Who Hacked the Halls of Congress?

Came across an interesting story about the halls of Congress being hacked in October 2006. Although no one knows or is saying, some speculate that the attack can be traced to the Chinese, who seem to get accused of hacking into a lot of government systems (worldwide). Of course, the Chinese officially deny these allegations.

Shane Harris of the National Journal reported the attack was initially discovered in one office, but cyber-investigators eventually traced it to eight members' offices, where one or more computers were infected. Besides this, seven committee offices, including the Commission on China, Ways and Means and the International Relations Committee were identified as having compromised computers in them. The International Relations Committee (now the Foreign Affairs Committee) had 25 infected computers and an infected server found in it.

The virus discovered was a trojan designed to allow malware (malicious software) to invade government machines and steal information. The investigation revealed that the trojan was probably downloaded by an employee, who clicked on a link in a spam e-mail. This method of dropping a virus on a computer is usually referred to as Phishing.

Phishing attacks are normally designed to steal personal and financial information, which is later used to commit financial crimes and identity theft. While most phishing attacks (from a historical perspective) have been financially motivated, we are now seeing more person/position-targeted attacks. This type of phishing is referred to as spear phishing or whaling. In April, there were reports of spear phishing attacks against corporate executives all over the country.

The unidentified hackers used a wide-array of attack methods and the malware was downloaded from random Internet addresses. It's suspected they were using other infected machines to launch the attacks, which makes the activity even harder to trace. In this latest instance, it makes sense; the intent was to steal confidential and sensitive information.

The article points out that there is a lot of evidence that the Chinese have "penetrated deeply" into both government and corporate systems.

Just hours before the Olympics, Joel Brenner, the top U.S. counterintelligence official, warned Americans to leave their smart phones and other wireless computer devices at home. He told CBS News that the public security services in China can turn on a cell phone and activate its microphone when the owner thinks it's off. In July, Senator Sam Brownback also warned that China was planning to mount a massive espionage operation on guests staying at major hotels during the Olympics.

Last year there was speculation in the press that Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez's laptop was hacked during a visit to China and the information was used to hack into government computers. Even scarier, rumors abound that Chinese hackers have already attacked power grids and that they are developing a cyber-warfare capability.

The article's conclusion points to a just released Report of the CSIS Commission on Cybersecurity for the 44th Presidency. The study recommends that President Elect Obama establish a Cyber-Security Directorate in the NSC, who would direct a National Office for Cyberspace.

As a mere observer of all of this, I think President Elect Obama needs to take this report seriously. We need to remember (especially while a financial crisis is going on) that besides being a threat to National security, hacking also threatens our financial stability. Although this post points to the Chinese, they certainly aren't the only players in the International hacking game, and the problem it presents isn't going away. Sadly, some believe the problem is getting worse.

There is little doubt that change is needed in the way we address this problem and hopefully this is what will occur.

NATO Summit and EU Conference address the global reaches of illict cyber activity

On the Internet -- crime, espionage and some say, terrorism can cross a border with the click of a mouse. Because of this, it probably shouldn't be surprising that this is a hot topic at the NATO summit, as well as, a seperate conference conducted by the EU.

The AP is reporting:

At a two-day conference starting Tuesday in Strasbourg, France, the Council of Europe will to review implementation of the international Convention on Cybercrime and discuss ways to improve international cooperation.

Cyber defense also will be on the agenda when heads of state from NATO's 26 member nations gather in Bucharest Wednesday for three days. The leaders are expected to debate new guidelines for coordinating cyber defense.

Cyber defense is increasingly becoming a concern. For instance, there is increasing evidence that the Chinese have been hacking into other government's systems and have a cyber war doctrine being developed.

Last year, there was the much written about attack on the government of Estonia, also.

The EU conference will also address more financially motivated criminal activity on the Internet, also.

The AP article quotes a German University Professor, Marco Gercke, who specializes in computer law as saying:

Compared to regular terror attacks, it is much easier for the offenders to hide their identity. There are at least 10 unique challenges that make it very difficult to fight computer-related crime," said Gercke, one of the conference participants. "The success rate of cybercrime is very high."

While it is unknown, whether or not, these meetings of the minds will yield any results -- the fact is that unless there is greater cooperation and collusion between the good guys -- the problems of undesirable activity being spread with the click of a mouse is likely to continue growing at an alarming rate.

A little more teamwork and forward thinking might go a long way towards solving the problem. Of course, taking some of the players out from the opposition (bad guys) would go a long way, also!

To close this brief post, I would like to point to matters a little closer at home. An American computer law expert recently wrote a forward thinking article on the Hannaford data breach, where hackers stole 4.2 million payment (credit/debit) card numbers and the recent settlement between TJX and the FTC.

In his well thought out article, Ben Wright of SANS writes:

The FTC is well-meaning here, but it is misdirected. By singling out TJX and chastising it with the “unfairness” “bad guy” rhetoric, the FTC distracts the necessary public conversation. It implies that if we can just punish these lazy merchants enough (and force them to comply with the PCI and similar controls), then credit cards will be safe. That’s wrong.

The criminal warfare directed at the credit card system is more powerful than the theory behind PCI. The whole credit card system needs to change. As a society we need to focus on beating the criminals, and stop flogging victims like TJX as unfair privacy infringers.

To me, this means that instead of spending all our resources on inadequate security and filing litigation against the "unlucky targets" of organized cyber crime, we need to start addressing the root of the problem. I'll give anyone reading this one guess, who that might be?

U.S. China Commission Report reveals serious issues that need to be dealt with!

Reports of the Chinese hacking into government systems are nothing new. Along with the constant reports of substandard products being put on our shelves, there is little doubt that the Chinese pose a threat to our safety in a LOT of different ways.

The U.S. China Commission has just released a disturbing report, which indicates some alarming evidence that the Chinese might be a threat to our National security.

The first concern is what appears to be a growing capability to target satellites. I got the following directly from the report, which was provided to Congress:

The hearing was timely, coming only three months after a successful direct-ascent anti satellite test by China that destroyed one of its own aging weather satellites in low-earth orbit. This test was only the third of its kind by any nation in history and served as a useful reference point during the hearing to illustrate not only China’s advances in military capabilities, but also the extent to which China’s decision making process is still very much opaque. This incident raises questions about Chinese intentions in space. The Commission will address these questions as it continues to monitor developments.

In the same realm, it appears that China is actively developing capabilities to conduct "irregular warfare." It should be noted that in addition to this report there have been regular reports of hackers from China specifically targeting government systems.

This is what the current report concluded:

Several experts testified that if China were to find itself in an armed conflict with the United States and its allies such as that resulting from a Taiwan dispute, China is likely to employ an array of irregular warfare strategies against its adversaries. According to Michael Vickers, Senior Vice President for Strategic Studies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a Chinese attack on Taiwan could entail special operations and cyber attacks on U.S. regional bases in Japan and South Korea, and might even include cyber attacks on the U.S. homeland that target the U.S. financial, economic, energy, and communications infrastructure.

Also covered in the report are previously documented cyber-intrusions into U.S. Government systems:

As evidenced by the trajectory of its military modernization, Chinese defense planners are seeking to accomplish the goal of undermining the U.S. military’s technological edgethrough a variety of disruptive means. Among these is cyber warfare. USSTRATCOM Commander General Cartwright testified before the Commission that China is actively engaging in cyber reconnaissance by probing the computer networks of U.S. government agencies as well as private companies. The data collected from these computer reconnaissance campaigns can be used for myriad purposes, including identifying weak points in the networks, understanding how leaders in the United States think, discovering the communication patterns of American government agencies and private companies, and attaining valuable information stored throughout the networks. General Cartwright testified that this information is akin to that which in times past had to be gathered by human intelligence over a much longer period of time. He went on to say that in today’s information environment, the exfiltration that once took years can be accomplished in a matter of minutes in one download session.

The report also concludes that the Chinese have been building up their more traditional military capabilities since 1992.

Going into the reasons why China has been able to accomplish this, the report states:

China’s policies of market liberalization have resulted in rapid export-led economic growth prompting increased foreign investment; development of China’s manufacturing capabilities; and integration into the global supply chain. China’s abundant and inexpensive labor supply has made that country an obvious place for multinational companies to expand their production. However, as Dr. Peter Navarro, Professor of Business at the University of California, Irvine, observed in his testimony, five of eight factors identified as major drivers of China’s comparative advantage—i.e., its ability to undercut the prices of global competitors—are considered unfair trading practices. These include its undervalued currency, counterfeiting and piracy, export industry subsidies, and lax health, safety, and environmental regulations. These practices violate China’s WTO commitments, especially regarding workers’ rights, market access, currency manipulation, subsidies, and the protection of intellectual property rights. These violations and unfair practices also contribute to a growing U.S. trade deficit with China, one that U.S. Census Bureau statistics confirm increased 177 percent in the past six years from $83.8 billion in 2000 to $232.5 billion in 2006.

Granting China a "Permanent Normal Trading Relationship" six years ago was sold to the American public as a means of making China a better place (more democratic) place for it's people.

Instead, we have seen a lot of questionable government activity, which includes a variety of criminal enterprises when we consider all the hacking, counterfeiting and piracy that can be directly traced back to that country.

The lack of safe manufacturing practices and counterfeiting also poses a threat to our safety. It should be noted that according to International Anticounterfeiting Coalition, counterfeiting is a $600 billion a year problem, worldwide.

There are no figures on how much of this comes from China, although most experts on this subject speculate a lot of it does. Additionally, there is a lot of evidence that a lot of counterfeit merchandise is present in our supply chain. This evidence would include products of a consumable nature such as drugs, also.

The FDA estimates that 10 percent of the drugs in our supply system are counterfeit.

A lot of this probably tied into another phenomenon traced to the Chinese known as corporate (industrial) espionage. Of course, there is probably less of a need for the Chinese to plant spies in our industrial complexes anymore. With the amount of outsourcing going on, they probably never have to set foot out of China to steal a lot of secrets from us.

According to the Washington Post, American companies are even outsourcing the manufacture of military parts:

The Pentagon is increasingly buying planes, weapons and military vehicles from private contractors that outsource the manufacturing to plants in China and elsewhere in Asia, the report said. But when questioned by the commission, defense officials admitted that they do not have the ability to track where the components of military equipment are made.

To me, given all the recent implications of Chinese intentions, this makes the least sense!

All of these factors have led to a loss of jobs within our country as corporations take advantage of cheap labor, which is often the greatest expense in any business.

This translates into record profits for the Chinese and a select few people in the West.

Given the safety, National security and economic implications, continuing down this road doesn't seem to be in the best interests of the average person.

The full report from the U.S. China Commission can be viewed, here.