Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

North Korea hacked him, so he took down its internet

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 256 posts

Re: North Korea hacked him, so he took down its internet

#161

Post by at-fates-hands »

landemva wrote: post #138
moron4hire wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the North Korean government would have standing in a US court.

Though US government claims standing in UK court to take Assange.

We signed an extradition treaty in 2003 with the UK:

The Parties agree to extradite to each other, pursuant to the provisions of this Treaty, persons sought by the authorities in the Requesting State for trial or punishment for extraditable offenses.

https://irp.fas.org/world/uk/extradite.pdf

As I understand it, this was an extension of the original 1972 treaty.

Re: North Korea hacked him, so he took down its internet

#162

Post by thenaterator »

heavyset_go wrote: post #72
ballenf wrote: post #2

I would have advised him to stay quiet about this. Not out of fear of the North Koreans, but out of fear of our own security agencies seeing the activity as interfering in international relations. Also the vagueness of our hacking laws probably make what he did a crime. But I also am immensely proud that we have people willing to take things into their own hands when needed. Also, I feel like the 2nd amendment should…

You can't own a firearm if you consume marijuana, so using the 2nd amendment for things like encryption might get interesting. The 2nd amendment allows for heavy regulation of arms.

> You can't own a firearm if you consume marijuana [...]

While BATF Form 4473 and the Gun Control Act may lead some to conclude that you cannot be "addicted to marijuana" and simultaneously legally possess a firearm, consider that many laws are on the books that would likely be adjudicated unconstitutional. The second amendment concludes with "shall not be infringed", and denying somebody their right to possess a firearm (for any reason) appears to be an infringement of that right, according to the second amendment.

> The 2nd amendment allows for heavy regulation of arms.

I'd be curious to hear what leads you to believe this. The language of the second amendment is clear, and the founder's intentions even more so. If you're developing your view based on the term "well-regulated", go do a bit of research on what that term meant when the Bill of Rights was authored (hint: it's different than what "regulated" is often interpreted to mean in 2022).

Re: North Korea hacked him, so he took down its internet

#163

Post by throwaway329183 »

reaperducer wrote: post #144
arbitrage wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NK's capabilities are vastly overblown. Calling it a "bear" is part of their disinformation strategy, just like Russia. You're amplifying their propaganda.

NK's capabilities are vastly overblown. Calling it a "bear" is part of their disinformation strategy, just like Russia. Calling it a "bear" is utilizing the common expression "Don't poke the bear," not an assessment of North Korea's abilities.

It's not "don't poke the mouse", if the target isn't dangerous there's nothing to fear from poking them

Re: North Korea hacked him, so he took down its internet

#164

Post by malermeister »

jokoon wrote: post #84

What do they mean "north korea hacked him" ? Does NK hire hackers? How is it possible for NK to have competent hackers?

Why wouldn't it be possible for a country of almost 26M people to have competent hackers? Just cause they live in a dictatorship doesn't mean they're all stupid.

Re: North Korea hacked him, so he took down its internet

#165

Post by whatshisface »

duskwuff wrote: post #115
gowld wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SCOTUS can also roll back existing policy. The power to flip a bit is effectively power to make policy.

Not autonomously. The Supreme Court can only hear cases which are brought to it -- it cannot "make policy" in the absence of a relevant case.

The SC receives an enormous number of cases most of which it declines to hear. It has a lot of authority over what is brought before it.

Re: North Korea hacked him, so he took down its internet

#166

Post by jerrysievert »

mrbald wrote: post #159
tomphoolery wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell that to the North Koreans :P

Looks like every man and his dog is an expert on North Koreans. Did it occur to you that most citizen there are hostages of the own state and may be fighting hard to get a piece of bread on the table? I highly doubt they give a shit to the US, or the internet or the hacker wars of any kind.

> I highly doubt they give a shit to the US, or the internet or the hacker wars of any kind.

somehow, I don't think that those are the people that are being targeted. it's the "elite" who actually have internet access, and can also eat.

those who make the decisions, and those who are friends of those who make the decisions would be the ones affected by the internet being down, not those who can barely eat and obviously don't have internet access.

Re: North Korea hacked him, so he took down its internet

#167

Post by nickff »

whakim wrote: post #150
voakbasda wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not being able to use arms absolutely is an infringement of the right to bear them. I mean, how would it be different if we claimed that you can own a gun but not shoot it? One point that gets lost about the 2nd Amendment is that it should be considered an inalienable right. Meaning, it cannot be diminished by any law of man. Consequently, most of the gun laws can be viewed as fundamentally unconstitutional, and any…

> Not being able to use arms absolutely is an infringement of the right to bear them. That doesn't follow. The right to own something does not imply the right to use it. > One point that gets lost about the 2nd Amendment is that it should be considered an inalienable right. Meaning, it cannot be diminished by any law of man. Consequently, most of the gun laws can be viewed as fundamentally unconstitutional, and any a…

>"The Constitution does not and cannot bestow inalienable rights."

The Bill of Rights was never supposed to bestow rights, just protect them, as per the preface:

>"The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution."

Re: North Korea hacked him, so he took down its internet

#168

Post by netsharc »

gunfighthacksaw wrote: post #18
mrkstu wrote: post #11

I would imagine the intelligence services aren't happy he's providing them free pen-test services. He's taking potential tools out of their toolbox when they may need/want them in a future time of conflict.

So if the reds start parachuting down over your community you should just sit pretty lest you interfere with your military’s operations? The equivalence is not a false one in my eyes because a cyberattack against a US national’s systems should be seen as an attack on a US national’s property.

Maybe the CIA/NSA were all over inside the North Korean networks, thanks to the weak security, monitoring their emails (do they use emails?) or probably even inside their mobile networks monitoring the North Korean elites' texts to each other.

Meanwhile this kid comes in screaming "Leeeeroy Jenkins!" making the North Koreans aware of their shit security.

A parachute attack is different to stealth spy missions...

Re: North Korea hacked him, so he took down its internet

#169

Post by ipaddr »

monocasa wrote: post #91
butlerm wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Supreme Court does not make policy, at most it stops other branches from making certain kind of policies, when presented an opportunity to do so when resolving an actual case or controversy.

Stopping certain forms of policy and not others is a way to make policy.

Shape policy but not make policy.

Re: North Korea hacked him, so he took down its internet

#170

Post by Maursault »

ballenf wrote: post #2

I would have advised him to stay quiet about this. Not out of fear of the North Koreans, but out of fear of our own security agencies seeing the activity as interfering in international relations. Also the vagueness of our hacking laws probably make what he did a crime. But I also am immensely proud that we have people willing to take things into their own hands when needed. Also, I feel like the 2nd amendment should…

> Also the vagueness of our hacking laws probably make what he did a crime.

I think it is likely North Korea could charge him with a number of crimes that may be extraditable, like cyber "terrorism" (the quotes are necessary, right?) The US has extradited at least one Russian hacker [1] P4X is also likely now featured in intelligence summaries in countries with security treaties with North Korea, like China and Russia. Also, it's possible P4X has violated the Logan Act.

[1] https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/russian-national-extradit...

Post reply on HN