4 ms·

I have no idea what the submitters intent was, but I upvoted this and am commenting on it because I think that it's interesting. If the anti-botnet vendor's as

by rm-rf 17y ago

I have no idea what the submitters intent was, but I upvoted this and am commenting on it because I think that it's interesting. If the anti-botnet vendor's assertion is true, that the botnet was ordinary/amateur, then the much of what the media called 'advanced persistent threats' and 'state sponsored' attacks would be incorrect. If major corporations got beaten by amateurs, the state of corporate desktop security is far worse than I imagined. The assertion originated from a security tool vendor though, so one must assume that they are severely biased toward selling security tools.

iuguy 17y ago
We don't sell security tools but do deal with this type of stuff. You'd be surprised at the state of corporate desktop security and how easy it is to get hit. To be honest the line between APT, the more advanced criminal stuff and the run of the mill botnets are more blurred than most vendors would be happy to say, especially when information is bought and sold anyway (so in theory the chinese government wouldn't even need to attack people).
- rm-rf 17y ago
  That's interesting. I thought I was the only one with fifty thousand unsecured desktops on my network. It's nice to know I have company. Not really.
kvs 17y ago
'advanced persistent threats': Also means having the discipline to use just the right amount of force. "Advanced" in APT could just be the mindset of the threat not necessarily the sophistication of exploit.
anamax 17y ago
> If the anti-botnet vendor's assertion is true, that the botnet was ordinary/amateur, then the much of what the media called 'advanced persistent threats' and 'state sponsored' attacks would be incorrect. That conclusion doesn't follow from the premises offered. Govts use amateur tools all the time. Govt does not imply competent or well-run - see your local DMV for an example.

by rm-rf 17y ago

iuguy 17y ago

We don't sell security tools but do deal with this type of stuff. You'd be surprised at the state of corporate desktop security and how easy it is to get hit. To be honest the line between APT, the more advanced criminal stuff and the run of the mill botnets are more blurred than most vendors would be happy to say, especially when information is bought and sold anyway (so in theory the chinese government wouldn't even need to attack people).

rm-rf 17y ago
That's interesting. I thought I was the only one with fifty thousand unsecured desktops on my network. It's nice to know I have company. Not really.

kvs 17y ago

'advanced persistent threats': Also means having the discipline to use just the right amount of force. "Advanced" in APT could just be the mindset of the threat not necessarily the sophistication of exploit.

anamax 17y ago

> If the anti-botnet vendor's assertion is true, that the botnet was ordinary/amateur, then the much of what the media called 'advanced persistent threats' and 'state sponsored' attacks would be incorrect. That conclusion doesn't follow from the premises offered. Govts use amateur tools all the time. Govt does not imply competent or well-run - see your local DMV for an example.