Undersea Cables Cut: Oops or Uh-oh?

The questions I have in mind that can apply equally to both business or military

What competitive/strategic advantages could be gained from these events?

Who would be the most likely to be able to make the most of those gains?



To refresh...here's a timeline of the cable events:

Originally posted by Golack
First cable cut
===============
Jan 30 (Wed) 0800 FLAG cable; 8.3km from Alexandria in Egypt.
[link to news.bbc.co.uk]

Second cable cut
================
Jan 30 (Wed) SEA-ME-WE4 cable thought to lie alongside FLAG cable was also split; 56km from Dubai.
(same BBC link as first cable above)

Third cable cut
===============
Feb 1 (Fri) FLAG Falcon fibre optic cable running through the Suez to Sri Lanka; cut somewhere between Dubai and Muscat.
[link to www.marketwatch.com]
[link to news.bbc.co.uk]

Fourth cable cut
================
Feb 1 (Fri) An undersea telecoms cable was damaged between the Qatari island of Haloul and the UAE island of Das.
[link to www.arabianbusiness.com]

What events took place that could be of concern over this period?

[edit on 5-2-2008 by citizen smith]

Originally posted by citizen smith
What events took place that could be of concern over this period?

If we knew the answer to that I think we'd know our culprit. Unfortunately, I don't think we are going to find out.

Same old story, loads of circumstantial evidence and no clincher. The Intel agencies are good, you know.

They are not that good, otherwise there would have at least been a boat in the area to back up the story!

Somethings going on thats for sure.

Originally posted by 2ciewan
First line of attack would be figure out the nature of the attack, then take appropriate action.

"Appropriate action" is dependent on the sensitivity of the target. I have data that is important enough to me that it would warrant a total disconnect, immediately. It's not a far-fetched scenario to imagine systems or data so sensitive that drastic measures are required and justified.

If systems are online, then it stands to reason that they are required to be online for a specific reason, hacking through parts of the internet is not going to do anything to help.

But this scenario doesn't take systems offline....they are still up and running with the aggressor scrambling to reconnect.

Systems admins don't cut cables, they value them greatly.

Don't think about it like a systems admin. I for one would relish the opportunity to cut my competitors cables.....

not going to argue hypotheticals here, as we will get no-where.

Its not realistic to cut backbones to protect services.

As a systems admin, if any of your systems with critical data on them are accessable to the outside world (authothorised use) then either -

1. your company is not spending enough money on security, or
2. you should be replaced by someone that can.

There is plenty of hardware and software that won't let a single packet thru unless its ment to be there, and if the attacker even knew where to find the server then..................... again see point 2.

No serious IT professional would advocate or even suggest cutting fibers to secure ports unless they were reading the BOFH.

Originally posted by 2ciewan
not going to argue hypotheticals here, as we will get no-where.

Oh....yeah, this is cutting into the "non-hypothetical" discussion, isn't it?

No serious IT professional would advocate or even suggest cutting fibers to secure ports unless they were reading the BOFH.

How about a very serious 4-star general? Or a serious rear admiral at one of the alphabet agencies? I don't think your viewpoint is global enough...I'm not describing a scenario that happens in my data closet. I can keep my systems up and running, yet trash the ability of an attacker to access the global network....all I gotta' do is yank some fiber off of the ocean floor. Done...attack hampered.

And if any system admin is over-confident enough to think some gee-whiz software and equipment guarantees his/hers data safety....they're a target waiting to happen.

[edit on 5-2-2008 by MrPenny]

I think my view is very global, as opposed to a more cynical, slightly naive view

Four star general - take down the infrastructure of the internet and effect the systems, risk unwanted attention in an overly public black op. Kill systems that at the end of the day that a crucial to the economic affairs of my country and pay for my nice warships.

OR trace the hacker(s), find out what they know and how they know it and finally, put a bullet in his/her head(s)?

Any one of the 4-star generals, or any of the alphabet agencies are going to go down that road first, as its cleaner, and less likey to lead to mass embarrassment.

Lets face it, in your scenario, you might as well take out front page adverts in every paper in the civilized world saying, all our networks are open.

I didn't notice any cables being cut when they caught Gary McKinnon, and we know what a serious threat he was, being such a superhacker and all

If you know your systems, know what's going through them, and control them, you can be as arrogant as you want as a systems admin. If you have done your job properly no-one is getting in, not even the Chinese.

To say, no system is every totally secure is a myth, and an excuse. There is always something that you can do. If that includes unplugging systems from www then so be it.

The problem occurs when you have lots of multi-site, multiuser, mutli-admin unsecured networks running on an insecure platform(s).

Security begins at home.

To stop someone robbing my home, what do i do. Lock the door, or block the nearest highway?

Originally posted by 2ciewan
slightly naive view

You're absolutely correct.....I defer to your better judgment.

Every day, the Defense Department detects three million unauthorized probes of its computer networks; the State Department fends off two million. Sometimes, these turn into full-scale attacks, such as an assault last spring on the Pentagon that required fifteen hundred computers to be taken off-line. In May, the German government discovered that a spyware program had been planted inside government computers in several key ministries, and also in the office of Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Empasis added by MrPenny

Source

Wright, L. The New Yorker, Jan. 21, 2008

[edit on 5-2-2008 by MrPenny]

Iran is not without Internet according to www.blacklistednews.com...

I tested the Blacklisted News webpage's example of the Iranian Bank (as I had heard the lines affected banking most) and the bank's webpage DID work for me. (Just before noon on 5 February 2008 - CST).

The site says the traffic logs are (or were?) showing no traffic because of a technical failure at a University. I guess they mean the "measurer" of traffic for Iran.

So, the Wikipedia article, the Iranian Oil Bourse, the Nuclear Inspection Team, rumors of war and pre-emptive strikes, and the worldwide banking problem with "decoupling" can be chucked-out the window as a possible "reason" for the seemingly intentional (non-coincidental) cable cuts.

This still doesn't tell us who or why though.

If you do a traceroute on the DNS names, the IP returned does not match what blacklistednews has published. So perhaps they have offsite servers as backups.

But the IP addresses on that news page cannot be reached by me.

Mtmind

Originally posted by Trexter Ziam
Iran is not without Internet according to www.blacklistednews.com...

I tested the Blacklisted News webpage's example of the Iranian Bank (as I had heard the lines affected banking most) and the bank's webpage DID work for me. (Just before noon on 5 February 2008 - CST).

The site says the traffic logs are (or were?) showing no traffic because of a technical failure at a University. I guess they mean the "measurer" of traffic for Iran.

So, the Wikipedia article, the Iranian Oil Bourse, the Nuclear Inspection Team, rumors of war and pre-emptive strikes, and the worldwide banking problem with "decoupling" can be chucked-out the window as a possible "reason" for the seemingly intentional (non-coincidental) cable cuts.

This still doesn't tell us who or why though.

double post sorry. I guess I'll add the comment that either thay will fix the cables and things will go back to the way they were or more cables may get cut. Either way the WHY? hangs out there. Qui bono?

[edit on 5-2-2008 by stikkinikki]

Alex Jones is addressing the issue on his show today. I should think we will be hearing more about this soon. I hope anyway.

ABC News is reporting today (Feb 5th) that it wasn't sabotage but the anchor of a ship forced to port by a storm that caused the damage.

"If this is what happens during a series of coincidences, think what intentional activity could do," said ABC News consultant Dick Clarke."

Link here: abcnews.go.com...

reply to post by ZombieSlayer


The report seems to contradict what the Egyptian Ministry of Information said, as well as the post by loam concerning the weather at the time. Disinfo?

The MMP may also be used as an underwater splicing chamber for tapping of undersea fiber optic cables.

I wonder where the USS Jimmy Carter is right now.

reply to post by CyberSEAL


Yup. That would be my natural instinct. Looked into some sub-cable stuff just out of interest. Those are the best tools... "neck 'em down to one pipe", flick the switch and?

I just walked perimeter on my usual Iranian "news" sites... Still nada, no issue, not even mentioned. Mr. Penny, thanks. It could make sense... takes time to get "all the ducks in a row". It's gone quiet eh.

This story has been going a while and half now... some would say before tha time of Mo' Pahlavi. Geez, I remember when Ken Taylor... ancient history. THIS cable related stuff is going on too long... how many or how few coincidences does it take before one side or the other acknowledges or lets something "slip".

If this is a statistical "freak" it's a pretty strong spike... Oprah scares me too though... just her new campaign voice. LOL. Both are evidence of news in dynamic systems... the news changes. No news isn't always...

Talked to a guy who says the new big push in cable is the Fujitsu stuff with the transponder bands and things, 'bout half "dark" and 10G per strand. There is a push for new cable$ and more cables... the IEEE has all kinds of stuff online.

Apparently when cable is laid or was laid ropes were used to lower the bundle to the bottom and the rope was cut... that's a bunch of expensive rope that can get caught on anchors and could drag the "wire".

Seems there are now going to be bots or already are bots for laying cable... and inspecting and apparently repairing them. Saves a fortune in rope. Just Goog it, there's tons. Oh yeah, almost forgot back September-time? The Goog was advertising in HR circles for a "Submarine Cable Negotiator".

I checked two nautical maps that are pretty current and submarine cables are clearly marked in the Great Lakes represented by a line and a shaded corridor.

Sometimes near land there are signs. I've never been in the Gulf but you'd think they'd know that cable sitting on the bottom unburied in spots can "blow around" in the currents and would apportion a specific "no anchor" right of way. They must. Um, that ABC ship to port dragging anchor? Real hard to make headway dragging anchor... heading for port in a storm... um, if OzWeatherman reads this he could let us know what the weather has been.

So, we wait. The script writes itself. Mr. Penny has a point and the Iran news agents aren't saying anything is wonky. I refuse to watch or visit the "Jeer". What's on the Arab street? I just see Gaza stuff...

Vic

[edit on 5-2-2008 by V Kaminski]

Quote Vic

Um, that ABC ship to port dragging anchor? Real hard to make headway dragging anchor...

That there's eye waterin, coffee shootin out the nose funny.

Give me a little warning first next time.

Originally posted by stikkinikki
I guess I'll add the comment that either thay will fix the cables and things will go back to the way they were or more cables may get cut. Either way the WHY? hangs out there. Qui bono?

Looks like the latter is the case. This article says it's up to five cables now.

www.khaleejtimes.com.../theuae/2008/february/theuae_february155.xml

Something tells me that it will be Israel that benefits by having Iran attacked. I really hope I'm wrong about that. I just can't see China and Russia putting up with much more before they begin defending their interests.

[edit on 5-2-2008 by resistor]

[edit on 5-2-2008 by resistor]

I'm having no luck fixing this link, but if you do a search for 'internet cut' on the site, the articles should come up.

[edit on 5-2-2008 by resistor]

Are any of the disruptions in any cables "not friendly to the West"? I see India, UAE, Dubai, Egypt...

www.ut.ac.ir... I love it. TU uses the Goog... the slow blade'

Interesting what db's are "active". utdbase.ut.ac.ir...

Vic

[edit on 5-2-2008 by V Kaminski]

This may not explain the why, but I think he's bang on with the how.
thegallopingbeaver.blogspot.com... arter.html