ESET researchers explain the difficulties in attribution of targeted attacks; evidence is often circumstantial and the source never positively identified.
Does the expression 'In the Wild' still mean anything today? Well yes, in the sense of something that is 'out there' threatening real-world systems. But things move a lot faster these days than they did in the 90s and later, fastburning mass-mailers notwithstanding. Just a few days ago (on the 30th of November, to be
I thought I’d blogged myself to a standstill over the weekend, but it seems there’s plenty of life left in the Tibet/China story, even if it’s only the East and the West exchanging accusations. A China Daily headline claims that "Analysts dismiss ‘cyber spy’ claims", though in fact the quotes in the article talk about exaggeration
I’ve mentioned here before that targeted malware, often delivered by "spear phishing" carried by apparently "harmless" documents such as PDFs, .DOCs and spreadsheets rather than overt programs, can have much more impact than the raw numbers of such attacks suggest. In fact, some sources now use the term "whaling" rather than "spear phishing" to reflect the