Let's say your firm got attacked by Chinese hackers who

>>54860601
Disconnect the servers retard

>>54860601
>offensive cyberwarfare
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT9VDzs6B50

spike them

File: hackers.jpg (65KB, 727x593px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 727x593px

>>54860601
>offensive cyberwarfare

Hollywood movies are not an accurate depiction of reality, anon.

>>54861417
What would the next rational step be? Why doesn't the government provide offensive cyberwarfare in case of attacks like that? That would deter further attacks, and prevent data loss if the data hasn't been transferred yet.

>>54860601
Frogposters are cancer

>>54861506

he needs to get his fringe trimmed

>>54860601
Use fail2ban and put China in your hosts list.

>some faggot chinese IPs trying to metasploit your ssh server
>TIME FOR CYBER WARFARE

>>54861506
>Holliwood

>>54860601
Well, I don't believe that hackback is legal in the US. I've been to several talks about hackback and everyone wants to but no one does.

Not even the gov't. Not talking about offensive, strike first. I'm talking about going after someone like in the OPM breech. Once you've been compromised, you can't try to "get them back". You can attempt to pin them in a honeypot but that's about it.

>>54861686
But why doesn't the government provide offensive cyber capabilities? It could make a huge difference. If they haven't transferred the data yet, or are in the process of doing so, striking them back could prevent further data loss in most cases.

>>54861841
well, another thing especially with medical, if the data is encrypted, they don't even have to report the breach.

>>54861532
Log everything.
If you could use a honeypot you could further study them.

And in what hole do you live? The government is known to weaken encryption in most software, implant backdoors, and willing to let your network insecure to other hackers just to have access too.