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

Dear Obama, from Infosec

blog.erratasec.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 91 posts

Re: Dear Obama, from Infosec

#11

Post by sergers »

cyberpunk wrote: post #9
jack9 wrote: post #3

> Russia's involvement is a huge issue Not really. China's been doing much more overt theft and hacking for years. If you think this is huge issue, you aren't paying attention. Russia got information and then released it to the US public (which nobody wants to authenticate or disavow). I consider this more of a good than a harm.

I find this whole thing kind of baffling... We (UK+US) have been doing this shit for years and much, much more obviously.. It's clearly an outrage though. Influencing the outcome of another countries election is america's job! How dare those pesky russians have an interest in getting a pro-ru govt installed in the US.... I mean, it's totally different to what we've been doing for decades elsewhere... Right...

Exactly what I was thinking... While I know it's leaning to one side and highly opinionated, I was watching Oliver Stone's untold history of the United states, right after the election.

I actually felt some anger and disgust into how US has influenced other nations and their own "democratic process" since it's beginning...

Re: Dear Obama, from Infosec

#12

Post by nl »

Bloody Hell.

I find it very frustrating that intelligent people don't seem to follow through their thought process here.

The intelligence community will never be able to release enough information to satisfy people. The information will either be so non-specific as to be useless ("we had spies who told us" - would anyone here believe that anymore than they do now?), or so specific it will damage ongoing interests ("We have communication intercepts between the hacking groups and the GRU/FSB, and there they are, and here is how we got them" - it's likely there are actual humans involved in that process who will die if they are exposed).

It's fair to argue that this issue is so important that burning some resources is worth it, but no one is taking that angle.

Don't mistake this for defending the US report though. It was terrible and made the situation much more confused. Before the report it was much clearer that Russian groups (either government or non-government) were involved, and now people are (incorrectly) questioning even that because of the pathetic report that was produced.

It's much more interesting to discuss the shared conclusion was formed that "the Russians" were trying to throw the election to Trump (rather than just to sow chaos).

Re: Dear Obama, from Infosec

#13

Post by sergers »

nl wrote: post #12

Bloody Hell. I find it very frustrating that intelligent people don't seem to follow through their thought process here. The intelligence community will never be able to release enough information to satisfy people. The information will either be so non-specific as to be useless ("we had spies who told us" - would anyone here believe that anymore than they do now?), or so specific it will damage ongoing interests ("W…

I feel I need proof to the fact Russia passed the data to be leaked.... Or was it some other org who had their hands in the same pot and cleaned up better their traces?

The focus has been arguments if they were responsible for hacking incidents during election.

I am sure US hacks many other governments, but does not release/leak the data. I am sure Russia, UK, Germany, china, and others do the same.

So more than highly plausible that they did hack DNC etc during election...

Is there any evidence of the data being extracted to Russia/Russia groups specifically..(not just access to the system).

Call me a nut, but its easier for govt (to save face, alterior motives) to claim state actors than the guy living in a bsmt suite down the street.

Also it was clear Podesta/HRC/US had a vendetta against Julian Assange before specific leaks... Which was confirmed with the leaks.

He could have orchestrated it himself or by WikiLeaks (rather than just receiving the info via leak).

Maybe WikiLeaks has Republican data and other data and just didn't release it.

Julian Assanges goal was to disrupt the democratic election and slap back the DNC Podesta and hrc...

This is a fact. And his goal was accomplished.

Re: Dear Obama, from Infosec

#14

Post by ivan_gammel »

nl wrote: post #12

Bloody Hell. I find it very frustrating that intelligent people don't seem to follow through their thought process here. The intelligence community will never be able to release enough information to satisfy people. The information will either be so non-specific as to be useless ("we had spies who told us" - would anyone here believe that anymore than they do now?), or so specific it will damage ongoing interests ("W…

Some attributions of the attack came from private security firms, not from intelligence community. Can their analysis be released or they have ongoing interests too? It would be interesting to know if espionage activities are privatized in USA and "actual humans who will die" work for private corporations.

Re: Dear Obama, from Infosec

#15

Post by mtgx »

nl wrote: post #12

Bloody Hell. I find it very frustrating that intelligent people don't seem to follow through their thought process here. The intelligence community will never be able to release enough information to satisfy people. The information will either be so non-specific as to be useless ("we had spies who told us" - would anyone here believe that anymore than they do now?), or so specific it will damage ongoing interests ("W…

As Snowden recently said (and it was already logical to assume that) the NSA should have the proof if the hacks as described by the U.S. government right now happened.

And they wouldn't really have to "burn sources" to do it, at least not in the sense that they would put spies in danger. But seriously, if this was such an issue, I would've rather they'd pulled those spies and showed the proof, than just trust them to start WW3 over "secret info that's totally real."

Re: Dear Obama, from Infosec

#16

Post by ivan_gammel »

dragonwriter wrote: post #7
lossolo wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Democrats lost everything in this elections, they could just blame Russia, why not? But then what does it say about USA democracy if couple of hackers can change who will be the next POTUS ? This is double edged sword. Until I see evidence of Russia involvement I don't want to make any judgments. I am just tired of constant narration "you know it was Russia, you don't need proofs". It would be great to see s…

> Democrats lost everything in this elections, they could just blame Russia, why not? It was attributed to Russians first before the election, and by a private cybersecurity that has never, AFAIK -- even since the attribution -- been accused of Democratic partisanship. So the idea that the Russians are being blamed by the Democrats because the Democrats lost everything in the election, while a convenient political na…

Did that private security publish any proof?

Re: Dear Obama, from Infosec

#17

Post by petre »

nl wrote: post #12

Bloody Hell. I find it very frustrating that intelligent people don't seem to follow through their thought process here. The intelligence community will never be able to release enough information to satisfy people. The information will either be so non-specific as to be useless ("we had spies who told us" - would anyone here believe that anymore than they do now?), or so specific it will damage ongoing interests ("W…

This Russians hacked the election narrative is just like Saddam has WMDs back ten years ago, only more dangerous. So unless any hard evidence comes to light, we can safely dismiss it as propaganda and not get too excited about it.

Re: Dear Obama, from Infosec

#19

Post by flukus »

nl wrote: post #12

Bloody Hell. I find it very frustrating that intelligent people don't seem to follow through their thought process here. The intelligence community will never be able to release enough information to satisfy people. The information will either be so non-specific as to be useless ("we had spies who told us" - would anyone here believe that anymore than they do now?), or so specific it will damage ongoing interests ("W…

> The intelligence community will never be able to release enough information to satisfy people.

Then they should say nothing. "It was the Russians, trust us" simply doesn't cut it.

Re: Dear Obama, from Infosec

#20

Post by ivan_gammel »

mtgx wrote: post #15
nl wrote: post #12

Bloody Hell. I find it very frustrating that intelligent people don't seem to follow through their thought process here. The intelligence community will never be able to release enough information to satisfy people. The information will either be so non-specific as to be useless ("we had spies who told us" - would anyone here believe that anymore than they do now?), or so specific it will damage ongoing interests ("W…

As Snowden recently said (and it was already logical to assume that) the NSA should have the proof if the hacks as described by the U.S. government right now happened. And they wouldn't really have to "burn sources" to do it, at least not in the sense that they would put spies in danger. But seriously, if this was such an issue, I would've rather they'd pulled those spies and showed the proof, than just trust them to…

This case does not worth to pull the spies. If such intelligence was collected by spies (which I highly doubt), it would mean they have extraordinary access to information and they are too valuable to be exposed on such cause (it's much more important to keep them on their place and continuously monitor cyberwarfare capabilities of Russia). Protecting them would be the top priority and there would be a whole another game to hide their traces (probably not pointing to Russia at all and taking hidden asymmetric measures). So, I don't believe such information could be collected by spies if intelligence community presents it this way.
Post reply on HN