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 majordomo@repsec.com with "subscribe isn".
Today's ISN Sponsor: Repent Security Incorporated [www.repsec.com]
Received on Wed Oct 7 19:48:38 1998