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

Further ties of NSA to Equation Group hackers

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 83 posts

Re: Further ties of NSA to Equation Group hackers

#21

Post by madaxe_again »

belorn wrote: post #18
venomsnake wrote: post #2

Is this really a big deal? They were doing exactly what NSA was supposed to do. We moved from NSA should not spy on everyone to NSA should be toothless ...

Spreading malware is a big deal, and I am sure many people would get quite upset if important US infrastructure was targeted. What would the reactions be if the 911 system got hit by untested malware, or some traffic control systems crash because of spying activities. What repercussion should the US have received if the Iranian uranium enrichment had exploded and thrown fine radioactive dust into the environment? Wou…

> or would they hide and put the blame on a third-party?

That's usually the point of this sort of work, yes. Espionage isn't just about acquiring information, it's about spreading false information, and dragging your enemies through the mud.

I don't approve of this shit, but "the them" have been up to it since forever, and the answers to your queries are a straightforward: "None", "No", "Yes" - unless someone else's intelligence agency outwits them, and has a media mouthpiece that can't be drowned out by chaff.

Edit: Your post got me thinking about Chernobyl and Reagan. The CIA had a programme to export defective technology to the USSR - which (apparently) culminated in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberian_pipeline_sabotage

One has to wonder. Yes, I'm aware that the questions as to how Chernobyl are well answered, and all the rest, case closed, etc. - but one still has to wonder. Nothing should be trusted 100%.

Re: Further ties of NSA to Equation Group hackers

#22

Post by barrkel »

tokenadult wrote: post #12

Not an astroturfer or an apologist here. I've never had any employment connection with NSA or any other intelligence agency of any government. I'm a United States citizen who has spent six years of my adult life living outside the United States. I'll agree with a previous lower-level comment here that it is possible to publicly protest NSA abuses (as I did, with my whole family, in view of news media cameras and poli…

Tailored access isn't one way. People controlling the kind of industrialized automated control over remote systems to make surveillance possible wouldn't need to rely on finding and exposing secrets; they could easily plant evidence.

Re: Further ties of NSA to Equation Group hackers

#23

Post by pdkl95 »

leereeves wrote: post #15
pdkl95 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The scope of these activities, especially when combined with the NSA's (and GCHQ's) indiscriminate "hack everything" attitude. When the NSA attacks so much infrastructure - including standards they are supposed to be supporting - at some point they start creating a reasonable doubt about the true actors behind any network attack. This could have various consequences, but one obvious one is how it affects a jury. It w…

It's unlikely that someone who knows about this would serve on a jury in a computer crime case, or that evidence of NSA activities would be admitted in trial.

Juries don't know about a lot of topics. In an adversarial system, it is the responsibility of the each party to inform the judge and jury what is relevant to the case.

Re: Further ties of NSA to Equation Group hackers

#24

Post by tptacek »

belorn wrote: post #18
venomsnake wrote: post #2

Is this really a big deal? They were doing exactly what NSA was supposed to do. We moved from NSA should not spy on everyone to NSA should be toothless ...

Spreading malware is a big deal, and I am sure many people would get quite upset if important US infrastructure was targeted. What would the reactions be if the 911 system got hit by untested malware, or some traffic control systems crash because of spying activities. What repercussion should the US have received if the Iranian uranium enrichment had exploded and thrown fine radioactive dust into the environment? Wou…

I don't know what repercussions there should be for that, but any consideration of repercussions has to consider the alternative to electronic attack, which is airplanes dropping munitions from great heights onto buildings with people in them.

People should probably not kid themselves about geopolitics and military competition vanishing if we somehow manage to regulate "electronic warfare".

Re: Further ties of NSA to Equation Group hackers

#25

Post by leereeves »

pdkl95 wrote: post #23
leereeves wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's unlikely that someone who knows about this would serve on a jury in a computer crime case, or that evidence of NSA activities would be admitted in trial.

Juries don't know about a lot of topics. In an adversarial system, it is the responsibility of the each party to inform the judge and jury what is relevant to the case.

Hence the second half of my comment:

> or that evidence of NSA activities would be admitted in trial.

Re: Further ties of NSA to Equation Group hackers

#26

Post by fnordfnordfnord »

tptacek wrote: post #24
belorn wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spreading malware is a big deal, and I am sure many people would get quite upset if important US infrastructure was targeted. What would the reactions be if the 911 system got hit by untested malware, or some traffic control systems crash because of spying activities. What repercussion should the US have received if the Iranian uranium enrichment had exploded and thrown fine radioactive dust into the environment? Wou…

I don't know what repercussions there should be for that, but any consideration of repercussions has to consider the alternative to electronic attack, which is airplanes dropping munitions from great heights onto buildings with people in them. People should probably not kid themselves about geopolitics and military competition vanishing if we somehow manage to regulate "electronic warfare".

>which is airplanes dropping munitions from great heights onto buildings with people in them.

I know that you didn't mean for your comment to be taken literally but there is literally zero chance of enemy airplanes invading US skies and dropping munitions from great heights onto buildings with people in them. It is a silly thing to say and it does nothing to justify the current situation vis a vis the NSA et al. Try not to hyperventilate.

Re: Further ties of NSA to Equation Group hackers

#27

Post by cryoshon »

arkem wrote: post #7
alecco wrote: post #6

No more claims from moral high ground from USA government. No sympathy for the devil. Now brace yourselves for astroturfers and apologists.

Your comment would be stronger if you omitted the final sentence. Fortifying your opinion by preemptively calling other people contributing to the discussion "astroturfers and apologists" is poor form.

Shrug. Consider JTRIG: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Threat_Research_Intellig...

They're very blatantly using astroturfing and shilling to silence people who go against their idea of the way things should be. I doubt HN is going to have an astroturf quotient as high as someplace like reddit, though.

Re: Further ties of NSA to Equation Group hackers

#28

Post by belorn »

tptacek wrote: post #24
belorn wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spreading malware is a big deal, and I am sure many people would get quite upset if important US infrastructure was targeted. What would the reactions be if the 911 system got hit by untested malware, or some traffic control systems crash because of spying activities. What repercussion should the US have received if the Iranian uranium enrichment had exploded and thrown fine radioactive dust into the environment? Wou…

I don't know what repercussions there should be for that, but any consideration of repercussions has to consider the alternative to electronic attack, which is airplanes dropping munitions from great heights onto buildings with people in them. People should probably not kid themselves about geopolitics and military competition vanishing if we somehow manage to regulate "electronic warfare".

We recently had a article from Schneier that made a similar observation comparing electronic attack to airplanes dropping munitions from great heights, which is why the conclusion was that electronic attacks should be under the control of the military and not by NSA. We expect the military to strike other nations civil infrastructure (or at least the subject can be debated), but we also expect them to take responsibility for it.

Re: Further ties of NSA to Equation Group hackers

#29

Post by duaneb »

venomsnake wrote: post #2

Is this really a big deal? They were doing exactly what NSA was supposed to do. We moved from NSA should not spy on everyone to NSA should be toothless ...

> They were doing exactly what NSA was supposed to do.

It's fairly unclear what the NSA is supposed to be doing. They appear to be attempting to destabilize the internet in a way that is advantageous to them and them only.

Re: Further ties of NSA to Equation Group hackers

#30

Post by at-fates-hands »

From the article:

"saying only that the operation had to have been sponsored by a nation-state with nearly unlimited resources to dedicate to the project."

Hmmmmmm, you mean like Russia or China?

"malware developers endeavor to scrub usernames, computer IDs, and other text clues from the code they produce. While the presence of the "BACKSNARF" artifact isn't conclusive proof it was part of the NSA project by that name, the chances that there were two unrelated projects with nation-state funding seems infinitesimally small."

Ironic considering this is almost the same scenario people were using in the Sony hack. Saying the code was similar in other attacks used by North Korea while most of the Info Sec community was saying it didn't believe their findings since malware can be reused, shared and distributed - but apparently all that goes out the window in this case?

I'm starting to have NSA fatigue for this stuff.

Kaspersky seems to be the only player actively trying to tie EVERYTHING they find to the NSA. While most of the stuff (flame, stuxnet) have been confirmed by other companies, I'm starting to wonder if Kaspersky has an axe to grind here as well - his ties to the FSB and the Russian government are well documented.

I'm not dismissing this out of hand, but I'm starting to take a lot of their claims with a few grains of salt.

Post reply on HN