Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Security Government Politics

U.S. Warns of Possible Cyber Biz Attack 179

Posted by Zonk 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This discussion has been archived.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.

U.S. Warns of Possible Cyber Biz Attack More

U.S. Warns of Possible Cyber Biz Attack

Comments Filter:

  • blame the muslims (Score:2, Insightful)

    by nihaopaul ( 782885 )
    seriously, is this new?

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Danga ( 307709 )
      blame the muslims. Seriously, is this new?

      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)

        by tritonman ( 998572 )
        I heard about this in a news report yesterday. They said "there is no evidence that this is a threat, but the government is reporting..." uh, no evidence? So wtf? Let's just try to scare some people around xmas so they can remember that we are here to protect them when nothing happens.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Fred_A ( 10934 )
          With a bit of luck they'll buy some extra stuff to comfort themselves and the GDP will fatten a bit. All the bases are covered :)

  • Advertising attacks? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by haluness ( 219661 ) on Friday December 01, 2006 @12:54PM (#17068704)
    How seriously can you take would be crackers who go around blabbing about an upcoming attack?

    Sheesh, and the media just have to take it up. They even contradict themselves in the same paragraph!

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by joe 155 ( 937621 )
      I think we can largely take people who annoce these things before hand, its just like foreplay for them. They want the media to report on it (which they do - handy really) and they want people to know that they are considering doing it. Its just another tool for spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt.

      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)

        by truthsearch ( 249536 ) on Friday December 01, 2006 @01:15PM (#17069140) Homepage Journal
        The intent of terrorists is to incite terror in order to bring about change. Terror can be spread without any actual attack. Just the fact that the government and companies are responding to a threat, plus the spread of this information through media, increases fear. Since we are listening the terrorists are successful to some extent, even without actually committing the cyber-attack.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by joe 155 ( 937621 )
          but if they never commit the attack then people will no long belive them next time... I think they do need to at least have a go at it. Although you are right on the whole that the fear is a big part. I think with the brand of "islamic" terrorism though there maybe some part which requires an actual attack - maybe because of a percieved need to hurt someone or something, maybe because of the instruction from the people at the top.

          Basically, I agree. But maybe they do want to do it aswell.
          • Basically, I agree. But maybe they do want to do it aswell.

            Congratulations. You have been successfully terrorized.
            Have a nice day.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Knara ( 9377 )
              Or, maybe more ironic for the times, "Congratulations, you've let the terrorists win. Have a nice day."
        • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • The intent of terrorists is to incite terror in order to bring about change.

          Actually, the object of terrorism as spelled out by its ideologues is to provoke increasingly outrageous responses from your enemy, undermining their credibility and political support from their citizens and the community of nations. It appears to be working very well in many parts of the world.

          • undermining their credibility and political support from their citizens and the community of nations

            But why? To bring about change. In the end terrorists don't care if the citizens of the US lose support in their government. They want the support lost so the government changes its involvement in their territory. They want us to stop controlling their economy, altering their culture, and undermining their governments.

    • Re:Advertising attacks? (Score:5, Funny)

      by russ1337 ( 938915 ) on Friday December 01, 2006 @01:06PM (#17068952)
      Exactly,

      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?)

    • Not a chance (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Salvance ( 1014001 ) * on Friday December 01, 2006 @01:18PM (#17069196) Homepage Journal
      It's almost impossible that a bunch of radicalists with relatively sophomoric computer skills could infiltrate the NYSE or the Nasdaq in any substantial way. This is akin to high schoolers joking on forums and IRC that they are going to hack into the school's computers and change grades. Sure it happens, but not typically by a bunch of attention-seeking kids, but usually by some kid that is smart enough he didn't need to do it, just wanted to see "if he can".

      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.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Blkdeath ( 530393 )
        It's almost impossible that a bunch of radicalists with relatively sophomoric computer skills could infiltrate the NYSE or the Nasdaq in any substantial way.

        What makes you think they have "sophomoric computer skills"?

        • There's enough source code available for enough viruses/trojans/worms that anyone who is interested could write a variation with their own payload.

          And instead of creating a zombie army to spew spam, they'd just change a few random numbers in any spreadsheet that was accessible.

          There, instant financial problems for most of corporate America. And the damage could take years to uncover.

          With a little bit of thought, the virus/trojan/worm would spread quietly. It shouldn't be that difficult if your aim is NOT to

          • Indicates nothing. (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Kadin2048 ( 468275 )
            At risk of violating some sort of Godwin's-Law like rule for making 9/11 analogies, doesn't what you're saying sound a bit like someone sitting around on Sept. 10, 2001 saying "With a little bit of thought, the terrorists could set off car bombs in front of a bunch of major airports and totally screw up air travel? Since they cannot accomplish even that minor task, they don't have the skills to accomplish a major attack."

            I think you're leaving out a major psychological motivator: the terrorists in large par
        • "What makes you think they have "sophomoric computer skills"?"

          Every Slashdotter knows, the only computers they have are Commodore 64's buried in the back yard.
      • Besides, there was never any question that terrorists would like to wreck the stock market, if they had some means to do so. Of course they would, just like countless other criminals would love to break into it for personal gain. So what? Issuing a new statement to that effect changes precisely nothing.

        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)

      by shadow349 ( 1034412 )
      How seriously can you take would be crackers who go around blabbing about an upcoming attack?

      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)

      by diersing ( 679767 )

      There is no information corroborating the threat

      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 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

    • Real crackers don't use obscurity to hide their attacks. They give warnings of exactly what they're going to do, and still manage to do it.

  • Infidel New Year? (Score:4, Funny)

    by minotaurcomputing ( 775084 ) on Friday December 01, 2006 @12:55PM (#17068718) Homepage Journal
    I can't wait to watch Dick Clark's Infifel New Year's Rockin' Eve!

    -m
    • I shall destroy the Earthlings' puny world in three of their Earth days, on midnight of their pathetic planet's Greenwich Mean Time, on the day they snivelingly refer to as... what was it again? Oh, yes... New Year's Day.

      Does "Infidel New Year" strike anyone else as a possible bad translation? It doesn't seem like something a person from a non-Western culture would be likely to say among themselves.

  • Up next, nano-virus threat to create mutants! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by khasim ( 1285 ) <brandioch.conner@gmail.com> on Friday December 01, 2006 @12:55PM (#17068742)
    So, some joker on some website posts a piece about how people should release viruses to attack the stock exchange ... and our government issues an alert?

    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)

      by plover ( 150551 ) *
      Seriously, you deal with terrorism by NOT being afraid.

      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)

        by ScentCone ( 795499 ) on Friday December 01, 2006 @01:16PM (#17069170)
        Fortunately, this last set of elections proved that fear-mongering by itself isn't enough; or that it can last only so long.

        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.

        • 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
          • So, I guess I can't help but laugh when you try to blame (or credit depending on your perspective) the Democrats for the Republican loss in Congress.

            You're missing the point! They didn't win by offering anything constructive, they won by saying "they suck, and we're not them!"

            • You're missing the point! They didn't win by offering anything constructive, they won by saying "they suck, and we're not them!"
              I think it's you that's missed the point. Pointing out all the ways the Republican party has screwed up isn't fear mongering. The way your post reads it's as if the Democrats are a bunch of liars and the Republicans haven't done anything wrong. The truth is if the Republicans hadn't screwed up, and people were generally happy with the direction the country was going there's noth
          • 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 really the only ones you can't blame for this one.

            Heh, the Dems do a lot of FUD. It wasn't that effective in the last election, but I saw

            • I'm doubting he meant it like that, unless he just happened to know Macaca was a dismissive epithet used by francophone colonials in Central Africa's Belgian Congo for the native population.
              Actually his mother was of French descent. According to wikipedia:

              Allen's mother, born Henrietta Lumbroso, is of French Tunisian descent and some commentators have suggested that she may have learned the pejorative during her childhood and introduced it to her son.

              So it's entirely possible, even likely he knew it was a

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by klaun ( 236494 )

          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.

          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

        • 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.

          Hmmm... this may be the case, BUT, the reality of the situation is that the GOP was selling "fake fear", and the dems were arguably pointing out the reality of the GOP's shortcomings and that the results of these shortcomings in governing are instigating REAL things to be scared about. I really feel like the GOP was really playing the "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain" card as the country has gone down the tubes (at least in its position on the world stage as being a bastion of personal free

          • Five guys get together in a room and plan a bank robbery.

            In legal terms, that's Conspiracy, and it justifies a police raid, arrests, a trial, and--if convincing evidence of Conspiracy is presented--a criminal conviction. We recognize a right to Free Assembly. We also recognize that abuse of that right is not itself always a right, but sometimes a crime.

            Five guys send letters to each other, planning a bank robbery via the post office. Again, Conspiracy. We recognize a right to Free Speech. But we also rec

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Darby ( 84953 )
          ,i>The dems gained seats in the legislature entirely by talking about how people should be afraid of the other party being in control.

          Bullshit you lying fuck.

          The people were rightly afraid of the other party due to their criminal treasonous actions.
          So please pull your lying head out of your ass and shut the fuck up if you can't tell the difference between the truth and a lie so idiotic that a child could see through it.

          The republicans got voted out because they made far and away the most corrupt Congress
          • So, thanks for making my point for me. Assuming you can actually read and comprehend complete sentences, try going back one more time. I responded to a comment that said fear had nothing to do with the election results. I pointed out that the campaign (on the dem side) revolved pretty much entirely on pointing out why the electorate should be afraid having the republicans in control of the legislature. This seems to be your point, too.

            So, rather than constructively pointing out how they'd get Iran to sto

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Darby ( 84953 )
              I pointed out that the campaign (on the dem side) revolved pretty much entirely on pointing out why the electorate should be afraid having the republicans in control of the legislature. This seems to be your point, too.

              No, there is a very large difference.

              For an example of fear based campaigs, just look at all the recent Republica races.
              "Oh no, the evil Demoncrats will ban your bibles if they're elected".

              That was one of their actual tactics.

              Now, that's clearly completely divorced from reality and designed
              • "Oh no, the evil Demoncrats will ban your bibles if they're elected".

                Do you really find that to be different, qualitatively, from "OMG! The republicans want people like Michael J. Fox and your grandmother to die!"

                a network of *death camps*

                Just out of curiosity, would you consider all prisons to be "death camps?" Prisoners die all the time (just like non-prisoners do). So, when someone from Syria is caught helpding to build IEDs in Afghanistan - with the purpose of blowing up supply and security per
        • 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.

          Eh? What are you drinking? Around these parts folks were simply fed up with *whoever* the incumbent was and voted accordingly. Or the folks who believe that a divided, get-nothing-done gov't is probably the best out of all bad choices.

          • Eh? What are you drinking? Around these parts folks were simply fed up with *whoever* the incumbent was and voted accordingly. Or the folks who believe that a divided, get-nothing-done gov't is probably the best out of all bad choices.

            I guess you weren't seeing the same ads we were here in the DC metro area! The ads this time around were totally unprecedented, as far as I'm concerned. From both parties.

    • Re:Up next, nano-virus threat to create mutants! (Score:5, Funny)

      by Thansal ( 999464 ) on Friday December 01, 2006 @01:07PM (#17068978)
      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?!?


      I buy the movie rights!

    • 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.

    • Seriously, you deal with terrorism by NOT being afraid.

      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?

      • 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.

        The public would propably never even notice if stock exchange was knocked out for a few hours.

    • Seriously, you deal with terrorism by NOT being afraid.

      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

  • Yawn (Score:3, Interesting)

    by davidwr ( 791652 ) on Friday December 01, 2006 @12:56PM (#17068748) Homepage Journal
    So the banks will have a higher-than-normal amount of crack-attempts this month, and a proportionately-higher number of successful ones.

    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)

      by MrAnnoyanceToYou ( 654053 ) <dylan@NOsPam.dylanbrams.com> on Friday December 01, 2006 @01:14PM (#17069114) Homepage Journal
      If there's anything about America I have faith in, it's the ability of the financial system to perpetuate itself. The only thing that could possibly drag it down (short term) at this point would be Microsoft going rogue and having a back door into everything they used to rip the entire system apart...

      Fortunately /unfortunately enough, I don't think they're organizationally capable of this.
    • So the banks will have a higher-than-normal amount of crack-attempts this month

      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)

    by AnswerIs42 ( 622520 ) on Friday December 01, 2006 @12:58PM (#17068794) Homepage
    The news articles I have seen, read and heard all said there was "No Credible Evidence" that this was a real threat.

    Save for the one slashdot finds and posts..

  • Not gonna happen (Score:5, Interesting)

    by 31415926535897 ( 702314 ) on Friday December 01, 2006 @01:03PM (#17068892) Journal
    This is a very funny attack. All of the important network connections, those that allow the NYSE and other exchanges to operate, and connections between them and brokers are not on the Internet. There are connections from the NYSE to the Internet, but they are not needed for trading (it's for when the traders are bored, they can look at porn). This group would definitely need somebody working on the inside to do any real damage.

    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.

    • I wish them the best of luck, because their attack is an exercise in futility.

      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, Insightful)

        by fastcoke11 ( 805687 )
        I think his point was that what they reported was not going to be able to effect the market in any negative way, so reporting this as anything other than an assinine idea brought up by some guy writing on a website is just exaggerating.
        • I think his point was that what they reported was not going to be able to effect the market in any negative way

          What do you or he know that the DHS doesn't? You should call them. As he said, they probably have an inside man.

          The London train bombings and the transatlantic bombing plot were both perpetrated by educated individuals, some of them with engineering degrees. We're not talking about a lunatic in a sandy cave running his Dell via camel dung incinerators.
    • Most people don't understand these details, and they thing "OMG Comuters. Hackers. Everybody Panic!" Including the editors and reporters in the media.

      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)

    by WolfMansDad ( 253294 ) on Friday December 01, 2006 @01:04PM (#17068902)
    Warning, that is. Don't you know we're at war! Americans aren't that good at hate, so we have to be given something to fear. Keeps the govt in business.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by plover ( 150551 ) *
      *RING* *RING*

      "Hey, Osama, it's for you. Some guy, says his name is Emmanuel Goldstein, says you're stealing his routine."

  • "There is no information corroborating the threat and that the alert was issued as a routine matter and out of an abundance of caution" How the hell does this make the news. Oh my the cyber-islamicfacist-terrorists are coming for us. "Radical muslim groups" are constantly making the threats. If they can do, they do, if they can't they make threats to inflate their balls and those stupid enough to follow them.

  • Not all systems on the internet (Score:3, Informative)

    by truthsearch ( 249536 ) on Friday December 01, 2006 @01:08PM (#17069000) Homepage Journal
    The largest banks, plus the stock exchange, still use a wide array of platforms. The stock exchange web site, for example, is not directly hitting the actual stock exchange servers. Most of your bank transactions still go through mainframes. A typical setup is for central transaction servers to push data files to data warehouse servers for reporting purposes. Most systems then run off of these reporting servers.

    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.
  • this attack will be done from American by Americas very own joe and jane's zombie machines. Dad shoul'd have stayed away from those free pron sites when mom is in bed, now he's a terrorist helper.
  • Attention tube terrorists.. could you please target the specific stock and mortgage people who keep spamming me?

  • The worst thing they cold do (Score:3, Funny)

    by plopez ( 54068 ) on Friday December 01, 2006 @01:27PM (#17069372) Journal
    Is target zombie networks and insure that Americans are deprived of Viagra ads, weight loss programs, stock tips and penis enlargements.

    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. ;)

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday December 01, 2006 @01:30PM (#17069406)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • One Whole Post (Score:3, Funny)

    by Siker ( 851331 ) on Friday December 01, 2006 @01:34PM (#17069466) Homepage
    It's amazing how much you can do with a single post on a single website when people are afraid of the dark.

    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.
  • The worst response to a passive terrorist threat is to publicize it - by putting it on Slashdot.

  • That's Funny (Score:4, Informative)

    by eno2001 ( 527078 ) on Friday December 01, 2006 @01:49PM (#17069688) Homepage Journal
    I don't EVER remember living in the "homeland" until the Bushista regime seized power. I still like to call this America myself. Former land of the free and brave. Now home of the politically blind and cowardly.

  • Homeland? (Score:3, Funny)

    by GrumblyStuff ( 870046 ) on Friday December 01, 2006 @01:50PM (#17069710)
    I like that term. It's like living in Soviet Russia.

    It makes me feel all warm and paranoid inside.
  • .... Given that every 12 year old wannbe 1337 h4x0r has been using "off the shelf" tools to break into places like these fore years, not to mention the armies of botnets, wouldn't these companies have already taken steps to protect themselves against this sort of thing?

    I'm just asking...
  • I work for a relatively small banking software company and our datacenter is down. It may just be a coincidence, who knows.

  • I thought this was an appropriate quote from V for Vendetta, "I want this country to realize that we stand on the edge of oblivion. I want everyone to remember *why* they need us!"
  • Has it occured to anyone that whoever made this threat is a terrorist equivalent of a pointy-headed-boss/marketing exec who is exhorting unknown terrorist hacker-types to unleash one of those virus thingies that he's heard about? Like, they sat in a meeting in some coffee house and said "Yeah! We could release one of those virus thingies! We'd rule the world! Get one of those computer infidels on the internets!"

    Isn't this the equivalent of a pathetic "release the hounds," only there are no hounds, and the "

Slashdot Top Deals

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (10) Sorry, but that's too useful.

Close