31–40 of 56 posts
I would hope that a country with the largest military industrial complex in the world can hack a group of camel herders in a desert. Doesn't seem particularly impressive
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny, I had the exact opposite reaction. Part of me wishes we divulged less about our tactics.
Assuming you're an American, you eventually have a civic duty to find out what they did so you can evaluate them. You can't wait forever, because once everyone involved has moved on far enough with their careers (or retired) it won't be possible for your evaluation to have any impact. Declassification has to happen at a reasonable speed in order for our system to work. Although I don't know, I think this story was re…
One of them is Twitter. "identified accounts" but they aren't shut down or shunted. Why's that?
Simple - once you identify a target and they're vocalizing their thoughts, why do you want to limit and censor them? allow them to post, collect metadata and help it tie together other pieces of the puzzle.Browser ident, time, date, time of access, ip address, etc.
Meanwhile you'll see in the article a different reason as to inaction.
I would hope that a country with the largest military industrial complex in the world can hack a group of camel herders in a desert. Doesn't seem particularly impressive
I wish articles like this would divulge some details of the technical side of hacking, rather than keep it a mystical field of study. What did they hack and how did they “get in”? Contrary to the title, there is little “how” and mostly “what”.
While I share your same streak of curiosity, unfortunately this is an area of life that opening up details of your own operations is probably most likely always a net negative. Get a TS/SCI and go work for CyberCommand if you want to be in the know.
It would be naive to require that all government information is shared with the public, but we should maintain robust oversight on all clandestine activities and give that oversight teeth to correct problems when such activities to too far. My 2c.
Cringe.
Interesting, but reads a bit like a bad Tom Clancy novel that I read when I was around 12. I think that "hacking a human" as they described it was the most likely vulnerability. Interesting to see that ISIS actually seem to have a decent infrastructure. From media reports you would believe that they are mainly some barbarians that may have or may have not access to electricity, never mind net access. That aside: NPR…
Nobody who has read anything serious about ISIS would think that. They were a nascent nation state, installing their own civil servants to run schools, infrastructure, etc. Their propaganda videos were nearly Hollywood level in production quality. They were barbarians in values, not capabilities. They were a massively serious organization and we got Mattis just in time to exterminate them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody who has read anything serious about ISIS would think that. They were a nascent nation state, installing their own civil servants to run schools, infrastructure, etc. Their propaganda videos were nearly Hollywood level in production quality. They were barbarians in values, not capabilities. They were a massively serious organization and we got Mattis just in time to exterminate them.
Since when are they exterminated?
I wish articles like this would divulge some details of the technical side of hacking, rather than keep it a mystical field of study. What did they hack and how did they “get in”? Contrary to the title, there is little “how” and mostly “what”.
Disclaimer: I had a security clearance when I was in the Army.