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

UK cyber security agency backs Apple, Amazon China hack denials

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 99 posts

Re: UK cyber security agency backs Apple, Amazon China hack denials

#11

Post by mattlondon »

justtopost wrote: post #3

Does it seem a little odd for the 5 eyes to be weighing in while the us gov is silent? I am not sure how to read this but it is weird. I have never seen them make a public statement on a hack in a way specific to specific companies (and not others mentioned in the bloomberg article). Even if taken at face value, it can only mean 2 things. 1. They already, thouroughly investigated it (draw your own conclusions what th…

Or, 3rd option, they did it (not china) and are trying to play it down as a non-event.

"Nothing to see here - move along!" while thinking of a new means to hide this stuff in the server hardware...

Re: UK cyber security agency backs Apple, Amazon China hack denials

#12

Post by kryogen1c »

beaker52 wrote: post #7

It could also be possible that these companies are legally bound by some sort of investigation-related order to maintain ignorance to the presence of the chips and that Bloomberg have just sunk an ongoing investigation/counter-espionage operation, potentially putting an associated intelligence network at risk.

This seems the most likely scenario to me. The official response definitely does not pass the smell test, and this is the simplest way 5 eyes has to benefit from lying.

Re: UK cyber security agency backs Apple, Amazon China hack denials

#13

Post by chatmasta »

sschueller wrote: post #9
beaker52 wrote: post #7

It could also be possible that these companies are legally bound by some sort of investigation-related order to maintain ignorance to the presence of the chips and that Bloomberg have just sunk an ongoing investigation/counter-espionage operation, potentially putting an associated intelligence network at risk.

This seems preposterous to me. We are not in China here.

There is plenty of precedent for the US government issuing national security letters (“NSLs”) containing gag orders for ongoing investigations, often with massive monetary penalties imposed for violations.

Re: UK cyber security agency backs Apple, Amazon China hack denials

#14

Post by kryogen1c »

mattlondon wrote: post #11
justtopost wrote: post #3

Does it seem a little odd for the 5 eyes to be weighing in while the us gov is silent? I am not sure how to read this but it is weird. I have never seen them make a public statement on a hack in a way specific to specific companies (and not others mentioned in the bloomberg article). Even if taken at face value, it can only mean 2 things. 1. They already, thouroughly investigated it (draw your own conclusions what th…

Or, 3rd option, they did it (not china) and are trying to play it down as a non-event. "Nothing to see here - move along!" while thinking of a new means to hide this stuff in the server hardware...

I don't think this is feasible. They are 100% going to get caught with this tactic. If they were guilty in the way you guess, I think the likely response would be to muddy the waters with FUD and create lots of confusion.

Re: UK cyber security agency backs Apple, Amazon China hack denials

#15

Post by beaker52 »

sschueller wrote: post #9
beaker52 wrote: post #7

It could also be possible that these companies are legally bound by some sort of investigation-related order to maintain ignorance to the presence of the chips and that Bloomberg have just sunk an ongoing investigation/counter-espionage operation, potentially putting an associated intelligence network at risk.

This seems preposterous to me. We are not in China here.

However, the US enforces the Patriot Act that obligates US companies to turn over user data and are further legally obligated to keep the fact secret? Is it that far fetched to think they couldn't be obligated to avoid admitting (explicitly, or implicitly) something that would jeopardise ongoing espionage-related activities?

Re: UK cyber security agency backs Apple, Amazon China hack denials

#16

Post by sschueller »

chatmasta wrote: post #13
sschueller wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems preposterous to me. We are not in China here.

There is plenty of precedent for the US government issuing national security letters (“NSLs”) containing gag orders for ongoing investigations, often with massive monetary penalties imposed for violations.

Apple with the largest pockets and very positive ratings would be the one that could make a stance against such draconian laws.

Re: UK cyber security agency backs Apple, Amazon China hack denials

#17

Post by JdeBP »

sorokod wrote: post #10

“We are aware of the media reports but at this stage have no reason to doubt the detailed assessments made by AWS and Apple,” This is a pretty mild statement, would not say it backs Apple and Amazon.

Yes, it's not really backing them any more than the equally non-committal statement from the Norwegian National Security Authority is. The Reuters headline is not borne out by its article.

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18146242

Re: UK cyber security agency backs Apple, Amazon China hack denials

#18

Post by chatmasta »

sschueller wrote: post #16
chatmasta wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is plenty of precedent for the US government issuing national security letters (“NSLs”) containing gag orders for ongoing investigations, often with massive monetary penalties imposed for violations.

Apple with the largest pockets and very positive ratings would be the one that could make a stance against such draconian laws.

Unless the fine is implemented as a percent of revenue, market cap or the like. Similarly, the US government once threatened to fine Yahoo $250k per day for non-compliance with PRISM. [0]

As an aside, what do you think is draconian about such a law? It seems like there are reasonable arguments for why it would be in the national best interest to keep an ongoing investigation classified. In fact it seems like an unusually straight forward application of the cliche justification “for national security reasons.”

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8305925

Re: UK cyber security agency backs Apple, Amazon China hack denials

#19

Post by lolc »

beaker52 wrote: post #7

It could also be possible that these companies are legally bound by some sort of investigation-related order to maintain ignorance to the presence of the chips and that Bloomberg have just sunk an ongoing investigation/counter-espionage operation, potentially putting an associated intelligence network at risk.

Wow, that would be the press doing their job! Still too early to tell whether this is what happened.

Re: UK cyber security agency backs Apple, Amazon China hack denials

#20

Post by sschueller »

chatmasta wrote: post #18
sschueller wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple with the largest pockets and very positive ratings would be the one that could make a stance against such draconian laws.

Unless the fine is implemented as a percent of revenue, market cap or the like. Similarly, the US government once threatened to fine Yahoo $250k per day for non-compliance with PRISM. [0] As an aside, what do you think is draconian about such a law? It seems like there are reasonable arguments for why it would be in the national best interest to keep an ongoing investigation classified. In fact it seems like an unusu…

I have no problem with keeping the details of an investigation classified. The issues is that you can't even say there is an investigation.
Post reply on HN