If hackers were to target a company and cause severe damage to it, one of the most effective areas to target would be company's information systems. Almost all companies have computerized information systems and companies are heavily dependent on them. Decision making inside the organization is heavily linked with the data in the information systems. A slight manipulation in the data through an attack, if goes unnoticed, may create havoc in the company. I think information systems should be one of the most critical areas that every company should protect.
From the ancient times we have seen that wherever there is money to be made or wealth to be seized there are attacks. The ancient attackers came in physical form armed with weapons and opened looted wealth from weaker sections of the society. Even some stronger nations invaded the week nations and took all the wealth they could carry to their homeland. This is the law of nature that in a given society you will have people with good intentions as well as evil intentions. The internet with its open coonectivity and world-wide acces is one of the easiest means in the evil hands to carry out their evil intentions. To bring to this mayhem we need some control authiority for the internet.( like we have a UN security council for all international defense matters ) . We ned to sectionalize this internet to bring in more security for classified information, Personal private infromation, commercial transactions , Advansed research data. We need now these compartments . Current internet technology virtually allows any computer i the world to access any other computer in the world and have a two way data traffic . This openness has to stop. Otherwise like an atom-bomb someday this internet will go into the evil hands and can casue catestrophies to occur. the next generation internet protocols not only should address the increased address space but a clear vision on the security of all the content lying in millions of servers, gadgets and appliances attached to it.
Yes it is very popular, a few websites on the internet that are dedicated to this form of research.........
But thanks to the American government it is now 'illegal', another example of a complete overreaction in an attempt to close certain copyright laws.
The stupidity of this action now means that in theory it is illegal to reverse engineer mobile phone and other systems, (sounds good), until you consider that Law enforcement relies on such information to extract details of criminal activity from mobile phones.
The police forensic teams don't have the time/resources to take apart and reverse engineer every mobile phone to extract information, they relied on the hardware/software phone hackers for the information to extract the data.
The irony is that laws which are supposed to clamp down on the criminals actually assists the criminals.
The people bringing in all these laws need to learn that laws only impact people that are willing to follow them, which criminals are not........ which is why they are criminals.
And if the Americans get their way... and continue to enforce their laws in other countries jurisdictions, it is only the 'free' honest people that are going to feel the pain.
There's one set of "hacking" and a group of "hackers" I can't work up the anger to dislike. These are the ones who disassemble a product so they know how it works and sometime, as you said, try to make such products compatible with whatever else is out there in the market. These "hackers" may make things difficult for companies that want to sell products that are then locked into their own eco-system (companies like Apple, for instance, that prefer to lock a phone into a service operator's domain) but they advance technological innovations by removing the roadblocks myopic company executives place in the way of consumer usage.
Much nonsense is talked about hackers and network security, personally I blame the media for most of this.
Hackers need to be broken down into specific groups, because some of these sub-groups are critical for I.T development, specifically I am thinking about Linux.(its birth was from 'hacking' and taking apart Unix), strictly speaking it was a legal breach, but look at the positive outcome.
Then there are the 'hardware-hackers' these are the people that may take a device such as Microsoft's new controller, and make it usable with other computing devices.
Microsoft initially took exception to this, and started issuing cease and desist orders, now suddenly Microsoft is 'on-board'.
Then we have network hackers, which may in some cases be made up of the above groups.
Finally the 'script-kiddies' which in many hacker communities are considered the 'scum', these are usually the ones that get caught because they do not know what they are doing, they use automated software written by 'real' hackers, generate viri from 'toolkits' written by real software & exploit hackers ,and operate out of places like starbucks, libraries or even home addresses.
The 'kiddies' are the ones that cause the most disruption, purely because of the shear numbers, but in many cases they are the 'stupid' victims, much of the software they use (and don't understand), is actually gateway systems used by professional hackers, to perform hacks on systems via the 'kiddies' own machine{ this is why IP blocks and checks will never work, and why 'bot' networks are so powerful}
Many of the websites taken down, were not 'hacked' because there was some 'amazing' super hacker, but rather the networks were not designed properly, were running software with known public exploits,or the custom software was written by poorly trained/inexperienced programmers, or worse..... Microsoft systems.
In fact if you look at companies that have 'exposed' networks many of them are vulnerable because they will not employ competent computing staff, or fail to enforce staffing policies related to network and ownership of the data paths.
Obviously from the Wikileak attack and counter attacks, hacking has become the electronic war zone and the warriors - the hackers need to be taken really seriously. The collateral harm done to the populace is what worriesme. thw question becomes, how do we finda middle ground since there is not going to be a victor or vanquish in this fight or better "still power play".
It's true about IP and network card addresses being straightforward to change. This leads down the path of having a computer license, which there are very compelling reasons to avoid. I'm thinking there should be some middle ground, but that the line in the sand isn't crossed beyond which an "enemies list" mentality prevails.
The internet is designed so that an adequate defense is actually the best defense. I wonder if a strategy of centralized blocking of those computer addresses with a history of nefarious activity is a good approach. I think if this kind of lock-down is based on real evidence, that a court can review, it could end a lot of the hacker problems.
I really doubt this strategy would help. The main problem with blocking IP addresses to block hackers is that hackers are exact group of people who will be able to most easily circumvent such a block. Besides, these days, there are too many options and methods to access the Internet: you block a hacker's home IP? Big deal. They use a neighbor's wireless. They go down to a Starbucks. They wouldn't even need to resort to IP spoofing.
But taking that idea a little further, it has been suggested in the past that IP blocks or additional security controls should be levied against geographic areas which have proven to be hotbeds of hacker activity, specifically parts of Russia. However, this idea is also flawed in my opinion, as surely large numbers of people will be blocked despite their innocence. Such a solution would be like arresting all the residents of a crime-heavy neighborhood.
Anyhow, good article, and it's true: hackers pose a much bigger threat then they did even ten years ago. For example, in the future, I don't think it's unrealistic that we'll see a scenario (this is just one example) where hackers attack a supply chain in order to sabotage a company, bringing its stock price down and thus enriching the hackers... who invested accordingly.
Bruce, thanks for bringing this up. I am fascinated by the political agenda behind the WikiLeaks debate. I can tell you how and why I respect hackers so much: in the course of researching an article, I discovered IBM has a full-time, 27/7 real-time lab that does nothing except track attacks and try to hack into its own products. I know IBM isn't the only organization that does this. The time, money and resources spent on out-hacking hackers is enough to convine me they should be taken very seriously.
In the modern age, hacking is as good as stealing. And according to the rule of the land the stealing has to be dealt with legal process. The thing is hackers are as brilliant as actual designers, so they got to be taken seriously.
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Archived Dialogues
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Euro-Crisis: What It Means for High-Tech Firms Join EBN Editor in Chief Bolaji Ojo and Contributing Editor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday, July 12, at 10:00 a.m. EDT for a Live Chat on high-tech and Europe's economic difficulties.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.
To save this item to your list of favorite EBN content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This
