Attacks/Breaches
10/22/2012
04:52 PM
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Who Is Hacking U.S. Banks? 8 Facts

Hackers have labeled the bank website disruptions as grassroots-level reprisal for an anti-Islamic film. But is the Iranian government really backing the attacks?
Previous
6 of 8
Next


Iranian officials, responding to allegations made by U.S. officials that the Iranian government is directing Operation Ababil, have denied all involvement. In response, U.S. officials have highlighted the Iranian government's announcement earlier this year that it had created a military "cyber corps" to help the country block future attacks of the Stuxnet variety.

In February 2012, notably, Brig. Gen. Gholam-Reza Jalali (above), who heads the Passive Defense Organization of Iran (PDOI), reportedly said that "Iran has begun to operate its first cyber army," while in later interviews, he said that a new "cyber command" would help Iran "develop mechanisms for cyber defense in a way that we will be able to defend the country against new viruses." Might the country's cyber plan also include offensive operations?

RECOMMENDED READING

Iran Denies Hacking American Banks, Censors Google

PNC Bank Hit By Crowdsourced Hacktivist Attacks

Bank Site Attacks Trigger Ongoing Outages, Customer Anger

Bank Hacks: 7 Misunderstood Facts

Hackers Launch New Wave Of U.S. Bank Attacks

U.S. Bank Hacks Expand; Regions Financial Hit

Bank Hacks: Iran Blame Game Intensifies

DOD: Hackers Breached U.S. Critical Infrastructure Control Systems

Previous
6 of 8
Next
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Leo Regulus
50%
50%
Leo Regulus,
User Rank: Apprentice
10/24/2012 | 4:52:32 PM
re: Who Is Hacking U.S. Banks? 8 Facts
Very disappointed in Editor's choice of article format. This has been extensively discussed in the past.
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Dark Reading, September 16, 2014
Malicious software is morphing to be more targeted, stealthy, and destructive. Are you prepared to stop it?
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2014-3090
Published: 2014-09-23
IBM Rational ClearCase 7.1 before 7.1.2.15, 8.0.0 before 8.0.0.12, and 8.0.1 before 8.0.1.5 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) via a crafted XML document containing a large number of nested entity references, a similar issue to CVE-2003-1564.

CVE-2014-3101
Published: 2014-09-23
The login form in the Web component in IBM Rational ClearQuest 7.1 before 7.1.2.15, 8.0.0 before 8.0.0.12, and 8.0.1 before 8.0.1.5 does not insert a delay after a failed authentication attempt, which makes it easier for remote attackers to obtain access via a brute-force attack.

CVE-2014-3103
Published: 2014-09-23
The Web component in IBM Rational ClearQuest 7.1 before 7.1.2.15, 8.0.0 before 8.0.0.12, and 8.0.1 before 8.0.1.5 does not set the secure flag for the session cookie in an https session, which makes it easier for remote attackers to capture this cookie by intercepting its transmission within an http...

CVE-2014-3104
Published: 2014-09-23
IBM Rational ClearQuest 7.1 before 7.1.2.15, 8.0.0 before 8.0.0.12, and 8.0.1 before 8.0.1.5 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) via a crafted XML document containing a large number of nested entity references, a similar issue to CVE-2003-1564.

CVE-2014-3105
Published: 2014-09-23
The OSLC integration feature in the Web component in IBM Rational ClearQuest 7.1 before 7.1.2.15, 8.0.0 before 8.0.0.12, and 8.0.1 before 8.0.1.5 provides different error messages for failed login attempts depending on whether the username exists, which allows remote attackers to enumerate account n...

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio