backtop


Print 30 comment(s) - last by Hieyeck.. on Jul 20 at 10:38 AM

The attack targeted a defense contractor, which remains anonymous for now. The country suspected in the attack remains anonymous as well

This year has been especially brutal in the internet security world. A slew of corporate and government hacks conducted by groups like LulzSec (Lulz Security), Anonymous and Goatse Security have resulted in the loss of millions of confidential files, data and even credit card numbers. Sony, one of the main targets during these hacks, may be boasting about how "great" the loss of customer data turned out to be for its company in particular, but its hard to argue that every hack that took place has been damaging in one way or another.

Now, new reports show that foreign hackers were able to steal 24,000 U.S. military files in a single attack on the Pentagon this past March. The attack targeted a defense contractor, which remains anonymous for now. The country suspected in the attack remains anonymous as well.

According to Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn, cyber attacks have compromised government systems like satellite communications systems, network security protocols, surveillance technologies and aircraft avionics. Military hardware such as missile tracking systems and the Joint Strike Fighter jet have been put in harms way as well.

Lynn added that terabytes of data have been "extracted from defense companies over the past decade."

"Current countermeasures have not stopped this outflow of sensitive information," said Lynn. "We need to do more to guard our digital storehouses of design innovation."

The Defense Department and the Department of Homeland Security are doing just that with a new pilot program that offers enhanced protection of computer networks. The government will do so in concert with certain defense companies, where classified threat intelligence is shared with defense contractors or commercial ISPs. 

"By furnishing this threat intelligence, we are able to help strengthen these companies' existing cyber defenses," said Lynn. 



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Unidentified?
By JasonMick (blog) on 7/15/2011 11:39:02 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
The country suspected in the attack remains anonymous as well.

*Cough* China *cough, cough*




RE: Unidentified?
By inperfectdarkness on 7/15/2011 12:03:51 PM , Rating: 5
my cynicism says that even though we know it's china; china knows it's china; and the rest of the world knows it's china--we're going to remain hush-hush on this.

we already owe china OVER a trillion in debt. pissing them off is not going to do us any favors.


RE: Unidentified?
By kleinma on 7/15/2011 12:36:44 PM , Rating: 2
Why? If we owe china a trillion dollars, then I would imagine it is them who need us, not us who need them.


RE: Unidentified?
By danobrega on 7/15/2011 1:21:01 PM , Rating: 2
Unless they start going "all your base are belong to us" up your arse.


RE: Unidentified?
By 91TTZ on 7/15/2011 1:59:08 PM , Rating: 4
Which they can't, because we bought tons of weapons with all that money they lent us.


RE: Unidentified?
By TSS on 7/15/2011 7:07:47 PM , Rating: 5
Which you cannot afford to run without chinese people lending you money. Those tanks aren't going to do you any good without fuel. Considering the chinese can bite that trillion and still have *plenty* money for fuel, i'm seriously not so sure china needs the USA more then the USA needs china.

Once china reaches the point where their export driven economy becomes a consumer driven economy (and their well on their way), they don't need the USA at all any more. They really won't need to invade - they can simply stop lending and leave you to your own devices. And they will, because they won't gain anything from invading, their main competitor went broke and they will be the biggest economy. The US didn't invade russia after the wall fell either.

Considering how divided the USA is between democrats and republicans right now a civil war would be more likely then an american-chinese war in such a scenario. Americans love to play the blame game, and the worse the crisis the worse the outcome of the game will be.


RE: Unidentified?
By geddarkstorm on 7/15/2011 1:27:47 PM , Rating: 2
This is all leading to something, the question is what.

(most likely, the answer is China wants to be the next Super Power, projecting influence and policy over the whole world as we are, which shall soon be a "were" at this rate).


RE: Unidentified?
By Reclaimer77 on 7/15/2011 1:24:22 PM , Rating: 2
Don't worry, Obama will probably force the Republicans to agree to raise the debt ceiling so we can go another 5 trillion in debt to China without addressing our spending problem for another 20 or so years.


RE: Unidentified?
By geddarkstorm on 7/15/11, Rating: 0
RE: Unidentified?
By Reclaimer77 on 7/15/2011 1:49:21 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Better than letting the government shut down and causing us, the people, to suffer.


First of all there is zero chance the government would "shut down". Secondly, if it's impossible to run this country without a 1.5 trillion yearly deficit, as Obama and the Democrats insist, then maybe we SHOULD shut it down and start over from scratch. Because something clearly isn't right and we can't just pretend we can tax our way out of it.


RE: Unidentified?
By snakeInTheGrass on 7/15/2011 4:06:03 PM , Rating: 2
I'm under the impression he has said that we need to both cut spending and increase revenues (which, for the government means taxes) to reduce the deficit.

But right-wing slant aside, the fact is that - as usual - neither party is willing to go far enough. They're talking not about balancing the budget, they're talking about *reducing* the amount of new debt by $4 trillion dollars (or less!) over the next 10 years? WTF?

Or maybe you're not trying to claim that Bush was doing anything different (other than not getting hit with the bill for his recession at the end of his own term)? They're all sell-out wankers that I wouldn't trust to balance my own checkbook, let alone that of the entire nation.


RE: Unidentified?
By Reclaimer77 on 7/15/2011 8:20:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm under the impression he has said that we need to both cut spending and increase revenues (which, for the government means taxes) to reduce the deficit.


Whatever he said is a lie or double-speak. As usual. If he believed in cutting spending, then duh, he would be willing to cut something. ANYTHING! But he's not. And you cannot "increase revenues" in a depressed economy due to massive spending debt and lack of private sector growth. And that's something you and Obama and everyone like you doesn't seem to understand. You can raise the tax rate 500% if you like, I don't care, you will NOT see increased revenues from it. And it will only further the slow slide into mediocrity as a whole.

quote:
Or maybe you're not trying to claim that Bush was doing anything different


In Bush's absolute worst time, at the height of the war and increased spending, we were looking at about a $350 billion deficit. Two years later, under Obama, we're now at $1.5 TRILLION dollars. I'm sorry, but there is not a single Bush policy or budget responsible for that. It's all on Obama, and I think people are starting to tire of his lack of leadership and the constant blame game.

This is why Obama doesn't work and fails as President. He's a complete 100% socialist presiding over a free market economy. He will not accept reality or compromise, because he is ideologically unable to. His beliefs won't allow it. And he's surrounded himself with cabinet members and appointees that are just as radical, maybe even more so. There is no hope, and damn sure little has changed.

This is the worst Administration in recent history, maybe of all time, in this country.


RE: Unidentified?
By KITH on 7/15/2011 4:45:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
another 3 or so years.


Fixed that for ya.


RE: Unidentified?
By NellyFromMA on 7/18/2011 8:46:36 AM , Rating: 2
Seriously, its vapor money. We'll be going to war long before we put a dent in that pile of vapor. Not a war monger, just saying.


Seperate network
By kfonda on 7/15/2011 12:27:06 PM , Rating: 2
Seems to me, the solution is to not put and classified or sensitive information on any system that might connect to the internet. They really need a completely separate and secure/encrypted network for this kind of information.

P.S. - I love that picture:-)




RE: Seperate network
By borismkv on 7/15/2011 1:31:25 PM , Rating: 2
They do that. Each classification level has it's own network that is inaccessible from the internet. The problem is when morons take their private/company laptops onto those private networks, pull down files, and place them on less secure networks,or bridge the Wireless and Wired NICs on their computers, or bring virus infected storage devices into the secured networks.


RE: Seperate network
By kfonda on 7/15/2011 2:18:02 PM , Rating: 3
Fixing that problem only requires someone with balls. First offense of a violation of the security rules should be punished by a revocation of security clearance and loss of job. If it is a contractor that does it they should lose the contract and be banned from bidding on future contracts. Intentional theft of data should be met with a stiff prison term.

This should apply to all government personnel/contractors at all levels no mater who you are or who you know.

Like I said, all we need is someone with balls.


RE: Seperate network
By Chaotic42 on 7/17/2011 5:11:58 PM , Rating: 2
I agree with firing someone who does that, but not with revoking the contract. That would lead to all kinds of corporate sabotage. If getting a contract is as easy as paying someone to get a job with your competition and copy one file, it will be done all of the time.

Simply put, bringing a thumb drive to work in that situation should be grounds for termination. Period. Blank media should be controlled, employees should be searched at the door for any media, cell phones, thumb drives, etc.


RE: Seperate network
By Ramstark on 7/15/2011 1:34:59 PM , Rating: 2
Isn't that why DARPANET was born in the first place?


RE: Seperate network
By Dug on 7/15/2011 1:39:41 PM , Rating: 2
This would seem obvious, but you know the military.


RE: Seperate network
By ussfletcher on 7/15/2011 1:52:14 PM , Rating: 2
Airgap security only works until you have someone that will copy data onto a cd, or a thumbdrive.


RE: Seperate network
By Hieyeck on 7/20/2011 10:38:40 AM , Rating: 2
The real question: what part of UNIVERSAL in USB doesn't the Military understand?


Dumb
By tech329 on 7/15/2011 12:09:03 PM , Rating: 2
Our government has decided the solution is to share classified threat information with the very people who are unable to protect classified information already under their safeguard.

It's very unlikely that government can create and implement a plan to solve this. The private sector has as their primary incentive one of making money. And it has been demonstrated over time that is all they care about. Unless government contractor companies and the principles in them have their employment and careers explicitly at risk this problem will never go away. You have to make them care more about this country than they care about the almighty dollar.




RE: Dumb
By borismkv on 7/15/2011 1:27:49 PM , Rating: 2
The problem isn't so much technical. The DoD keeps classified data on a network that is completely inaccessible from the Internet as long as the people who use those networks do what they are supposed to. There are programs in place to make check on all systems connected to those networks to determine if they are a threat to the private network. However, the major weakness is always people, and unfortunately the majority of Government workers and contractors are complete fraktards that should *not* be in the positions they are in. There's a lot of cronyism and fear of retribution from the higher-ups for correcting them when they do something stupid. It's a complete mess, which is why I don't really want to work in government anymore, despite the fact that it pays roughly double my current paycheck for *less* of a workload.


Owe China?
By jfelano on 7/15/2011 12:26:18 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah we owe China a lot of money.

A lot of money they will never get.

The US government knows we will all be long gone before any payback to China begins.




RE: Owe China?
By danobrega on 7/15/2011 1:23:06 PM , Rating: 2
I expect you're going to pay China the amount of dollars you owe them, but we you start doing it the dollar value is not going to be what it is now.


czxcxz
By xiaomai on 7/18/2011 7:23:15 AM , Rating: 2
http://www.benzlogo.com

I tide fashion
Good-looking,
not expensive
Free transport




Department of Defense
By chmilz on 7/15/11, Rating: 0
cczzzvc
By vciucxx on 7/17/11, Rating: 0
ganc
By nannang on 7/15/11, Rating: -1
"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen














botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki