Message-ID: <4b6ee9310808130949w58f74517xf24cdf44b32c277c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:49:07 +0100
From: n3td3v <xploitable@...il.com>
To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Internet attacks against Georgian web sites

On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 6:43 AM, Viktor Larionov
<viktor.larionov@...va.ee> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As a comment to Gadi's story: it's not nice to accuse anyone if it's still
> not clear who's behind all this and what is really happening.
>

It would be great for the U.S to take down the .ge sites while Russia
is attacking Georgia in a ground conflict, as it ramps up U.S's
ambitions for an offensive cyber command.

They already cyber false flagged Estonia to get money support
politically and public acceptance for the big U.S cyber command to get
built in the first place.

Now that the big U.S cyber command has been given the go ahead because
of the Estonia cyber false flag, they've got to keep reasons in the
media that the U.S cyber command is still a good idea.

Russia gets all the blame for the .ge cyber attacks and U.S get to
keep the politicians and the public sweet about the ongoing need for
the big U.S cyber command and "legitimate" reasons for its existence.

I couldn't think of a better time for U.S to do a bit of cyber false
flagging, than is when another country invading another, while keeping
U.S cyber ambitions afloat politically and publically.

Remember, U.S need to keep the idea of ground conflict and cyber
attacks as the same thing in the eyes of the public and the
politicians or the idea of the U.S cyber command doesn't float.

In reality, proper government-led cyber attacks wouldn't target web
sites, this is purely an attention seeking exercise to highlight the
ongoing need for the U.S cyber command.

In reality, proper government-led cyber attacks are invisible to the
public, as they are targeting specific government and military stuff
that the public and politicians don't get a chance to know about. Its
a classic media whoring exercise to take out web sites, as taking out
websites has no real cyber operational value apart from a bit of media
whoring.

I don't think it was Russia, but Russia have been framed by the U.S.
who need to keep the ideology of a U.S offensive cyber command afloat
and OK'd as the next president and its administration take over, so
that "cyber" gets full funding and the attention of Obama or McCain.

Watch this video by Marcus Sachs at Black Hat 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSUPTZVlkyU, he talks about, how are we
going to get the next president's attention in the transition period
in the first 100 days of Obama or McCain getting into the White House
and to take "cyber" seriously?

Now by this video it seems that Marcus Sachs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Sachs is trying to say we need a
cyber false flag attack in the first 100 days that Obama or McCain get
into the White House to make sure "cyber" is fully funded and that
cyber offensive operations are fully OK'd for the next four to eight
years.

"We want to get the attention of the next administration as they are
coming in" --Marcus Sachs.

He talks about the first two months or 100 days of the next presidency
is crucial in getting the attention of the president and its
administration.

Is this a hidden message here by Marcus Sachs about a Die Hard 4.0
scenario false flag attack being planned?

He said also in the video, when Bush was coming in, the powers that be
got their attention with 9/11 and that "cyber" got distracted, and now
he is basically saying when Obama or McCain come in that the U.S
government under world are planning a cyber 9/11.

It seems that Marcus Sachs is frustrated that 9/11 got all the
attention last time, and now the powers of be are going to make sure
"cyber" takes up the main agenda this time around.

How are they going to get the attention of the next presidency to get
"cyber" fully funded and taken seriously is anyones guess, but I fear
the worst and that we must keep our eyes and ears open for any false
flagging and other suspicious looking cyber security incidents, so we
are better prepared to call out "false flag" at the earliest
opportunity.

All the best,

n3td3v

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists