3 ms·
> So far I haven't seen any evidences that there was cable splicing. Thus using occam's razor I would assume that the hack was much simpler than that. What? Th
by kllrnohj 13y ago
> So far I haven't seen any evidences that there was cable splicing. Thus using occam's razor I would assume that the hack was much simpler than that.
What? The evidence totally points to cable splicing. What hack involves getting all the inter-DC packets but nothing else? Obviously the machines weren't compromised, or they wouldn't have cared about reverse-engineering the wire protocol. So what are you proposing was hacked?
> I'll re-iterate that security should be built on defense-in-depth principle. Every single protection layer will fail or someone will go around it. The assumption that a data center is "safe" is a bad assumption period. You have to play "what-if" game and think for the attacker.
And I'll re-iterate that you're asking for a goddamn magical pony.
Side note, if your data center isn't safe go get a new one. Seriously. Most DCs have tons of security to make them safe. That's not an assumption.
- lsh123 13y ago> The evidence totally points to cable splicing. I don't think there are any evidences at all. As far as I know, the only known thing is that NSA was able to obtain the un-encrypted google traffic. For example, it could have been backdoor in the router, one extra cable in the switch, or a few other similar low-tech options. > Most DCs have tons of security to make them safe. Don't disagree. But this doesn't make them invincible from other attack vectors (e.g. rogue employees). I actually heard the same argument from quite a few people during interviews and I usually don't hire them because you have to be paranoid to get security right :)