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

Havana syndrome: NSA officer’s case hints at microwave attacks since 90s

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 222 posts

Re: Havana syndrome: NSA officer’s case hints at microwave attacks since 90s

#201

Post by tsimionescu »

whereis wrote: post #198
tsimionescu wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be more correct to say that they never deal in truth with the public. Of course they are a source of well researched and painstakingly obtained truths for government decision makers, but never for the public.

Not true. Take cyber threats for instance. Govt makes public disclosures all the time

They are also known to hoard 0-days for years, and use some of them in their own attacks against others (such as, quite likely, Stuxnet). So, even there, the reason why they release information about some cyber threats isn't the simple fact of their existence, it is some other calculation of the effect of releasing this information.

The good part about releasing information about exploits and such is that they can be easily verified to exist, so there is no need to trust the spy agency. Any claims they make about the source of those exploits is not easily verifiable, and since you can't trust them, should be ignored.

Re: Havana syndrome: NSA officer’s case hints at microwave attacks since 90s

#202

Post by whereis »

tsimionescu wrote: post #201
whereis wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true. Take cyber threats for instance. Govt makes public disclosures all the time

They are also known to hoard 0-days for years, and use some of them in their own attacks against others (such as, quite likely, Stuxnet). So, even there, the reason why they release information about some cyber threats isn't the simple fact of their existence, it is some other calculation of the effect of releasing this information. The good part about releasing information about exploits and such is that they can be…

Tech has been too premature to achieve "fluorescent purple" while simultaneously achieving mission objectives. Besides, the hoarding all got burned last decade and the agencies have clearly evolved.

What's the significance of attribution of exploit source?

Re: Havana syndrome: NSA officer’s case hints at microwave attacks since 90s

#203

Post by whereis »

l332mn wrote: post #199
whereis wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So according to this conspiracy theory, part of the mission was to evacuate all of our diplomats from Cuba to create the appearance that we were fleeing these supposed REW attacks?

The only "conspiracy" is that it is called an attack without evidence. It's so easy to do that, and is hardly conspiratorial in nature. No one's making any claims about the real causes or what really happened here. It is the usual ordeal, you take some happenstance, often heavily distorted, and frame your enemies for it. This is especially common with regards to cybercrime. People will eat it up, often no matter how…

Clearly there's evidence. You can contact the vets who are currently suffering. Plz look on SOCMED and ask them for an interview, then draw your own conclusion.

Re: Havana syndrome: NSA officer’s case hints at microwave attacks since 90s

#204

Post by tsimionescu »

whereis wrote: post #202
tsimionescu wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are also known to hoard 0-days for years, and use some of them in their own attacks against others (such as, quite likely, Stuxnet). So, even there, the reason why they release information about some cyber threats isn't the simple fact of their existence, it is some other calculation of the effect of releasing this information. The good part about releasing information about exploits and such is that they can be…

Tech has been too premature to achieve "fluorescent purple" while simultaneously achieving mission objectives. Besides, the hoarding all got burned last decade and the agencies have clearly evolved. What's the significance of attribution of exploit source?

> Besides, the hoarding all got burned last decade and the agencies have clearly evolved.

You claim this based on what? Kaspersky has recently found what they claim is (another) massively complex US malware in the wild.

> What's the significance of attribution of exploit source?

As in my example above, people always look for the source of an exploit and claim various actors created them. This creates certain reputations for these actors, just as in the claim from Kaspersky above (which may or may not itself be true - Kaspersky is a private company, but it is also known to work with the Russian government, which is clearly antagonistic to the US).

Re: Havana syndrome: NSA officer’s case hints at microwave attacks since 90s

#205

Post by whereis »

tsimionescu wrote: post #204
whereis wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tech has been too premature to achieve "fluorescent purple" while simultaneously achieving mission objectives. Besides, the hoarding all got burned last decade and the agencies have clearly evolved. What's the significance of attribution of exploit source?

> Besides, the hoarding all got burned last decade and the agencies have clearly evolved. You claim this based on what? Kaspersky has recently found what they claim is (another) massively complex US malware in the wild. > What's the significance of attribution of exploit source? As in my example above, people always look for the source of an exploit and claim various actors created them. This creates certain reputati…

One massively complex malware is nothing compared to 2010's shtshow.

Noone can bullsht too often; attribution for hacks/tools as disinfo has limited utility value. And, again, attributing brain injuries to REW's as disinfo wouldn't help and they know that.

I still don't believe the US would decide to lie about this matter.

Re: Havana syndrome: NSA officer’s case hints at microwave attacks since 90s

#206

Post by l332mn »

whereis wrote: post #203
l332mn wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only "conspiracy" is that it is called an attack without evidence. It's so easy to do that, and is hardly conspiratorial in nature. No one's making any claims about the real causes or what really happened here. It is the usual ordeal, you take some happenstance, often heavily distorted, and frame your enemies for it. This is especially common with regards to cybercrime. People will eat it up, often no matter how…

Clearly there's evidence. You can contact the vets who are currently suffering. Plz look on SOCMED and ask them for an interview, then draw your own conclusion.

We're talking about evidence for an attack.

Re: Havana syndrome: NSA officer’s case hints at microwave attacks since 90s

#207

Post by iudqnolq »

kragen wrote: post #111
ben_w wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MythBusters tested that, the outsides (of food) heat up first.

The fact that reverse thermal gradients are often present in microwave thermal processing of materials is quite well known and can be replicated in food in your home microwave, precisely as nabla9 said, regardless of Mythbusters being able to produce a forward thermal gradient. Microwaves attenuate as they penetrate a resistive or high-permittivity substance, because they deposit some of their energy as they pass thr…

I'm not sure why my sibling is downvoted. See for example page E-17 of this manual

> When the radar transceiver is energized, it poses a microwave radiation hazard to personnel. The hazard distance for the Q-47 is much greater than the distance for the Q-37. The hazard distance for troops extends in front of the radar for 217 meters over the radars full 1600-mil area of scan. The radar also poses a hazard for electrically detonated explosives. Figure E-14 depicts the radar’s radiation hazard area.

https://web.archive.org/web/20141226051243/http://armypubs.a...

Re: Havana syndrome: NSA officer’s case hints at microwave attacks since 90s

#208

Post by PhasmaFelis »

staticassertion wrote: post #154
PhasmaFelis wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Have you noticed how microwave cooking is not warming up the skin any faster than the insides? No. Microwave hot pockets are famous for coming out boiling on the outside, cold on the inside (if you don't let it sit for a couple minutes to equalize).

Basing an argument on hot pockets feels weak.

It's an example, not an argument. An argument isn't really needed; the way microwaves heat things is well-documented. For example: https://culinarylore.com/food-science:do-microwaves-cook-fro...

Re: Havana syndrome: NSA officer’s case hints at microwave attacks since 90s

#209

Post by whereis »

l332mn wrote: post #206
whereis wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly there's evidence. You can contact the vets who are currently suffering. Plz look on SOCMED and ask them for an interview, then draw your own conclusion.

We're talking about evidence for an attack.

Evidence comes in many forms.

There's definitely evidence unless the govt is completely fabricating the existence of these injuries (which is unlikely).

Re: Havana syndrome: NSA officer’s case hints at microwave attacks since 90s

#210

Post by ford_x »

eternalban wrote: post #110
jchook wrote: post #30

The USSR irradiated the US embassy in Moscow with microwaves from 1953 to 1979. Later analysis showed virtually no health impacts and no increase in mortality. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30676008/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3509929/

From your first cite, there are some interesting tidbits to consider: Interesting to learn that USSR (& associated block) had set a safe exposure level of 0.010 mW/cm2, while in US the level was set in 1953 to, and remains at, 10 mW/cm2 for GHz freq. range. The paper notes (and it is worth quoting at length in the context of this thread): " It is essential to understand the historical context in which this episode oc…

How do W/cm2 relate to W/kg (used e.g. in https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/05/26/055...)? Furthermore, if I have a detector, that gives only the number of W, will it be equal to W/cm2?
Post reply on HN