National Broadband Netwrok Susceptible to Hacking and Eavesdropping
THE National Broadband Network could be vulnerable to attack unless it is backed by tougher counter-measures, says a cyber security report.
The report by strategic think tank the Kokoda Foundation says the $36 billion network may need to be accompanied by tougher regulation to protect it against threats that could range from foreign cyber spies to local criminals.
It says the network’s builder, NBN Co, along with industry and internet service providers, needs to be alert to the “vulnerabilities” of the new network that could be exploited by hackers. So far, the foundation says, cyber security has not been part of the national debate on the NBN. “At this stage NBN Co has not articulated its approach to ensuring or improving cyber security,” says the foundation’s report, which will be released later this month.
“Introduction of the new National Broadband Network could provide a tipping point in terms of new and tougher regulation.
“It will be important for NBN Co to ensure security standards are adequate and to build strong relationships with industry associations, the Internet Industry Association and the Internet Society of Australia, and not just with government.”
The report notes that once the network is built, taking high-speed broadband services through fibre-optic cable to an estimated 93 per cent of households, responsibility for maintaining cyber security will rest with retail service providers rather than NBN Co. “The rollout of the NBN offers a significant opportunity to engage the public to better understand the vulnerabilities that exist and that could be exploited through the significantly increased bandwidth that will be made available, and in turn the responsibilities of individuals as well as the ISPs to take appropriate security measures,” the report says. “This opportunity must be grasped by all relevant parties.”
As revealed in The Australian yesterday, the Kokoda report warns that Australia is poorly prepared for the growing cyber security threat.
The report warns that cyber hackers now pose a serious threat to national security, the economy and to personal privacy.
In 2008, The Australian revealed that Australian intelligence agencies were investigating Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei, in the wake of international concerns about its alleged links with the Chinese military and government.
Huawei, which is seeking to be a major player in the NBN, has strongly denied any such links and has enlisted former foreign minister Alexander Downer’s lobbying firm Bespoke Approach to help it open doors for it in Australia.
The federal government believes China is the nation that poses the most serious cyber threat to Australia because of the scale and sophistication of its hacking capabilities.
China denies it employs cyber spies to glean national security information from Australia.
Australian Government Computer Hacked for Espionage
By Simon Benson, Courtesy of Daily Telegraph
THE parliamentary computers of at least 10 federal ministers including the Prime Minister, Foreign Minister and Defence Minister are suspected of being hacked into in a major breach of national security.
It is believed that several thousand emails may have been accessed. Senior sources in the Government have confirmed to The Daily Telegraph that the espionage occurred over more than a month, beginning in February.
Four separate government sources confirmed that they had been told Chinese intelligence agencies were among a list of foreign hackers that are under suspicion.
An investigation is now believed to be under way by ASIO after Australian intelligence agencies were tipped off to the cyber-spy raid by US intelligence officials within the Central Intelligence Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
The cyber attack is believed to have occurred on the Australian Parliament House (APH) email network used primarily for MPs’ correspondence and not on the more secure departmental network which ministers use for sensitive communications.
An intelligence brief to the Australian Government is believed to have revealed hackers had been accessing the APH computers of a number of cabinet ministers.
However, the sources claimed it was a network not primarily used by ministers for official communications.
Among the ministers’ parliamentary computers believed to have been compromised in Canberra were Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd and Defence Minister Stephen Smith.
It is believed Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s parliamentary computer was also compromised.
The Attorney-General Robert McClelland would neither confirm nor deny the cyber-spy incident.
In a statement issued to The Daily Telegraph, Mr McClelland said: “It’s the long standing practice of successive Australian Governments not to comment on the operations of security and intelligence agencies.
“Australia’s security and intelligence agencies, as a matter of course, work closely and co-operatively with their international counterparts on cyber security.
“The Australian Government takes the issue of cyber security very seriously and is constantly strengthening cyber security measures.
“Australia has in place a range of measures including the Cyber Security Operations Centre within the Defence Signals Directorate and a dedicated cyber investigations unit within the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO).”
However, several government sources confirmed to The Daily Telegraph they had been made aware of the breach to the parliamentary network. “That is the information that has been relayed to me,” one senior government source said.
Another government source, who confirmed they were provided with the same information, said t it was “deeply concerning”. “These claims need to be examined seriously,” they said.
One MP said they regularly received informal warnings from security agencies that “foreign” interests may be trying to access computers and telephones.
“[But] most ministers work off their departments’ systems which are far more secure than APH,” they said.
A recent cyber attack occurred in France when 10,000 government computers were hacked into and documents relating to the G20 were accessed by sources believed to have originated in China.
The Defence Signals Directorate has publicly warned that Australia was under threat from cyber attack.
Article Source: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/hackers-log-in-to-federal-mps-emails/story-e6freuzr-1226029677394
Appeals court in NYC reinstates lawsuit challenging US right to eavesdrop on overseas chats
NEW YORK, N.Y. – A lawsuit challenging a law that lets the United States eavesdrop on overseas communications more widely and with less judicial oversight than in the past was reinstated Monday by a federal appeals court that said new rules regarding surveillance had put lawyers, journalists and human rights groups in a “lose-lose situation.”
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said it took no position on the merits of the lawsuit brought by those in jobs that require them to speak with people overseas, saying only that the plaintiffs had legal standing to bring it against the latest version of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
U.S. District Judge John G. Koeltl in Manhattan had sided with the government in a 2009 ruling, saying the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue since none of them could show they were subject to the surveillance. He said Americans’ fears that their conversations would be monitored and their rights violated were “purely subjective.”
Attorneys, journalists and human rights groups whose work might require speaking to possible surveillance targets had brought the lawsuit on constitutional grounds, saying new government procedures for eavesdropping on international communications forced them to take costly and burdensome steps to protect the confidentiality of their overseas communications.
In a lengthy written ruling, the 2nd Circuit said the plaintiffs had standing to sue in part because they had established that they had a reasonable fear of injury from the surveillance and had incurred costs to avoid it.
A three-judge panel of the appeals court wrote that the new regulations had “put the plaintiffs in a lose-lose situation: either they can continue to communicate sensitive information electronically and bear a substantial risk of being monitored under a statute they allege to be unconstitutional, or they can incur financial and professional costs to avoid being monitored.”
The appeals court said its ruling “does not mean that their challenge will succeed; it means only that the plaintiffs are entitled to have a federal court reach the merits of their challenge.”
A spokeswoman for government lawyers who argued the case said they had no comment.
Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union, called the ruling a “watershed opinion.”
“For too long, the government has used unwarranted secrecy to shield intrusive surveillance programs from constitutional scrutiny,” he said. “The government’s surveillance practices should not be immune from judicial review, and this decision ensures that they won’t be.”
The plaintiffs had argued that the new procedures made it possible for the U.S. to seek to review all telephone and email communications to and from countries of foreign policy interest, including communications made to and from U.S. citizens and residents.
“This is a statute that allows the government to engage in dragnet surveillance of Americans’ international communications. As far as Americans’ international communications are concerned, the statute eliminates the probable cause and warrant requirements altogether,” Jaffer said.
The appeals court noted plaintiffs’ declarations citing individuals whose work might be affected by the eavesdropping procedures. Those individuals included a lawyer for self-professed Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed who regularly communicates with Mohammed’s family members, experts and investigators around the world.
Article source: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/appeals-court-nyc-reinstates-lawsuit-challenging-us-eavesdrop-20110321-103956-422.html
Over appliance parts, a case of espionage
BUFFALO, N.Y., March 21 (UPI) — A New York state judge has barred appliance parts firm 1st Source Servall from soliciting business from a rival firm’s client list due to corporate espionage.
State Supreme Court Justice John Michalek, in a 21-page injunction said, “Unrebutted evidence now demonstrates” two former Marcone Supply company employees “intentionally took and/or received” customer information from their former employer, The Buffalo News reported Monday.
With the list in hand, Marcone employee Mark Creighton resigned from his job April 20, 2010, and “within six days became Servall’s vice president of sales for the Northeast Region,” the judge wrote.
In addition, the judge said Creighton admitted he destroyed memory sticks and a computer hard drive that contained information about 3,300 Marcone customers.
The judge’s injunction is limited to the top 640 clients on Marcone’s customer list. Marcone attorney James Donathen called the situation “serious” and “a classic case of corporate espionage.”
Marcone lost $12 million worth of business in 2010 because of the theft, the company said.
“I think the main reason they’re suing Servall is that Servall is No. 2, and a lot of customers are better off with Servall,” Servall attorney B. Kevin Burke Jr. said.
“Customers are better served if there is competition,” Burke said.
Article source: http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2011/03/21/Over-appliance-parts-a-case-of-espionage/UPI-75211300730057/
Government’s right to eavesdrop on Americans challenged as lawsuit against Patriot Act re-instated
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Monday, March 21st 2011, 5:02 PM
A lawsuit challenging the government’s right to eavesdrop on Americans without warrants under the Patriot Act was re-instated by an appeals court Monday.
Libertarians cheered the decision, which will allow Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and other groups to continue questioning the government’s ability to listen in on phone calls and to monitor emails.
An earlier ruling by District Judge John Koeltl dismissed the lawsuit, saying the plaintiffs didn’t show they would be the subject of surveillance.
The American Civil Liberties Union and others argued they should be allowed to sue because they feared that “their communications will be monitored, and thus force them to undertake costly and burdensome measures to protect the confidentiality of international communication necessary to carrying out their jobs.”
The Second Circuit Appeals court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, finding they have “a reasonable fear of injury.”
The three-judge panel’s 63-page decision does not comment on the merits of the lawsuit.
“The government’s surveillance practices should not be immune from judicial review, and this decision ensures that they won’t be,” ACLU deputy legal director Jameel Jaffer said.
“The law we’ve challenged permits the government to conduct dragnet surveillance of Americans’ international communications, and it has none of the safeguards that the Constitution requires.
“Now that the appeals court has recognized that our clients have the right to challenge the law, we look forward to pressing that challenge in the trial court.”