Re: huawei

[Mark Seiden <mis () seiden com>]

On Jun 13, 2013, at 5:39 PM, Michael Thomas <mike () mtcc com> wrote:

> On 06/13/2013 05:28 PM, Scott Helms wrote:
> > Bill,
> >
> > Certainly everything you said is correct and at the same time is not useful
> > for the kinds traffic interception that's been implied.  20 packets of
> > random traffic capture is extraordinarily unlikely to contain anything of
> > interest and eve if you do happen to get a juicy fragment your chances of
> > getting more ate virtually nil.  An effective system must either capture
> > and transmit large numbers of packets or have a command and control system
> > in order to target smaller captures against a shifting list of addresses.
> > Either of those things are very detectable.   I've spent a significant
> > amount of time looking at botnet traffic which has the same kind of
> > requirements.
>
> I think you're having a failure of imagination that anything less than
> a massive amount of information sent back to the attacker could be
> useful. I think there are lots and lots of things that could be extremely
> useful that would only require a simple message with "got here" back to the
> attacker if the "got here" condition was sufficiently interesting. Spying doesn't
> have the same motivations as typical botnets for illicit commerce.
>
> Mike

and even botnets for illicit commerce may only be interested something that 
is small and may not change very often so will not need regular exflitration...

e.g. on a server, 
the current password of a user who can sudo
or a few private keys