• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How your DVR was hijacked to help epic cyberattack

Deuce said:
Yes, apdst, just a coincidence.

When somebody breaks into your car, do you blame road construction regulations for it? Would privatizing the DOT change anything about the situation? No, the issue wasn't the construction of the road. Your car's security was compromised.

This is how the botnet works. Various home devices were compromised via malicious software. Often delivered via the user opening an infected email or visiting a website that gives them the virus. Once compromised, the person spreading the virus can control certain behaviors on the device, often using them to gather personal data or credit card numbers. In this case, the controller of all these devices triggered them all to attack a set of servers that direct web traffic called a DNS server. The attacks are simple, simply using thousands of devices to flood the server with bogus information requests. The overload causes the server to be unable to deliver legitimate data, causing loss of access to the websites.

ICANN doesn't control what emails you open, or what websites you visit. It doesn't control what smart devices you buy, or what the security features in those devices are. ICANN would have no ability to stop an attack like this because it's way, way outside their area of control.

Blaming Obama for this attack is like calling the library when your car gets broken into.
Click to expand...

Again, you people turn to the rediculous to cover Obama's ass.
 
apdst said:
Again, you people turn to the rediculous to cover Obama's ass.
Click to expand...

Which part of the above do you believe to be incorrect?
 
poweRob said:
Make the tie. I await your proof with baited breath.
Click to expand...

Hard to blame Obama for this. However, the federal government needs to make internet hacking a far more serious offense. the US Sentencing Guidelines can easily be modified to increase the offense level for hacking based on the number of people affected. You do something like that was done the other day, millions of people affected. Give a point of relevant conduct for each thousand people affected, and you can get an offense level over 40 which means a hacker with even no criminal history is going to get 240 months in federal prison for starters. works for me, these internet hackers need to be absolutely crushed with prison sentences.
 
Deuce said:
Which part of the above do you believe to be incorrect?
Click to expand...

Why would I blame the DOTD for my car getting broken into? That's an idiotic comparison.
 
poweRob said:
So you have absolutely no proof... gotcha.

I'm sure you ffeeeeeeeel that that's the case though. :lol:
Click to expand...

Obama drones. Hillary Drones. Trump Drones. one thing in common, they'll defend their person no matter what.

Giving into internet globalism was the dumbest thing to do. I know you disagree because Obama is your lord and savior, but if you really use that brain of yours, you'll come up with the answer.
 
11Bravo said:
Obama drones. Hillary Drones. Trump Drones. one thing in common, they'll defend their person no matter what.

Giving into internet globalism was the dumbest thing to do. I know you disagree because Obama is your lord and savior, but if you really use that brain of yours, you'll come up with the answer.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the way debate works is you make your argument and then you back it up. That's how it works. I suppose you work on a different school of thought where you make wild guesses and conspiracy theories and just personally insult anyone who doesn't buy your ridiculous crap.

So back up your ridiculous nonsense. Or as in this cae where you are aligning yourself with apdst's argument, prove it.
 
poweRob said:
Yeah, the way debate works is you make your argument and then you back it up. That's how it works. I suppose you work on a different school of thought where you make wild guesses and conspiracy theories and just personally insult anyone who doesn't buy your ridiculous crap.

So back up your ridiculous nonsense.
Click to expand...


What "nonsense" did I argue in this "debate"? What good comes out of a globalism of the internet? I'm asking you to answer with common sense. No encyclopedia needed. This is a very easy question. How does that benefit your freedom? You must be an extremist drone.
 
11Bravo said:
What "nonsense" did I argue in this "debate"? What good comes out of a globalism of the internet? I'm asking you to answer with common sense. No encyclopedia needed. This is a very easy question. How does that benefit your freedom? You must be an extremist drone.
Click to expand...

The internet is global. What's you problem with that?

And can you ever make a post without a personal snark? You dont know me from Adams house cat so you should probably stop trying to make assumptions about me because you are failing badly and hurting your own argument in the process.
 
poweRob said:
The internet is global. What's you problem with that?

And can you ever make a post without a personal snark?
Click to expand...

It's privatized and not monitored as a whole by foreign governments. You may think my argument is stupid, but I'm lobbying for your right to privacy. If you don't think foreign governments (even allies) will take advantage of this new US sanctioned internet-sharing...well that's just sad.

I would think everyone on all sides of the board would be against this.
 
11Bravo said:
It's privatized and not monitored as a whole by foreign governments. You may think my argument is stupid, but I'm lobbying for your right to privacy. If you don't think foreign governments (even allies) will take advantage of this new US sanctioned internet-sharing...well that's just sad.

I would think everyone on all sides of the board would be against this.
Click to expand...

So you are going with the debunked Ted Cruz theory on this are you


Ted Cruz incorrect about Obama giving control of internet to UN-like body | PolitiFact Texas
 
poweRob said:
So you are going with the debunked Ted Cruz theory on this are you


Ted Cruz incorrect about Obama giving control of internet to UN-like body | PolitiFact Texas
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? Where did I say a UN counsel was setup for monitoring? The agreement (still in the early stages) just allows for foreign support and monitoring. I also never said Obama was GIVING AWAY CONTROL (as you posted the Cruz link). I said involving more governments.

I think your privacy is important and you may disagree, but I'll always fight for it.
 
apdst said:
Obama gave up control of the internet on October 1. In less than a month there's a massive cyber attack on The United States. Duh!
Click to expand...

Wha.....?

This is the most nonsensical statement I think I've ever actually seen lobbed by any side on this board.

Nothing about the switch over to ICANN had anything what so ever to do with this attack. Had the powers still be in US control at the time of this attack, it would have had zero impact.

Do you think "control of the internet" was some kind of magic power, where the US would just hit a button and magically end any cyber attack because CONTROL and 'MERICA?

Anthem Insurance had their 80 million records hacked. Banks in the US were part of a global hack that stole over $1 billion. The White House's unclassified network was compromised. The CIA Director's email was breached. Every federal employees personnel records dating back to 2000 were stolen. And those were all over just a 1 year period. And guess what, we still controlled domain naming at this time.

The amount of abundant ignorance regarding the internet and technology in your statement is just mind boggling to behold.

The swap over to ICANN had as much to do with your last visit to a porn site as it had to do with this hack.
 
11Bravo said:
What are you talking about? Where did I say a UN counsel was setup for monitoring? The agreement (still in the early stages) just allows for foreign support and monitoring. I also never said Obama was GIVING AWAY CONTROL (as you posted the Cruz link). I said involving more governments.

I think your privacy is important and you may disagree, but I'll always fight for it.
Click to expand...

Well when you commented me I was talking with a chap that said "thanks obama!" For giving away the internet and said that is why we got hacked. That's the conversation you stepped into when you quoted me and called me an obamabot. That's where the confusion happened.
 
apdst said:
BS, huh? You need to become more informed.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/an-internet-giveaway-to-the-u-n-1472421165
Click to expand...
You are obviously deficient in computer-history.

The US itself created ICANN in 1998 and committed to privatizing the organization in 1999. The United States hasn't had an active hand in managing DNS (internet addresses) in over 18 years.

ICANN is a multi-stakeholder entity ... which means its governance includes firms, individuals, and public interest groups. This ensures the Internet remains open, as it has always been.

Nations like Russia, China, and Iran want DNS governance to be multi-lateral ... government control reminiscent of a UN organization which means the Internet could become fragmented into regions/blocs etc.
 
Zyphlin said:
Wha.....?

This is the most nonsensical statement I think I've ever actually seen lobbed by any side on this board.

Nothing about the switch over to ICANN had anything what so ever to do with this attack. Had the powers still be in US control at the time of this attack, it would have had zero impact.

Do you think "control of the internet" was some kind of magic power, where the US would just hit a button and magically end any cyber attack because CONTROL and 'MERICA?

Anthem Insurance had their 80 million records hacked. Banks in the US were part of a global hack that stole over $1 billion. The White House's unclassified network was compromised. The CIA Director's email was breached. Every federal employees personnel records dating back to 2000 were stolen. And those were all over just a 1 year period. And guess what, we still controlled domain naming at this time.

The amount of abundant ignorance regarding the internet and technology in your statement is just mind boggling to behold.

The swap over to ICANN had as much to do with your last visit to a porn site as it had to do with this hack.
Click to expand...

You're obviously deficient in knowledge of world events.


Obama Admin. To Give Up Control Of The Internet To The World | The Daily Caller
 
NonoBadDog said:
For crying out loud. Really? Obama didn't do this. This is as much Obama as the creation of Mount Everest.
Click to expand...

Obama created Mt. Everest too? Damn!! :mrgreen:
 
apdst said:
Why would I blame the DOTD for my car getting broken into? That's an idiotic comparison.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Why would you blame Obama's decision on ICANN for a DVR getting broken into? That's an idiotic thing to do. Domain name distributions don't have anything to do with security features built in to smart devices, or home users opening infected emails.

apdst, you need to understand that there's literally no part of ICANN's authority that could prevent or encourage an attack like this.
 
Last edited:
danarhea said:
Oops, Zyphilin is not someone you can throw BS at. You are going to get your ass kicked. How do I know this? From experience. LOL.
Click to expand...

Is that a threat? If it is, I doubt anyone here can kick my ass and If I'm wrong, I'm sure I've been whipped by better men.
 
poweRob said:
Well when you commented me I was talking with a chap that said "thanks obama!" For giving away the internet and said that is why we got hacked. That's the conversation you stepped into when you quoted me and called me an obamabot. That's where the confusion happened.
Click to expand...

So do you think the globalization of the internet, from the facts I provided about my views, is a positive thing?
 
11Bravo said:
So do you think the globalization of the internet, from the facts I provided about my views, is a positive thing?
Click to expand...

I don't see the issue with it.
 
apdst said:
More reality for the deniers.

Internet Crashes Hard To Stop After Obama Internet Giveaway | The Daily Caller
Click to expand...

This article does absolutely nothing to substantiate its claim. Did you even read it?

They say that these attacks could be harder to stop. They don't bother trying to tell you why. They jump the conversation to foreign countries with weaker freedom of speech laws shutting down websites, which doesn't remotely change the cyber attack situation.

The source of a botnet DDOS attack is infected devices on the user end.

apdst, it's not the government that comes to your rescue when an attack like this is underway, so whether or not the US controls ICANN is irrelevant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom