Cyber-Terrorist, Who are they?

Cyber-Terrorist, Who are they?

On a wall facing dozens of cubicles at the FBI office in Pittsburgh, five guys from Shanghai stare from “Wanted” posters.

  • Wang Dong
  • Sun Kailiang
  • Wen Xinyu
  • Huang Zhenyu
  • Gu Chunhui

According to a federal indictment:

 indictment unsealed last year, agents of China’s People’s Liberation Army Unit 61398, who hacked into networks at American companies—U.S. Steel, Alcoa, Allegheny Technologies (ATI), Westinghouse—plus the biggest industrial labor union in North America, United Steelworkers, and the U.S. subsidiary of SolarWorld, a German solar-panel maker. Over several years, prosecutors say, the agents stole thousands of e-mails about business strategy, documents about unfair-trade cases some of the U.S. companies had filed against China, and even piping designs for nuclear power plants—all allegedly to benefit Chinese companies.

It is the first case the United States has brought against the perpetrators of alleged state-sponsored cyber-espionage, and it has revealed computer-security holes that companies rarely acknowledge in public. Although the attackers apparently routed their activities through innocent people’s computers and made other efforts to mask themselves, prosecutors traced the intrusions to a 12-story building in Shanghai and outed individual intelligence agents. There is little chance that arrests will be made, since the United States has no extradition agreements with China, but the U.S. government apparently hopes that naming actual agents—and demonstrating that tracing attacks is possible—will embarrass China and put other nations on notice, inhibiting future economic espionage.

That may be unrealistic. Security companies say such activity is continuing, and China calls the accusations “purely ungrounded and absurd.” But there’s another lesson from the indictment: businesses are now unlikely to keep valuable information secure online. Whatever steps they are taking are not keeping pace with the threats. “Clearly the situation has gotten worse, not better,” says Virgil Gligor, who co-directs Carnegie Mellon University’s computer security research center, known as CyLab. “We made access to services and databases and connectivity so convenient that it is also convenient for our adversaries.” Once companies accept that, Gligor says, the most obvious response is a drastic one: unplug. Another answer, which would be more logical would be to implement a program that uses mathematical, statistical and analytical anomalies to detect any abnormal activity and stop these type of attacks from occurring against our nation. 

Joe B.

Certified eDiscovery, Forensic and Cyber Expert

9 年

In Federal criminal cases the Government can’t divulge all evidence when enemies of the state are under indictment. Matters of National Security involve facts we are not all privy to. As for cyber-security hackers, categorized as “simply spies, after, mostly, intellectual property”. Definition terrorist: a person who terrorizes or frightens others". The recent OPM breach has put 32M people at risk of loss of money, freedom, and fear of what has been exposed which is categorically a terroristic act.

回复
Zoltan S.

Computer Science Faculty @ Richland College of DCCCD

9 年

Tracing digital data back to its source and connecting it to an actual human being just by looking at digital traffic is not feasible nor it is 100% accurate. You would need much more data from other sources to tie a human to the keyboard attacking. Thus, it would be hard to prove in court. Another concern I have is the use of terrorist; what makes a corporate or state sponsored espionage a terrorism? Aren't we started overusing this term? Aren't these people just spies after, mostly, intellectual property?

回复

要查看或添加评论,请登录

Joe B.的更多文章

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了