It does not spill blood nor does it have a specified demand and it appears to be leaderless.
It seems to be the outcome of the frustration felt by the behavior of Politicians and as such its targets are wide-ranging.
What is at stake is National secrets and National Security.
Imagine what could happen if they hack power grids, Traffic Controls,Finance markets,Military Soft ware.
This has to be the most dangerous group around and as such needs urgent and concerted action by the Governments the world over.
It also means that the politicians must mend their ways to prevent a system collapse.
If they don’t, this group shall gain public sympathy as well.
A collection of 10,365 e-mails from the Iranian government were leaked by digital activist group Anonymous Operations on June 2. According to members of Anonymous, the files were taken after the hacker accessed the Iranian Passport and Visa Office email center…
“I don’t know why the Islamic regime keeps providing money to their cyber army while they can’t secure their most important mail server,” Anonymous stated…
The growing phenomena of “hactivism,” whereby groups and individuals use hacking and cyberattacks as a form of dissent, is steadily growing. Anonymous Operations is among the main groups falling under the category of hactivists, and has garnered international attention through their operations, with targets ranging from Iran to Sony.
Following the White House release of an international cyberspace strategy, issues of cybersecurity and hacking are gaining heavy attention. The report even states in part that cyberattacks can be regarded as acts of war.
It states that countries “have an inherent right to self-defense that may be triggered by certain aggressive acts in cyberspace … When warranted, the United States will respond to hostile acts in cyberspace as we would to any other threat to our country.”..
A new NATO report on cybersecurity, “Information and National Security,” refers to Anonymous directly, stating “The longer these attacks persist the more likely countermeasures will be developed, implemented, the groups will be infiltrated and perpetrators persecuted.”
The report states NATO’s concern that “Observers note that Anonymous is becoming more and more sophisticated and could potentially hack into sensitive government, military, and corporate files.”..
“As traditional means of protest … have slowly turned into nothing but an empty, ritualized gesture of discontent over the course of the last century, people have been anxiously searching for new ways to pressure politicians and give voice to public demands … Anonymous has, for now, found this new way of voicing civil protest in the form of the DDoS,” states the letter.
They add, “You can easily arrest individuals, but you cannot arrest an ideology. We are united by a common objective and we can and WILL cross any borders to achieve that.”.
NATO leaders have been warned that WikiLeaks-loving ‘hacktivist’ collective Anonymous could pose a threat to member states’ security, following recent attacks on the US Chamber of Commerce and defence contractor HBGary – and promise to ‘persecute’ its members.
In a toughly-worded draft report to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, General Rapporteur Lord Jopling claims that the loose-knit, leaderless group is „becoming more and more sophisticated“, and „could potentially hack into sensitive government, military, and corporate files“.
The group demonstrated its capabilities in February, says the report, when it hacked into US-based defence contractor HBGary. Documents stolen in the attack lifted the lid on the US military’s plans to use social network surveillance software, code-named ‘Metal Gear’ by the online hive-mind, which could control an army of fake profiles, collecting data from disparate sites and piecing together an individual’s identity by analysing linguistic traits and other details.
Describing the rise of the group from its beginnings on internet picture message board 4chan, via campaigns against the Church of Scientology and, more recently, in support of whistle-blowing website Wikileaks, the report continues: „Today, the ad hoc international group of hackers and activists is said to have thousands of operatives and has no set rules or membership.“
The report goes on to lay out a stark warning to the group’s nameless participants:
„It remains to be seen how much time Anonymous has for pursuing such paths. The longer these attacks persist the more likely countermeasures will be developed, implemented, the groups will be infiltrated and perpetrators persecuted.“.
Indian politicians might be negotiating to get the Technology and planning to award it to foreign firms the illegal way like 2G and S Band.
A new cyberweapon could take down the entire internet – and there’s not much that current defences can do to stop it. So say Max Schuchard at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis and his colleagues, the masterminds who have created the digital ordnance. But thankfully they have no intention of destroying the net just yet. Instead, they are suggesting improvements to its defences.
Schuchard’s new attack pits the structure of the internet against itself. Hundreds of connection points in the net fall offline every minute, but we don’t notice because the net routes around them. It can do this because the smaller networks that make up the internet, known as autonomous systems, communicate with each other through routers. When a communication path changes, nearby routers inform their neighbours through a system known as the border gateway protocol (BGP). These routers inform other neighbours in turn, eventually spreading knowledge of the new path throughout the internet.
A previously discovered method of attack, dubbed ZMW – after its three creators Zhang, Mao and Wang, researchers in the US who came up with their version four years ago – disrupts the connection between two routers by interfering with BGP to make it appear that the link is offline. Schuchard and colleagues worked out how to spread this disruption to the entire internet and simulated its effects.
Surgical strike
The attack requires a large botnet – a network of computers infected with software that allows them to be externally controlled: Schuchard reckons 250,000 such machines would be enough to take down the internet. Botnets are often used to perform distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, which bring web servers down by overloading them with traffic, but this new line of attack is different.
“Normal DDoS is a hammer; this is more of a scalpel,” says Schuchard. “If you cut in the wrong places then the attack won’t work.”
An attacker deploying the Schuchard cyberweapon would send traffic between computers in their botnet to build a map of the paths between them. Then they would identify a link common to many different paths and launch a ZMW attack to bring it down. Neighbouring routers would respond by sending out BGP updates to reroute traffic elsewhere. A short time later, the two sundered routers would reconnect and send out their own BGP updates, upon which attack traffic would start flowing in again, causing them to disconnect once more. This cycle would repeat, with the single breaking and reforming link sending out waves of BGP updates to every router on the internet. Eventually each router in the world would be receiving more updates than it could handle – after 20 minutes of attacking, a queue requiring 100 minutes of processing would have built up.
Clearly, that’s a problem. “Routers under extreme computational load tend to do funny things,” says Schuchard. With every router in the world preoccupied, natural routing outages wouldn’t be fixed, and eventually the internet would be so full of holes that communication would become impossible. Shuchard thinks it would take days to recover.
“Once this attack got launched, it wouldn’t be solved by technical means, but by network operators actually talking to each other,” he says. Each autonomous system would have to be taken down and rebooted to clear the BGP backlog.
Meltdown not expected
So is internet meltdown now inevitable? Perhaps not. The attack is unlikely to be launched by malicious hackers, because mapping the network to find a target link is a highly technical task, and anyone with a large enough botnet is more likely to be renting it out for a profit.
An alternative scenario would be the nuclear option in a full-blown cyberwar – the last resort in retaliation to other forms of cyberattack. A nation state could pull up the digital drawbridge by adjusting its BGP to disconnect from the internet, just as Egypt did two weeks ago. An agent in another country could then launch the attack, bringing down the internet while preserving the attacking nation’s internal network.
Sitting duck
Whoever launched the attack, there’s little we could do about it. Schuchard’s simulation shows that existing fail-safes built into BGP do little to protect against his attack – they weren’t designed to. One solution is to send BGP updates via a separate network from other data, but this is impractical as it would essentially involve building a shadow internet.
Another is to alter the BGP system to assume that links never go down, but this change would have to be made by at least 10 per cent of all autonomous systems on the internet, according to the researchers’ model, and would require network operators to monitor the health of connections in other ways. Schuchard says that convincing enough independent operators to make the change could be difficult.
“Nobody knows if it’s possible to bring down the global internet routing system,” says Mark Handley, an expert in networked systems at University College London. He suggests that the attack could cause “significant disruption” to the internet, with an effect greater than the Slammer worm of 2003, but it is unlikely to bring the whole thing down.
“The simulations in the paper make a lot of simplifying assumptions, which is necessary to simulate on this scale,” he explains. “I doubt the internet would behave as described.”
During a December 16 raid, agents seized a server at Tailor Made Services, a Dallas-based co-location, or server-hosting, facility, and copied two of its hard drives, according to The Smoking Gun Web site, which said it has obtained the FBI affidavit in support of a search warrant for the seizure.
It’s not clear what was found on the drives, The Smoking Gun reported, saying that search warrant records showed agents were authorized to seize material related to the attacks or to other illegal activities involving the groups Anonymous or 4chan.
Anonymous has claimed responsibility for deluging the Web sites of PayPal and others with data in order to bring the sites down. The attacks, the group says, were a response to actions taken by the site holders against WikiLeaks, after WikiLeaks publicly released a slew of confidential U.S. diplomatic cables. PayPal, MasterCard, and Visa all decided to prevent WikiLeaks from collecting donations via their financial networks. 4Chan has said it was behind an attack to shut down the sites for Swiss bank PostFinance and lawyers in Sweden prosecuting sex allegations against WikiLeaks front man Julian Assange. http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20026908-38.html#ixzz19qN3SBhP
Related:
VANCOUVER — A global network accused of Internet attacks against perceived WikiLeaks opponents has a link to British Columbia.
One of the eight Internet protocol addresses — the unique identifiers assigned to computers — hosting a website used to dispense instructions on how to electronically attack the perceived opponents has been traced back to FranTech Solutions, based in the Victoria area, according to five pages of an FBI affidavit obtained by the Smoking Gun website.
Following WikiLeaks’ highly publicized release of diplomatic cables in November, U.S. companies including PayPal, Visa and MasterCard decided to suspend the whistle-blowing website’s accounts, citing the ongoing investigation against the organization.
In response, groups of WikiLeaks avengers — collectively going under the name “Anonymous” — organized distributed denial of service attacks against the companies.
DDoS attacks typically involve bombarding a server with external requests, therefore overwhelming it and making it unable to respond to legitimate requests.
You must be logged in to post a comment.