backtop


Print 35 comment(s) - last by redbone75.. on Jul 13 at 8:25 AM

South Korean, U.S. networks still being targeted days after massive attacks

Days after systematic cyber attacks against government and financial institutions crippled computer networks in South Korea and the United States, additional cyber attacks have hit both nations.

Unlike the first wave of attacks earlier in the week, the U.S. State Department said its networks are still being targeted, but with lower volumes of attacks.  South Korean officials said some of its government networks are still being targeted, but also have noticed a dramatic decline in the attacks following July 4.

The botnet had at least 100,000 hijacked computers in South Korea, Japan, China, the U.S. and other countries, which makes accurately tracing the source of the attacks extremely difficult.

"The anticipated attack did take place, but considerable countermeasures were taken and it did act as a defense to some degree," an Ahnlab security firm official told Reuters.  Ahnlab also pointed out that "tens of thousands" of affected computers could have problems booting up, although other experts have not been able to verify that number.

Several U.S. federal agencies will now monitor popular online hacker hideouts, while security experts attempt to locate any digital fingerprints left behind in computer code.  The group responsible appears to be rather unorganized and possibly inexperienced, causing experts to note how a larger, more organized group may be able to cause a higher level of cyber damage to targets.

Security experts are now trying to figure out who is behind the cyber attacks, though early reports indicate North Korea may be behind the attacks.  China and North Korea were both immediately suspected of the attacks, but Chinese officials denied the accusations, saying there was no reason for them to launch so many attacks against South Korea.

The country, unlike China and other regions in Eastern Europe, reportedly have not launched organized cyber attacks, but this could mark its entrance into cyber warfare.

Moving forward, security experts are concerned the cyber attacks could spread from major computer networks to individual PCs, with hackers possibly hijacking them, then turning them into zombies.  If this truly is a cyber war, it appears there is very little the U.S. and South Korea can do against the perpetrators -- assuming they're accurately identified in the first place -- leading to other attacks from the same group.



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: !#!$#s
By wrekd on 7/10/2009 8:55:47 AM , Rating: -1
Well, "we" the internet community, do not collectively believe that preemptive measures are needed. Lay off the Fox News.


RE: !#!$#s
By Regs on 7/10/2009 9:04:43 AM , Rating: 1
I didn't mean just bombs you dumb idiot. We could of done a lot more before 9/11 with just our thumbs up are arse though. This includes actually investigating and making arrests. Now what if a country did it? What's your solution? Wait until a few buildings burn down to the ground or your precious retirement fund disappears?


RE: !#!$#s
By wrekd on 7/10/2009 11:45:17 AM , Rating: 2
I'm not really sure what you mean. You tried to paint a picture that we are weaker for not preemptively stopping an imaginary fire sale. You talked about preemptive measures and asked them to come out and fight. But they are coming out to fight; it's just a different kind of soldier this time.

I was just trying to get at what you meant by preemptive measures. To me, and in today’s world, preemptive measures means someone’s privacy, property, and security could be marginalized for the greater good of some group. I don’t like preemptive postures and I’m sure I’m not alone.

If someone punches you in the face, then punch them back. But I don’t think we should provoke and attack, or simply just attack first, because we think one could be coming.


RE: !#!$#s
By MrBlastman on 7/10/2009 1:45:19 PM , Rating: 2
Who is this "we?" I'm not part of it.

Oh, I suppose by your not believing in pre-emptive measures that means you are all for removing our missile defense systems and are against installing more of them?

Hey, the world is a nice and friendly place, nobody would ever try to nuke or bomb us here in America. :-| Isn't this the same kind of thinking that was big and prominent during the Clinton era that lead to 9/11?

What a sack of poo. If anything, we should be hacking the Chinese/N. Koreans right back - hack them into the ground.

However, since you are speaking of the "internet community," I propose a simple solution: Take our best gamer and challenge their best gamer to a duel in Quake or Doom to decide the war. Winner takes all. Nobody fires a single shot or kills a single baby.

:(


RE: !#!$#s
By wrekd on 7/10/09, Rating: 0
RE: !#!$#s
By rcc on 7/10/2009 3:20:01 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Well, "we" the internet community, do not collectively believe that preemptive measures are needed. Lay off the Fox News.


Perhaps your "we" the internet community was a bit optimistic? Because based on experience "we" never all agree on anything.


RE: !#!$#s
By wrekd on 7/10/2009 11:01:47 PM , Rating: 2
I give up, yall win!

Funny because I agree.


RE: !#!$#s
By FITCamaro on 7/10/2009 9:14:40 AM , Rating: 2
Well I'm glad you've been appointed to speak for the world as to what we all think.


RE: !#!$#s
By wrekd on 7/10/2009 11:21:21 AM , Rating: 1
That was the whole point of my statement and why I quoted "we".


"The whole principle [of censorship] is wrong. It's like demanding that grown men live on skim milk because the baby can't have steak." -- Robert Heinlein














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki