Group items tagged

Howard Schdmit, The Whitehouse's Cybersecurity coordinator has revealed the US Government's plans for tackling attacks on it's networks. He has promised transparency. The official announcement (this bookmark) is very vague in it's initiatives. It will be interesting to see whether their can really separate US government networks from other parts of the Internet.  Cyber attacks are definitely increasing and play a major part in conflicts between countries. China amongst others is said to have attacked & attempted to hack and launch DoS attacks on US government networks and Russia shut down the Georgian communications infrastructure during the last week between the two countries et. )

Google blames Chinese-backed groups for attacking blogs of political critics. But who can stop this actions, who has the power to, within the current legal framework, do so?

This article is dealing with the recent disclosure by Google that it had fallen victim to a cyber attack. It renews the growing sentiment that a global response to the issue of cybersecurity is needed with particular emphasis on the cooperation between the government and business sectors.

Interesting comparison was made in this article regarding President Obama's priorities. It stated that "Obama has made cyber security a top priority for his administration, and has listed the threat from cyber weapons along with other weapons of mass destruction - such as nuclear, chemical and biological weapons." Is it fair to make a comparison between the threat of nuclear weapons and threats which exist within the world of computers?

This article is criticizing the attack lunched by Anonymous. It said, the any protest against the Mandatory ISP filtering plan is encouraged, however, the bring down government website is an illegal way to make political statement, and will render the protest null and avoid. Instead, even the anti-censorship community advocate legal way to protest the Mandatory censorship. In my opinion, this attack is interesting, although it is illegal, it doesn't cause big cost, just threw little troubles to government website, it can be considered as a prank, not a crime. Anyway, no one can be convicted, as it is an anonymous attack by hacker, lol.:)

With an increasing number of critical systems being placed within virtual environments, security is now understandably a prime concern. Systems can be attacked, and valuable information and assets can be compromised. maybe looking at a Vulnerability management system?

Students at a high school in Perth have been suspended for setting up a facebook page and verbally attacking one of their teachers.  Parents were "horrified" at their children's actions. 

This article discusses the potential problems managing your reputation and identity online when a person (known or unknown) decides to attack you. As the article reads: "The proliferation of blogs and Web sites can allow angry clients, jealous lovers or ruthless competitors to define a person's identity. Whether true or not, their words can have far-reaching effects" The question to ask is - how do we stop this from happening, and manage it when it does?

google's response to the cyber attacks in China, and claim to close google.cn.

'Freedom of speech' for one country is another country's 'propaganda attack'. Country is also a debatable term. Google is synonymous with the USA in most reports, and indeed the US Secretary of State is responding to China over this Google issue.

This article is about an intresting hacker attack to the government portal website. The orgnazion Anounymous laughed this attack to express their protest of the forthcoming Mandatory ISP filtering plan. Several government site are down at February 10th 2010 morning. The alleged principle of Anounymous is to fight against the threaten of internet freedom.

Highly detailed white paper on the underworld of cyber-espionage. Multinational corporation and state sponsored - all explore this backbone of the internet to get an advantage. Note: This gets quite technical at times. Very eye opening considering the recent events with the Australian/China cyber attacks on government and corporate targets.

Attacking a person's reputation via the Internet has become a very quick and easy process through sites like Facebook and Twitter. However, the author argues (and hopes) that maybe in time, since bashing of a person's online reputation is evolving into common behavior, it wont really matter anymore - that incriminating photos on Facebook wont have that much of an impact in a few years.

According to Peter Tippett, Vice President, Verizon, we will see far fewer cyber attacks by 2020, with the majority of them becoming targetted attacks instead. This will be aided by increased use of reputation systems and automation that will help users avoid sites and emails with malicious content.

Google has released the extent to which intruders broke into their system in January. It targeted their password system which controls access to users worldwide. This brings up the debate about the security and privacy of systems like Google that centralize personal information. However, the real issue behind this attack was that it was traced to two computers in China which then started the whole 'Google to change its policy toward China'.

India's government is planning to develop its own OS due to security reasons. They do not want to rely on foreign operating systems as they believe this makes them more susceptible to cyber attacks. 

Increasing "probes" on US military networks has led to the appointment of a senior general to Cyber Command operations and approximately 30,000 troops have been re-assigned from IT support to "the frontlines of cyberwarfare". The US is increasingly anxious about the vulnerability of its networks to attack. Chinese, Russian and Korean hackers have been targeted as alleged attackers so far. There is concern that cyberwarfare techniques being used by the US are outpacing the ability to develop policy surrounding their use.

Product alert - but this one is free! Symantec have released 'Norton Everywhere' which aims to provide a holistic security solution to all internet devices. What this means for DNS is rather than defaulting to the DNS server of your internet provider you can use choose to use the Norton DNS. This will filter insecure sites and guard against malicious DNS attacks. Symantec isn't the first to provide such a service. If Norton doesn't appeal there are other free DNS options such as Google Public DNS an OpenDNS. Changing your default DNS setting to one of these providers seems like a worthwhile thing to do.

Amendments made to the digital economy bill last week, handing courts the power to force internet service providers (ISPs) to block certain websites, threaten freedom of speech and will lead to British websites being blocked without due judicial process, the chief executives of leading technology companies said in an open letter to the Financial Times. The heads of the four largest UK internet service providers as well as Google, Facebook, eBay and Yahoo have all co-signed the letter, along with consumer groups and academics, objecting to amendment. Theoretically the amendment could lead to sites such as YouTube being blocked in the UK.

Ilse Aigner, Germany's minister of food, agriculture and consumer protection, who usually concentrates on issues over rotten meat, genetically engineered corn and imitation cheese, recently took on a different kind of issue: the Internet and data privacy. Suddenly Aigner finds herself facing online giants Amazon, Facebook and, above all, Google. Soon Google plans to send cars equipped with cameras out onto Germany's roads once again for the company's Street View project. Aigner is now insisting that Google should ask permission before violating the privacy of German citizens. The minister's attack and the following discussions reveal just how divided the German government is when it comes to the online world. The debate revolves around questions of national security and individual self-determination on the Internet. But it also concerns the power of the large giants such as Apple, Microsoft, Amazon and MySpace, as well as the question of what these companies are doing with the records of our everyday data, and how they will be able to obtain information from us, influence us or perhaps even control us in the future. It seem like, once again, a German politician is exploiting the popular issue of internet privacy and censorship in a superficial way in the hope of scoring political points.

Google speaks out on censorship and the violation of user privacy in China. Yahoo in the US agrees but its Chinese partner Alibaba Group does not. Are they afraid of a backlash from Beijing and fear for their ungoing business success? Makes me wonder how bad the quagmire in China really is...