ZDNet UK


Skip to Main Content

ZDNet.co.uk - Winner of Best Business Website 2007
  1. Home
  2. News
  3. Blogs
  4. Reviews
  5. Prices
  6. Resources
  7. Community
  8. My ZDNet

 

ZDNet UK RSS Feeds


IT Jobs

Security threats Toolkit

Government sites defaced in US, UK and Australia

Richard Barry ZDNet.co.uk

Published: 22 Jan 2001 13:24 GMT

  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendly
  • Post Comment

Government sites in the US, UK and Australia were reportedly hit by a single group of hackers Saturday in what has been described as the most systematic defacement of world-wide government servers on the Web.

According to reports on hacking news site attrition.org, the attacks occurred at the same time across three different timezones with the hackers' logo and the message "presents... the largest .gov and .mil mass defacement in the history of mankind".

The hackers, who call themselves Pentaguard, reportedly hit several UK sites including www.bseinquiry.gov.uk (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy -- Mad Cow Disease) and www.hull-lea.gov.uk (Kingston upon Hull Lea City government). US attacks included the Republican Caucus for the Californian Leglislature.

Andrew Cormaq, head of CERT (Computer Emergency Response Team), at the UK's educational network Janet says that the defacements are unlikely to indicate a serious breach at government level.

"The central government network doesn't extend to local government," he says. "Some of the sites were even hosted by ISPs. Technically it is probably quite run of the mill."

Tom Watson, senior security auditor at European security firm Defcom, says that government and military sites still have a certain allure for computer hackers. "Obviously there is a lot of kudos within the hacking community for targeting these sites. It is something of a Holy Grail."

However, Watkinson also says that hackers defacing Web sites often rely on well-known straightforward vulnerabilities that are only found on Web servers.

Pentaguard has previously claimed responsibility for defacing Chinese government sites for its occupation of Tibet, as well as government sites in Kuwait, Romania, Georgia and Vietnam. Cormaq says that this round of defacements do not appear to have been politically motivated.

See what the hackers wrote.

Take me to Hackers

Have your say instantly, and see what others have said. Click on the TalkBack button and go to the ZDNet News forum.

What do you think? Tell the Mailroom. And read what others have said.

  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendly Print with HP

Did you find this article useful?
45 out of 92 people found this useful


Full Talkback thread

0 comments

Company/Topic Alerts

Create a new alert from the list below:









Related Jobs

QA (Quality Assurance) Auditor

QA (Quality Assurance) Auditor QA (Quality Assurance) Auditor: My client is a small, independent diagnostics company who are very much in the ...

Security Consultant Ethical Hacking / Penetration Testing - London

Responsibilities: - Deliver security assessment services including network scanning, vulnerability testing, penetration testing, search engine ...

QA (Quality Assurance) Auditor II, Global CRO, Berkshire

QA (Quality Assurance) Auditor II, Global CRO, Berkshire QA (Quality Assurance) Auditor II: My client is one of the worlds leading CROs, with sites ...

Sentry Posts Blog

Mobile Linux Better For Mobile Busines...

Mobile Linux Better For Mobile Business Apps? Author: Eric Everson, MyMobiSafe.com As mobile Linux is carving it’s footprint on the future of mobile application development, the... More

Post a comment

DWP downplays security breach

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has admitted that some of its staff have been forwarding passwords with password protected material. An email that was leaked on the 'Dizzy... More

Post a comment

How many headshots does one chairperso...

We got a strange request last week from the head of PR from Russian security experts Kaspersky. It seems although the company was very happy with the interview we recently carried with... More

Post a comment

Featured Talkback

On the contrary, if vendors were forced to stand behind their products it should increase innovation. It would force more, and better , testing before hitting the sales floor, resulting in fewer updates and less downtime for the consumer. At present the EULA removes responsibility from the vendor, and moves it to the user, which is a step backward. Make the vendor responsibility for their code.

By: ator1940

Read full story:
RSA: Vendor liability may stifle innovation