated that the Americans are unable to "understand that not everybody wants to be American". In the context of your narrative, the implied suggestion is that Americans wanted the Vietnamese to become Americans - otherwise that entire sentence makes no sense, and doesn't fit into the rest of the argument. Now, you can try to backpedal, if you want, and make all sorts of excuses, but nothing you say will turn my statement into a "straw man a

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by sznupi (719324)

      Still, "Iranian Cyber Army" is awfully convenient.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by pyrosine (1787666)
        This is actually a very smart move, by masking their actions behind political or even religious ideals (providing they dont actually support that cause), they will confuse people into looking into more details than need be. Could quite easily be a group in America with no affiliation to Iran, meaning they have achieved their goal of misdirection extremely well.
    • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

      It seems [reuters.com] that there is no real connection between this group and Tehran. It's important to remember that when there is real discussion [theatlantic.com] going on about conflict with Iran. That being said, this group does seem to be motivated by some sort of Iranian nationalism. It's just a further reminder of how small groups and individuals can inflame international imbroglios, leaving state actors in a bind. Think the Netanyahu and Obama administrations' paralysis over how to handle the settlers in the West Bank.

      Except, you know, the Iranian president doesn't like anyone who isn't a Muslim.

      As for how to deal with the West Bank "settlers", move 'em out (same with the Gaza Strip folks). That is Israeli territory. Period. They have a legitimate claim to that land as it was legally bought by Jewish settlers a long time ago at more than fair prices and NO ONE was forced to sell their property.

      • by sznupi (719324)

        They don't like anyone perceived as supportive / keeping in power the brutal Shah regime of 3 decades. You know, the one started with 1953 coup d'etat; read about the circumstances, consequences, think how you would perceive such actions.

        They have good relations with India (with which they collaborate in supporting anti-Taliban Afghan government...you know, the one also US-backed), Japan, South Korea, China, Brazil, Cuba, Venezuela, CIS; generally not exactly Muslim.

        And formal legality of something isn't a

      • by chrisG23 (812077)
        You do realize that when the term "settlers" is used in conjunction with the west bank and gaza, and the term "settlements" as well, its not in reference to Palestinians. It is in reference to Israelis moving in an establishing new settlements there. In places that Palestinians have been living in for a long time. So if you were to move out settlers, you would be removing the Israelis that are moving there.
        • One thing that's always bugged me about other nations' inability to see that settlement is a military activity is the fact that Machiavelli explicitly stated in The Prince that the way to take and hold territory was to start with settlers... both giving an excuse to send in the army "in defense of the poor defenseless settlers" and providing influence and control over the area.

          If this was known 700 years ago, how come it's not known now?

          • by sjames (1099)

            I'm fairly sure they're very well aware of that. They just want to establish a sort of deniability.

            • That my nation would "want to establish a sort of deniability" about ethnic cleansing bugs me even more.
      • by elrous0 (869638) *

        Yes, because ethnic cleansing never comes back and bites anyone on the ass.

    • by johnhp (1807490)
      I don't think your West Bank comparison holds water, because it's not as if the settlers have no support from the government. Israel has been perfectly willing to tell us to fuck off over the West Bank, while I would bet that the Iranians want no part of any "cyber terrorist" organization, at least not one that operates outside of their direct control.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Xest (935314)

      "It's just a further reminder of how small groups and individuals can inflame international imbroglios, leaving state actors in a bind."

      No I'm pretty sure the whole nuclear issue is what's got the state actors in a bind in this case.

      Obama and Ahmadinejad could likely not give a flying fuck what a bunch of script kiddies are upto.

      • What the OP meant to say is that the peace negotiations between Israel and Palestine can be ruined by a single rocket propelled granade shot by a dissident Palestine who ignores whatever leadership they have there.
        Similarly, countries outside Iran will demand from Iran that it stops these cyber attacks... even though the group that did the attacks is not related to the official government.

        The situation in the Middle East is older than the discussion about Iranian nuclear ambitions. Obama and Ahmadinejad giv

        • by Xest (935314)

          Yes, but the only people who pick up on the movement and actions of this "Iranian Cyber Army" are sites like Slashdot, the mainstream public don't care, mainstream news will give a brief report of a hacked site, and really, that's it.

          It's just not something that registers on the political radar other than a very brief mention unless some country is looking for an excuse, but when Iran is busy playing the nuclear game, when it's had fraudulent elections, it's not hard to find an excuse and again, a few scrip

    • by rtechie (244489)

      It's extremely unlikely this group has any connections with Iran whatsoever, ad hoc or otherwise. Iran simply doesn't have a big hacker community. This is almost certainly an international group (maybe in China) that is using the recent Iranian cyber attacks as a "cover" for the typical hooliganism.

    • by thomst (1640045)

      Think the Netanyahu and Obama administrations' paralysis over how to handle the settlers in the West Bank.

      There's no "paralysis" on Netanyahu's part - it's a deliberate policy. Because of the batshit-crazy Israeli parliamentary party-list proportional representation seat-allocation system, he's forced to cater to extreme Zionists in order to hold onto a majority large enough to keep his government in power. Since personal power is more important to him than statesmanship, the settlers therefore are allowed to get away with anything short of outright murder - and, more often than not, they get away with that, to

      • by Xest (935314)

        You can't blame politicians in a proportional representation system like that. If the population continues to vote someone in who is catering to minority elected extremists then the population are explicitly granting support for that through their vote.

        The system isn't the problem, the problem is the electorate that votes for both extremist parties, and parties who are willing to work with and cater to extremists.

    • It's a Zerg rush! /plays way too much

  • Who knows where they are from or what their motives are?

    Is there any actual evidence what they are or where they are from? Or are we just told to believe some article on 'Good Gear Guide' as fact?

    What we need is an all-out bot-net army war to keep them all busy fighting the forces of good vs. evil.
  • so-called Iranian Cyber Army

    Maybe it should be pointed out in the title that this group of script kiddies have nothing to do with Iran.

    Wait a minute, maybe that's exactly what Tehran wants us to believe. By having Iran in the name, it would actually draw suspicion away from Iran because presumably they would want to keep their secret hacker army secret and would never name it something so obvious.

    But then again, maybe the script kiddies are using reverse psychology. By using one of the most deceptive names possible for the actua

    • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

      by Larryish (1215510)
      More likely it is a false flag operation to drum up support for more U.S. occupation.
  • who brought you WMD's in Iraq and a double-rape case against wikileaks. Come on... they may be Muslims but they aren't retarded.
    • by santax (1541065)
      That one was for the folks who blame the Iranian government :) Should have put that in the same message.
    • by c6gunner (950153)

      I don't remember angry_tapir having anything to do with those articles ....

  • It was these folks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbionese_Liberation_Army [wikipedia.org]

    Most of them are working posthumously . . .

  • and will be, from all over the world :(

Your own mileage may vary.

Working...