And scanning every IP for a port is how you trigger automatic abuse reports to whoever owns the IP block, and failure to respond to said abuse reports (and, more importantly, ceasing said abusive behavior) leads to eventually the attacker (the aforementioned government office) having their Internet service ended due to ToS violations.

Not only that, I suspect some ISPs now run 11211 honeypots to capture networks that source such attacks, so eventually the FBI would end up in common RBLs due to their abusive behavior.

In short, I suspect this entire article is bullshit. It is on Wired, after all.

There are many, many institutions preforming global IPv4 scans daily and many tools that allow you to do it[0][1][2]. The trick is to "Be a good citizen", work with a scan friendly host, signal your benevolence, and limit the rate at which you scan. Also smart to black-list DoD networks. If you don't believe me setup a honey pot and open up a popular udp amplification port. Haven't done so myself but I would expect many instances of scanning would be seen everyday.

[0]:https://zmap.io/ [1]:https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/masscan [2]:https://memcachedscan.shadowserver.org/

It's rare that abuse reports are handled quickly, and obviously the FBI is using non-attributable ranges for this kind of stuff. The article has a lot of misnomers but the core reporting seems correct. I would be shocked if the FBI (or Cyber Command or whoever) weren't doing port scanning to help secure the Internet by finding vulnerable servers and services.

(I'm sure NSA is, too, but obviously with different objectives.)

you massively overestimate what any ISP is going to do. it's nothing. they're not running honey pots, they don't care.

I think I agree. It's better to not be proactive, especially since port scanning is a natural way to perform diagnostics. I would wait for others tell me there's a problem, I wouldn't put money toward sniffing out problems as an ISP.

> a new evolution of DDoS, known as Memcache

I almost literally LMAOed.

So, I also have an evolution way of DDoS, known as TCP/IP!

It sounds like a "The hacker known as 4 Chan" joke.

Honestly, that Wired magazine which has inspired the DotCom bubble, is long gone. Nowadays, it's basically a waste of time to read, except for occasional good articles.

> Honestly, that Wired magazine which has inspired the DotCom bubble, is long gone. Nowadays, it's basically a waste of time to read, except for occasional good articles.

Some of the articles have some pretty nice illustration at least.

I still remember it. I have the first few years of issues stashed away somewhere.

With it being so reviled, how does it even survive? last resort airplane reading?

Scanning every ip is relatively easy, as long as you stick to ipv4. It was done a number of years ago by some grey/black hats. See: http://census2012.sourceforge.net/paper.html

And yeah, the explanation of memcache as a type of DDoS is laughable, but it sounds like it was just used for amplification like I think DNS and NTP have been in the past.

Yep probably. The FBI does not attract top talent these days.

You don't need to attract top talent when they come to you via court order, I suppose…

Is that true? What else can you relate about the FBI's talent pool?

> Then I want share, because I can’t get on the stage without talking a little bit about the problem we call Going Dark, which is encryption. And then I’d like to take your questions. And I’m hoping you’re going to think up a question that has nothing to do with Secretary Clinton’s e-mails.

Dear Lord... "going dark" like when people go to their banks website?

What about the whole "we cant unlock an iphone, make us a tool to unlock all iphones" or could they and lied about it.

So much ignorance about this. The FBI needs its evidence to be admissible. I'm sure the FBI has no trouble accessing phones with warrantless surveillance when they need to for national security, but they need surveillance to be legal when it's used as evidence in a judicial context

No, this was for a locked iPhone. They were after encrypted data-at-rest. Warantless surveillamce would not apply, as they had a warrant - I believe - seeing as they went after the iCloud data and said it was not helpful (No backup stored there).

Additionally, an OIG report seems to suggest they did not attempt their usual avenue for acquiring access tools in order to get in, instead trying to force a legal precedent.

It always looked to me like they just wanted the tool, and the whole “can’t unlock” was just an excuse.

Of course it’s true. How could the FBI possibly attract top talent beyond a few altruistic outliers?

They have an incredible brand. Way more people grow up wanting to be FBI agents than 99% of all other professions.

Why would they have any more problem buying talent than anyone else?

Because of the President constantly attacking and attempting to sabotage the agency, including firing its head for transparently political reasons.

If I were in law enforcement, I'd certainly think twice about taking a position there. I'd be asking myself "what if I get drawn into Trump drama? Would that be good for my career?"

I don't mean to overstate things—I'm sure the FBI is mostly composed of talented professionals. But I'd be amazed if the recent drama had no effect on their ability to recruit.

>The FBI does not attract top talent these days.

They don't attract it. They arrest it. The benefit is that prospective employee can't refuse the offer.