Re: WMF Threat OK , but no huge attack ... WHY ?
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.security.incidents |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 17:34:18 GMT, [email protected] said: > Hi, > > The WMF threat was and continues to be important. > But Im curious to know why we didnt observe any important attack on Internet? Maybe there was one, and we didn't notice. > WMF was a perfect Zero-Day attack and a scenario like the blackout of Internet was possible but nothing or no important attack! Only if that was a goal... > All hackers become white-hat? No. Many of the hackers depend on the net being *UP* to make their money. If the net is down, it's harder to go hacking for credit card numbers, or threaten to DDoS a specific site, or all the other ways the hackers pay their rent. Who benefits if the *entire* net is down? (Think about that for a while....) > Or they attacked and we didnt see anything? Well, if *I* was a black hat, I'd have used the WMF hole to get a backdoor into a fairly limited number of machines that I intended to use for benefit. Just think - a few compromised PC's on the internal net of each of the hundred biggest banks... And I'd certainly want to be as invisible as possible while doing it.
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 226 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iD8DBQFDw06ZcC3lWbTT17ARApjAAKDss21mxzydMNZ+Vts35OuzRhBpMQCfVSNI 2xbR9DtZC27bjZtahF2lfd4= =VzpV -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----