Archive for the ‘Chairman Meow!’ Category
DPRK INTERNET AND INTRANET:
As the DPRK under Kim Jung Un has been poking the global bear lately with threatening faxes I thought it was time to re-approach the CNE/CNO/CNA capabilities that they have and gut check against the hype in the news cycle. As there has been talk of cyber attacks allegedly carried out by the DPRK against at least the South, one has to wonder just what kind of connection the North actually has to the global internet. As it turns out the DPRK has a class B (220.127.116.11 – 18.104.22.168) address space that is ostensibly outwardly facing to the global internet. Inside the country though the fiber intranet is closed off to the external internet for the most part save for those eleets deemed important enough to have it. The gateways for this internet connection are sourced out to the Chinese mainland (China Unicom/ Star JV/ Loxley Pac) and are most likely located in southern China. This however has not stopped certain people actually downloading from Bittorrent this last year so we know that a certain amount of people actually do have access that goes to the internet directly from Pyonyang which was a bit of a surprise for me at first but then you look at the small area from which they are coming from and you see it is a very small subset of people accessing the net to pirate movies. The masses though who have access to a computer are relegated to the Kwangmyong network that they can only access through the “Red Star OS” that the DPRK has special made for them to use. This intranet is from all reports, more like a BBS than the internet and consists of very little content and certainly not anything revolutionary (both technically and literally) I have downloaded a copy of Red Star and will be putting it in a sandbox to play with and report on at a later date.
- The official North Korean governmental portal Naenara at: http://www.naenara.com.kp
- Committee for Cultural Relations with Foreign Countries at: http://www.friend.com.kp
- Korea Education Fund at: http://www.koredufund.org.kp
- Korean Central News Agency at: http://www.kcna.kp
- Korea Elderly Care Fund at: http://www.korelcfund.org.kp
- Rodong Sinmun newspaper at: http://www.rodong.rep.kp
- Voice of Korea at: http://www.vok.rep.kp
- : http://www.ksf.com.kp
- Air Koryo, a North Korean flying service, at: http://www.airkoryo.com.kp
- Pyongyang Film Festival at: http://www.korfilm.com.kp
- Pyongyang Broadcasting Station at: http://www.gnu.rep.kp
DPRK Internet Accessible sites:
DPRK CNO, CNA & CNE:
There seems to be some cognitive dissonance concerning the capabilities of the DPRK where network warfare is concerned. As seen below in the two snippets of articles either they have nothing much in place because they are focusing more on nuclear technologies or they are creating a master group of hackers to attack the US and South Korea. I for one think that the truth lies somewhere in the middle in that I know that fiber has been laid and that the eleet and the military both have access to the internet for their own purposes. That the connection is routed through a satellite ostensibly (mostly) shows just how disconnected the regime wants to be to insure their power consolidation. Though there is a single “internet cafe” in Pyongyang, it must be noted that it only serves network traffic to the intranet that they have created. I have to wonder though if perhaps somewhere within that infrastructure lies unknown dark spots where the government may not have as much control as they would like.
On the topic of cyber capabilities, the report said North Korea probably has a military computer network operations capability. North Korea may view computer network operations as an appealing platform from which to collect intelligence, the report added, and the nation has been implicated since 2009 in cyberattacks ranging from computer network exploitation to distributed denial of service attacks.
In assessing North Korea’s security situation, the report said, “North Korea continues to fall behind the rising power of its regional neighbors, creating a widening military disparity and fueling its commitment to improving asymmetric and strategic deterrent capabilities as the primary guarantor of regime survival.”
Tensions on the Korean Peninsula have grown as relations between North and South Korea worsen, the report noted. North Korea has portrayed South Korea and the United States as constant threats to North Korea’s sovereignty in a probable attempt to legitimize the Kim family rule, its draconian internal control mechanisms and existing strategies, the report said.
“The regime’s greatest security concern is opposition from within,” the report added, “and outside forces taking advantage of internal instability to topple the regime and achieve unification of the Korean Peninsula.”
North Korea seeks recognition as an equal and legitimate international player and recognized nuclear power and seeks to normalize its diplomatic relations with the Western world and pursue economic recovery and prosperity, the report said.
“[North Korea’s] rhetoric suggests the regime at this time is unlikely to pursue this second goal at the expense of the primary goal of pursuing its nuclear and missile capabilities,” the report added.
North Korea has the highest percentage of military personnel in relation to population than any other nation in the world, with approximately 40 enlisted soldiers per 1000 people with a considerable impact on the budge of the country. Don’t forget also that North Korea has capabilities that also include chemical and biological weapons. A defector has declared that North Korea has increased its cyber warfare unit to staff 3,000 people and it is massive training its young prodigies to become professional hackers.
The large cyber force responds directly to the command of the country’s top intelligence agency, the General Reconnaissance Bureau. Last year in internet have been published satellite photos of the area that is suspected to host North Korea’s ‘No. 91 Office’, a unit based in the Mangkyungdae-district of Pyongyang dedicated to computer hacking, its existence was revealed in a seminar on cyber terror in Seoul.
According the revelation of Army General James Thurman, the commander of US Forces Korea, the government of Pyongyang is massive investing in cyber warfare capabilities, recruiting and forming high skilled team of hackers to be engaged in offensive cyber operations against hostile government and in cyber espionage activities.
In more than one occasion the North Korea has threatened the South promising waves of attacks, and the cyber offensive option is the most plausible considering the advantage in terms of efficiency, noise and political impact.
North Korea’s electronic warfare capabilities are second only to Russia and the United States…
So when the question of CNO/CNA/CNE comes up with many here in the rest of the world it is all pretty much a guess as to what the answer truly is. Of course I would love to know what the NSA knows about that internal infrastructure. I suppose that the NSA, with all of the revelations of late, probably has(d) entre into the intranet from hardware that had been spiked with surveillance tech. Overall the picture from using nmap and other technologies shows that the infrastructure outside looking in, without backdoor access to China Netcom systems, is pretty blank from an information warfare perspective. The sites that are sitting out there that are live are flat but if one were to r00t one what would the acl’s be like one wonders. DPRK has spent a lot of time hardening and walling themselves off but nothing ever is 100% secure. With all the talk about their DD0S attacks against S. Korea though and the bank hack (2013) there have been some leaks that lead us to believe that they do use that .kp IP space for access to their malware C&C’s. In the case of the bank hack this last year the malware was beaconing to an IP within their internet facing space surprisingly. For the most part though the attacks that have been perpetrated by the DPRK have been through proxy addresses (S. China etc) so as to have some plausible deniability.So short of some leaking of intelligence on DPRK and their internal fiber networks it’s pretty much still a black hole or maybe more apropos a giant darknet of their own and we cannot see inside.
Speaking of Darknets I just wanted to touch on this idea for a bit. One wonders just what CNA/CNO the DPRK might be carrying on with regard to TOR nodes and the use of the darknet. I should think an interesting study might be tracking IP’s from Southern China to see where much of that traffic is being routed through TOR nodes. I think that this could be a real untapped subject for study to date. If the eleets have access to not only the internet through INTELSAT/Chinacom and MAC OSX boxes then perhaps some of them are actually routing traffic through proxies like TOR to cover their own censorship arcology? Can you imagine that Un doesn’t have high speed SAT connection through INTELSAT so he can surf unencumbered? What about certain high ranking intelligence and military people as well? It surprises me that I am not seeing more in the darknet from the DPRK itself as well. Of course this would, even with it being on TOR or in a proxied hosted system, a dangerous game to have any kind of truth telling coming directly out of Pyongyang. Still though, I would love to see this happen as well as perhaps some incursion into the intranet by someone adding a rogue SAT feed and a router. Presently I have seen reports about how former DPRK escapee’s have been smuggling in DVD’s, Net-Top PC’s and Netbooks over the Chinese border and giving them to people. The thrust of this idea is to bring Western movies and media to the DPRK as a subtle form of mental malware. I would push that further and create a new darknet within their dark fiber network.
When one sIn the final analysis, the DPRK has connectivity that is very limited in scope and in actual use. The eleet few have access to the outside world while the rest have a very controlled intranet that is full of propaganda and surveillance. When one starts talking about their capabilities for cyber warfare you have to take what is usually said with a grain of salt or a whole shaker. The fact of the matter is that much is still not known about their capabilities outside of perhaps the NSA and certain people in the IC. From the attacks seen to date we have seen much activity out of China that could also be dual purpose attacks for DPRK as well. Since much of their CNA/CNE capabilities and training has come out of (literally) China one has to assume that not every China hack is just for China or originating from them. For that matter, it is entirely possible that traffic we have all seen coming from S. Korea could in fact be proxy attacks from the DPRK as well for plausible deniability. My feeling though is that the DPRK is still getting it’s unit’s together and building capacities and is not a clear and present danger to the world from any kind of cyber warfare scenarios. DPRK uses the aggrieved and angry squeaky wheel approach to diplomacy cum bullying on the world stage and is not suited for sneaky cyber war just yet. Also cite the fact that if you poll the likes of Crowdstrike or Mandiant you will not see too many (if any at all) attacks or campaigns being designated to DPRK actions. Now why would that be?
gedh gedh gedh gedh gedh gedh
OMG THE DAM DATA!
Last week a report came out on Wired about how the ACE (Army Corps of Engineers) database was hacked by China and “sensitive” dam data was taken.. By China, let that sink in for a bit as there was no real attribution data in the story. Anyway, aside from the BOOGA BOOGA BOOGA headlines I had to wonder just how hard it was for these “Chinese” hackers to get in and steal the all important super secret DAM data. Given the nature of this type of site and the groups involved in generating, managing, and *cough* protecting it, I had a feeling that it would be rather easy to get the information without having to be uberleet. Sure enough a quick Google Fu session showed me how easy it was to just bypass the login and password scheme as a proof of concept. You can see from the picture at the top of the page that you can just download what you like there (16 meg on dams alone) just by clicking a link on Google and then the link on the page that is not supposed to be served out without authentication.
*I feel so secure now*
So yeah, there you have it and I still cannot understand how the media types paid no attention to my attempts to make them aware of this little factoid. See, here’s the thing kids, I didn’t go any further. Nor did I download the 16 meg file because, well, no one else wants to be Aaron Swartz right? I am sure they could even try to squash my nuts over this post alone but hey, I am sick of the bullshit stories of China hacking our shit when in reality all one need do is GOOGLE the information. This is not to say that this information here is the SAME information that was allegedly stolen by China, but it is a PROOF OF CONCEPT that the site, EVEN TODAY is still insecure and leaking information without authentication!! (yes above pic was taken today via a tor node) So, when I stopped there one has to continue to wonder if you looked further and enumerated more of the site by directory walk could you in fact get even more access?
Feel the derp burn…
Meanwhile back in the hallowed halls of Congress and the Pentagon we have reports coming out in pdf that China is hacking our shit to gain a better “war footing” by taking such data as what this story is all about. DAMS COULD BE BLOWN! WATER COULD LEAK! LIVES LOST! yadda yadda yadda. If you were to take it seriously then one would think that SECOPS demands that this data would be classified and protected per classification. Obviously it wasn’t given the access that you see above as well as the alleged password issue that the hack was allegedly predicated on in the Wired article. But I digress.. I am meaning to talk about China… Yes, so the DOD puts out a report that is subtly saying that no longer are the Chinese only looking to steal IP but now they are looking for ways to stalemate us in war.
NO WAY! Like we aren’t doing the same thing everywhere else as well? Derp! Look, it’s only natural that they would be doing so and their doctrine says as much. Just go take a read of their doctrine on all things cybery and you will see that the domination of the infoscape is really important to them. We have only been paying attention for a little while now and we have catching up to do! Alas though, not all roads lead to China so really, I would love to see some attribution on this alleged hack on the dam data when one, once again, could just GOOGLE that shit up. As they say on the internets.. “Pictures or it didn’t happen!”
So here we are again. Our cybers are FAIL and the news media perpetuates more FAIL with their non depth articles on the problem. Maybe China stole some dam data. BIG WHOOP. The real story is that the site that it came from and the people watching it are not paying attention to the cyberz. Their clue phone is broken! They do not know how to “Internet” and it is just another derpy hype cycle in the media that allows China to be blamed for our own stupidity. I swear somewhere there is a Chinese guy laughing like Chumley rolling on the ground over this.
Smell our own fail kids… And weep.
Huawei, Cisco, Nokia, Alcatel, ZTE… Commonality? Everything Is Made in China:
There are a couple of stories going around that are claiming that Huawei, the maker of many telco products has pre-pwn’ed their hardware with architecture flaws in the chips themselves or, alternatively, created deliberate software/firmware flaws that could allow takeover. The spawn of this seems (at least this go round) is due to a Defcon presentation this July that showed how easy it was to overtake certain lower end routers made by the company. Now, this would just be chalked up usually to lackadaisical programming on the part of any other company, but, since this is a Chinese company, then of course, it’s a nefarious plot to overtake the world!
*puts on neru jacket and puts cigarette in mouth, holds white cat* MWAHAHAHAHAHA
The realities though, are somewhat different in the real world, outside of the one where the media goes off half cocked on an idea that will generate copy for them and drive traffic to their sites. The real story here lies between the xenophobic lines and I think that actually The Economist does the best job of level headed reporting about this story, what there is of it that is. No, the real story is that EVERYTHING is made in China now, and to say that just one company, a Chinese owned company is the arbiter of our digital doom for merely being “Chinese” is akin to “Driving while black”
This is not to say though, that some espionage hasn’t come out of our pals at Huawei, nor for that matter ZTE, as wholly owned Chinese companies with ties to individuals in the PRC and PLA. No my friends, this too can be called into question and I for one would take a close look at the players and their motives to understand who they are and what they may be doing now and then in the way of digital espionage. Clearly in the case of Huawei there are accounts of outright theft of IP being used to generate their hardware/software to gain a foothold to start (see article in the Economist, link provided above) No friends, I would put it to you now, at this very moment, that there is no grand plan to backdoor every phone or telco device by either of these companies that I am privy to, in fact, the people I know, have said (from the MIL side that is) that they do indeed check all of the chip sets and systems that go into secure areas or missile systems and there, to date, has been no large effort to subvert those systems en masse. There have been instances where systems had bad chips and there have been instances where some have been, shall we say circumspect, but overall, no “Chinese invasion plan” has been detected.
… And after all.. If there were… Would we not have a moratorium on buying from them per the government if it were the case?
Who’s on the Board at Huawei and ZTE? *cough* PRC Ties Anyone?
So, Ren Zhengfei was a member (is) of the PLA (Peoples Liberation Army) and the stellar rise of Huawei can be somewhat tracked to those ties. This though does not mean that the PLA runs the show right? One wonders though who else in the echelon is/was also PLA right? As for ZTE, at the time of this posts being written, I could not locate solid backgrounds on all the members however, the bio of the company plainly shows their connection with the PLA So, there you have it, both have ties to the People’s Liberation Army, but when you think about it, it’s China! If you did not have affiliation with the PLA, it usually meant you were in some gulag or other, so, your mileage may vary.
Suffice to say, that every company in China (born of it) will likely have connections to the PLA because that is their base. Does this mean that they all are bent on overtaking the US with bogus chips or pre-pwned hardware? Not necessarily.. Though, I for one would be checking that shit.. Wouldn’t you? Meanwhile, the US government has seen fit (ok, congress critters really) to look into both companies over allegations of spying. Which I think is prudent, and not just from this knuckle headed idea that everything is pre-pwned but instead, by proxy of their affiliations, their buy outs, and their cutout companies that do business to steal others IP.
Aye, there’s the rub…
Does this mean I think the Congress Critters will get to the bottom of things?
But they will have a good time trying while endeavoring not to be too xenophobic.
Supply Chains and Their Subversion:
Meanwhile, back to the pre-pwned chips, routers, phones, and everything else that Dr. Cyberlove is pimping as the latest in cyber-warfare-douchery. Look, frankly, if you were going to be China or a company thereof owned by or beholden to, then you would want to futz with the supply chain now and again. I mean, who wouldn’t right? If you were one of the pre-eminent purveyors of prodcts of this ilk, then you would have ample opportunity to mess with the supply chain! There would be no need to just go all in and backdoor everything right? I mean, where’s the sense people? Lull your targets into complacency and then hit them with some bad hardware where it counts ok?
So, if you were to ask me, and really, no one has, and frankly *small tear in corner of eye* I’m hurt you all haven’t, I’d say that perhaps there are more than one way to skin this digital cat. First off, look at the notion that everything is made in China now. Why? Because its CHEAP! Cheap labor, cheap facilities, and no taxes etc. You get all the benefits that help your bottom line as say CISCO, and no down side financially! No pesky unions and more black in your balance sheet no? Ok, so there are issues of potentially having software or hardware embedded in your stuff because you were paying attention to every piece, but sure, you get more MONEY!
“mo money mo money mo money”
Ok lets back up a bit there.. So, no, not everything made on site necessarily has been tampered with. In fact, there is a HUGE grey market as well for this tech and of course since this shit is all now made IN China, and the plans are in their hands, they can reverse R&D things as well. Say they get a piece off the line at the end, paid for through a front company, and then pwn it and re-sell it to the US government?
Ooooh, now there’s a notion huh? Just Google for stories of grey market chip sets for missiles and you will see where bad grade stuff has been put into actual systems meant for use and failed. Yeah.. it’s happening and has been for some time. Some of these companies are just in it for the money and the con, others are fronts for the MSS. So,as I said, there are many ways this can play out. Frankly, I have more respect for the Chinese than to believe these half baked ideas of a full on frontal assault on us by products made by ZTE or Huawei for public consumption.
Trust But Verify:
So, where does that leave us? It leaves us at the point where we should be. Any systems we buy for anything important, be they telco/infrastructure/gov/mil should be lot checked and assured that they are what they claim to be. This does go on today in any areas where sensitive data resides (mil and gov at least) Public side though, well, many do not have the wherewithal to do that. However, once again, I say that no one can be sure of any hardware they buy right? I mean, even if it is made in the US, it could also be parted out from other sources, or tampered with right?
Trust but verify… If it’s important then test your stuff. Insure that it not only works, but that it also is not blatantly hiding extra chip sets on the board right? The same goes for any company that you are going to do deals with. Do your homework and see what they are all about before you do it. This is just common sense to me, but then again it seems that the general populace is clueless I guess. Do the leg work and if you feel hinky about anything, don’t buy from them. The same goes for hardware you might buy from an intermediary or “grey market”
After all, as they say in the con game biz.. “If it’s too good to be true, then it probably isn’t” We, the US, have unfortunately set ourselves up in a “pay less” mindset that has ha the military buying cheap hardware for missile systems that in the end, failed to launch. Do you want to have the same happen to your router or other hardware that your company relies on? Never mind the whole espionage thing…
Trust but verify.
Xenophobia Will Not Help:
In the end, I just have to say that the xenophobia going on over the Chinese is getting out of hand. Yes, they spy on us and they steal A LOT of our IP, but, so do other countries. They are not the Fu Manchu character out of the old movies nor are they Charlie Chan either. This is a country that surely wants to be a superpower, if not THE superpower. They do have agenda’s but, they are not omniscient…
We just have to work smarter and be better players at the game of ‘Go’
So far, well, we are not so good and its time to learn..
Hard power is a term used in international relations. Hard power is a theory that describes using military and economic means to influence the behavior or interests of other political bodies. It is used in contrast to soft power, which refers to power that comes from diplomacy, culture and history. While the existence of hard power has a long history, the term arose when Joseph Nye coined ‘soft power’ as a new, and different form of power in asovereign state’s foreign policy. Hard power lies at the command Hegemon end of the spectrum of behaviors and describes a nation’s ability to coerce or induce another nation to perform a course of action. This can be done through military power which consists of coercive diplomacy, war, and alliance using threats and force with the aim of coercion, deterrence, and protection. Alternatively economic power which relies on aid, bribes and economic sanctions can be used in order to induce and coerce.
While the term ‘hard power’ generally refers to diplomacy, it can also be used to describe forms of negotiation which involve pressure or threats as leverage.
Over the weekend I had a twitter conversation (140 char’s at a time, rough) about the meaning of “Soft Power” in the current parlance propounded by Joseph Nye. I have a different opinion of the nomenclature concerning the terms “Soft Power” and “Hard Power” in today’s political and economic environment. While the other party I was speaking to had a more strict version of thinking per Mr. Nye’s (he coined the term soft power) definition. I myself feel that today things are a little more complex for the terms to be so tight given that now economic “hard power” seems to have morphed into a vast array of economic digital espionage that softly, along with other soft power style moves, create a hard power outcome of directing or tricking other countries into actions that the others desire.
The primary mover and shaker of this for me is of course China and one only has to look at the news cycle to see both these types of “power” being wielded by the RPC. I think it is time to take a look at the means and the philosophies that China has been using to effect the changes that they need to become not only the predominant military force in the world, but more so an economic juggernaut that will outweigh and perhaps stealthily creep behind and slit the throats of other countries in subtle and not so subtle ways.
Hard vs. Soft Powers and Nomenclature
As seen above in the quoted text, hard power is seen as economic sanctions as well as military actions. This is all in response to the soft power of politics and the methods of carrot to the hard power stick. All of these allude to direct actions that are perceived as means to manipulate nations states and other actors into actions desired by the power that is employing them. I would put to you all that there is another form of “soft power” that the Chinese have really created over the last decade that employs a more stealthily nimble approach from the espionage arena (hard power by strict definition?) and economic strategies that, with nationalistic goals of grand scale, have wrought a new type of “power”
Perhaps this power should be called “Covert Soft Power” as it is being employed covertly both in the hacking of companies to steal their economic secrets (IP) as well as by the addition of espionage and common business tactics to buy into, and or subvert companies to facilitate access to economic secrets as well as out maneuver companies and close them out on deals etc. All of this seems logical to me (adding this meaning to the term) but perhaps I am outside the norms on this one. The way I see it though, there is a new vector here that the Chinese are leveraging and I think we could use a little thought on the matter and perhaps how to counteract it all.
China, The Hard and Soft Power via Economic Espionage and Investment
China in particular has been working at a multiply pronged and diligent attack on systems and corporations as well as governments to effect the long game strategies that they want. Instead of attacking things head on, the Chinese prefer the methods of “The Thousand Grains of Sand” where many operations and operators work to effect the larger outcomes from small pieces. The Chinese are patient, and because of the Eastern mind, seem to come at things in a more subtle way than most of us in the West tend to think about. In all, the subversion and outright theft of IP has a multipurpose goal of broadening their technical abilities, their economic abilities, and overall, their dominance in the world as a power.
What the Chinese have realized mostly though, is that the subtle knife is the best way to control the enemy, slowly, and subtly slitting the throat of the opponent without a struggle. Frankly, I admire the approach really. In terms of the argument of “soft power” I place these efforts squarely into it because in tandem with certain “political” maneuvers, they can have huge net effects. By combining the military, the economic, and the political aspects of soft and hard power, and the gray’s in between, China has become a force to be reckoned with. So, I put it to you all here, that there is room for a change within the nomenclature of Mr. Nye’s coinage and that I think, in order to better understand the mosaic that is happening, we need to re-tool some of the ideas we have pre-conceived for ourselves.
A New Battlespace, A New Set of Battles
Finally, I would also put it to you all that the battle space is much different today than it has been in the past. Not only do we have the digital landscape, but said same digital landscape, that makes it easier to steal, also makes everything more interconnected. By interconnected, I mean that it is far easier to effect large changes to companies by the automation that we all have in place today to speed up our transactions. Today it is far easier to quickly make instant trades, and effect the bottom line of a company for the better or worse as well as steal data in minutes that in the past, would have taken days, weeks, or months to ex-filtrate from a company via conventional HUMINT means.
In the scenarios run on trades on the markets, you can see how one alleged “fat finger” incident can have a large scale and rippling effect on the whole economies of states, never mind businesses individually. So, once again, the battle space has changed greatly because of the interconnected-ness of things. It seems that the matters of state now more than before, can be changed through the soft power of the digital attack or manipulation. This is what I mean by “soft power” or perhaps the term I mentioned above “Covert Soft Power”, attacks that we are seeing now, and are having trouble truly attributing to nation-state, corporate, or individual actors are having larger and larger effects on our economy, our policies, and our long term viability as nations, companies, or groups.
At the end of the day though, I suggest that we are being manipulated by masters at the game of “Go” and we need to pay attention to every subtlety and not be so rigidly minded. It is the water that flows around and over the rock, eventually wearing it down to nothing.
China’s cyber-warfare capabilities are ‘fairly rudimentary’… What is it with these crazy Australians?
Chinese strategists are quite aware of their own deficiencies and
vulnerabilities with respect to cyber-warfare. In June 2000, “a series of high-
technology combat exercises” being conducted by the PLA “had to be
92 suspended” when they were attacked by “a computer hacker”.
China‟s telecommunications technicians were impotent against the intermittent
hijacking of the Sinosat-1 national communications satellite by Falun Gong
„practitioners‟ in the early 2000s. China‟s demonstrated offensive cyber-
warfare capabilities are fairly rudimentary. Chinese hackers have been able
to easily orchestrate sufficient simultaneous „pings‟ to crash selected Web
servers (i.e., Denial-of-Service attacks). They have been able to penetrate
Web-sites and deface them, erase data from them, and post different
information on them (such as propaganda slogans). And they have
developed various fairly simple viruses for spreading by e-mails to disable
targeted computer systems, as well as Trojan Horse programs insertible by
e-mails to steal information from them. However, they have evinced little
proficiency with more sophisticated hacking techniques.
The viruses and Trojan Horses they have used have been fairly easy to detect and remove
before any damage has been done or data stolen. There is no evidence that
China‟s cyber-warriors can penetrate highly secure networks or covertly
steal or falsify critical data. They would be unable to systematically cripple
selected command and control, air defence and intelligence networks and
databases of advanced adversaries, or to conduct deception operations by
secretly manipulating the data in these networks. The gap between the
sophistication of the anti-virus and network security programs available to
China‟s cyber-warriors as compared to those of their counterparts in the
more open, advanced IT societies, is immense. China‟s cyber-warfare
authorities must despair at the breadth and depth of modern digital
information and communications systems and technical expertise available
to their adversaries.
China is condemned to inferiority in IW capabilities for probably several
decades. At best, it can employ asymmetric strategies designed to exploit
the (perhaps relatively greater) dependence on IT by their potential
adversaries—both the C ISREW elements of adversary military forces and
the vital telecommunications and computer systems in the adversary’s
homelands. In particular, attacks on US information systems relating to
military command and control, transportation and logistics could “possibly
degrade or delay U.S. force mobilisation in a time-dependent scenario”, such
as US intervention in a military conflict in the Taiwan Straits.
China‟s cyber-warfare capabilities are very destructive, but could not compete in
extended scenarios of sophisticated IW operations. In other words, they
function best when used pre-emptively, as the PLA now practices in its exercises.
In sum, the extensive Chinese IW capabilities, and the
possibilities for asymmetric strategies, are only potent if employed first.
Desmond Ball: China’s Cyber Warfare Capabilities
Desmond, Desmond, Desmond… You spend so much time pointing out all of the Honker Union activities, the malware created by China, and all their overall IW/Espionage activities and then you say;
“Well, because there’s no real proof of their actually having done anything, they are unable to do so”
Crikey! Have you been sipping what Dr. Wright has been drinking or what? Tell me Desmond, what is your classification rating? Because I think you are lacking some pertinent information that might change your hypothesis quite a bit. Either way, your contention is lacking understanding of the playing field I think, so let me enlighten you a bit ok?
I personally have heard of “on the fly” coding of malware to affect pertinent systems within a defense contractor network to not only keep access within said network, but, also to exfiltrate even more interesting data. Now, that sounds rather advanced to me..
How about you?
Sure, the coders could have been just about anyone, but, the data was being exfiltrated to areas that were in the Asia Pacific and more than likely were Chinese in origin so, yeah, it likely was them and not say, Germany. However, once again, we have no real proof of it being “solely” China. Oddly enough though, when data was caught in the hands of the Chinese we pretty much had to admit it was them doing it. So, no Desmond, they are not wholly unskilled and certainly as unsophisticated as you would paint them. This is just one instance of access and hacking that allowed for the APT (Advanced Persistent Threat) activity that, well Desmond, was coined for their activities against the defense industrial base here in the US.
Simply Desmond, you can cite all the articles from the internet you want.. You still won’t have the whole picture.
PSSST… Guess What?
So, to move this further along the philosophical and technical path for you let me explain it another way for you. The Chinese, as with most of the Asiatic countries, have a different perspective on things than we in the West. Something core to the Chinese mindset on warfare are the following:
- Soft Power: the ability to obtain what one wants through co-option and attraction
- The Thousand Grains of Sand: Using many options to obtain goals
Alrighty, now that I have gotten that off my chest, Cyberwar is to me, too hard to carry out for ANY of the countries out there now. China being only one country that might want to. The systems are too disparate and to control a single node would take great effort. So, yes, I can agree with you that they are not in a position to do us major damage from a CYBERWAR booga booga booga perspective. Frankly, no one could in my opinion. However, your contention that they could not insert bad data during a time of war is a load of crap.
ANYONE could IF they had the access and the desire. It would not need to be nation state, it could be a private citizen for that matter. What is more interesting Desmond is that you fail to understand the espionage angle here. The Chinese use their expat’s to do their bidding under threat, or, mostly under the “poor poor China” argument. Imagine an insider adding code to systems that could be triggered…
Yeah.. Soft power once again.. It could turn hard though with the right circumstances.
Once again Desmond, you think too one dimension-ally.
The Sad Truth…
Now, with all of that said, lets turn it around a bit. The saddest truth is this;
“Given all of what has happened recently with Lulzsec, it has become clear that it does not take an uber hacker to take down pretty much anyone”
The systems out there have not been protected well enough. Patching, and secure coding have not been at the fore here and thus it is trivial for the most part to hack into systems throughout the internet. So, the Chinese need not be uber haxx0rs to do the damage needed because we collectively have done a bad job at securing our own networks.
Once again, you fail to look at the problem from a more multidimensional angle.
Please go back to the drawing board Desmond because you lack the proper information and perspective to really make the claims you are making.
From China with Love:
Within the last year (since Stuxnet) the general populace has become more aware of the problems we all face from digital attacks and espionage. Of course sitting here today writing this blog entry, I look back at my past posts and wonder just why people are catching on now. China has been working us over for a long time and with each day’s passing we have been steadily more and more compromised by the 7th directorate and their proxy hacking groups. This is not to say that others aren’t doing the same thing as well. China just happens to be the more active due to their single minded desire to be the pre-eminent superpower and they have the politically charged populace to do it (i.e. PLA and their civilian hacking counterparts)
Israel, Russia, England, the list goes on, all spy on us as we spy on them. In the case of industrial espionage, the Chinese are first on the list, followed closely by Israel and Russia as well as France. Its a game we all play, its just that China has been going at it in a much smarter and cohesive way is all. All one need do is look at the current state of affairs to determine that they have been exceedingly adept at it as well, kudos to them really and shame on us. We (the US) have been too busy being slaves to greed and cheap products from, you guessed it, China, to notice that our collective clocks were being cleaned. Sure, some have been in the know about this (the military, DOD DIB parters) but we have been hampered by several things.
1) Contractors (i.e. private companies) do not have robust security postures and often are connected to DOD systems (say an air force base) Not to mention that these systems that the contractors own hold the goodies and escalation vectors that the APT want. Patching, IDS/IPS, SIEM, DLP, all words that are foreign to many exectuives making decisions about security and often have not one clue in the matter to start. I have in fact seen one place that had a C level exec with a 4 character password to their system! One that also had a pre-populated ID! YAY! Way to go there Mr. C level who manages a company that makes war-fighter systems! So, suffice to say that they companies have been ill equipped to handle security and the executives have been reticent to care.
2) Government regulations have been too lax in governing the security mandates and repercussions on any and all contractor companies that work on war-fighter systems. Sure, there are ITAR regs and potential fines, but really, how many of these companies have had true audits of their networks and environments to test their security postures? A good red team of many of these places I am sure would turn up shockingly scary vulnerabilities and network security gaff’s that would, if leveraged by the likes of the Chinese, lead to huge compromises of the companies as well as their proprietary data. In the time I was at a defence contractor, I only saw one red team and in that event it only took about an hour to compromise the place utterly. We need to enforce security on all defense contractors for both sides of their businesses (defense base and public) in order to insure that the data is safe. Right now, even after everything that has happened with China, we still have no real regulation and control over these companies security postures and that is why we will keep failing.
3) Human nature and corporate group think are the lead causes in our failures mentioned above. We as beings seem to lack the ability to see the long term dangers with regard to this type of warfare. We are also being leveraged by social engineering attacks (phishing, vishing, etc) to gain the toehold into the networks that lead to escalation and persistence. We need to be teaching secure computer practices both on a personal and a corporate level in order to be better equipped to try and stop these attacks. It’s not going to be the new piece of hardware or software that the vendors want to sell you (though they do have a place if they work) but instead the human factor that will be able to help here. I just would like to see the C levels at least aware of the security threats and really understand them. So far, I have seen too many in management without a clue and who don’t seem to care.
So, what I think we really need are some rules set up for companies doing government business that mandate secure practices and insure that if those companies are not following through, will be fined and shamed as well as lose their contracts. Its one thing to be compromised even if you are doing the due diligence, its quite another to be compromised and not really care nor understand the problem because there are no negative incentives to being that way. In today’s world, we need to be sharper than this if we want to stay in play on the global scale.
What we really need to be now is a ‘Digital Sparta’
Meanwhile, we are behind the game here. The government is trying to come to grips with all of this (poorly) all the while the Chinese and others now using the APT style of persistent attacks, are making bigger and more audacious hits against us (cough RSA & Lockheed cough!) while the news media spins on telling only half of the story that they comprehend to the masses that have little comprehension of the issues at all. Meanwhile, we in the security community talk about attribution and the problems of not only trying to stop all this from happening, but also deal with the repercussions politically trying to capture those carrying out the attacks.
All of this during the cacophony of vendors (and I mean you McAffee) spewing buzzword bingo out of your collective keisters trying to make sales and use the situation to your advantage.
Its time to pay real attention to the problems allowing these attacks to take place so easily and to the companies that are being targeted by the likes of China. For a little more history, I have collected the “From China With Love” collection on my blog. Dating back to 2008/2009 to today, you can see that this has been going on for a long time, and there is much more that has gone on that you might know about, or ever will unless you are cleared to know.
Oh and as a post script; This post was also brought to you by @diocyde because he/she was such a pendantic wanker about me not caring about what China was up to as I was too busy chasing “pimple faced jihadists” online..