Slashdot Mirror


NSA Hack of N. Korea Convinced Obama NK Was Behind Sony Hack

Mike Lape links to a NYTimes piece which says "The evidence gathered by the 'early warning radar' of software painstakingly hidden to monitor North Korea's activities proved critical in persuading President Obama to accuse the government of Kim Jong-un of ordering the Sony attack, according to the officials and experts, who spoke on the condition of anonymity about the classified N.S.A. operation." From the linked article: For about a decade, the United States has implanted “beacons,” which can map a computer network, along with surveillance software and occasionally even destructive malware in the computer systems of foreign adversaries. The government spends billions of dollars on the technology, which was crucial to the American and Israeli attacks on Iran’s nuclear program, and documents previously disclosed by Edward J. Snowden, the former security agency contractor, demonstrated how widely they have been deployed against China. ... The extensive American penetration of the North Korean system also raises questions about why the United States was not able to alert Sony as the attacks took shape last fall, even though the North had warned, as early as June, that the release of the movie “The Interview,” a crude comedy about a C.I.A. plot to assassinate the North’s leader, would be “an act of war.”

15 of 181 comments (clear)

  1. Stands to reason by oheso · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, the US says North Korea attacked Sony. And the US knows this because it attacked North Korea years ago ...

    1. Re:Stands to reason by 3.5+stripes · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're an anonymous poster, we can't believe a thing you say..

      --


      He tried to kill me with a forklift!
    2. Re:Stands to reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "You're an anonymous poster, we can't believe a thing you say.."

      Slashdot doesn't verify users nor restrict signups. Why do you think an account is any more trustworthy? It's not like people make puppet accounts all the time, nor long time users with low UIDs sell their account when they get bored.

      At least with an AC, the only thing you have to judge them by, is their words.
      When you see a +5 comment by an AC, it's normally of very high quality. It had to stand on its own merits with the small number of users that bother to read at 0 or less, and it had to make it to the top without the benefit of the +2.

      I'm seeing this a lot on Slashdot nowadays, and it really shows the difference between the current culture, and the culture when the site was new.
      Older members grew up with the X-Files, Sneakers and "Trust no one". It was a badge of pride to remain anonymous and be judged solely on the quality of your discourse. Now it's more common to see users looking down on anonymous comments, as if a few seconds long account creation process was difficult to game or some weird badge of pride. It's like these users completely miss the point of the hacker culture and have no imagination in how it can be used for social hacking.

    3. Re:Stands to reason by aitikin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think this is the most "Interesting" or "Insightful" comment I've seen yet in this (otherwise predictable) thread, yet it has gotten modded down to -1. By doing that, I think you're only proving his point.

      I'm burning my bad mod point, accidentally modded GP down (after it was already -1). That being said, his point about anonymity is kinda off base. We often were of the anonymity mindset, but thought we'd have some degree of credibility by have a pseudonym that we could go by ("Marginal Coward", "3.5 stripes", etc or 3557951, 578410, etc) and people would be able to go, I remember this guy's comments have always been insightful, I'm going to give him more credit, but could clearly have the freedom of anonymity through being an anonymous coward (hell, there's even a check box for me to post this anonymously).

      --
      "Don't meddle in the affairs of a patent dragon, for thou art tasty and good with ketchup." ~ohcrapitssteve
    4. Re:Stands to reason by houghi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Question: Where did the hack came from?
      Answer: North Korea
      Q: How do you know?
      A: Uh, uhm, ah, we saw it pass our routers that were in North Korea.

      Could have easily been the NSA themselves. The only thing we do not know for sure is at what moment they started lying about what they know. So it could be 100% true or 100% false.

      As such it is useless information.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  2. Freedom fighting made easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Thank god people know now that the threat is North Korea hacking a movie company. This way, they can be freedom fighters just by watching a mildly funny movie with Mr. Rogen and Mr. Franco, which is both fun and easy.
    Otherwise, they would have to assume that the threat to their freedom is more like a court approving a single warrant on the telecomm data of more than a million people. Or the CIA spying on the institution that is supposed to supervise them. Fighting these would be much less fun and easy, maybe even dangerous.

  3. Doesn't Matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    There's nothing they could do or say that would convince the Slashdot crowd that it really was North Korea behind the attack. North Korea could reveal exactly how it did it and Slashdot would still tinfoil hat this into a conspiracy.

    Cue the "false flags" bullshit comments or talk about how one of the DPRK's 1024 IP addresses was hacked by someone else to use as an attack vector from the United States. This whole readership should really just cough up its computer networks card right about now ...

    1. Re:Doesn't Matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > There's nothing they could do or say that would convince the Slashdot crowd [...]

      Not talking for "the Slashdot crowd" (whatever that might be [1]), but look: the NSA isn't an impartial party here -- and they're whoring for sympathy at the moment. Given its track record, *I* prefer to not trust anything it says.

      --- ---
      [1] To me it looks like a big honkin' strawman, but hey.

    2. Re:Doesn't Matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Here's my "go fuck yourself for using a shitty idiom" card, does that help?

  4. Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1. This is another "45 minute" claim of the sort that provided pretext for the Iraq war, isn't it? It might be true, or it might be misleading but have an element of truth, or it might be utter fiction. An intelligence agency is an agency of state security, and "state security" means working on behalf of state interests, and state interests tend not to coincide with the people's interests.

    2. It might then be in the interests of the state to let the attack happen, so it can be used as an excuse to further state interests.

    3. I don't know why people are getting their panties twisted about NK's typically sabre-rattling reaction, which we all know is 1 part "I'm a maniacal dictator" and 1 part "goad the Americans into reacting so we can use their reaction as internal propaganda proving them to be an on-going threat that necessitates our regime". How would the West feel about the release of a popular film in which the assassination of a living head of state is planned? How would your government behave toward you if YOU wrote a book / published a film / performed a play about this?

    1. Re:Well... by DrXym · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How would the West feel about the release of a popular film in which the assassination of a living head of state is planned?

      You mean like if a villain plotted to kill the queen at a baseball game with hypnotised assassins with all kinds of hilarious pratfalls along the way?

      I suspect the reason it doesn't happen more often is due to legal issues, audience reception (and therefore box office) and the fear of repercussions of pissing off the people whose good graces they want to be in. It doesn't stop one book, movie and TV show after another putting fictional heads of state in perilous situations and occasionally bumping them off.

      And if North Korea did some movie about whacking Obama, it's likely it might generate some media noise but I doubt it would do much else.

  5. Red Herring by Iamthecheese · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This isn't even about convincing the American public to support the NSA. It's about giving politicians talking points to justify the support they intend to continue to give.

    --
    If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
  6. Show me the Evidence please. by abridgedslashdotuser · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I will never believe anything a US government ever says, because they showed in the past that they can not be trusted and that this does not change with whatever party is in charge right now. It is just lies that come out of every official PR persons mouth. Without hard facts to back it up everything they say must be considered not true.

    1. Re:Show me the Evidence please. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So all they have to do is say the opposite of what they want you to feel, and you'll go along with it?

      Do you understand why aggreeing to the above is just another way of saying "I believe whatever I want to believe, especially if it suits my taste"? Not exactly the objective outlook on existence you seem to want.

  7. Double standard all the way by anti-pop-frustration · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Snowden warns us that we're being spied on and that the grip the NSA has on the whole Internet goes far beyond what even the most paranoid had imagined and the US government answer is: espionage prosecution, international warrant etc.

    Compare with: Unnamed NSA official, no doubt with the blessing of his bosses, anonymously reveals the same kind of information about NSA spying - but this time because it is convenient for the administration and it fits into their political agenda, there won't be any legal consequences, prosecutions etc., absolutely nothing will happen, we all know it - and even worse - we all passively accept it.

    Laws are being selectively enforced by the government; there are no actually classified documents. There are "things the government wants you to know", those can be leaked and released on demand by "unnamed officials" - screw the legality of it - and there are "things the government doesn't want you to know", and anyone revealing those things will be spied on, harassed and prosecuted (James Risen? Laura Poitras?), it doesn’t matter that the people writing about those are journalists who have no duty of any kind towards the US government, they’re just doing their job.

    If the administration has proof of North Korean involvement, they can present it to try to convince the American public... but wait, no they can’t. They can't do that because the evidence they have comes from the NSA exploiting and hacking systems all over the internet. "Yes, your honor, I saw it all, it was the North Koreans who painted that graffiti. How do I know? I was there that night, burying a few bodies in the empty lot next door".

    The NSA giving actual proof of NK involvement is equivalent to them coming forward and admitting what they are: a threat far more dangerous for the security of the Internet than anything North Korea will ever be capable of.