US Weapons Data Stolen During Raid of Australian Defense Contractor's Computers (wsj.com) 78
phalse phace writes: Another day, another report of a major breach of sensitive U.S. military and intelligence data. According to a report by The Wall Street Journal (Warning: source may be paywalled; alternative source), "A cyberattacker nicknamed 'Alf' gained access to an Australian defense contractor's computers and began a four-month raid that snared data on sophisticated U.S. weapons systems. Using the simple combinations of login names and passwords 'admin; admin' and 'guest; guest' and exploiting a vulnerability in the company's help-desk portal, the attacker roved the firm's network for four months. The identity and affiliation of the hackers in the Australian attack weren't disclosed, but officials with knowledge of the intrusion said the attack was thought to have originated in China."
The article goes on to state that "Alf obtained around 30 gigabytes of data on Australia's planned purchase of up to 100 F-35 fighters made by Lockheed Martin, as well as information on new warships and Boeing-built P-8 Poseidon maritime-surveillance aircraft, in the July 2016 breach." The stolen data also included details of the C-130 Hercules transport aircraft and guided bombs used by the U.S. and Australian militaries as well as design information "down to the captain's chair" on new warships for Australia's navy.
The article goes on to state that "Alf obtained around 30 gigabytes of data on Australia's planned purchase of up to 100 F-35 fighters made by Lockheed Martin, as well as information on new warships and Boeing-built P-8 Poseidon maritime-surveillance aircraft, in the July 2016 breach." The stolen data also included details of the C-130 Hercules transport aircraft and guided bombs used by the U.S. and Australian militaries as well as design information "down to the captain's chair" on new warships for Australia's navy.
No problemo (Score:2)
"A cyberattacker nicknamed 'Alf' gained access to an Australian defense contractor's computers and began a four-month raid that snared data on sophisticated U.S. weapons systems. Using the simple combinations of login names and passwords 'admin; admin' and 'guest; guest' "
Wow, much sophistication in the Australian loginname/password scheme,
Re:No problemo (Score:5, Insightful)
That's kind of what happens when the Australian Signals Directorate wants brilliant hackers to work for them, but only offers to pay them entry-level Help Desk wages.
It wasn't the Australian Signals Directorate but some dickhead project sub-contractor. According to someone on TV last night it's a 50 person company and they only have one man doing IT functions, which includes things like fixing printers. I wonder what happens if this person goes on holidays?
While this company deserves to burn in hell, we also need to look at the idiots which gave them the job. Was no due diligence done to see if the sub-contractors were capable, and why did they need this kind of information in the first place? Balls should roll.
Re: (Score:2)
Gov't Decision Maker: "This one's the cheapest, take them."
In the US that's more or less the requirement, after taking things like Equal Opportunity and Small Business into account, provided the bidder claims that they have the basic competence to do the job. Privatization is the way to go! </s>
Summary tells half the story (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No problem, as long as the warship plans don't include any exposed ventilation shafts that are vulnerable x-wing fighters.
In fact there is nothing to see there (Score:2)
Well what do we have
* the stolen information was commercially sensitive rather than “classified” military information.
* the firm was subcontracted four levels down from defence contracts.
In other words a nonevent not worth discussing, but he catchy title and summary are made up to sell it anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
* the firm was subcontracted four levels down from defence contracts.
It doesn't matter whether it was subcontracted one hundred levels down, ultimately those at the top are responsible for not having proper security in place. Like making sure that sub-contractors check on the security of sub-sub-contractors, and so on.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes as we all know only Australia uses that default username/password combo.
Either that or something easy to remember and guess like waltzingmatilda or the likes. I would think that one could break into most of the infrastructure of .au with that one.
Allowing user set passwords to administration rights that are global and are accessible over the internet to critical data that is not locked down and encrypted is inherently stupid. About as smart as allowing remote admin priviledge to a website from the assholes claiming over the phone to be from microsoft windows security division
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, much sophistication in the Australian loginname/password scheme.
The article left out 'mate; mate' and 'That's not a knife;THAT's a knife'
Re: (Score:2)
In case you were curious, this is the cultural reference. [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Pull your head in, mate. Anonymous Drongo thinks there's only ever been one TV character named "Alf".
Re: (Score:2)
I would tend to lean to this Alf https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com], heh heh, bloopers so apt. The security breach, even unclassified still really bad. New tender requirements, companies computer network security specifications, staffing, security system in place, parrallel networks (internal connections vs external connections) et al. Most places are quite secure because they do not want competitors who are meant to be on their side, stealing proprietary data and also of course publicly humiliating their co
Re: (Score:3)
Source [theage.com.au]
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, much sophistication in the Australian loginname/password scheme,
I was expecting at least username = fosters, password = xxxx.
Australia's "navy" *rolls eyes* (Score:1)
http://www.navy.gov.au/fleet/ships-boats-craft/current-ships
Re: Australia's "navy" *rolls eyes* (Score:1)
That's ok.
Piles of dead Germans, Japanese, Koreans, Vietnamese (and others) made the same mistake.
They underestimated too.
I doubt the US Navy did much eye rolling when their aircraft carriers got "blasted" out from underneath them during joint exercises.
Same as has always been (Score:1)
Yup (Score:2)
Computers make everyone stupid.
Re:Yup (Score:4, Funny)
sit on their couches in their PJs watching soap operas
Why? Is Pornhub down?
Re: (Score:2)
how - foreign contractors == different standards? (Score:1)
Doesn't the DoD audit and require proof of security protocols when handing over Secret information to both domestic and foreign contractors? How could having passwords of admin/admin and guest/guest miss even the simplest of tests?
Pathetic and ridiculous to even classify stuff if this is how they run the show.
Re: (Score:3)
Having protocols and policies in place is one thing, actually adhering to and enforcing them is quite another...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
100 F-35? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
No no, it's just doing what it perceives as its duty as the 52nd state of the US. I understand the UK is the 51st.
Re: (Score:1)
I think the original order was 48 aircraft but then we got a national leader who wanted to enact Reagan-era policies of welfare-bashing, gifts to the rich and a big military. So he ordered another 52 aircraft and a maintenance contract. He was demoted from leadership before he could enact other far-right policies but we're still fighting the deluded ideologues he left behind. We still hear him in the background, proclaiming he knows better than his own boss.
Re: (Score:2)
"Australia 'cracked top-secret US jet fighter codes'" http://www.news.com.au/nationa... [news.com.au] (March 17, 2009)
"The Americans kept saying they'd provide the codes, but never did."
The new thinking is to spend big with the USA and everything will be so much better this generation.
Those "sophisticated weapons" are irrelevant (Score:1)
Or fast becoming so. Sure, they still appeal to cave-men that like to kill wholesale and make things go "boom". In the actual conflicts to come, they will just be extremely expensive historic artifacts, nothing else. The age of "big weapons" (with small brains behind them) is coming to an end.
'admin; admin' and 'guest; guest' (Score:4, Funny)
Re:'admin; admin' and 'guest; guest' (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I switched my SSH port to non standard but always see login attempts... less than before but still, some people do insane port scanning
Re: (Score:2)
less than before but still, some bots do insane port scanning
I took the liberty of fixing that for you. ;-)
Old-fashioned notions of combat. (Score:2)
I believe that these things occur because of an old mentality amongst the military that is still true on a physical battlefield: "the best defence is a strong offence".
The thing is that, in "the cyber", offence and defence are mostly unrelated. Hacking another country does not stop that country from hacking back.
This leads to the ridiculous situation where the NSA leaves the US government vulnerable so that it can hack Russia.
The secure cloud is not (Score:2)
In the old days, penetration exploits like this would be noticed, as large file transfers flooded routers going to unusual IPs, and someone literally would pull the plug on the router or swap in a honeypot.
Nowadays, there is no such oversight, and the weakest point in any system is any weak point, be it someone not following basic security protocols or the NSA and other groups (there are more than you think) leaving exploit holes everywhere, including in your mouse, keyboard, monitors, and so on.
It's like v
ALF is a ref. to ALf Stewart and his rape dungeon (Score:1)
yep.
My guess is this was a "false flag" organised by the DSD to force the government into policy changes to make things more secure. Australian government is full of dinosaurs with little or no knowledge of IT and they really make idiotic descions (see the recent fuck up of the NBN).
No sensitive data was lost, and they have released ALOT of info about this breach which is unusual.
Therefore.. I call bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
Every document and file would have had a checksum. The new NSA buddy system and more contractor security than ever would now be in place in 5 eye nations.
Every access down a pipe or tube to any contractor has always been watched. Staff have all their home/work networks watched.
The entry of any intruder would have been detected in real time. The files copied and what was of interest examined.
The code
One would hope (Score:2)
But I'm a realist. I look at the hope hand and and see a pile of smelly stuff. I look in the "smart folks" hand and see nothing.
So I am curious (Score:2)
Just how much hacking / stealing / pilfering needs to happen before someone decides the current way of doing business probably isn't the most secure way of doing it ?
Here's a thought:
Quit allowing sensitive / classified data outside of secure networks.
You want access to that data ? Drive your ass into the facility designed to house and secure it. Yes, it's inconvenient. Security usually is.
But it's either that or we may as well just de-classify all of it and mail it to everyone on the planet. Save a lot
Kinda reminds me of when.... (Score:2)
Military and intelligence data stolen .. (Score:1)