US military and intelligence computer networks (2015)(electrospaces.net)
electrospaces.net
US military and intelligence computer networks (2015)
https://www.electrospaces.net/2015/03/us-military-and-intelligence-computer.html
27 comments
I saw a topological diagram of how each of these systems and many not mentioned were connected to each other, and it raised more questions than it answered.
https://intelink.gov is a gateway to some of these.
Wow.
1. The non-www version doesn't seem to work.
2. If you try https://www.intelink.gov/, the browser immediately warns you that the site is not secure, because of certificate problems.
3. If you still dare to venture ahead, you are greeted with this: "This is a United States Government computer system. This computer system, including all related equipment, networks, and network devices, including Internet access, are provided only for authorized U.S. Government use. U.S. Government computer systems may be monitored for all lawful purposes, including ensuring that their use is authorized, for management of the system, to facilitate protection against unauthorized access, and to verify security procedures, survivability, and operational security. Monitoring includes authorized attacks by authorized U.S. Government entities to test or verify the security of this system. During monitoring, information may be examined, recorded, copied, and used for authorized purposes. All information including personal information, placed on or sent over this system may be monitored."
I am out of here :-)
1. The non-www version doesn't seem to work.
2. If you try https://www.intelink.gov/, the browser immediately warns you that the site is not secure, because of certificate problems.
3. If you still dare to venture ahead, you are greeted with this: "This is a United States Government computer system. This computer system, including all related equipment, networks, and network devices, including Internet access, are provided only for authorized U.S. Government use. U.S. Government computer systems may be monitored for all lawful purposes, including ensuring that their use is authorized, for management of the system, to facilitate protection against unauthorized access, and to verify security procedures, survivability, and operational security. Monitoring includes authorized attacks by authorized U.S. Government entities to test or verify the security of this system. During monitoring, information may be examined, recorded, copied, and used for authorized purposes. All information including personal information, placed on or sent over this system may be monitored."
I am out of here :-)
> 1. The non-www version doesn't seem to work.
Common for "internal" USG sites. I don't know if it's intentional.
> 2. If you try https://www.intelink.gov/, the browser immediately warns you that the site is not secure, because of certificate problems.
Internal USG sites use USG-generated root certificates and certificate chains. These need to be installed manually from USG sources.
> 3. If you still dare to venture ahead, you are greeted with this: "This is a United States Government computer system. This computer system, including all related equipment, networks, and network devices, including Internet access, are provided only for authorized U.S. Government use. U.S. Government computer systems may be monitored for all lawful purposes, including ensuring that their use is authorized, for management of the system, to facilitate protection against unauthorized access, and to verify security procedures, survivability, and operational security. Monitoring includes authorized attacks by authorized U.S. Government entities to test or verify the security of this system. During monitoring, information may be examined, recorded, copied, and used for authorized purposes. All information including personal information, placed on or sent over this system may be monitored."
The standard disclaimer on all internal and classified systems. I'm glad I no longer have to click through that daily.
Common for "internal" USG sites. I don't know if it's intentional.
> 2. If you try https://www.intelink.gov/, the browser immediately warns you that the site is not secure, because of certificate problems.
Internal USG sites use USG-generated root certificates and certificate chains. These need to be installed manually from USG sources.
> 3. If you still dare to venture ahead, you are greeted with this: "This is a United States Government computer system. This computer system, including all related equipment, networks, and network devices, including Internet access, are provided only for authorized U.S. Government use. U.S. Government computer systems may be monitored for all lawful purposes, including ensuring that their use is authorized, for management of the system, to facilitate protection against unauthorized access, and to verify security procedures, survivability, and operational security. Monitoring includes authorized attacks by authorized U.S. Government entities to test or verify the security of this system. During monitoring, information may be examined, recorded, copied, and used for authorized purposes. All information including personal information, placed on or sent over this system may be monitored."
The standard disclaimer on all internal and classified systems. I'm glad I no longer have to click through that daily.
You need the DoD Root CAs.
You can get them from here, just follow the instructions: https://public.cyber.mil/pki-pke/end-users/getting-started/
They're not bad to have in general.
The notice you see there is standard boilerplate.
You can get them from here, just follow the instructions: https://public.cyber.mil/pki-pke/end-users/getting-started/
They're not bad to have in general.
The notice you see there is standard boilerplate.
This seems like it should be included in default root stores. I am out of my element here, but it would be cool if anyone can explain why or if I would need to manually add govt CAs.
If you allow the US gov CAs to be bundled with your browser, do you allow any country?
How would non-US citizens feel about having US CA's in their browser by default?
How would non-US citizens feel about having US CA's in their browser by default?
> 3.
These banners are required on all government IT systems. The sole purpose of these banners is to prevent criminals from saying they were not aware of what they were doing, mistakenly accessed the site, etc. It is a legality.
These banners are required on all government IT systems. The sole purpose of these banners is to prevent criminals from saying they were not aware of what they were doing, mistakenly accessed the site, etc. It is a legality.
see this STIG (NIST) requirement for network devices - https://www.stigviewer.com/stig/firewall/2015-09-18/finding/...
Then it's just as well you didn't scroll down to the comments section of tfa that links to a blog page called "Dangerous I.P. addresses that you should never ever scan" (https://dangerousip.blogspot.com/)
In a previous life, I worked for a security company that made a "hacker in a box" - a security auditing tool that would scan a machine, or a range of addresses, to see what doors were open, and how they could be exploited, and if the exploits opened any new doors, and how they could be exploited, and so on until it ran out of things to try. Since this was a security auditing tool rather than an attack tool, it left some very big, obvious, deliberate footprints in the scanned machine's logs.
One day someone at our company decided that it would be a good idea to scan whitehouse.gov. We got told to never do that again...
One day someone at our company decided that it would be a good idea to scan whitehouse.gov. We got told to never do that again...
I'm curious what services like Shodan deal with the legal aspects of things. For example they obviously scan the Irish governments sites but I would be afraid to do that even though I do legitimate research. Is there any actual guidance out there about how to balance these things?
> 207.60.36.176 - 207.60.36.183 Chris Pet Store
Peculiar on many levels...
Peculiar on many levels...
" All the below are FBI controlled Linux servers & IPs/IP-Ranges 207.60.0.0 - 207.60.255.0 "
I have no idea how they verified it* (or perhaps inserted as a prank?) but almost certainly it's no longer current (the list is from 2016) but uhmm yeah - It makes all those 80's movies that had the surveilance teams in grey vans marked 'Joes 24 Hour Plumbers' or 'Billy-Bobs Flowers' kinda funny.
* IIRC one of the US Three Letter Agencies set up a load of dummy websites but used the same html code snippet in all of them. Once the first one was discovered and exposed as being a front it was game over. (meta comment - I think I might have read it as a post here on HN)
I have no idea how they verified it* (or perhaps inserted as a prank?) but almost certainly it's no longer current (the list is from 2016) but uhmm yeah - It makes all those 80's movies that had the surveilance teams in grey vans marked 'Joes 24 Hour Plumbers' or 'Billy-Bobs Flowers' kinda funny.
* IIRC one of the US Three Letter Agencies set up a load of dummy websites but used the same html code snippet in all of them. Once the first one was discovered and exposed as being a front it was game over. (meta comment - I think I might have read it as a post here on HN)
You might be talking about the way the CIA reused code to communicate with sources in Iran in its China operations? Then got a ton of people killed by being stupid/lazy - despite internal whistleblowers going to Congress to warn them it was dangerous?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2018/11/03/dozens-us-...
Something similar happened in Lebanon IIRC. Lazy reuse of tradecraft - a pizzeria and some mobiles I think it was.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2018/11/03/dozens-us-...
Something similar happened in Lebanon IIRC. Lazy reuse of tradecraft - a pizzeria and some mobiles I think it was.
What a great rabbit hole! It's pretty interesting to see how some of these sites are "protected" (big HTML warning stating "DO NOT ACCESS THIS") and some oldschool-IT named domains such as https://itdashboard.gov/ .
Given the recent SolarWinds breach I wonder how these networks are impacted. Most of them look like from the early 90s.
Given the recent SolarWinds breach I wonder how these networks are impacted. Most of them look like from the early 90s.
>> Given the recent SolarWinds breach I wonder how these networks are impacted.
Classified military networks are very different than civilian networks. They aren't just air-gapped. Because they are not general purpose networks they can have lots of internal barriers that would not be acceptable outside of the military. Want to use HDMI for your new screen? Nope. VGA because it doesn't require compute power within the screen. Want to use a Bluetooth headset? Nope. You are stuck with a curly wire from 1972 because that wire has passed the emissions security inspections. Such principals extend to the internal barriers too. Important national security websites can look like personal websites from the 1990s not because they are not updated but because they are very restricted in how they can load information from other sources. The fact that these networks look old doesn't mean they are behind the curve on security.
Got too many passwords to remember? Want a "password manager"... lol. Good luck with that in a world where computer A isn't even allowed to be in the same room as computer B.
Classified military networks are very different than civilian networks. They aren't just air-gapped. Because they are not general purpose networks they can have lots of internal barriers that would not be acceptable outside of the military. Want to use HDMI for your new screen? Nope. VGA because it doesn't require compute power within the screen. Want to use a Bluetooth headset? Nope. You are stuck with a curly wire from 1972 because that wire has passed the emissions security inspections. Such principals extend to the internal barriers too. Important national security websites can look like personal websites from the 1990s not because they are not updated but because they are very restricted in how they can load information from other sources. The fact that these networks look old doesn't mean they are behind the curve on security.
Got too many passwords to remember? Want a "password manager"... lol. Good luck with that in a world where computer A isn't even allowed to be in the same room as computer B.
We aren't allowed to use VGA because it's vulnerable to being sniffed. Everything has to be hdmi or display port/mini display port
It depends on the threat profile. In an emissions secure zone, inside a big metal box like say a ship, the chance of a bug in the monitor's hdmi circuitry can be higher than the risk of the vga being sniffed.
Funnily enough a static configuration HDMI display needs no special circuitry, as it's essentially VGA that didn't pass a DAC and you can spam it directly to LCD matrix.
If theres a chance of there being a bug in the HDMI circuitry isn't there just as much chance of there being a bug in VGA?.
Those HTML banners aren't intended to "protect" anything, they just indicate what classification level the content is.
Sensitive networks are airgapped because vulns like solarwinds are not unforeseeable.
PKI, not username/password