The Coming “Quiet” War

Cybercrime knows no borders. There are thousands of attacks globally every day and cyber crime costs the UK £27 billion yearly. Tero Pollanen, international expert on cyber crime and security warns that this growing threat on the UK including global networks is a serious threat to economic security. “The magnitude of this threat cannot be overstated.”

With the increasing level of sophistication of attacks from both enemy states and criminal organizations, cyber security is one of the greatest challenges of today. The alarm has been sounded by the government and it has been “quietly” suggested that the UK should in fact declare war on states and criminals that are targeting the country by employing “aggressive retaliatory strikes” hoping to destroy their operatives.

The latest attacks are now focusing on business targets.  This, of course could include core infrastructure grids which, if compromised, would bring the country to its knees. Time after time Tero has reiterated that complacency is the biggest enemy within a company. Often they do not begin to realize that they have been compromised until sensitive information falls into other hands and/or their entire network is under the control of criminals. The bottom line is that companies are not taking this threat seriously.

The government has offered new guidance in it’s “10 Steps to Cyber Security.” But again complacency raises its ugly head as a recent survey has determined that nearly 9 out of 10 UK businesses were confident that they were already adequately protected. It has been said that such confidence is a grave mistake.

Ref.: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9522969/Hackers-could-be-running-company-computers-GCHQ-chief-warns.html

Not really my normal blog post but still fraud

Hey Boy, Hey Girl… 

At a time when high-level fraud is in the news more and more, the story of Gemma Barker was unusual to say the very least. The story of the teenager hit newspapers across the country this week as the case was heard in court.

According to The Telegraph and The Metro newspapers, Gemma Barker created three male alter-egos for herself, and social media profiles to match. The 20 year old from Staines dressed as a boy to trick and seduce her female school friends. Despite already knowing Barker, who was 19 at the time, the 15-16 year olds had no idea that the ‘males’ were infact a female acquaintance of theirs. Some of the girls began relationships with Barker which “incolved kissing, cuddling and groping” according to Ruby Selva in court. To reinforce the lie, she created Facebook profiles and contact details for the three male characters Aaron Lampard, Conor McCormack and Luke Jones.

The police became involved after one of the victims grew suspicious. During the investigation Barker made allegations against one of her characters “Luke Jones”, claiming she had been assaulted by him. Furthermore, according to The Telegraph, she approached the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board in a bid to cheat money.

Miss Barker  appeared at Guildford Crown Court where the case is currently being heard. The defence is reported to have told Guildford Crown Court that Barker is autistic and a "rather lonely character". She admitted to two charges of sexual assault and one of fraud fraud, making it possible for her to receive a prison sentence of up to two years. For now she is remanded on bail until early March, when she faces sentencing and psychological reports.  Summing up in court, Judge Moss reportedly said "What concerns me is that it has got a very mean and manipulative streak to it. And it's very serious. The girls she preyed on are much younger than her." Miss Barker was forced to sign the Sex Offenders Register.

Whilst this incident is unusual, it does highlight the often faceless side to the crime. The human factor in this incident, whilst traumatic, does drive home the dark, manipulative, and dishonest side to fraud. 

No More Mr Nice Guy?

Security analysts believe the US should clarify the repercussions of cyberattacks following sustained hacks from China.  It is also believed that the Chinese attacks are carried out by as few as 12 groups directed, for the most part, by the Chinese government. During the cyberattacks, the Chinese groups have stolen billions of dollars' worth of intellectual property and information from US companies and government agencies, according to online security experts.

Thanks to advances in technologies and increasing knowledge amongst experts, more cybercriminals are being identified by their ‘digital fingerprint’. The distinguishing characteristics of each attack is monitored by US experts enabling them to link individuals to particular groups of hackers, and sometimes where they are, or who they are. These techniques have, according to US security experts, shown an intensifying pattern. This escalating issue has sparked the recent concern amongst industry experts. As James Cartwright, a retired Marine general and former vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff puts it, "If you want to attack me you can do it all you want, because I can't do anything about it. It's risk free, and you're willing to take almost any risk to come after me."

The problems the US has in confronting the issue are the same as any other country has: firstly it is very hard to prove exactly who carried out the attack, and secondly both countries must have mutual agreements on such a situation. Mr Cartwright went on to say that the US "needs to say, 'if you come after me, I'm going to find you, I'm going to do something about it.' It will be proportional, but I'm going to do something ... and if you're hiding in a third country, I'm going to tell that country you're there, if they don't stop you from doing it, I'm going to come and get you."

The question is, how should the US proceed? Due to the nature of what is being stolen, the response is pretty much unanimous from  US government campaigners: a clear and firm message must be sent to those breaking the law. Online security specialist, Tero Pollanen, agrees Cartwright that "the US needs a clear policy on dealing with cyber attacks, and the countries through which the attacks are routed. This way, when an attck is apparent, the US can request the country to stop the attack. If the request is refused, the US then has the right to stop the computer server from sending the attack. "

The problem is, he goes on, "there is no international police force. Enforcing laws in another territory is always going to be tricky to manage."

This article is by Tero Pollanen; an online security and fraud prevention specialist. For the latest online security and financial news, tips and more, check out his blog: http://tero-pollanen.blogspot.com/