Waging war with the click of a mouse

Bernard Thompson discovers how the internet has become a battlefield of ethnic conflict

Published in The Irish Examiner, May 23, 2001


Lurking in the shadows: even amateur computer users can hack into systems to promote a political cause or draw attention to themselves.

LAST week saw the end of an international hackers’ war, dubbed by the New York Times as “the harbinger of World Wide Web War 1”. The cause and nature of the conflict suggest that any future political crisis could potentially have similar consequences.

The Honkers Union of China (Honkers is Chinese slang for hackers), called for an end to hostilities with their American counterparts, sparked by the collision of a Chinese Air Force jet and a US spy plane.

The call for a truce came after China’s Communist Party newspaper, The People’s Daily, described the exchange as web terrorism and unforgivable. The Honkers Union methods had ranged from audio-visual displays of the Chinese flag and anthem on American school websites, to hijacking major internet servers and distributing viruses. American hackers retaliated on behalf of their country, mostly displaying insulting graffiti on Chinese sites.

Chinese statements were more profound. “We are ready to devote anything to our motherland, including our lives,” was a common message.

However, this was not the first such conflict. Following the lynching of two Israeli soldiers, an ex-Israeli Army firefighter decided to launch his own war. Mikael Bouzaglo targeted the Lebanese guerrillas, Hezbollah. After 19 hours of sustained effort, he gained control of a Hezbollah site, Hizballa.org, and displayed a Star of David flag while playing the Israeli anthem.

Again, there was swift retaliation. There followed a series of “distributed denial of service” attacks, overwhelming the systems of the Israeli internet service provider, Netvision. The official sites of Israel’s Prime Minister’s Office, Foreign Ministry, Knesset, the Bank of Israel and the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange were disabled. In one attack, Netvision’s mail servers were suspended by an Arab hacker, calling himself (or possibly herself) “m0nk3y of Arab”.

This was part of a damaging exchange that hackers on both sides later agreed was a mistake. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) found their website attacked by a hacker, allegedly from Pakistan, using the name Doctor Nuker. In these attacks, two databases were accessed, revealing 200 users’ credit card information; personal contact details for 700 AIPAC members and 3,500 e-mail addresses. If the success of these assaults was impressive, the subsequent on-line exchange was groundbreaking.

Through the on-line site of The Industrial Standard (thestandard.com), their Israeli correspondent, Avi Machlis, brought the sides together. Bouzaglo, calling himself Mikki, addressed m0nk3y of Arab and a United States-based Arab hacker, Sammy, the oldest of the three, at 26. The protagonists generally professed a mutual respect; they considered themselves to be a part of an international community of hackers, but ethically driven.

However, when Mikki announced that he had ceased his attacks and invited his “enemies” to do the same, m0nk3y of Arab responded frankly, “If I stop, my mates will continue till all Palestinians get their rights. It’s not my decision only, Mikki.” Therein lies a key danger. Hacking is essentially a solitary pastime. One individual has the potential to cause untold damage without being part of any conventional chain of command. They are isolated individuals with access to potentially offensive technology but beyond the reach of effective control mechanisms.

It is also apparent that hacking is not simply the preserve of the technical genius that it was once thought to be. The case of Bouzaglo, for example, offers a chance to examine the model of the wreaker of virtual mayhem. He took the unusual step of revealing his identity to the world, partly to highlight the potential of hacker wars and partly to promote his ambition of achieving political office with Israel’s right-wing Likud party. He was a moderately skilled enthusiast with time on his hands.

It is clear that the internet provides the means for a potent weapon as well as for constructive dialogue.

Governments are almost certainly taking part and are definitely taking notice. British Foreign Minister Robin Cook, recently informed MPs: “A computer-based attack could cripple the nation more quickly than a military strike.

Tom King, chairman of the House of Commons Intelligence and Security Committee agreed: “You don’t need a bomb,” he said, “a good computer hacker could threaten far greater damage.”