Comments on: North Korea: Cyber Mad Dogs or Bluster Kings?

By: Henry Collins

Henry Collins — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 22:12:09 +0000

Mark is right. The Mac is the most secure platform on the market. It’s not about market share, but the technology.
I have noticed that these people who bash the Mac OS know little or nothing about it.

By: Garrett

Garrett — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 21:57:53 +0000

I believe its OpenBSD which is the OS with the least amount of vulnerabilities. It’s holes can be counted on two hands. I’m not an expert, just passing along something I heard.

By: Mark S.

Mark S. — Mon, 11 May 2009 00:59:28 +0000

Matt, if you knew anything about what you were talking about, you’d know know that a Mac is great for anything you use it for.

Since you don’t, you make comments like you do, living in a cave.

By: dvortex

dvortex — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 18:26:27 +0000

They will never, if they indeed caused damage to all members of the security council including China and Russia, they could just as well start digging graves. That would be an invitation for expanded sanctions, possibly even military intervention or threat thereof much like the circus going on before latest Iraq war.

By: Matt

Matt — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 04:24:53 +0000

Unfortunately the military isn’t drawing pretty pictures and making awesome YouTube movies all the time. Otherwise yes, a Mac would be the perfect OS of choice.

By: MacMan

MacMan — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 01:17:02 +0000

Mac OS X is the most secure operating system right out of the box bar none.
With the right…enhancements it is ironclad. However you are correct when you state that additional precautions are always prudent.

By: B.Price

B.Price — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:43:43 +0000

MacMan you are partially correct but not 100%. As long as a system/node has access to an unsecured medium such as the World Wide Web it is vulnerable. Regardless of it’s operating system.

Kevin — Well written response and i’ve had the pleasure of reading some of your organizations briefings and I must say that they are very spot on and detailed. Just an FYI for everyone these guys are CPISC certified and very much so know what they are talking about.

Brian — Not really. Those were not “kids”.

By: MacMan

MacMan — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 09:47:10 +0000

As long as we are tied to a Windows based infrastructure we will be at risk.

By: Kevin Coleman

Kevin Coleman — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 23:29:58 +0000

Brian you bring up an excellent point.

Unless there is global cooperation investigating these event, you really have a difficult time uncovering who is behind a cyber attack. That is why when I spoke at the United Nations I suggested the UN get a cooperation agreement in place to assist in binging those behind cyber attacks to justice. However, the attacks on South Korea were not done by kids. North Korea’s capabilities should not be brushed aside likely.

By: Smith

Smith — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 21:14:05 +0000

Please stop using the terms ‘cyber attacks’ and ‘DDOS attacks’ interchangeably. Exploits for zero day vulnerabilities are a far different animal then some silly bandwidth competition from 2001.

By: Brian W

Brian W — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 19:23:39 +0000

“Miscreant kids” were largely responsible for the cyber attack on Georgia, even though it was more of an annoyance than a really damaging cyber attack.

Don’t underestimate the power of politically motivated youth with access to a tool suite. And there is no inherent superiority of “military” cyber attack suites as opposed to non-military ones. The complexity and ingenuity of the Conficker worm is proof of that.

By: Kevin Coleman

Kevin Coleman — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 17:45:47 +0000

James
In answer to your question, we began tracking and estimating cyber capabilities back in 2001. We examine military budgets, attacks attributed to the entity, education, technical and scientific research and capabilities, internet connectivity, infrastructure, political motivations, export and import data on computer equipment and coordinated military exercises with other countries as well as several other factors that cannot be disclosed. Our analysis has been referenced by US Strategic command in their testimony before congressional commissions. In addition we are used by military and intelligence entities for our insight and foresight. Intelligence analysis collects all available data and comes up with an educated estimate of capabilities.

It has been a long time since anyone we have been concerned about “miscreant kids.” The complexity of many attacks and sophistication of the code left behind from attacks has risen far beyond the capability of kids!

By: PFC Harvell

PFC Harvell — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 17:40:34 +0000

I agree with James, North Korea could and will become a serious problem if we do not deal with them now.

By: James Hasik

James Hasik — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 15:30:56 +0000

Twelve thousand “cyber troops”? Annual spending of $56 million? Where does he get these estimates? What hard information is there that could be believed?

The North Koreans have been working on ballistic missiles for decades, and so far, can’t manage the accuracy that Werner von Braun attained (such as it was) in the 1940s. If the Dear Leader’s boys are #8 on the cyber warfare list, my guess is that there’s some miscreant kid down the street from me who should be ranked seventh.

And who calls Libya the “Libyan Arab Jamahiriya”, except Qaddafi and his cronies? Really.