Reply From: Anonymous > Seattle's FBI office is in line for a high-tech upgrade - a team of > agents specially trained to counter a troubling trend, the rise of > computer crime. I heard *precisely* this same story in 1986, only the FBI techno-thinktank was then named as being in Chicago. And for the past 12 years, it's still painfully apparent that the FBI is little more than the Keystroke Kops. > Prosecutors and computer-security experts are concerned about one big > obstacle: a pattern of silence on the part of many computer-crime > victims. One prosecutor even likened the situation to rape, with > victims worried about being re-victimized if they go public. And that is a valid concern. All too often, the FBI will tell computer-crime victims that there's nothing they can do; that they have more pressing concerns; that the financial damage isn't enough to warrant an investigation; and that the next time they're hit with yet another bout of harassment from their tormentors, they should "just ignore it." Generic gripes? I think not. That is what happened to me in 1997. > Experts cite several reasons for the reluctance, including fear of > drawing attention to weaknesses that might attract other attacks, > liability questions, a perception that law enforcement isn't up to the > task and relatively light sentences when offenders are caught. All concerns are valid. My experience alone more than amply proves it. > Even so, Seattle's new unit is part of a larger national effort to boost > confidence in law enforcement's ability to fight computer crime. The > unit would add 11 agents to the regional office, plus about a half-dozen > non agent technical analysts with a computer-science background. If they learned about computers and networks in any school save for the School of Hard Knocks, they are clueless. Technically competent, yes, but they couldn't find a tree in the forest. > Officials at FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C., say their proposed > 1999 budget includes $11.6 million to cover the cost of the new Seattle > squad as well as five similar Computer Analysis and Response Teams > around the country. Funding comes in part from money freed up from Cold > War-era counterintelligence activities. A handful of big cities, > including New York, San Francisco and Washington, D.C., already have > such squads. Give me five hardcore hackers and five million dollars and I guarantee we'd have a more sophisticated, more effective and more newsworthy team. Guaranteed. > The Seattle unit could also be called upon as part of a larger response > to cyberterrorists intent on pulling off the electronic equivalent of > the World Trade Center bombing. *rolling eyes* Not the "digital Pearl Harbor" schtick AGAIN! > -- In 1994, criminals operating in several countries hacked into the > Citibank Cash Management System that is used for functions such as wire > transfers. They attempted 40 transfers totaling $10 million. Four years is a LONG time ago in technological terms. > -- Late last year, authorities in this country and Israel arrested three > teenagers who are suspects in a series of intrusions into Department of > Defense and other government agencies' computers. Those were glorified scriptkiddies who also happened to be media whores. They were begging to get caught! > "Roughly two years ago, the FBI had 100 pending (computer intrusion) > investigations. . . . Today, we have over 500," says Ken Geide, section > chief for the Computer Investigations and Operations section of the > National Infrastructure Protection Center, based in Washington, D.C. And it's spit in the ocean, people. > Computer-crime statistics are scarce. For example, the most current > figures, from fiscal 1997, show that the number of FBI arrests increased > 950 percent from the previous year. That's not terribly meaningful, > though, because the number of arrests jumped from four to 42. The reason the statistics are scarce is because most Law Enforcement agencies don't recognize computer intrusion as a crime and thus refuse to investigate. You get 0wn3d in this world and you are _on_ your own. Don't expect J. Edgar's boys to so much as lift a finger to help you out, in spite of this latest bout of media whoring. > In a similar vein, findings from a 1998 survey conducted jointly by the > FBI and Computer Security Institute indicate that computer crime is on > the rise. And how many millions did they waste to find out that PAINFULLY OBVIOUS fact? > Given this trend, Prosecutor Schroeder thinks it's good news that the > local FBI office has been designated to receive a computer-crime squad. Too little, too late. Too typical. > He recounts a case from the mid-1980s when an 18-year-old on the Eastside > got into at least 50 companies' computers - and only four complained to > police. They're citing stuff from the 1980s?? They're really having to scrape the bottom of the barrel on this one. > The federal fraud-and-abuse computer statute was shaped in part by a > 6-year-old Seattle case, Schroeder recalls. In that case, two young Puget > Sound area men hacked their way into the computer system maintained by > U.S. District Court, and downloaded an encrypted password file. I'm actually surprised. I'd think a U.S. District Court would leave their password file lying around in plaintext. Puh-LEEZE! Grabbing /etc/passwd is child's play! Strobe any machine with phf on it, invoke uname and cat /etc/passwd. That's not exactly hacking!! > Then, the duo got into a Boeing supercomputer, which had the ability to > decrypt the courthouse password file, Schroeder says. That move gave > them "superuser" status in the courthouse system, meaning they could > read, alter or delete any file in the system. That's pretty simple stuff. What's next? Are we going to see a movie about these guys whistling redbox tones into the phone sometime soon?? [Disgusted] -o- Subscribe: mail majordomot_private with "subscribe isn". Today's ISN Sponsor: Repent Security Incorporated [www.repsec.com]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Apr 13 2001 - 13:06:51 PDT