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

Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 205 posts

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#151

Post by graycat »

vegabook wrote: post #111
jgwest wrote: post #105

Maybe it's the doing of the U.S. gov't... maybe not... But in any case, what's the point of keeping the U.S. government's action or non-action secret? As the linked piece states: "If the attack was American in origin — something the United States would probably never acknowledge ..." It's sort of like the Doomsday Machine in Dr. Strangelove: it just doesn't work as a deterrent if you keep it a secret. Or is all this…

Your excellent point has a follow on: who exactly is responsible for deciding when or if such a retaliation is to occur? Is there any oversight? Is there any accountability? Who are the individuals involved? Which agency is involved? Is Obama fessing up or not? I am not saying that I agree or disagree with the retaliation, only that open accountability is necessary, precisely such that our collective liberty is safeg…

Supposedly CloudFlare has ways to trace and then block a DDoS attack. So, maybe they know the origin of the NK DDoS attack if it was a DDoS.

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#152

Post by crazypyro »

unclebucknasty wrote: post #146
dragonwriter wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Acts of the executive branch (or of anyone the executive branch agrees with) can escape criminal prosecution (whether or not they are technically crimes) simply because (1) the executive branch controls prosecutions, and (2) the executive branch has the power of the pardon. Criminal law, except from a political standpoint, does not constrain the policy of the executive branch.

So, you're saying that the GP's point is moot, in that the USG would disregard any perceived constraints imposed by the CFAA in limiting an attack like this? If so, we're effectively saying the same thing, with the exception that I do believe individuals are, and know themselves to be, technically liable for criminal conduct. As such, I believe that individuals and groups working within the USG (Executive or otherwis…

My point isn't moot because I'm not assuming the USG is behind this attack. It's still illegal, even if the USG wouldn't enforce it against itself. If it was a third party, then they would definitely be prosecuted if the USG had proof/extradition. That was my point.

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#155

Post by lotsofmangos »

vlunkr wrote: post #85

Is it weird to anyone else that all this "cyber warfare" is happening over the release of a movie. A comedy movie, not a documentary or propaganda film. I don't know if media has every had such an inadvertent impact on politics before. I would say it's a strange age we live in, but I think this strangeness is all from North Korea.

It is a propaganda film.

edit -

Propaganda [mass noun] Information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view.

Lots of films, many I particularly like, are propaganda films.

Pleading comedy or satire doesn't prevent something being propaganda, and featuring the slow-motion fiery death of the leader of a country that you have bombed and not yet made peace with, I think qualifies.

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#156

Post by graycat »

Well, NK likely does not have the best electric grid. So, maybe the problem was just their electric grid! Or maybe the problem was someone clicking on the wrong icon or push button in some system management software, maybe written in NK?

But if the outage was from a DDoS from the USG, then I have to regard it as mostly a publicity stunt: That is, I have to believe that the NSA and CIA have much better control over, penetration of, NK computing than just a DDoS!

I mean, NK has, what, bootleg, never updated copies of Win 95, Win 2K, Win XP SP0, really old IE with lots of ActiveX pages, really old FF and Flash? The place has to be a computer version of a fire trap without a firewall! NSA and CIA rootkits have to be tripping over each other all over NK like rats in a garbage pile.

Oh, did someone compare NK with a garbage pile? Oh, how pejorative! I mean, how could one regard that pinnacle of fashion that gave the world the unique haircut of the Great Patriotic Leader, Jr.?

Besides, their girls nearly all look so young, that is, small and thin, possibly because nearly everyone there is thin. Maybe they get a lot of exercise, aren't very warm in the winters, and don't eat very much, or all of those.

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#157

Post by andreyf »

Alupis wrote: post #89
andreyf wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this [1] the original message? How does anyone know this was actually uploaded by the Sony hackers? 1. https://www.quickleak.org/HFgbYdfG

That appears to be the original content, but from what I've read it was posted on pastebin, so this is likely a re-post by somebody.

Why does anyone think this is the same people, though?

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#158

Post by unclebucknasty »

crazypyro wrote: post #152
unclebucknasty wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, you're saying that the GP's point is moot, in that the USG would disregard any perceived constraints imposed by the CFAA in limiting an attack like this? If so, we're effectively saying the same thing, with the exception that I do believe individuals are, and know themselves to be, technically liable for criminal conduct. As such, I believe that individuals and groups working within the USG (Executive or otherwis…

My point isn't moot because I'm not assuming the USG is behind this attack. It's still illegal, even if the USG wouldn't enforce it against itself. If it was a third party, then they would definitely be prosecuted if the USG had proof/extradition. That was my point.

Well, I wasn't saying it was moot, even if you were assigning responsibility to the USG! I was just pointing out that it was the implication of dragonwriter's comment with regard to potential USG involvement.

So, rather than haggling with dragownwriter over that bit, I went on to point out that I don't believe the USG would be constrained by it for different reasons than the outright impunity he suggested; that is, that they would find legal justification for it.

But, I do see that I may have misconstrued your comment by over-focus on the USG involvement bit. My bad.

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#159

Post by dragonwriter »

unclebucknasty wrote: post #158
crazypyro wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point isn't moot because I'm not assuming the USG is behind this attack. It's still illegal, even if the USG wouldn't enforce it against itself. If it was a third party, then they would definitely be prosecuted if the USG had proof/extradition. That was my point.

Well, I wasn't saying it was moot, even if you were assigning responsibility to the USG! I was just pointing out that it was the implication of dragonwriter's comment with regard to potential USG involvement. So, rather than haggling with dragownwriter over that bit, I went on to point out that I don't believe the USG would be constrained by it for different reasons than the outright impunity he suggested; that is, t…

> I went on to point out that I don't believe the USG would be constrained by it for different reasons than the outright impunity he suggested; that is, that they would find legal justification for it.

I don't think that's really different; finding the legal justification to cite for it is responding to the political constraint (it also is a means of invoking the impunity, because reliance on such a legal justification provided by superiors within the executive branch itself creates a colorable legal defense against future prosecution without requiring an explicit pardon, even if the justification itself is flawed. This has been identified by many experts as one of the problems with actually prosecuting the people directly involved in torture in the US criminal justice system.)

Re: Attack Is Suspected as North Korean Internet Collapses

#160

Post by rgbrenner »

downandout wrote: post #120
crazypyro wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is illegal. Under the CFAA, any unauthorized access of any "protected" system anywhere (that causes at least $5,000 in damages, but hell, anything over a 1-2 man business can have $5,000 in damages, in legal terms, in a few seconds) is a felony. Protected system: "including a computer located outside the United States that is used in a manner that affects interstate or foreign commerce or communication of the Un…

Yes, but the larger question is whether computers in NK "affect interstate or foreign commerce or communication of the United States ". Since we don't conduct business with NK, I think it wouldn't meet the definition.

The FBI disagrees with your interpretation:

http://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybercrime/docs/ccmanual.pdf

(I was going to quote some parts of this, but there are too many... giant wall of text.)

Edit: This is also useful: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/97-1025.pdf

And I'll quote this part (which is from a case cited in the footnotes):

A computer that accesses the Internet is a computer used in interstate or foreign commerce.

So there's your answer

Post reply on HN