World Wide Web

[alexander]

Scientists have come to decide that by 2014 most people will be directly dependant on the internet, and that in itself can cause a destructive terrorist attack on the Net.

A study called "The Future of the Internet" has showed that 66% of people asked, everyone from students, to industry workers, government officials and all other people interested in this problem, think that at least one destructive attack on the internet infrastructure is guaranteed to people within the next 10 years. What kind of terrorist act it will be is so far only a subject hypothesese. Some experts think that together with the ever growing complexity of the internet structure itself, the viruses will also become a lot more complex and dangerous. Others think that although the attack can cause some miscomfort, it will probably not result in death of any people. Specialists are sure that the attack on the web will not be very distructive. Susan Fox, the projects director says "Now, many people are working to harden the security of the web, so you must be absolutely sure that a full distruction of the web will not happen."

Scientists agree that terrorism is not as big of a problem as peoples growing WWW dependancy. The research shows that by 2014 most of utilities and tools used will be connected to the web. And as a result, more arrests will be made because government control over what people do will be far greeater even in democratic governments, nevermind the totaliterrian ones.

Although some experts dont agree that these tools will be used to only arrest people, most agree that such connections to the internet will completely destroy "private life".

Overlooking the easiness that would come from such a web, by 2014 the web would still not be as protected as people like. Because of that, american people for example, would still not be able to vote online. Curtis Hans, the head of the commitee that studies american voting system says "I'm not sure that even in 100 years, citizens of USA will be able to select their leader online. In order to vote online, you need to be 100% sure that you have protection from viruses, hackers, and errors within the system. I dont think that that will ever happen."

 

translation from http://www.utro.ru/articles/2005/01/18/397468.shtml

[Tormod]

I have read somewhere that virus attacks are already being used as part of warfare. I don't remember wher eI read it though, possibly New Scientist during the last Gulf War.

[pgrmdave]

We aren't 100% sure that there are no errors in the current system, in fact, we ARE sure that there are errors in it.

[lindagarrette]

I think the threat is minimal. That's not to say that worse spamming could do a lot of harm. But there is no way to attack an infrastructure per se.

 

 

From "How Stuff Works." One of the greatest things about the Internet is that nobody really owns it. It is a global collection of networks, both big and small. These networks connect together in many different ways to form the single entity that we know as the Internet. In fact, the very name comes from this idea of interconnected networks. Since its beginning in 1969, the Internet has grown from four host computer systems to tens of millions. However, just because nobody owns the Internet, it doesn't mean it is not monitored and maintained in different ways. The Internet Society, a non-profit group established in 1992, oversees the formation of the policies and protocols that define how we use and interact with the Internet.

[Tormod]

Yet it was only about a year ago or so that one single router went down and stopped Internet traffic around the world.

[lindagarrette]

Yet it was only about a year ago or so that one single router went down and stopped Internet traffic around the world.

Never heard of such a thing. I've been on the internet almost 10 years and recently almost continuously. Local servers have crashed but nothing has done any damage to the data I have stored on cyperspace since almost the beginning. I don't see how it could. Maybe you could explain or at least give an example.

[lindagarrette]

Yet it was only about a year ago or so that one single router went down and stopped Internet traffic around the world.

Here's why I think you are wrong.

 

 

 

Main > Computer > Hardware

 

How Routers Work

by Curt Franklin

 

Table of Contents function ViewTOC (selSelectObject) { if (selSelectObject.options[selSelectObject.selectedIndex].value != "") { location.href=selSelectObject.options[selSelectObject.selectedIndex].value } } Introduction to How Routers Work Keeping the Messages Moving Directing Traffic Transmitting Packets The Path of a Packet Routing Packets: An Example Knowing Where to Send Data Logical Addresses MAC Addresses Understanding the Protocols Tracing a Message Denial of Service Attacks Backbone of the Internet Lots More Information Shop or Compare Prices Transmitting Packets

When you make a telephone call to someone on the other side of the country, the telephone system establishes a stable circuit between your telephone and the telephone you're calling. The circuit might involve a half dozen or more steps through copper cables, switches, fiber optics, microwaves and satellites, but those steps are established and remain constant for the duration of the call. This circuit approach means that the quality of the line between you and the person you're calling is consistent throughout the call, but a problem with any portion of the circuit -- maybe a tree falls across one of the lines used, or there's a power problem with a switch -- brings your call to an early and abrupt end. When you send an e-mail message with an attachment to the other side of the country, a very different process is used.

 

Internet data, whether in the form of a Web page, a downloaded file or an e-mail message, travels over a system known as a packet-switching network. In this system, the data in a message or file is broken up into packages about 1,500 bytes long. Each of these packages gets a wrapper that includes information on the sender's address, the receiver's address, the package's place in the entire message, and how the receiving computer can be sure that the package arrived intact. Each data package, called a packet, is then sent off to its destination via the best available route -- a route that might be taken by all the other packets in the message or by none of the other packets in the message. This might seem very complicated compared to the circuit approach used by the telephone system, but in a network designed for data there are two huge advantages to the packet-switching plan.

• The network can balance the load across various pieces of equipment on a millisecond-by-millisecond basis.
  
• If there is a problem with one piece of equipment in the network while a message is being transferred, packets can be routed around the problem, ensuring the delivery of the entire message.
  

[Tormod]

Linda, I was wrong about the time. It was in October 2002.

 

Here is a document outlining the event (PDF):

http://www.isoc-chicago.org/internetoutage.pdf

[lindagarrette]

Well, it wasn't a single router and it only affected some (although major) servers. The worst result was a slowdown for about 20 percent of the users on the Worldcom network.

 

October 21, 2002 – DDoS Attacks Against the 13 Internet Root

Servers In the afternoon of this otherwise normal Monday, on October 21, 2002, a series of wellcoordinated, simultaneous DDoS attacks were launched from various points around the world, against each of the 13 Root Servers that are used for the Internet’s Domain Name System (DNS). The attack, which disabled nine of the 13 Root Servers, started at 4:45 pm EDT, lasted for about one hour. The most affected Root Servers during this attack are listed below: A VeriSign Global Registry Services Herndon VA, US G U.S. DOD Network Information Center Vienna VA, US H U.S. Army Research Lab Aberdeen MD, US

I Autonomica Stockholm, SE J VeriSign Global Registry Services Herndon VA, US K Reseaux IP Europeens - Network Coordination Centre London, UK M WIDE Project Tokyo, JP

 

Ordinary Internet users experienced no slowdowns or

outages because of safeguards built into the

Internet's architecture. A longer, more extensive

attack could have seriously damaged worldwide

electronic communications, the source said.

Internet Software Consortium Inc. Chairman Paul Vixie

said that if more servers went down, and if the

hackers sustained their hour-long strike a bit

longer, Internet users around the world would have

begun to see delays and failed connections.

[alexander]

What about an attack on the .com domain name servers? I think that it will be possible that screw up the DNS services, and that should be a good hit on the internet infrastructure... And i dont only mean a virus attack, what about a phisical attack also on their main sites?

[alexander]

When you send an e-mail message with an attachment to the other side of the country, a very different process is used.

Very much agreed, but what if instead of a tree falling on a wire you have a nuke falling on the mail server, does your email get to its final destination then, after the ok packet has been sent from the mail server back to yours so it thinks its all ok?

[alexander]

We aren't 100% sure that there are no errors in the current system, in fact, we ARE sure that there are errors in it.

even the most secure piece of software has possible bugs, i dont know who said this, but i know it was said in latin first, "if one man could build something, another man can definately destroy it."

 

i gotta stop clicking post every time i think i'm done...

[lindagarrette]

Longevity has greatly improved the security of hardware and software. In the early days, when I was a beginning programmer (1401 Autocoder) it was mostly trial and error. Some systems are so sophisticated and redundant these days that failure rate on NASA applications, for instance, is less than ,01%. How far you go depend's on the cost benefit analysis.

[alexander]

agreed, but the other side example linux kernel code had very small percentage of errors (refer to one of the threads below) when 3.6 came out, now 99% is patched up, but does it mean that it is impossible to break into a linux machine? Even CIA computers get hacked every now and then, NASA, FBI, Gov Officials ... etc. the only protection that hasnt been broken through code is the write protection on a floppy...