Attorney-General Robert McClelland. Photo: Marco Del Grande
Cyber espionage and foreign interference pose serious threats to Australia’s national security, the federal attorney-general says.
“The next ten years will undoubtedly see a marked intensification of this activity,” McClelland told a Sydney summit discussing the decade since the attacks of September 11, 2001.
McClelland pointed to recent prominent cyber attacks such as Ghostnet, which infected computers belonging to the office of the Dalai Lama and Stuxnet which brought Estonia to a virtual standstill.
“These attacks and the threat to critical infrastructure such as banking, telecommunications and government systems is not something we can be complacent about,” he said yesterday.
The Australian government has made cyber security a top national security priority and is investing to significantly enhance Australia’s cyber security capabilities, he added.
The global and interconnected nature of the internet means the threat extends beyond nations.
“For this reason it is critical that laws designed to combat cyber threats are harmonised, or at least compatible to allow for international cooperation,” McClelland told the conference hosted by the United States Studies Centre.
The government is seeking to strengthen international arrangements by moving to accede to the Council of European Convention on Cybercrime.
This is the only binding international treaty on this “significant threat”, he said.
“[Accession to the convention] will help Australian agencies to better prevent, detect and prosecute cyber intrusions.”
VANCOUVER, British Columbia, June 22, 2011 /PRNewswire-Asia/ — By following insider trading activities – or the trades being made by executives within a company – you can get the inside track on what is happening with your investments. Today Insiderslab.com has issued special stock trading reports for Caterpillar, Halliburton, NetApp, JDS Uniphase, Intuit, Salesforce.com. For example Caterpillar 90-Day net sell amount reached $2.65 Million by company C-Level Officers and Directors, at CAT stock price (US$110.37 – 115.49).
Insiderslab.com generates daily reports on insider trading activities. These reports clearly separate open-market from non-open market insider trades allowing investors to easily screen out the noise typically associated with thousands of insider trades reported by the SEC on a daily basis.
(Read full report by clicking the link below, you may need to copy and paste the full link to your browser.)
(Reuters) – The recent spate of cyber attacks have raised questions about the security of government and corporate computer systems, and the ability of law enforcement to track down hackers.
Here’s a breakdown of the different types of cyber assaults, from “hactivists” to serious criminals.
DISSIDENT HACKERS SEEKING MAXIMUM PUBLICITY
The Lulz Security and Anonymous groups have broken into computer servers to steal data that they publish on the Internet to embarrass their targets. Examples of this include LulzSec hacking into Fox TV’s “X Factor” contestant database, or breaking into FBI affiliate Infraguard and publishing its user base.
So-called hactivists also use distributed denial of service (DDOS) attacks, in which they get supporters to crash the websites of their targets by overwhelming the servers with traffic. The Anonymous group launched DOS attacks against Visa and MasterCard because the group thought the companies were hostile to Wikileaks and its founder Julian Assange.
CYBER ATTACKS FOR FINANCIAL GAIN
Primarily based on getting financial information, such as payment card data or bank account details, perpetrators tend to keep their attacks secret because the data is more valuable if victims do not know it has been stolen.
Citigroup disclosed that unknown hackers in May had stolen information from 360,083 credit card accounts in North America, in what was the most significant known direct assault on a financial institution.
These attacks can come from just about anywhere, although Western security experts have said that Russia and China deliberately turn a blind eye to this kind of activity from within their borders, provided it is not targeted domestically.
GOVERNMENT OR STATE-BACKED ATTACKS
Hacking by governments or state-sponsored groups is usually aimed at stealing classified information, such as military secrets or other prized data. Security experts have cited attacks on the International Monetary Fund and Google Inc’s email service as recent examples.
There is often finger-pointing at Russia and China after such attacks, although experts suspect other nations including the United States of using this technique more quietly.
There are also occasional suspected state-backed DDOS attacks, such as on Estonia and Georgia in 2007.
FROM VIRTUAL NETWORKS TO THE REAL WORLD
These are cyber attacks aimed at causing actual physical damage, such as by hacking into industrial computer controls to destroy military assets or public infrastructure.
The Stuxnet virus, which Iran has said was used to attack computers at its Bushehr nuclear reactor, is the only case so far that security experts widely agree fits into this category.
(Reporting by Marius Bosch and Jim Finkle; editing by Tiffany Wu)
London, June 25(ANI): The Chinese government represents one of the most significant espionage threats to the United Kingdom, a British official has said.
“They (the Chinese government) continue to devote considerable time and energy trying to steal our sensitive technology on civilian and military projects and trying to obtain political and economic intelligence at our expense,” The Telegraph quoted Jonathan Evans, the Director General of British intelligence agency MI5, as saying.
Evans’ comment comes ahead of Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao’s visit to the UK for the UK-China Strategic Summit.
The summit is an annual meeting between the two nations and is aimed at building bilateral relations.
Jiabao will also meet British Prime Minister David Cameron on Sunday.
Earlier, a 14-page “restricted” report from MI5’s Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure (CPNI) last year had described how China attacked British defence, energy, communications and manufacturing companies in a concerted hacking campaign.
The report had claimed that Chinese agents were trying to cultivate “long-term relationships” with the employees of key British companies.
“Chinese intelligence services have also been known to exploit vulnerabilities such as sexual relationships and illegal activities to pressurize individuals to co-operate with them,” the report had said.
It also warned that hotel rooms in major Chinese cities, such as Beijing and Shanghai, frequented by foreigners, were likely to be bugged and have been searched while the occupants are out of the room. (ANI)
A former KPMG senior manager caught insider trading has been ordered to undertake community service for two years.
In the NSW Supreme Court on Friday, Justice Peter Hall sentenced Andrew Dalzell to two years’ imprisonment, to be served by way of ‘an intensive correction order’.
Under the order, the 49-year-old unemployed Randwick man is required to undertake a minimum of 32 hours of community service a month.
He had pleaded guilty to one charge of insider trading, relating to his purchase of 40,000 shares in the printing company Promentum Limited in November 2006.
At the time, the KPMG senior manager was part of a team advising Promentum about a proposal to acquire another printing company, MacMillan Group.
Dalzell paid $52,369 for the shares, but two weeks later when the offence was detected, he resigned from his job and sold the shares at a loss of about $3000.
The judge said the insider trading was at the lower end of seriousness for such offences and did not involve a ‘gross abuse’ of highly confidential information.
Dalzell told the judge that a confidential report to which he had access played only a part in his decision to buy the shares.
Over the years, he had followed printing companies and the report was only a ‘stage-one pitch document’, he said.
In saying he had not recognised he was acting in a criminal way, Dalzell noted he bought the shares in his own ‘unusual’ name and used his usual broker.
But Justice Hall concluded he must have known what he did was ‘wrong and an abuse of trust’, although he may not have been mindful of the serious criminality of his acts.
He said Dalzell’s purchase had the potential to make him substantial profits.
The judge also referred to the need for general deterrence in sentencing, as insider trading had the capacity to undermine the integrity of the market and diminish public confidence.
