Study smarter with Fiveable
Get study guides, practice questions, and cheatsheets for all your subjects. Join 500,000+ students with a 96% pass rate.
In Networked Life, you're not just learning about how networks connect—you're learning about the vulnerabilities that emerge from that connectivity. Network attacks exploit the fundamental properties of networked systems: trust relationships, information asymmetry, protocol weaknesses, and the human nodes within the system. Every attack type you study demonstrates a core principle about how networks function and fail.
When exam questions ask about network security, they're testing whether you understand attack vectors (how threats enter systems), exploitation mechanisms (what vulnerability is being leveraged), and network effects (how attacks scale across connected systems). Don't just memorize attack names—know what each one reveals about network architecture and human behavior in networked environments.
These attacks target the technical architecture of networks themselves—the protocols, servers, and data pathways that make communication possible. They succeed because network infrastructure must remain accessible to function, creating inherent vulnerabilities.
Compare: Packet Sniffing vs. MitM—both intercept network traffic, but sniffing is passive observation while MitM actively positions the attacker between communicating parties. If an FRQ asks about confidentiality breaches, sniffing is your example; for integrity violations, use MitM.
These attacks target weaknesses in how software processes input and executes code. They succeed because applications must accept user input to be useful, but validating that input perfectly is extraordinarily difficult.
Compare: SQL Injection vs. XSS—both are injection attacks exploiting poor input handling, but SQL Injection targets the server's database while XSS targets other users' browsers. This distinction matters for understanding where damage occurs in the network.
These attacks recognize that humans are nodes in every network, often the most vulnerable ones. They succeed because security systems ultimately depend on human decisions, and human cognition has predictable weaknesses.
Compare: Phishing vs. Social Engineering—phishing is a specific technique within the broader category of social engineering. Phishing scales through network distribution; other social engineering attacks (like pretexting calls) are more targeted but potentially more effective against high-value targets.
These attacks leverage the way software spreads and executes across networked systems. They succeed because networks enable rapid distribution, and users must install software to accomplish tasks.
Compare: Worms vs. Viruses—both are self-replicating malware, but viruses require human action (opening files, running programs) while worms spread autonomously through network connections. Worms demonstrate pure network propagation; viruses show human-network interaction.
These attacks target the mechanisms systems use to verify identity. They succeed because authentication must balance security against usability, and users consistently choose convenience.
Compare: Brute Force vs. Dictionary Attacks—brute force is exhaustive but slow; dictionary attacks are faster but only work against common passwords. This tradeoff illustrates the security principle that attack efficiency depends on assumptions about the target.
| Concept | Best Examples |
|---|---|
| Infrastructure exploitation | DDoS, Packet Sniffing, MitM |
| Input validation failures | SQL Injection, XSS |
| Human psychology exploitation | Phishing, Social Engineering |
| Network propagation | Worms, Viruses, Trojans |
| Authentication weaknesses | Brute Force, Dictionary Attacks |
| Information asymmetry | Zero-Day Exploits, MitM |
| Passive vs. active attacks | Packet Sniffing (passive), MitM (active) |
| Scale through networks | DDoS, Phishing, Worms |
Which two attack types both exploit poor input validation, and what distinguishes their targets within a networked system?
Compare how worms and phishing attacks leverage network connectivity differently—one exploits technical propagation, the other exploits human-network interaction. Explain the distinction.
If a system has perfect encryption but users choose weak passwords, which attack categories remain effective? Why does this illustrate the "weakest link" principle in network security?
An FRQ asks you to explain why zero-day exploits are particularly dangerous in networked environments. What concept about information asymmetry and patch distribution should your answer emphasize?
Categorize DDoS, social engineering, and SQL injection by whether they primarily exploit network architecture, human behavior, or software implementation. Which attack could arguably fit multiple categories, and why?