Comments on: Cyber Threat Matrix

By: Adv.DeepaMadhu

Adv.DeepaMadhu — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 06:44:43 +0000

you havent given a clear explanation for cyber arm.I think it will make the article more informative.

By: stephen russell

stephen russell — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 05:22:32 +0000

Should be in every Best Buy store etc showing the effect Hacking has on Web services
& force more Industry wide changes.
Make Info acessable to the Public.
Must know & for all Geek Squads alone.
& all ISPs, Webhosting, Website developers etc.
VitalInfo.

By: Kevin Coleman

Kevin Coleman — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:28:49 +0000

A few thoughts. First ever consider the concept of malicious code being placed on a computer when the hard disk is imaged at the manufacturer? It happend to over 1,800 Seagate external hard drives earlier this year! Now take that out to a several million devices. The discuption and loss of confidence could trigger a massive sell off in the stock markets.

By: Spy Guy

Spy Guy — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:55:30 +0000

I say Kevin’s presentation at SecTor in November and it opened my eyes. The feedback at the conferences indicates this is a real and current issue. Does anyone know if it is illegal to create a cyber weapon. If not the black market for this type of code would be huge and draw the interest of those seeking to make quick money.

By: Curtis

Curtis — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 04:10:20 +0000

A lone hacker is not that great a threat. A small group of hackers aren’t that great a threat, the difference is when you throw in human or onsite intelligence. Government cyberwarfare teams are slowed down by bureaucracy when it comes to synchronizing with other forms of intelligence.
IE Suppose an angry employee at a large corporation who’s just dying to release some crippling backdoor tricks on his employee. A nation would send in a KGB or CIA style “Spook” to make contact and get the intel. Then thirteen bureaucrats would have to sign off to allow the cyber team access to the info, with additional regs written in to maintain the cloak of Plausible deniability. The spy agency would want more rules to protect their spy and his source. The hackers can just walk up to the guy personally and get the info. Or they can go dumpster diving behind the corporations’ headquarters, or any other numbers of intel. The government operated Cyber team wouldn’t be allowed to do all that stuff, because that would be encroaching on other agencies turfs. They’d have their computers, and nothing else.
A government has the advantage of size and resources. The individual (or independent group of individuals) has the advantage of speed and most importantly, agility. They don’t have a big set of rule books to play by, no higher ups looking over their shoulders, no Bureaucracy. They also have a much easier time keeping thier secrets, as only the absolutely critical number of people are informed as to what exactly is going on.

By: Brian

Brian — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 22:13:38 +0000

Aaargh! Make it where I can read it! Little picture equals fading interest.

By: az

az — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 22:03:52 +0000

To me as a software engineer this article is simply ludicrously grotesque and has nothing whatsoever todo with reality.
It’s an embarassing display of stark raving incompetence.

By: D

Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:56:47 +0000

Sounds intelligent but isn’t

By: The Cenobyte

The Cenobyte — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:56:07 +0000

A single rogue hacker is less likely to cause problems than a group. However groups of hackers do not have to be from nation states, they are in fact far more likely to not be nation states. I would suggest that these people, often for higher are more dangerous than the nation states themselves for the same reasons mercs. are almost always more dangerous.

By: C

Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:31:13 +0000

what i’m wondering is why they keep using the word “cyber” to denote software-based “weapons”.