Russian Cyberspies Targeted MH17 Crash Investigation (trendmicro.com)

itwbennett writes: Security researchers from Trend Micro have found evidence that the Pawn Storm cyberespionage group set up rogue VPN and SFTP servers to target Dutch Safety Board employees before and after the report on the crash of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17) was finalized. It is likely that the rogue servers were set up with the goal of phishing login credentials from people involved in the MH17 crash investigation in order to obtain access to confidential information, the researchers said.

Comments

First post not from Saint Petersburg`

[Anonymous Coward]

First Post not from Saint Petersburg.

Linked to the Russians, you say?

[rmdingler]

So. Russia has a State-sponsored Cyber Division that uses its skills to further the needs of the Russian power brokers.

Maybe the US and Europe should look into developing a program like that.

Re:Linked to the Russians, you say?

[The Grim Reefer]

How charming that you think the US _doesnt_.

How charming that you didn't hear that loud WHOOSH.

Who is surprised?

[mi]

For a country that shot a passenger airliner to begin with — and not for the first time — for such a country to attempt to affect the investigation of the crime is no surprise at all. What may be surprising, is that none of the Dutch officials involved were killed or blackmailed. But it ain't over yet, is it?..

Re:Who is surprised?

[Zocalo]

Dumb thing is that KAL007 should have taught them nothing much would come of it even if they did own up, and in this case they could quite easily have pegged the blame on some unidentified rogue elements of the Pro-Russian forces in Eastern Ukraine right from start and probably have walked away from the whole affair without so much as a slap on the wrist. Instead, all the heavy handed actions, conspiracy theory level alternative theories and random protestation, just make it look all the more likely that they have something to hide - which is kind of ironic coming from the nation that pretty much made the concept of "if you've got nothing to hide, then you've got nothing to fear..." not all that long ago.

Re:Who is surprised?

[pushing-robot]

In fairness the USA has shot down airliners and made plenty of similar mistakes in the past (MSF bombing, anyone?). So have other countries.

Thing is, most countries would at least be honest admit their mistake, and if Russia had admitted they provided their separatists the missile in question it wouldn't have invited some debate and condemnation but blown over fairly quickly. But Putin's administration is so steeped in Soviet-era propaganda they think they can create whatever reality they want by inventing their own "truth*".

While that may work on the faithful chauvinists, to the rest of the world (and Russians in the age of the Internet and satellite TV) it just makes them look like dangerous idiots, not to mention drags out this whole incident far longer than necessary.

* insert Pravda joke here

Re:Who is surprised?

[mi]

it was rebels from Ukraine which were armed by Russia

False. Operating the Buk system is too complicated for "peaceful coal-miners" to have done it — certainly not the mere 3 months into the insurrection. It was Russian military — even if disguised as locals. Whether they targeted a passenger liner by mistake or deliberately is still a question, but it obviously was not the rebellious locals.

I'm pretty sure a good number of the commercial airplanes which were shot down could be attributed to the US.

For an accusation of such gravity, you better have more solid citations than your own "pretty sure". Do you?

Finally, Ukraine also shot a Russian commercial aircraft in 2001.

First of all, that was an honest mistake. Second, Ukraine hasn't denied it. And third — and most intriguing — the missile was fired from Crimea and the servicemen responsible are now all Russians. Temporarily.

And by the way, the US certainly played an important role in the current Ukrainian situation

Whether that's true or not, how is this relevant to the conversation?..

The ones who are in power right now in Ukraine had support from the US and Europe

So?.. Your desperation in trying to switch the topic is really showing. Mr. Kiselev would've done a better job — were he not busy blaming some non-existent Ukrainian jets for the crime.

Imagine if Russia was supporting a successful coup in Mexico.

Why imagine it in Mexico, when saw it actually happen in Cuba and, more recently, Venezuela? No passenger airliners were shot down in either place...

Go back to watching Kremlin-TV...

Re:Who is surprised?

[Rei]

It was not Russia who shot down MH17, it was rebels from Ukraine which were armed by Russia.

Because random untrained individuals can operate a SAM site?

If you count that as Russia, than considering the US have armed rebels pretty much everywhere around the world, I'm pretty sure a good number of the commercial airplanes which were shot down could be attributed to the US.

Since when does the US give SAM sites to random rebel groups? The US doesn't even give (and actively blocks attempts to give) even groups it supports MANPADs, let alone SAM sites. The latter poses a vastly greater threat to commercial airliners - MANPADs can only hit them shortly after takeoff or shortly before landing, while SAM sites can hit them during cruise phase. They're also far more complicated systems and require a lot more training.

I'd also like to remind you that the US also directly shot a commercial airplane (Iran air flight 655), killing 290 civilians. Finally, Ukraine also shot a Russian commercial aircraft in 2001.

So peacetime accidents are equivalent to pumping military hardware and troops into a neighboring country to try to rip off part of it and shooting at anything that flies without warning civil aviation that you're supplying hardware that can shoot their planes down? And FYI, Russia initially tried to hide the fact that Ukraine had accidentally shot down Siberia Airlines Flight 1812, because they were actively propping up Ukraine's then government, claiming that it was impossible for the S200 to overshoot by 250 kilometers. And in the former case the US military made 10 attempts to hail Flight 655, three of which it received, and none of which it responded to.

In the former case, Ukraine initially denied its culpability, but later admitted it. In the latter case, the US admitted its involvement pretty much immediately. Russia to this date continues to deny, obfuscate, and apparently, hack too to try to avoid culpability.

And by the way, the US certainly played an important role in the current Ukrainian situation. The ones who are in power right now in Ukraine had support from the US and Europe.

Oh yes, the US clearly cares so tremendously much for Ukraine - that's why they won't even toss them a single Javelin, let alone heavy hardware, to help them defend their country, right? Clearly Russia had no choice but to flood the country with troops and vast amounts of heavy military hardware!

Re:Who is surprised?

[Zocalo]

I don't think that's the issue that the Russians are so touchy about. Realistically, it's highly unlikely that the Russians would just "give" a BUK to the separatists and let them drive it away without there being some unofficial advisors along for the ride to provide at least some training/oversight. That implies that not only are Russian personnel officially on the ground (something they are still denying, despite all the evidence to the contrary) but that they were almost certainly on hand when the BUK was used since a BUK apparently requires override to enable it to fire at a commercial aircraft that was presumably broadcasting its IFF, something untrained personnel wouldn't have been likely to know how to do.

I don't think it's about the slap on the wrist for culpability they might have got (or not, given what happened in the aftermath of all the events you listed), and others like KAL007 and KAL902, it's about maintaining the pretense that they have no official involvement on the ground. Basically, in their panic after MH17 was shot down, the Russian government rushed out a story to maintain that pretense that was never going to stand up to scrutiny instead of taking their time and coming up with something that might at least have raised enough doubt. Now they are stuck with either trying to defend a story that has more holes in it than the fuselage of MH17 or changing their story and risking blowing away the fiction of their non-involvement they have spun for their own people.

Re:Who is surprised?

[Anonymous Coward]

In fairness the USA has shot down airliners and made plenty of similar mistakes in the past (MSF bombing, anyone?). So have other countries.

Thing is, most countries would at least be honest admit their mistake, and if Russia had admitted they provided their separatists the missile in question it wouldn't have invited some debate and condemnation but blown over fairly quickly. But Putin's administration is so steeped in Soviet-era propaganda they think they can create whatever reality they want by inventing their own "truth*".

While that may work on the faithful chauvinists, to the rest of the world (and Russians in the age of the Internet and satellite TV) it just makes them look like dangerous idiots, not to mention drags out this whole incident far longer than necessary.

* insert Pravda joke here

yea... what if it really was not Russia though? We may never know. And neither Russia nor Ukraine may not know. There are untrained idiots with rocket launchers on both sides. The state of Ukrainian army is not very safety assuring. Also, tracing a clear path of ownership of prehistoric weapons like BUK is nearly impossible. It is Soviet-made, not manufactured or used in Russia for 2 decades, so they would have had to try really hard to produce one. But they are still on active duty in the Ukrainian army.
Then of course the rebels could have gained them in battle from the Ukrainians, tried to shoot, and failed. It is a complex system to navigate and aim, and requires trained personnel. Or Ukrainian army conducted an exercise that misfired, which is quite possible, knowing the sad state of affairs there
There is one thing, though. I think the attempt to blame Russia for INTENTIONALLY shooting down the plane is completely baseless, and fully manufactured. Russia was blamed almost before the plane was shot down - amazing investigative speed, I wish we investigated Benghazi-gate that fast

Re:Who is surprised?

[Cederic]

It was not Russia who shot down MH17, it was rebels from Ukraine which were armed by Russia

I'm not sure that's certain. It may have been rebels using Russia supplied equipment, or there may have been Russians operating the equipment too.

We'll probably never find out.

Re:Who is surprised?

[Cederic]

Since when does the US give SAM sites to random rebel groups? The US doesn't even give (and actively blocks attempts to give) even groups it supports MANPADs, let alone SAM sites.

The BUK launcher isn't a SAM site. The US have been giving anti-air missiles to random rebel groups since the 80s, or haven't you heard about the Afghans using them to take down Russian Hind helicopters?

Re:Who is surprised?

[Cederic]

I think the attempt to blame Russia for INTENTIONALLY shooting down the plane is completely baseless, and fully manufactured.

Yeah, it's curious seeing the Dutch politicians demand criminal charges - that aren't against the fuckwits flying civilian aircraft through a warzone in which multi-engine aircraft have recently been shot down.

Re:Who is surprised?

[bkmoore]

...I'm not sure that's certain. It may have been rebels using Russia supplied equipment, or there may have been Russians operating the equipment too.

Just giving "untrained" rebels, who are operating on the Russian border, a BUK system without any oversight or command and control would endanger Russian aircraft in the region as well. I don't think the Russians would be that stupid.

Re:Who is surprised?

[Cederic]

They stole the launcher from Ukrainian army and then fired their new toy.

Now that's total bullshit. Congratulations on outing yourself as a Russian astroturfer.

Re:Who is surprised?

[Cederic]

Well, I personally believe you. But I'm keeping a distinction between personal belief and the available evidence, and the evidence is that the rebels were claiming credit for shooting down aircraft at the time - including MH17.

Re:Who is surprised?

[bkmoore]

They stole the launcher from Ukrainian army and then fired their new toy.....

If that were the case it would pose an equal danger to Russian aircraft operating in the region. Russia would have an interest in taking said new toy off of their hands.

Re:Who is surprised?

[ph1ll]

"Russian personnel ... were almost certainly on hand when the BUK was used since a BUK apparently requires override to enable it to fire at a commercial aircraft that was presumably broadcasting its IFF, something untrained personnel wouldn't have been likely to know how to do."

What I don't get about your theory is that if the Russian personnel had enough experience to know what they were doing (as you say) then they were deliberately trying to bring a commercial jet down. That seems unlikely given the panic that ensued and that it benefits nobody.

Re:Who is surprised?

[Rei]

BUK is a surface to air system. It's mobile (vehicle mounted) rather than fixed, but that's usually the case these days. What it isn't is a MANPAD.

The US stopped giving anti-air missiles to rebel groups after the late 80s, after proliferation concerns were raised about the Stingers in Afghanistan. Nowadays the US on a rather anti-MANPAD crusade, including a MANPAD buyback program that buys MANPADs from anywhere, no questions asked, spending a small fortune ($40M/year) to try to get them off the black market.

Honestly, I think the US has gone a bit overboard in its anti-MANPAD obsession. They let Syria get flooded with TOWs in batches of 250-500 with a potential supply of over 13.000 (the amount that they sold to Saudi Arabia for that purpose), but finds the concept of a single MANPAD - which requires that you smuggle it to near the airport if you want to hit a commercial plane - unthinkable. A TOW can of course take out a passenger train, a truck carrying hazardous waste, attack nuclear facilities, hit a plane on the ground, etc. But the US has this weird distinction of "MANPADs = Unthinkable, Antitank = Use as many as you need". That's not to say that the TOWs are unrestricted - they have a pretty good policy for their distribution, requiring returning the spent tubes and filming the attacks and a bunch of other things; of the thousands that have been sent only 2-4 are believed to have been captured by al-Nusra, who's already used some if not all of them. But still...

And with the anti-MANPAD crusade, you'd think that they'd have poured more money into anti-proliferation countermeasures. Yet you don't see that hardly at all. In fact, it looks like the next version of the Grom is going to be the first anti-proliferation MANPAD, and that's Polish. And sometimes people talk about "ways anti-proliferation measures could be cheated", but these arguments are usually based around really dumb implementations of anti-proliferation measures. They don't have to be limited to electronic lockout mechanisms, you can have the missiles additionally be literally designed to degrade, with a "guaranteed to still work" time of X months and a "guaranteed to not work" time of Y months. Degradation isn't some unusual thing, it's much harder to *stop* than to cause. Replace for example gold interconnects on the circuitboards with sulfrous silver, or even calcium metal. Great conductor in the beginning, but it'll oxidize fast, especially if moist. Seal it in a casing with silica gel to slow the rate of decay to the desired length. Anyone opening the casing would only make it degrade even faster. Have the explosives and propellant similarly degrade so that for X months they're still fine, but after Y months they're no longer useful. You could even have the casing rust - and probably save yourself money in the process.

You can easily make it to the point where it'd be far, far easier to make a new MANPAD than to fix the degrading one.

Re:Who is surprised?

[quantaman]

it was rebels from Ukraine which were armed by Russia

False. Operating the Buk system is too complicated for "peaceful coal-miners" to have done it — certainly not the mere 3 months into the insurrection. It was Russian military — even if disguised as locals.

Well it apparently was too complicated since they shot down the wrong kind of plane. There's a big difference between experts that years of military training creates and a couple weeks back in Russia being taught which buttons to push in order to shoot down planes. I'm not saying it was locals (or foreign volunteers) for certain, but I don't think we can really know.

Whether they targeted a passenger liner by mistake or deliberately is still a question, but it obviously was not the rebellious locals.

Why is that a question? What possible motive would the rebels have for shooting down a civilian airliner? Why claim to have shot down an AN-26 instead only to go into massive denials once it turned out to be a civilian plane? There are even recordings of phone calls from the first rebels who went to the crash site and called back freaking out when they realized it was full of civilian bodies.

There's overwhelming evidence that the plane was shot down by Russian rebels (active Russian military or not) who thought they were shooting down a Ukrainian military plane. That's already damning enough, we don't need our own unsupported conspiracy theories.

Re:Who is surprised?

[Cederic]

To be fair, there are so many Russian designed RPGs out there that a few thousand TOW missiles aren't going to make all that much of a difference.

Re:Who is surprised?

[fustakrakich]

I'm pretty sure a good number of the commercial airplanes which were shot down could be attributed to the US.

For an accusation of such gravity, you better have more solid citations than your own "pretty sure". Do you?

Would you believe one is a pretty good number? Of course, that was different, right? But hey, it's not like we shouldn't be keeping Russia in a box or anything. Casualties of war... shit happens

Re:Who is surprised?

[Zocalo]

That's definitely the real head scratcher here. On the one hand, an untrained crew possibly wouldn't even know to look for an override in the first place, yet on the other a properly trained and responsible crew ought to suspect that the aircraft with the civillian IFF might actually *be* a civillian aircraft and take the necessary precautions, so why would they fire regardless? Even assuming that Russian military personnel were on site, and there are numerous instances of the Russian military generally not caring about civillian casualties such as downing other commercial aircraft, numerous hostage "rescues" where few hostages actually survived, and so on, it's still a case of "who knows?". There are any number of things that might lead to a SAM battery crew downing a civillian airliner, whether deliberately or through sheer incompetence, and obviously none of them are going to reflect well on the image of the Russian military being a professional and well trained outfit. It's pretty clear that image matters a lot to Moscow, so a threat to both that and the fabrication that they are not overtly involved in Ukraine would quite likely cause the kind of knee jerk reaction we appear to have got.

Re:Who is surprised?

[Incadenza]

Then of course the rebels could have gained them in battle from the Ukrainians, tried to shoot, and failed. It is a complex system to navigate and aim, and requires trained personnel. Or Ukrainian army conducted an exercise that misfired, which is quite possible, knowing the sad state of affairs there

No, they could not. The load on the BUK contained specific shapes that were retrieved from the bodies of the crew, which prove that the BUK's load was of the type 9N314M. That Ukrainian army has never been in possession of that type.

Re:Who is surprised?

[bloodhawk]

simple coal-miners? you do realise most of that part of the world (Russia and Ukraine) have compulsory military service. Every one of those simple farmers and miners will have likely spent some time in the military.

Re:Who is surprised?

[KGIII]

This may be immaterial and I can, in no way, speak for the simplicity of this specific equipment. I have, on the other hand, used a great deal of military hardware - vehicular and weapons. Much of it is really trivial to operate and has very easy to understand documentation available - very complete and exacting documentation. Add to that the familiarity, these civilians were likely conscripts at one point, and it's quite possible that a bunch of peasant farmers could accidentally shoot down a plane. Hell, if anything, I'd expect the peasants to make the mistaken identification and not know enough to hit the remote self-destruct if they realized the plane was civilian before impact. (I'm assuming it has a remote self-destruct, even if it doesn't then that too is immaterial but included for the sake of completeness.)

So, yeah, I don't really know enough to hold an opinion but it's actually possible that some peasant farmers did this. It's probably not much more difficult than knowing how to set it up and then waiting until the beep turns into a solid beep and push the big red button labeled in Cyrillic words that mean, "Kill Stuff."

Possible? Quite. Probable? I hold no opinion. I just figured that I'd share some of my experiences and what logic I'm using.

Re:Who is surprised?

[bloodhawk]

Given the USS Vincennes was sitting under a commercial flight zone, ignoring orders, hailing them while stating incorrect altitude, speed et al. The transponder was also on, however the Vincennes supposedly incorrectly read the transponder of another military jet near the airport at the time. I can't see how you can attribute blame on anyone for this except for those firing the missile on the Vincennes.

Re:Who is surprised?

[gl4ss]

it's not for international discussions sake that puting is denying it.

putin is saying in Russia that Russia does not participate, that there is no russian soldiers dying in ukraine and so forth - and in current russia if you say otherwise you're an undesirable and potentially subject to.. well, getting shot in the back near kremlin to put bluntly.

the international news following russians are being scared into being quiet or just outright leaving the country so there's that - also a typical russian has been accustomed to not really give a shit what happens 20 km's away, he is more concerned if he has enough potatoes and vodka for the winter.

Re:Who is surprised?

[dunkelfalke]

First of all, that was an honest mistake. Second, Ukraine hasn't denied it. And third â" and most intriguing â" the missile was fired from Crimea and the servicemen responsible are now all Russians. Temporarily.

First: looks like operating a SAM was too complicated for the regular army, so what do you expect of insurgents? Buk has a certain operating mode for unskilled operators, and this mode ignores IFF and basically just shoots down the first available aircraft. I guess this is exactly what happened.

Second: oh, but they have, very much so. Only when evidence became overwhelming they have finally admitted that a missile possibly maybe might have shot down the airplane by mistake and paid compensation ex gratia, meaning they don't even recognise their liability. Up to this day there is only a court ruling that has decided that there was no evidence for a shootdown by a stray missile. And even then their president mentioned something along the lines of "no big deal, worse things happen".

Third: how would you even know where the people responsible are right now? It is not like the staff of a military base consists of locals, in many countries it is exactly the other way round, the soldiers serve as far from home as possible. In fact, I have looked it up. Here is the commanding officer overseeing the anti aircraft exercises that day. Apparently he is on the Ukrainian investigation board for the MH17. This makes you a liar.

Seriously, you hate Russians so much that you are willing to excuse any atrocities as long they harm Russia in any way. Maybe you should go and see a shrink about this.

Re:Who is surprised?

[mi]

Well it apparently was too complicated since they shot down the wrong kind of plane

The system is manned by an officer and two enlisted men — conscripts with no more than 2 years in the military total, including basic training. There are no "years of experience".

a couple weeks back in Russia being taught which buttons to push in order to shoot down planes

Russia merely having provided such weapons is bad enough. Russia also providing training, however poor, is worse.

So much worse, the question of whether or not it was bona-fide Russian military or "merely" Russia-trained locals becomes moot — distinction without difference.

Re:Who is surprised?

[mi]

Luckily for the rebels, many of them have military experience in the Ukrainian army

False. Ukrainian army prior to 2014 was, for most intents and purposes, non-existent. Nobody trained in the use of Buk.

Well, there's the Iranian one for a start.

The claim was, there is "a good number of the commercial airplanes which were shot down could be attributed to the US" (emphasis mine). All you can name is one. Why don't you offer a longer list?

Interesting that you don't acknowledge that MH17 is almost certainly an honest mistake too.

I do, actually, when I state, that the question of whether the targeting was deliberate or a mistake. But the topic is who, not why.

You're falling apart in our other debate too.

I will not debate a comic without audience. And that other "debate" only had the two of us remaining last week — I'm done with it and any posts made there during and after this past weekend shall be returned unopened.

In Soviet Russia...

[JoeyRox]

the investigation investigates the investigators.

They just can't do that

[Trachman]

Internal propaganda keeps telling to the Russian audience of 150 million people that Russia does not participate, and that all the weapons, heavy flamethrowers, drones and tanks, are merely bought at military surplus stores.

Entire story would just collapse.

Russia does have a history of keeping the parallel history and making it official.

Re:They just can't do that

[Anonymous Coward]

That and the fact that Putin is a coward who would rather kill a few thousand people more than admitting that he might have misjudged something.

Re:They just can't do that

[Zocalo]

Sure they could. They'd only have needed to have done a little handwavium over where the BUK launcher used actually came from (not too much of a stretch given that the Ukrainian military operates the launchers), continued to deny any official Russian military involvement, and insisting that it was all the work of separatists. That still fits the official internal Russian storyline, yet provides a much more plausible story to everyone else that maybe the Ukrainian government really might have "misplaced" a BUK in the turmoil and that it fell into the hands of separatists who, not being suitably trained in its use, then proceeded to shoot down a target without adequately verifying it wasn't civilian - or even did so regardless. Not perfect, certainly, but a heck of a lot better than all the indications of a cover-up that they are now ensnared in.

Re:They just can't do that

[Rei]

Their latest propaganda line by the Russians is "the report is flawed, as the Russian findings were not taken into account" and that Russia was "kept out of the loop of the investigation". Which, of course, is total BS.
 

Re:They just can't do that

[quantaman]

Internal propaganda keeps telling to the Russian audience of 150 million people that Russia does not participate, and that all the weapons, heavy flamethrowers, drones and tanks, are merely bought at military surplus stores.

Entire story would just collapse.

Russia does have a history of keeping the parallel history and making it official.

They still could have come up with a better story than they did. ie:
"The rebels stole a loaded BUK from a Ukrainian base (let the Ukrainian's try to disprove that) and tragically shot down a civilian airliner by accident! Oh and we think the Ukrainians left the civilian airspace open to deliberately confuse the rebels about which planes were safe to shoot down."

If Russia pushes that narrative they've instantly acknowledged the obvious with the only major downside being that if the DPR survives they'll probably need to throw them an extra chunk of money to pay off the settlement. The arguments over the origin of the BUK and Ukrainian intensions over leaving the airspace open are fairly academic and the whole thing mostly goes away in the media.

That's one of the problems with being an authoritarian state. There's no one to tell you that you're being an idiot trying to sell a bunch of bizarre conspiracy theories when you can dodge most of the blame with a half-truth.

Re:They just can't do that

[Incadenza]

Sure they could. They'd only have needed to have done a little handwavium over where the BUK launcher used actually came from (not too much of a stretch given that the Ukrainian military operates the launchers)

The report states that the explosive head of the BUK was of the type 9N314M, a newer type of explosive head that was never supplied to the Ukrainian army. This was proven by the typical shapes of this head's load, that were retrieved from the bodies of the crew.

Interestingly, this conclusion was first made by the Russian members of the investigation team, shortly before they were being recalled to Moscow.

Re:They just can't do that

[newcastlejon]

Putin a coward? Nonsense! I mean, the man has wrestled naked with a bear, and I'm not just talking about his live-in chum Vasily!

Trend Micro and the Russian Cyberspies ..

[nickweller]

I don't understand how these Russian Cyberspies are so careless as to leave a trail all the way back to Moscow.

Equation: The Death Star of Malware Galaxy

Re:confidential information.

[nickweller]

"The pattern of damage observed in the forward fuselage and cockpit section of the aircraft was consistent with the damage that would be expected from a large number of high-energy objects that penetrated the aircraft from outside." ref

But How???

[Xenna]

Let's put the political stuff aside for a moment and look at the technical side. How did the attackers operate? A fake mail/vpn server? How is that supposed to work?

Or are we talking about standard script kiddie attacks (seeen by every site on the web) interpreted by Trend Micro as Russian government attacks? Let's not forget that this is a great commercial message for Trend Micro. Is this stuff for real or is someone trying to scare us?

Obviously there are lots of Russian hackers/script kiddies who are angry enough at the west to start something like this on their own. No real need for a big Russian government conspiracy.

(Never thought I'd be defending Poetin some day. You owe me one Vladimir!)

Active protection system for civil aircrafts

[Max_W]

There are so many portable SAM missiles out there in the wild, that it makes sense to use an active protection system on civil aircrafts too.

For example, an IR-decoy flares system. It is small and relatively cheap.

The ejection seats would also be useful. In case of an Air France crash into the ocean when the airplane just stalled and fell down from the sky, it would save hundreds of passengers.

Civil Aircraft construction industry is stagnating. It has completely bureaucratized and politicized. There are so many innovations in the aeronautics, and they cannot even find fallen aircraft for years.

Tonkin's Gulf redux.

[WOOFYGOOFY]

Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17) is the Tonkins Gulf incident of Eurasia, except thsi time something DID happen, but the attribution is fake. Read the headlines, read the incessant drumbeat against Russia. This is being used to whip the US into approviing some military interventionism in the Ukraine.

It's total bullshit. Just like the US, Russia has tons of their weapons in the hands of people they do not directly control every action of. So we really have no hope of finding out who fired that missile and if they did, if they intended to target the plane; the "why" is mysteriously left out of all stories presented to you by the MSM. It's presented as a whodunit, meant to draw you in without triggering your critical thinking.

The Ukranians basically hate each ther for deep cultural, political and ethnic reasons. What needs to happen there is the nation needs to be divided between east and west but fairly, perhaps with one-of-a-kind critical things like ports and other natural resources being shared / accessible to all.

Russia has far far far greater interest in what happens there and is in it for the long haul. America is being driven by hegemonic power lust and behind that are a variety of power players who are looking to make a buck by 1) strting a conflict from which they profit directly 2) gaining control over natural resources.

Just like in Afghanistan then Iraq, the basic dynamic is- the people who live there aren't going anywhere, so how long would YOU like to stay here and keep things the way you like them, America? Because if your answer is anything other than "forever" rest assured things will eventually go in some way you're not going to like.

We'd have a lot more rela power in the world if we went in big on critical things and 8sought to work out equitable compromises elsewhere*.

But we don't do that because the US foreign policy is a tool of multinational corporations, the defence industry, individuals with a distorted and paranoiac world view who are deeply embedded in the national security complex and politicians who never tire of being seen as *tough* and who need an ever changing rolodex of "dangerous enemies" to justify their interventionsim.

For the last category- please let em help yo fill that rolodex with REAL worries.

Our infrastrcuture- water, electrcity, sewer systems are critically even insanely vulnerable to terrorism and a plausibly big attack on them would kill tens of thousands even millions. Feel free to start fixing that anytime.

The advancing state of civilian technology is leading us directly into a world where just anyone or a few people can kill people by the tens of thousands or millions. We're talking civilian access and ability to alter the DNA of organisms and even viruses. We're talking about synthetic biology. We're talking about the force multiplier for evil a poorly done IoT will subject us to.

We haver a lot more in common (to lose) with established nation-states like Russia than we have differences. We should be working WITH them, not trying to decide what goes down in their backyard. Would we let them decide what happens in Mexico? In Nicaragua or Chile or Argentina.. oh wait.. we already know the ansers tothose questions.

What -exactly- is the US afraid Russia is going to do to us? If the answer is "prevent a small gorup of billionaires like the members of the Blackstone Group fropm conrtolling more of the world's resources" then, yeah, that's not actually a national security concern.

Does anyone have a theory on what strategic purpose Russia and Putin may be said to have had in shooting down this flight which coud not have been achievedina "better" (quieter say) way?

This doesn't pass the smell test.