Evil Estonians Crack Down on Helpless Russian Minority

[Pekka]

Well, according to Estonian news, they have evidence the attacks were launched from govt buildings. So they were either govt people attacking OR their servers where hijacked by a 3rd party who use it for the attacks.

How interesting :boring:

[Serb]

Plain BS.
They could track an IP address, but without assistance of the Russian secret services, who can force the local ISP to coopereate to determinate the customer whose IP adresses have been involved in a attack, the Estonians (or anyone else) would never know location of the building from where the attack has been carried out.
It's just NOT POSSIBLE.
The IP adress don't give you any info about the building where a hacker could be.

And a government sponsored hacker attacking from the government building is just a NONSENSE, absurd, pure idiotism.
Only a totally brainwashed moron can buy this story.

[Pekka]

Almost every country has prepared for information warfare over the net. Any country who isn't is nonsense and pure idiot.

They can show the addresses going back to govt computers.

They don't need secret service permission to know that. I can introduce you to ISP's terms of use and defending their network as well as bunch of other stuff that means you need no permission from authorities to make things happen and have confirmation on the attackers.

It might be that Estonian officials have no real evidence and that they're just saying this.

BUt if you really believe wha tyou just said, you are a) an idiot b) don't know **** about computer security and c) should just about now kill yourself.

[Arrian]

e-Stonia Under Attack
An old-fashioned diplomatic dispute plays out in cyberspace.
By Anne Applebaum
Posted Tuesday, May 22, 2007, at 6:53 AM ET

And now for a quick quiz: A European country—a member in good standing of NATO and the European Union—has recently suffered multiple hostile attacks on its institutions. Can you a) name the country; b) describe the attacks; and c) explain what NATO is doing about it?

If you can't, don't worry: NATO itself doesn't quite know what it is doing about it, despite the alliance's treaty, which declares an armed attack on one of its members "an attack against them all." For the country is Estonia—a very small, very new member of NATO—the attacks are taking place in cyberspace, and while the perpetrators aren't exactly unknown, their existence can't be proved, either.

Which creates a dilemma—several, in fact: Is this an "armed attack"? Is the NATO alliance obliged to respond? And if so, how? None of these questions have clear answers: Welcome to the 21st century. And if you thought that terrorists headquartered in ungovernable bits of the undeveloped world were our worst problem, think again.

To add an extra layer of complication to this story, it's important to explain that its origins lie not in the high-tech cyberfuture but in a Cold War-era argument over the past. Several weeks ago, the Estonian government decided to move a bronze statue of a Soviet soldier from its place in the center of Tallinn, the capital, to a cemetery outside town, together with the remains of the Soviet soldiers who had been buried beneath it. That might not sound like a casus belli, but to the Russian minority in Estonia, most of whose families arrived in the country after the Red Army drove the Germans out in 1945, that statue had become a rallying point as well as a justification of their right to remain in Estonia. To the Estonians, one in 10 of whom was deported to Siberia after 1945, the statue had become a symbol of half a century's worth of Soviet occupation and oppression. A riot ensued; a Russian protester was killed; hooligans attacked the Estonian ambassador in Moscow; and, a few days later, Estonian government, bank, and newspaper Web sites began to go down one by one.

Elsewhere, this might not have mattered quite so much. A defense information specialist from another newish NATO member state told me, somewhat ruefully, that his country wouldn't be vulnerable to a cyberattack because so little of its infrastructure is sophisticated enough to use the Internet. But Estonia—"e-Stonia" to its fans—practices forms of e-government advanced even by Western European standards. Estonians pay taxes online, vote online, bank online. Their national ID cards contain electronic chips. When the country's Cabinet meets, everyone brings their laptop. When denial-of-service attacks start taking down Estonian Web sites, it matters.

Of course, as is the way of these things, their precise origin cannot be determined: Unlike classic terrorism, the essence of modern cyberwarfare is its anonymity. Though some of the attacks did appear to come from PCs belonging to the Russian presidential administration, others came from as far afield as Brazil and Vietnam. As a result, even the Estonian government's experts have backed away from directly accusing the Russian government. After all, angry hackers can organize a "botnet"—a group of computers that have been remotely hacked and forced, unwittingly, to send out spam or viruses—anywhere. Indeed, "patriotic" Chinese hackers have made a specialty out of this sort of thing, launching cyberattacks at moments of high tension against both Japanese and U.S. government Web sites, using computers based all over the world.

Both the anonymity and the novelty may turn out to be part of the appeal, particularly if, as some in NATO now believe, the attacks are Russian "tests," both of the West's preparedness for cyberwarfare in general and of NATO's commitment to its newest, weakest members in particular. Some believe the Russian government is now playing with different tactics, trying to see which forms of harassment work best: the verbal attacks on Estonia, the Russian oil pipeline to Lithuania that mysteriously turns out to need repairs, or the embargos on Polish meat products and Georgian wine.

If that is the case, then surely the lesson of the last three weeks is that cyberwarfare has a lot going for it: It creates no uproar, results in no ***-for-tat economic sanctions, doesn't seem like a "real" form of warfare, and doesn't get anyone worried about Europe's long-term energy needs. NATO did, in the end, quietly send a few specialists to Estonia, as (even more quietly) did the Pentagon. A few Europeans complained a bit at a summit over the weekend, too. But there the affair will end—until the attacked Estonian government in cyberspace comes back online, better armed for the next battle.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Pekka
They can show the addresses going back to govt computers.

Oh really? Explain how is this possible whithout hacking.

They don't need secret service permission to know that.

I don't know how about Finland, but in Russia only the FSB have a right (according to our law) to force ISP to reveal the information about its customers.

I can introduce you to ISP's terms of use and defending their network as well as bunch of other stuff that means you need no permission from authorities to make things happen and have confirmation on the attackers.

You have no idea what are you talking about.
If you are under attack and tracked the IP responsible for the attack, you can inform your ISP about that, to let them do something about attack. But your ISP would never tell you the location of the building from where the attack has been carried out, simply because they do not know it.

It might be that Estonian officials have no real evidence and that they're just saying this.

Exactly. They are just bullsh!ting.

BUt if you really believe wha tyou just said, you are a) an idiot b) don't know **** about computer security and c) should just about now kill yourself.

Considering your spelling, I think we are in the same weight category (both pretty drunk ). Me and my wife just have seen Shrek-III and I consumed a lot of beer in the theater.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Serb
Plain BS.
They could track an IP address, but without assistance of the Russian secret services,

Which of course will be forthcoming since Russia has been so cooperative in other investigations.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Which of course will be forthcoming since Russia has been so cooperative in other investigations.

of course it will be forthcoming.

Just as they will extradite the guy who is accused by UK of killing Litvinenko.

[Pekka]

"Oh really? Explain how is this possible whithout hacking."

Depends what do you mean by hacking. Tracing isn't exactly inventing the satellite.

"I don't know how about Finland, but in Russia only the FSB have a right (according to our law) to force ISP to reveal the information about its customers."

Ahh! To force, but ISP's may also cooperate. Also depending on ISPs terms of use, which they always state, most ISPs (if they aren't dumb, which I'm sure Russian ISPs aren't), in case of an abuse, ISP has the right to defend itself. In situations like these, ISPs do often submit, depending on teh nature of the attack of course. That is, the attack is taking place in or through their network, so it is abusing the ISP, and the ISP can defend itself by their statements in terms of use, thus they don't even need to contact authorities to track down folks. Just few examples.

"But your ISP would never tell you the location of the building from where the attack has been carried out, simply because they do not know it."

True and not true. If I said building, I was supposed to say IP. And namespaces are pretty much known, so if you've got an IP that you can recognize, well... game over. And yes, you can most likely pinpoint it to a building as well. These cables and things aren't exactly unmarked.

So yes, most likely the ISP knows the physical address as well.

"Exactly. They are just bullsh!ting."

Might be. Or not.

"Considering your spelling, I think we are in the same weight category (both pretty drunk ). Me and my wife just have seen Shrek-III and I consumed a lot of beer in the theater."

No I just got out of work and fairly tired. You can drink in the movie theater? Crazy

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
of course it will be forthcoming.

Just as they will extradite the guy who is accused by UK of killing Litvinenko.

Indeed. Russian justice moves quite quickly to bring these matters to the light of day.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Pekka
"No I just got out of work and fairly tired. You can drink in the movie theater? Crazy

Here in G-d's country, we have "cinema n' suds" houses that play movies on second run (after theyve been through the first release theaters) that serve beer.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Pekka
Depends what do you mean by hacking. Tracing isn't exactly inventing the satellite.

And what do you mean by tracing? You can trace an IP, but it won't give you any information about the physical location of the hacker. Only the ISP who gave this IP to its customer (hacker) can idetify him.

zAhh! To force, but ISP's may also cooperate. Also depending on ISPs terms of use, which they always state, most ISPs (if they aren't dumb, which I'm sure Russian ISPs aren't), in case of an abuse, ISP has the right to defend itself.

To defend yourself from what? The ISP is not the subject of the attack, they won't be aware about the attack one of their customer is carrying out, unless the ISP of the victim reported about it and asked for cooperation. And even in this case this ISP doesn't have to share its commercial information and reval the location of its customer.

In situations like these, ISPs do often submit, depending on teh nature of the attack of course. That is, the attack is taking place in or through their network, so it is abusing the ISP, and the ISP can defend itself by their statements in terms of use, thus they don't even need to contact authorities to track down folks. Just few examples.

In Russia only secret services like the FSB can demand a commercial information (like location of the customer) to be revealed. ISP can block the hacker or do whatever they want, if his activity somehow is a threat for them, but their customer's location is a commercial classified information and I see no reason to share this information with other ISP or anyone else, except the secret services who have a right to get this info.

True and not true. If I said building, I was supposed to say IP. And namespaces are pretty much known, so if you've got an IP that you can recognize, well... game over. And yes, you can most likely pinpoint it to a building as well.

BS.
If you know the IP and want to know the building, you should either hack the ISP (which is responsible for this IP) data base or ask them to reveal the information about one of their customers (this IP).

These cables and things aren't exactly unmarked.

Cables? Sorry, Pekka, but that's just laughable.

So yes, most likely the ISP knows the physical address as well.

ISP KNOWS the physical address, but the ISP doesn't have to reveal this information to the foreign secret service, unless the domestic secret servise is asking for that.

Might be. Or not.

Believe me they are bullsh!ting.

No I just got out of work and fairly tired. You can drink in the movie theater? Crazy

Sure I can. Popcorn+beer+good movie= good mood
That's why I bought tickets for the May 24 premiere of the new Pirates of the Carribean (normally she protests when I drink beer, but movie theater is an exception).

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Serb

That's why I bought tickets for the May 24 premiere of the new Pirates of the Carribean (normally she protests when I drink beer, but movie theater is an exception).

She only wants you to drink vodka?

[Serb]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Here in G-d's country, we have "cinema n' suds" houses that play movies on second run (after theyve been through the first release theaters) that serve beer.

Your a product of your system and don't know a thing about Russia.

[Serb]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


She only wants you to drink vodka?

FOF. I don't drink vodka at all.

[Pekka]

"To defend yourself from what? The ISP is not the subject of the attack, they won't be aware about the attack one of their customer is carrying out, unless the ISP of the victim reported about it and asked for cooperation. And even in this case this ISP doesn't have to share its commercial information and reval the location of its customer. "

Its network is abused by using it as a tool for the attack. This is very well defined around the world and in use. I'm sorry, this is how terms of use is really used in the world we live in and how ISPs can cooperate with certain entities wishing to locate attackers, so no authorities are even needed at this point. Let me repeat, this is how in real world stuff is actually done. I'm not making this up. And it's perfectly legal, unless the ISP has not stated this options in the terms of use.

"If you know the IP and want to know the building, you should either hack the ISP (which is responsible for this IP) data base or ask them to reveal the information about one of their customers (this IP)."

Yeah. And some IPs are known, even the buildings they come from. THat's like woaah, magic, because some IPs belong to certain namespaces that are very public. Such as govt IPs most of the times. One example more, university IPs. IPs of institutions.

"Cables? Sorry, Pekka, but that's just laughable."

AND THINGS. This was a response to what actually was laughable, your earlier statement that:

""But your ISP would never tell you the location of the building from where the attack has been carried out, simply because they do not know it.""

... which just isn't true.

"but the ISP doesn't have to reveal this information to the foreign secret service, unless the domestic secret servise is asking for that. "

But but but. They often do.

"Believe me they are bullsh!ting."

Well, investigation is undergoing so we will just have to wait and see.