Massive Cyber Attack Coming Soon?

[xDarc]

Hey guys, I was just looking over the outages this week and there's quite a few.

August 19th - Amazon goes down for 15-25 minutes:
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-08-19/business/chi-amazon-outage-20130819_1_outage-largest-online-retailer-amazon-com

August 16th - Google goes down for 2 minutes; 40% of world internet traffic stops:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/08/17/google_outage/

August 16th - New York Times outage
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/14/new-york-times-website-outage

August 14th Outlook.com outage was intermittent over 3 days
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-08-14/business/41410233_1_mobile-users-outlook-com-microsoft-corp

That was just in the past week.

I work for a bank and back in April we were affected by a cyber attack with PNC as the intended target. There were tons of financial institution attacks in the first part of this year: http://www.cnbc.com/id/100613270 The attackers didn't just target PNC; they attacked Fiserv- the company that actually makes/hosts/sells technology products to thousands of banks. PNC doesn't just come out and say that, all banks brand their junky 3rd party software as their own, so whoever did it knows a fair amount about the financial system.

Then anonymous is throwing it's hat in the ring this coming November 5th:
http://rt.com/news/anonymous-action-guy-fawkes-223/

And lastly; let's be clear that the US has come out talking about their offensive cyber warfare capabilities. http://hothardware.com/News/US-Cyber-Command-Admits-Offensive-Cyberwarfare-Capabilities-Fundamental-Shift-In-US-Doctrine/ They just set up a cyber warfare command in 2010.

Who's to say they won't start a cyber attack and then blame it on the Iranians or the Syrians to incite conflict? Or what about justification to push more NSA digital surveillance down our throats? What about more ridiculous internet regulations like SOPA and CISPA?

So, what do you think? Add an attack or outage I forgot to mention; there's been TONS of them this year, more than I can ever remember.

 

[DefunctTheory]

That's 99.999% of the hacks currently experienced. It can be quite troublesome for retailers and such, but its not the catastrophe usually reported.

As for the US government committing hacking fraud... why? Its about the weakest method of inciting outrage, and most governments are taking digital whacks at each other anyway.

The Chinese introduced something called Titan a decade or so ago. Now that was a doosy...

 

[xDarc]

As for the US government committing hacking fraud... why?

Because they aren't gonna spend almost 400 million a year on something and not use it; (USCYBERCOM)- and because every time a government official's mouth is open they are lying. In the past year we have seen lies at every level:

Barrack Obama: I was just about to have a discussion about NSA spying before Snowden leaked all those documents
James Clapper: I made an "error" when I lied to congress about the NSA spying program- at first it was just metadata, now it's all digital communications, now it's we only look at it when a secret court says it's ok, scouts honor.

Janet Napolitano: There was no Saudi at the Boston bombing, we aren't buying billions of rounds of ammunition or turning Homeland Security into a domestic army.

It's all lies all the time and you can't trust these people. Since USCYBERCOM has come about we have only seen high profile hacks and high powered disturbances increase. It's not to say that anonymous or hacktivists won't try to cause their share of the mayhem; but blaming the New York Times on the "Syrian Electronic Army," come on.

I think there's something big in the works, and it's finally gonna help them clamp down on the web after it's all over.

 

[KazeAizen]

As for the US government committing hacking fraud... why?

Because they aren't gonna spend almost 400 million a year on something and not use it; (USCYBERCOM)- and because every time a government official's mouth is open they are lying. In the past year we have seen lies at every level:

Barrack Obama: I was just about to have a discussion about NSA spying before Snowden leaked all those documents
James Clapper: I made an "error" when I lied to congress about the NSA spying program- at first it was just metadata, now it's all digital communications, now it's we only look at it when a secret court says it's ok, scouts honor.

Janet Napolitano: There was no Saudi at the Boston bombing, we aren't buying billions of rounds of ammunition or turning Homeland Security into a domestic army.

It's all lies all the time and you can't trust these people. Since USCYBERCOM has come about we have only seen high profile hacks and high powered disturbances increase. It's not to say that anonymous or hacktivists won't try to cause their share of the mayhem; but blaming the New York Times on the "Syrian Electronic Army," come on.

I think there's something big in the works, and it's finally gonna help them clamp down on the web after it's all over.

Personally I think you are probably just a little bit too paranoid my friend. Not every little thing that comes from a government officials mouth is a lie. I wish people would wake up to that.

 

[xDarc]

A quick update to this:

A "technical glitch" prevented trading of many popular stocks yesterday such as Apple, Facebook, etc.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/cybertruth/2013/08/22/nasdaq-outage-aligns-with--denial-of-service-attacks/2687323/

I think ultimately we have to suspect that something big is coming soon, and in my mind an attack may look like this:

Early in the day bank accounts and stock market indexes show 0 to start the panic.

Later in the day communications are majorly disrupted or cut off entirely and people are primed.

Media sources are also attacked; television signals are hijacked or knocked out.

Finish up the day by taking down the power grid.

Basically it would like die hard 4. With the exception of the power grid, every single one of the things mentioned above has been attacked this year... Wonder if we'll see a black out soon now that I mention it...

 

[Scentedwiind]

I don't exactly see why anyone would actually intend to take down the global trading market or power grid considering that such things provide the hacker with what he/she needs during the day. If we crash, let's say and the entire global market is shit, those hackers won't have power for their computers nor would they have the gas to drive to a store to buy hot pockets which may no longer be sold. If everything goes to shit really fast, it won't be the nerd who survives but the brute and the man with the gun or sword. So, again, why would any hacker in his/her right mind want to actively destroy the world's markets and such.

 

[shootthebandit]

A quick update to this:

A "technical glitch" prevented trading of many popular stocks yesterday such as Apple, Facebook, etc.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/cybertruth/2013/08/22/nasdaq-outage-aligns-with--denial-of-service-attacks/2687323/

I think ultimately we have to suspect that something big is coming soon, and in my mind an attack may look like this:

Early in the day bank accounts and stock market indexes show 0 to start the panic.

Later in the day communications are majorly disrupted or cut off entirely and people are primed.

Media sources are also attacked; television signals are hijacked or knocked out.

Finish up the day by taking down the power grid.

Basically it would like die hard 4. With the exception of the power grid, every single one of the things mentioned above has been attacked this year... Wonder if we'll see a black out soon now that I mention it...

I wouldnt worry as long they dont kill bruce willis i think we'll be perfectly fine. After all hes a timex watch in a digital age he might not be a hacker but he can still kick your ass the old fashioned way

 

[Agayek]

A quick update to this:

A "technical glitch" prevented trading of many popular stocks yesterday such as Apple, Facebook, etc.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/cybertruth/2013/08/22/nasdaq-outage-aligns-with--denial-of-service-attacks/2687323/

I think ultimately we have to suspect that something big is coming soon, and in my mind an attack may look like this:

Early in the day bank accounts and stock market indexes show 0 to start the panic.

Later in the day communications are majorly disrupted or cut off entirely and people are primed.

Media sources are also attacked; television signals are hijacked or knocked out.

Finish up the day by taking down the power grid.

Basically it would like die hard 4. With the exception of the power grid, every single one of the things mentioned above has been attacked this year... Wonder if we'll see a black out soon now that I mention it...

Let's take a step back here and consider another question, one that will actually give a definitive answer to your suppositions.

What does whoever you think is going to do this stand to gain by doing so?

If the answer is not an overwhelming benefit of some sort, then something on the scale you are proposing simply isn't going to happen. People do not expend time or resources on that kind of scale without a clear, achievable goal that will be worth the cost, and I can't really see any gain for the government, or anyone else really, for a large scale cyber attack like you propose.

If they crash the economy, people will be outraged and on the verge of riot, regardless of government promises or scapegoats, and they will lose power. If they cut off communications, people will be discontented and the government will lose influence, especially if government communications are the only ones still working. If they incite a panic, they'll then have to deal with the homeland erupting in riots and outrage from large portions of the population aimed specifically at them for failing to do the job they've spent all the time and money supposedly preparing for, etc.

I just can't see what they would gain from launching a cyber attack on their own citizens.

 

[Spartan448]

You made sense until you got to the part about the US cyberattacking itself and then blaming it on Iran or Syria. Never mind that we Americans are nowhere NEAR smart enough to pull that off, it also sounds a)really improbable, and b) way too much like another scheme concocted by the Patriots.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I hope so. It would make the world a weirder place for a bit.

 

[shootthebandit]

I hope so. It would make the world a weirder place for a bit.

Shrodingers bobcat. Like shrondingers cat but extreme. The bobcat is both alive and dead but you better hope that mofo is dead because hes fucking angry

 

[MammothBlade]

You made sense until you got to the part about the US cyberattacking itself and then blaming it on Iran or Syria. Never mind that we Americans are nowhere NEAR smart enough to pull that off, it also sounds a)really improbable, and b) way too much like another scheme concocted by the Patriots.

The illusion of incompetence has served the authorities well, it creates this complacency that the establishment's actions are ultimately benign. That it would never assassinate or frame its own citizens willingly. If some grave injustice is exposed, "it's a mistake".

 

[NiPah]

So if no massive cyber attack occurs within a week will you agree that you're being overly paranoid?
If you agree to this I'll agree that I need to be more paranoid if said attack does occur.

 

[Agayek]

The illusion of incompetence has served the authorities well, it creates this complacency that the establishment's actions are ultimately benign. That it would never assassinate or frame its own citizens willingly. If some grave injustice is exposed, "it's a mistake".

While the spirit of what you're saying is more-or-less true, one thing I have to point out is that most government incompetence actually is true. Large bureaucracies make even simple tasks ludicrously difficult and so they do most certainly end up being relatively incompetent. This is as true for government as it is for everything else. It's the same reason why large companies tend to provide products of relatively lesser quality than small companies with similarly skilled employees, despite having ridiculously larger budgets. Things get bogged down in the bureaucracy and so they end up not working out terribly well.

There's always people who can game systems like that however, and those people, while rare, can take advantage like you're implying. It's not in any way common, and if they're good enough to do that, they're good enough to keep their name out of the news, so odds are very good we've never heard of any of them, but they do spring up from time to time.

 

[Lilani]

A "technical glitch" prevented trading of many popular stocks yesterday such as Apple, Facebook, etc.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/cybertruth/2013/08/22/nasdaq-outage-aligns-with--denial-of-service-attacks/2687323/

The NASDAQ going down would have prevented the trading of all stocks, not just the popular ones. I don't see why you felt the need to point those out. That's like saying, "The bank robbers made off with millions in cash, including 10s and 20s."

As for the rest, they seem very splintered. An Iranian group has claimed responsibility for the NASDAQ one. The same group claimed responsibility for your bank one, but nobody's claimed responsibility for the the Google, Amazon, and Outlook ones. It could be the same group trying their hand at taking down different services, but I find it rather odd they'd admit to taking down the NASDAQ but not Google. Being "the group that took down Google" would strike a lot more fear into people's hearts than "the group that took down NASDAQ," even though technically taking down the NASDAQ can do more immediate harm. Seems rather inconsistent to be the same group.

And then you mention Anonymous in your OP, which as far as this stuff seems completely irrelevant. Anonymous, in general, is all about access of information. Taking down Google would be completely against everything they claim to stand for. It's just not what Anonymous does. And plus, they always say they're up to something. If there's any threat here, I would say it's the Iranian group, not Anonymous.

You've got a lot of accusations going on in this thread, and most of them you don't seem to have completely thought through. I think you need to step back and think about this more before you throw even more accusations around.

 

[A Shadows Age]

As for the US government committing hacking fraud... why?

Because they aren't gonna spend almost 400 million a year on something and not use it; (USCYBERCOM)- and because every time a government official's mouth is open they are lying. In the past year we have seen lies at every level:

Barrack Obama: I was just about to have a discussion about NSA spying before Snowden leaked all those documents
James Clapper: I made an "error" when I lied to congress about the NSA spying program- at first it was just metadata, now it's all digital communications, now it's we only look at it when a secret court says it's ok, scouts honor.

Janet Napolitano: There was no Saudi at the Boston bombing, we aren't buying billions of rounds of ammunition or turning Homeland Security into a domestic army.

It's all lies all the time and you can't trust these people. Since USCYBERCOM has come about we have only seen high profile hacks and high powered disturbances increase. It's not to say that anonymous or hacktivists won't try to cause their share of the mayhem; but blaming the New York Times on the "Syrian Electronic Army," come on.

I think there's something big in the works, and it's finally gonna help them clamp down on the web after it's all over.

Personally I think you are probably just a little bit too paranoid my friend. Not every little thing that comes from a government officials mouth is a lie. I wish people would wake up to that.

You should probably look up the definition of paranoia, because he's not being paranoid just pessimistic and a little too simplistic, I mean I would like to think someone in charge actually gives a fuck about something other than their own agenda... But I'm a little old for fairy tales like that.

 

[Angelous Wang]

Have you ever notice that most big hacking happen during June-Sep? It's summer thing, and you know what us sit at the computer 90% of our lives do during summer? ... be bored. All the jobless/schoolless hackers are sitting at home bored, so they just go and create some trouble to keep themselves amused.

Plus the legitimate employed sit at the computer 90% of our lives are in the same boat, they have nothing to do with their free time so they spend it unnecessary "upgrading and tweaking" their hardware and software which often leads to more problems ... and then you end up with Outlook.com (or such) being screwy for few days whilst they re-fix everything.

And you know the legitimate employed people do that all the time anyway, add unnecessary fixes/changes to things that cause more problems ... just so they then have problems to fix. It helps keep them securely employed. Done that myself.

 

[xDarc]

The NASDAQ going down would have prevented the trading of all stocks, not just the popular ones. I don't see why you felt the need to point those out.

Actually, from what I've read those stocks were targeted specifically; which is why it mentioned it- it's kind of a big clue that the technical glitch line was bs from the get go. So because some major stocks couldn't trade, NASDAQ halted trading entirely. If someone has claimed responsibility, this is news to me.

 

[KeyMaster45]

I'm surprised nobody has put this in the thread yet. Shame on all of you, -50 internets from Hufflepuff.

Sounds to me like these are just bugs in software or hardware that was bound to happen eventually. Eventually something will divide by zero, or carry the wrong 2, or Steve the intern will spill his coffee on the motherboard and several crucial systems to a megalithic infrastructure are suddenly compromised.

Most often a banana is just a banana and not a camouflaged space plane powered by the devil.