Re: [Full-disclosure] back to high value targets
On Jan 31, 2008 2:43 PM, coderman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ... > two cables: > FLAG Europe-Asia and SeaMeWe-4 now up to nine or more... > you'd be surprised how often trawlers, boat anchors, cable scavengers > (yes, really!) and even marine life sever under sea cables... or maybe > you wouldn't. > > no need to attribute to skilled malice (NSA taps from the undersea bay > of the Jimmy Carter sub fiber splicing deck) what is easily > accomplished via sheer stupidity or carelessness or simple bad luck. after the third cut, and geographically disperse cuts along strategic routes services the same nations, the odds of accidental cuts have rapidly approached zero. http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/ConnectingTheDots.htm """ By my count, we are probably dealing with as many as eight, maybe even nine, unexplained cut or damaged undersea cables within the last week, and not the mere three or four that most mainstream news media outlets in the United States are presently reporting. Given all this cable-cutting mayhem in the last several days, who knows but what there may possibly be other cut and/or damaged cables that have not made it into the news cycle, because they are lost in the general cable-cutting noise by this point... The evidence therefore suggests that we are looking at a coordinated program of undersea cable sabotage by an actor, or actors, on the international stage with an anti-Muslim bias, as well as a proclivity for destructive violence in the Middle Eastern region. The question then becomes: are there any actors on the international stage who exhibit a strong, anti-Muslim bias in their foreign relations, who have the technical capability to carry out clandestine sabotage operations on the sea floor, and who have exhibited a pattern of violently destructive policies towards Muslim peoples and nations, especially in the Middle East region? The answer is yes, there are two: Israel and the United States of America. """ such sabotage has long been possible and widely acknowledged, but this type of warfare leads to escalating attrition and is something no nation has every eagerly embraced. if this is the start of coordinated warfare against telecommunications infrastructure, god help the intarwebs... (no ones wins in these battles, it merely becomes a question of who loses the most and how quickly) enjoy the show gmaggro, it will be interesting. ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] back to high value targets
On Jan 31, 2008 2:43 PM, coderman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ... > > On a somewhat related note, it's always been my guess that very little > > net traffic, relatively speaking, is carried over satellites due to the > > distance and lag issues. Is this a foolish notion? > > i don't know figures (anyone?) but this tends to be the case. sats > are great for broadcast relay, but suck for low latency bi-directional > comms. however, they do make useful backups. how else are you going > to get data back and forth across the planet when those fibers get > sliced? forgot to mention, they are definitely used for data, i just don't know how much. Mentat even provides a dedicated appliance with modified TCP like reliable stream delivery over sat links to accommodate the long, wide pipe characteristics of satellite transport. your typical TCP stack will severely under-utilize a sat link due to the latencies involved. ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] back to high value targets
On Jan 31, 2008 12:35 PM, gmaggro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ... > And a quip from the article that just tickles me pink: "...The outage, > which is being blamed on a fault in a single undersea cable..." two cables: FLAG Europe-Asia and SeaMeWe-4 > This is all assuming that the story is true; that it is one cable, and > not a cover for something else. Glomar Explorer and K-129 anyone? Maybe > they're just patching in another Echelon node, hehe :) you'd be surprised how often trawlers, boat anchors, cable scavengers (yes, really!) and even marine life sever under sea cables... or maybe you wouldn't. no need to attribute to skilled malice (NSA taps from the undersea bay of the Jimmy Carter sub fiber splicing deck) what is easily accomplished via sheer stupidity or carelessness or simple bad luck. > Doesn't really matter how or why the damage occured, the point is that > fairly massive single points of failure clearly exist. rarely single points, but pairs or small groups. the moment you get a good pair of failures in a critical link, you often see cascading failures, and it turns into a a cyclone of crap hitting fans.. whee > What does matter > is how similar results could be replicated by a loose coalition of > like-minded individuals using highly insecure media. "i wuz just fishin' fur dungeness offisah, didnt mean no harmz to dem cablz!!" > I seriously wonder what the bandwidth of those are. DWDM can get pretty fat. the economic incentives to squeeze as much bandwidth as possible through every single strand makes these the phattest of the phat pipes, in general. > On a somewhat related note, it's always been my guess that very little > net traffic, relatively speaking, is carried over satellites due to the > distance and lag issues. Is this a foolish notion? i don't know figures (anyone?) but this tends to be the case. sats are great for broadcast relay, but suck for low latency bi-directional comms. however, they do make useful backups. how else are you going to get data back and forth across the planet when those fibers get sliced? ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] back to high value targets
Maybe I'm going about this wrong? I suspect if you figured out a way to downgrade a handful of bond/investment companies we might be eating squirrel meat in the local park come spring ;) ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] back to high value targets
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:39:57 EST, Dude VanWinkle said: > On Jan 31, 2008 3:51 PM, gmaggro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > One planned for Egypt-France is 8 pair, each pair doing 128 lambdas > > > at 10Gbit per lambda. Do the math. > > > > That's a lot of retards > > And they dont have to upgrade the fiber in order to upgrade the > bandwidth. They use the same fiber and just swap out the lasers on > either side Within limits - the replacement laser has to be something that works with the regen units located every 30 to 50 miles or so along the cable (incidentally, getting power to a regen unit that's 1,500 miles down the cable and under 4 miles of water is non-trivial - the usual solution for that is to pump a high-voltage feed down a copper conductor in the cable. Only one conductor is needed, because salt water makes a *very* good ground. ;) ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] back to high value targets
On Jan 31, 2008 3:51 PM, gmaggro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > One planned for Egypt-France is 8 pair, each pair doing 128 lambdas > > at 10Gbit per lambda. Do the math. > > That's a lot of retards And they dont have to upgrade the fiber in order to upgrade the bandwidth. They use the same fiber and just swap out the lasers on either side -JP ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] back to high value targets
> One planned for Egypt-France is 8 pair, each pair doing 128 lambdas > at 10Gbit per lambda. Do the math. That's a lot of retards ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] back to high value targets
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:35:19 EST, gmaggro said: > I seriously wonder what the bandwidth of those are. One planned for Egypt-France is 8 pair, each pair doing 128 lambdas at 10Gbit per lambda. Do the math. ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
[Full-disclosure] back to high value targets
Several months ago I blathered about this topic, and the following incident backs some of my previous assertions: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/31/internet.blackout.asia And a quip from the article that just tickles me pink: "...The outage, which is being blamed on a fault in a single undersea cable..." This is all assuming that the story is true; that it is one cable, and not a cover for something else. Glomar Explorer and K-129 anyone? Maybe they're just patching in another Echelon node, hehe :) Doesn't really matter how or why the damage occured, the point is that fairly massive single points of failure clearly exist. What does matter is how similar results could be replicated by a loose coalition of like-minded individuals using highly insecure media. Tons of maps and resources at wikipedia and www.iscpc.org/cabledb/01Cable_Database_Page.htm I seriously wonder what the bandwidth of those are. Clearly they're not as well planned or maintained as one might think, so I suspect slop abounds in other areas of their configuration. Could one million retards with cablemodems saturate a cable? How would you co-ordinate entry points for huge masses of nodes such that you could be certain the output was confined to a single cable? On a somewhat related note, it's always been my guess that very little net traffic, relatively speaking, is carried over satellites due to the distance and lag issues. Is this a foolish notion? Hail Xenu! ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
