Automated Trading

[Lord Thesaurian]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...100107205.html

I've been wondering about this for some time, and seek the input of those of you who have more knowledge of the mechanics of real time economics and business and such. Most in the business world know about the flash crash a couple years ago, or the fact that there is a move to develop ways of sending trades faster than the speed of light - because honestly, 200,000 km/s is pretty slow.

What worries me, though, is the fact that some 50% of the Exchange is automated. Granted, that's a dramatic decrease from recent years, but I'm frankly shocked that some anarchist teenager in his mother's basement hasn't hacked the Exchange and crashed the global economy by now. If nearly 1 trillion dollars can vanish in ten minutes (luckily it "reappeared"), who's to say the economy of the entire world isn't hanging by the security and efficiency of supercomputers?

Surely I'm missing something.......

[I WUB PUGS]

<-Works in Telecomm, laughs at "hackers" (and no I don't sell phones at Verizon). The movies don't show the half of it. Cool, you got ScarJo's boobies and you can put obscenities on the CIA's website.

The level of communications equipment required to get into these intrawebs from the outside WITH the right passwords and encryption scare away most hackers.

All the craziness in those articles is done from in house, just like all the goodies WikiLeaks has are from people in house. Getting into a modern secure network isn't like the movies, its impossible and its actually really boring. Hence my presence on these boards 8:30am to 5pm Pacific Time.

[Menelik_I]

<-Works in Telecomm, laughs at "hackers" (and no I don't sell phones at Verizon). The movies don't show the half of it. Cool, you got ScarJo's boobies and you can put obscenities on the CIA's website.

The level of communications equipment required to get into these intrawebs from the outside WITH the right passwords and encryption scare away most hackers.

All the craziness in those articles is done from in house, just like all the goodies WikiLeaks has are from people in house. Getting into a modern secure network isn't like the movies, its impossible and its actually really boring. Hence my presence on these boards 8:30am to 5pm Pacific Time.

You lie, I saw it on Skyfall

[Nietzsche]

Getting into a modern secure network isn't like the movies, its impossible and its actually really boring.

O Rly? I guess we can just ignore all the documented SCADA break-ins, DoD network hacks, business infiltration for the purpose of espionage... etc... etc... Impossible? LOL. I seriously can't stop laughing.

[Lord Thesaurian]

<-Works in Telecomm, laughs at "hackers" (and no I don't sell phones at Verizon).

So.... T-Mobile?

The level of communications equipment required to get into these intrawebs from the outside WITH the right passwords and encryption scare away most hackers.

All the craziness in those articles is done from in house, just like all the goodies WikiLeaks has are from people in house. Getting into a modern secure network isn't like the movies, its impossible and its actually really boring. Hence my presence on these boards 8:30am to 5pm Pacific Time.

OK, well, that makes sense. We're safe, then....... or are we? *dum dum duuuuuum*

[I WUB PUGS]

Shhhhhh, I haven't seen the movie yet..............................cause I have too many kids and I never get to go on a date. I've had one in the last 3 years.

Check it out:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

http://&#91;IMG]http://i200.photobucket.....jpg&#91;/IMG]

Several of my units that just got installed at a site in South Africa. Doesn't look all that impressive right? Laugh, you're looking at basically a brand new Ferrari, and that's just the basics, god knows what kind of stuff they have inside.

Hackers, pfft, like you need a keyboard and some wifi and you can get into anything. Let me know when a laptop can get through 10 levels of encryption and scrambling that's necessary for just signal stability. Don't even need security.

[Menelik_I]

Shhhhhh, I haven't seen the movie yet..............................cause I have too many kids and I never get to go on a date. I've had one in the last 3 years.

I knew you hated the planet ... #overpopulation

[I WUB PUGS]

Yeah, and they got so much from that top layer of nothing. Please. The DoD hacks? What like the Predator feeds that are broadcasted in plain A/V without any encryption because that eats bandwidth? Or do you mean all the stuff stolen from the inside.

Get real.

Any network in the world can go completely secure just by having internal point to point capability, which every larger corporation has.

Unless the hacker has a million dollars and all the info he needs to access said point to point link.

[Nietzsche]

Yeah, and they got so much from that top layer of nothing. Please. The DoD hacks? What like the Predator feeds that are broadcasted in plain A/V without any encryption because that eats bandwidth? Or do you mean all the stuff stolen from the inside.

Get real.

Any network in the world can go completely secure just by having internal point to point capability, which every larger corporation has.

Unless the hacker has a million dollars and all the info he needs to access said point to point link.

ROFL... You're cracking me up dude. KILLTV was not hacked. Someone just discovered they could watch it OTA.

I'll agree that lots of stuff walks out of buildings, but if you are seriously arguing that point to point is secure (unless you somehow own every piece of equipment in between) I'll just let ya keep cheerleading.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

ROFL... You're cracking me up dude. I'll just let ya keep cheerleading.

Stop that. Your posts would be more popular and you would be more lovable if you weren't constantly LOLing and ROFLing and generally annoying people you disagree with. Don't be unpleasant.

[I WUB PUGS]

ROFL... You're cracking me up dude. KILLTV was not hacked. Someone just discovered they could watch it OTA.

I'll agree that lots of stuff walks out of buildings, but if you are seriously arguing that point to point is secure (unless you somehow own every piece of equipment in between) I'll just let ya keep cheerleading.

Edit: I didn't say it was hacked, but since you've shown no knowledge of the topic, I believed you would classify all of those "breaches" as hacks. You still haven't cited an example with a support.

Which it is very easy to own every single piece of equipment except for the satellite which you can also own but it is much more expensive. I can build you a basic point to point network for maybe a hundred grand where you and I can talk completely secure over a satellite. Or we could just get Iridium phones and put up the encryption sleeve and be done with it.

The US military separates secure from non-secure as do large corporations. This does nothing to prevent an idiot from emailing or putting a thumb drive with a virus on it into a secure machine (which is why those drives are supposed to be missing or disabled), but no one is getting in from the outside via "hacking".

Please inform us of your extensive knowledge on the topic.

For me if I have banks of computers in 10 different places around the world and those computers are only connected to each other via satellite and do not have access to the internet then those are secure. The only way to get onto that network is either on one of those local machines which would require a break in which isn't hacking, that's burglary, or hacking into the satellite which it would be impossible to do that unnoticed since the only way to communicate to a satellite is by broadcasting to the satellite, that takes energy and the same level of energy on the same frequency you need to use to talk to the satellite is already being used by everyone else on the satellite and that satellite it monitored 24/7 by a person, not to mention you would be going in unauthorized and unless you picked a slot that no one was in, you'd mess up someone elses shot to the bird and they would be calling the satellite controller to find out why they are getting kicked off. But since you'd be picking an unused slot, no one would be tuned to receive that transmission so you'd be talking to no one so you couldn't hack. The only way to hack would be to transmit on the same frequency your target is receiving and do so without the real transmitter realizing his shot is getting overrun which again would be impossible because all sorts of alarms would go off, nevermind the fact that the two signals would be interfering with eachother and it is doubtful your hacker packets would even make it to anyone. And then the two legit parties would be told to turn off their TX and RX while the man finds out where you are transmitting from and well, who knows what happens to people who try to hack into secure US military communications.

This is just getting onto the satellite, you would have no way of knowing any of the details of the secure links (unless someone privy to that info told you) you are trying to hack into which add dozens of variables.

There is a reason why secured networks are completely removed from the non-secure in the DoD. I can't google or email on a SIPR computer because it doesn't even have a line into the internet, if it does, someone has ed up an it isn't SIPR anymore.

Yeah, you keep your delusions going, those of us that do this for a living are completely secure in the knowledge that only an inside job can steal truly vital information.

We're so secure in that knowledge that X Band satellite az and el are located on the internet. Also all sorts of great info on them can be found by people that are just monitoring them. Again anyone can monitor them, you just need a dish, an X Band LNB and a spectrum analyzer. FYI, X Band satellites are all owned by the US Military, they own the actual band and any equipment designed to transmit on X Band must be certified by the DoD and cannot be exported without expressed consent.

Here, a bunch of people monitoring secure US military communication and publishing it on the internet. They can't do anything with it because it's just a mess of crap without the right equipment and the right settings in that equipment but they can still see the raw.

SIPR and that's not even Top Secret which has its own network including satellites and has tons of encryption at every level. Notice the article brings up Bradley Manning.......................inside job.

Yep, I'll keep cheerleading because I actually know what I'm talking about.

Oil companies own entire communications networks that are top notch. Telecomm companies clearly do. No idea if financial ones are even allowed to. Personally the level of secrecy that oil companies adhere to is something I'd rather not see in the financial world.

Diagram:

Kindly explain how you would hack that network if I removed that router on the left? Which to be fair I wouldn't even bother since there's already several levels of encryption in there. But for you, lets say the router on the left is gone.

[Menelik_I]

I WUB PUGS @ Work.



People don't realize how boring programming is.

[frozenprince]

I WUB PUGS @ Work.



People don't realize how boring programming is.

You mean, real life isn't "The matrix" or "Hackers"? Man... That bums me out.

[I WUB PUGS]

Well, anyone can "find" secure satellite communications, you just need to point at the right satellite and know what frequency you care to listen to....it's all DirectTV does, they just train some monkey to set up a dish, point it south, slap some LNBs on it, give'em a spectrum analyzer and when the signal is strong enough they lock in the antenna........its all simple receive side, which actually isn't that simple technically, but any monkey can find a satellite..............Now what you plan on doing with that garbled mess is beyond me since you would need to have all the crypto and the right settings in your equipment to actually pull usable info out of that mess. So literally like millions of possible combinations that aren't just handed out.

The moment you truly want to "hack" into secure satellite communications you show yourself because any unauthorized access will be seen immediately by the controllers since you would have to broadcast over the satellite and of course your target would have to be tuned to the frequency you are on, or if you ride over someone elses frequency they'll undoubtedly call and get you found out since you are interfering with their shot.

This is secure communications via an intranet/web. The moment you remove data from internet accessible hardware, you've effectively made it hacker-free. That is until, you know I can't even come up with a plausible scenario.

Now I've talked about this before, the question is this:
The markets are surely not on a secure intraweb, at least I don't think so since we have some access to them, dunno maybe there is a well guarded proxy to transfer info/orders from the internet to the intranet.

Would you as a citizen of the world prefer to see the markets go to a full on intraweb where they can control communications completely without government control like a corporation can?

Any corporation can buy the equipment and the space to communicate securely over a satellite. Would you want the world markets to have that much of a barrier free from prying eyes like you, me and the governments?

Our most secure info isn't attached to the internet, it if it ever was someone would be fired. But you don't need the internet to send data all around the world...............

[Condottiere 40K]

A little social engineering and a thumb drive. Even in the twenty third century Kirk managed to infiltrate a virus to rewrite programming on what was supposed to be a secure mainframe by sending his girlfriend an eMail.

Just consider the irony as all those financial jobs get outsourced to automated programmes.

[YukonTrooper]

Forget about the hackers. Worry about the criminals in suits who come up with these tools simply to expand their wealth and power.

[Denny Crane!]

Actually yeah the danger from automated trading is far more insidious than someone being able to hack the network or computers. It really destroys the original intention and genuine trading that used to take place on the market.

[Vizsla]

It's OK the high frequency trading party is over.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles...ed-the-profits

The profits from high frequency trading are declining: down 35% this year and 74% on the peak in 2009. Their systems keep on getting faster but the speed of the exchanges don’t, so there is an upper limit.
Adam Smith predicted this sort of thing.
Someone invents a new way to make loads of money. They make loads of money. Everyone else copies them. The competitive advantage disappears because everyone is doing it. Profits decline to normal levels.
Then it’s up to some other bright spark to invent a new way of coining it.

[Nietzsche]

Keep living the dream bro. I'm not going to argue with someone with knowledge so expansive. You said networks can't be hacked. I SRSLY ROFL'd.

If you think a satcom link is secure then you're deluded. It's footprint is massive and requires some high level encryption to break I'll grant you, but to categorically say sats can't be hacked is incorrect. Besides, I can use the metadata to find out a ton of information and start building a profile.

As for your SIPR comments, they're definitely worth some chuckles. I love it when mil types claim their traffic doesn't go over the internet. In some cases, that may be true, but in many it's simply false, plain and simple. There's a reason why there are high level encryptors son and that reason ain't because it's a point to point shot.

Since you obviously are worked up about this, I'm not going to comment any more. I'll just say, you're mostly wrong, and I hope that your continuing education and experience will illustrate why.

Stop that. Your posts would be more popular and you would be more lovable if you weren't constantly LOLing and ROFLing and generally annoying people you disagree with. Don't be unpleasant.

My apologies. I sincerely did not intend to hurt anyone's feelings.

Oh, and on to the OP, automated trading is the future. I'm scared of the algorithms myself, but I'm not going to don the tin-foil and start hiding my money under the mattress. If the market gets hacked or crashes itself (two rather unlikely events) I'll definitely be glad I bought gold

[I WUB PUGS]

Keep living the dream bro. I'm not going to argue with someone with knowledge so expansive. You said networks can't be hacked. I SRSLY ROFL'd.

I said intranet/web. Prove how a secure intranet that encompasses the whole network from workstation to workstation with everything in between over a satellite or even a microwave can be hacked.

If you think a satcom link is secure then you're deluded. It's footprint is massive and requires some high level encryption to break I'll grant you, but to categorically say sats can't be hacked is incorrect. Besides, I can use the metadata to find out a ton of information and start building a profile.

This is a blanket statement and I've already explained and linked to sources that shows what you can get from satellites, but I doubt you can understand any of it, but by all means enlighten us. I wrote extensively on how you would be able to hack into the satellite and it would involve transmitting to it, not just tuning to a frequency which is all receive side and is just noise unless you know what and how to pull from the signal.

As for your SIPR comments, they're definitely worth some chuckles. I love it when mil types claim their traffic doesn't go over the internet. In some cases, that may be true, but in many it's simply false, plain and simple. There's a reason why there are high level encryptors son and that reason ain't because it's a point to point shot.

Another blanket statement. Secure lines may be dug and you could conceivably tap into them, but then you'd have to break the encryptions, and the most secure traffic doesn't and I would wager doesn't ever need to go over a land line so there is no reason to be passed on the internet.

Since you obviously are worked up about this, I'm not going to comment any more. I'll just say, you're mostly wrong, and I hope that your continuing education and experience will illustrate why.

Nice way to dodge it. This is my profession and you've offered nothing to counter it, prove something, source it give us your insight instead of the above. Give us some examples or admit you're just spouting nonsense.