Security research guru Ross Anderson has a talk up on Google Video, "Searching for Evil", that, among other things, surveys some of the more unusual Web-based financial schemes.
If you only have a few minutes, jump to 20:23 to check out Ross' frightening examples of some phishing-like schemes that are popping up on the web. The first example shows how people recruit mules on the Web to sit in the middle of a fraudulent financial transaction, with the person who accepted a too-good-to-be-true job offer getting badly screwed in the end.
If you have more time to dive in deeper and watch the whole thing, I enjoyed Ross' discussion at the beginning of the talk about using evolutionary game theory in simulations of network attacks. He refers to a WEIS 2006 paper, "The topology of covert conflict" (PDF), for more details. That paper starts to "build a bridge between network science and evolutionary game theory" and to "explore ... sophisticated [network] defensive strategies" including "cliques ... the cell structure often used in revolutionary warfare" which turn out to be "remarkably effective" for defending a network against adaptive attackers.
Similarly, though not mentioned in his talk, Ross has a ESAS 2007 paper, "New Strategies for Revocation in Ad-Hoc Networks" (PDF) which looks at how to "remove nodes that are observed to be behaving badly" from ad-hoc networks. They come up with a remarkable conclusion that "the most effective way of doing revocation in general ad-hoc networks is the suicide attack ... [where] a node observing another node behaving badly simply broadcasts a signed message declaring both of them to be dead."
good talk, though i did only watch from your pointer to the scams. i really like the term "security theater" -- it is very descriptive. Interesting that some of the identified (potential) evils only exist because google ads give them a business. not sure I would put the Ad trolls in the same camp as the other scams myself, but as Ross points out, the same methods identify both.
ReplyDeleteI guess "do no evil" does not preclude "create a business model for those (possibly) doing evil." :)