Tuesday, February 17, 2015

military-backed criminal superhacking, or, three stacks for uncle sugar, one stack for me?

NYTimes |  In a report to be published on Monday, and provided in advance to The New York Times, Kaspersky Lab says that the scope of this attack on more than 100 banks and other financial institutions in 30 nations could make it one of the largest bank thefts ever — and one conducted without the usual signs of robbery.

The Moscow-based firm says that because of nondisclosure agreements with the banks that were hit, it cannot name them. Officials at the White House and the F.B.I. have been briefed on the findings, but say that it will take time to confirm them and assess the losses.

Kaspersky Lab says it has seen evidence of $300 million in theft through clients, and believes the total could be triple that. But that projection is impossible to verify because the thefts were limited to $10 million a transaction, though some banks were hit several times. In many cases the hauls were more modest, presumably to avoid setting off alarms.

The majority of the targets were in Russia, but many were in Japan, the United States and Europe.
No bank has come forward acknowledging the theft, a common problem that President Obama alluded to on Friday when he attended the first White House summit meeting on cybersecurity and consumer protection at Stanford University. He urged passage of a law that would require public disclosure of any breach that compromised personal or financial information.

But the industry consortium that alerts banks to malicious activity, the Financial Services Information Sharing and Analysis Center, said in a statement that “our members are aware of this activity. We have disseminated intelligence on this attack to the members,” and that “some briefings were also provided by law enforcement entities.”


BigDonOne said...

--The last line says it all, "current limitations in the FARS dataset do not allow calculation of unbiased, reliable and valid estimates of the risk of crash involvement that results from drug use.", i.e., the included graphic is bogus for weed. Preparers of that chart were probably under the influence when they drafted it....

BD suggests a different study---> http://seattle.cbslocal.com/2014/02/04/study-fatal-car-crashes-involving-marijuana-have-tripled/ "According to a recent study, fatal car crashes involving pot use have tripled in the U.S. ...one of nine drivers involved in fatal crashes would test positive for marijuana..[based on data from] over 23,500 drivers that died within one hour of a crash between 1999 and 2010.... researchers found that drugs played an increasing role in fatal traffic accidents. ...
researchers also found that marijuana was the main drug involved in the increase. It contributed to 12 percent of fatal crashes, compared to only 4 percent in 1999. ...“If a driver is under the influence of alcohol, their risk of a fatal crash is 13 times higher than the risk of the driver who is not under the influence of alcohol,” Li said. “But if the driver is under the influence of both alcohol and marijuana, their risk increased to 24 times that of a sober person.; "

Dale Asberry said...

Silly rabbit, trix are for kids!

BigDonOne said...

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Driver-17-sentenced-in-Kitsap-Co-crash-that-killed-3-292781421.html "The 17-year-old driver in a Kitsap County crash that killed three high school classmates was sentenced ...teen pleaded guilty last month to three counts of vehicular homicide...driver told sheriff's deputies the four had been at a party and that he had smoked marijuana about an hour before the wreck. He said he was traveling about 75 mph in a 45-mph zone."