Slashdot Mirror


Norse Security IDs 6, Including Ex-Employee, As Sony Hack Perpetrators

chicksdaddy writes Alternative theories of who is responsible for the hack of Sony Pictures Entertainment have come fast and furious in recent weeks -- especially since the FBI pointed a finger at the government of North Korea last week. But Norse Security is taking the debate up a notch: saying that they have conclusive evidence pointing to group of disgruntled former employees as the source of the attack and data theft. The Security Ledger quotes Norse Vice President Kurt Stammberger saying that Norse has identified a group of six individuals — in the U.S., Canada, Singapore and Thailand — that it believes carried out the attack, including at least one 10-year employee of SPE who worked in a technical capacity before being laid off in May. Rather than starting from the premise that the Sony hack was a state sponsored attack, Norse researchers worked their investigation like any other criminal matter: starting by looking for individuals with the "means and motive" to do the attack.

HR files leaked in the hack provided the motive part: a massive restructuring in Spring, 2014, in which many longtime SPE employees were laid off. After researching the online footprint of a list of all the individuals who were fired and had the means to be able to access sensitive data on Sony's network, Norse said it identified a handful who expressed anger in social media posts following their firing. They included one former employee — a 10-year SPE veteran who he described as having a "very technical background." Researchers from the company followed that individual online, noting participation in IRC (Internet Relay Chat) forums where they observed communications with other individuals affiliated with underground hacking and hacktivist groups in Europe and Asia. According to Stammberger, the Norse investigation was eventually able to connect an individual directly involved in conversations with the Sony employee with a server on which the earliest known version of the malware used in the attack was compiled, in July, 2014.

5 of 158 comments (clear)

  1. Circumstantial at best ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nothing anywhere near conclusive from the information provided.

  2. Re:Oh how great is this! by ihtoit · · Score: 5, Interesting

    motive, means, opportunity:

    MOTIVE: disgruntled ex employees. Check.
    MEANS: prearmed with information on the machinations of SPE, not ordinarily known to the public. Check.
    OPPORTUNITY: High profile release with the potential to piss off a State leader and shift the blame onto him. Check.

    Yes, being a pissed off ex employee with inside information and the chance to make a high profile disruption to those who would risk your mortgage and pension with little to no personal risk is a big fucking bullseye.

    --
    Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  3. This is impossible! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I was assured by numerous talking heads that this particular network intrusion against a Japanese multinational was not only state-sponsored; but an act of Cyber-terror-war against America and the Homeland, and something that could only be answered in a suitably apocalyptic fashion, lest our nation's honor be soiled!

    How could it possibly be something as pedestrian as upset employees?

  4. Told you it wasn't North Korea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I just talked with all the rest of the guys here on Slashdot, and we all agree: how could we be so stupid? We're all sorry and it definitely won't happen again; we'll pay really close attention to everything you say from here on out.

  5. Re:Told you it wasn't North Korea by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Umm, you think that the inconclusive opinions of a subsidiary of Monoc Security are positive proof?

    Seems to me you're doing exactly what the guys you're poo-pooing were doing - using your own opinions to turn next to no data into proof positive that you were right.

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"