Slashdot Mirror


North Korean Hackers Are Targeting US Defense Contractors (wpengine.com)

chicksdaddy quotes Security Ledger: North Korean hackers have stepped up their attacks on U.S. defense contractors in an apparent effort to gain intelligence on weapon systems and other assets that might be used against the country in an armed conflict with the United States and its allies, The Security Ledger is reporting. Security experts and defense industry personnel interviewed by The Security Ledger say that probes and attacks by hacking groups known to be associated with the government of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) have increased markedly as hostilities between that country and the United States have ratcheted up in the last year. The hacking attempts seem to be aimed at gaining access to intellectual property belonging to the companies, including weapons systems deployed on the Korean peninsula.

"As the situation between the DPRK and the US has become more tense, we've definitely seen an increase in number of probe attempts from cyber actors coming out of the DPRK," an official at an aerospace and defense firm told Security Ledger. The so-called "probes" were targeting the company's administrative network and included spear phishing attacks via email and other channels. The goal was to compromise computers on the corporate network... So far, the attacks have targeted "weakest links" within the firms, such as Human Resources personnel and general inquiry mailboxes, rather than targeting technical staff directly. However, experts who follow the DPRK's fast evolving cyber capabilities say that the country may have more up their sleeve.

CNBC also reports that America's congressional defense committees have authorized a last-minute request for $4 billion in extra spending for "urgent missile defeat and defense enhancements to counter the threat of North Korea."

Other countries newly interested in purchasing missile defense systems include Japan, Sweden, Poland, and Saudi Arabia.

146 comments

  1. Counter with honeypots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Filled with anti-NK propaganda, in the Korean language.

    1. Re:Counter with honeypots by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Filled with anti-NK propaganda, in the Korean language.

      No, seed the honeypot with "plans" and "manufacturing data" for the new American "quantum wormhole bomb" of infinitely powerful capabilities and that has already been deployed in DPRK territory using "microdrones." Start a snipe hunt that diverts Un's military in hilarious directions until it runs out of resources.

    2. Re: Counter with honeypots by dougdonovan · · Score: 1

      nkh r ? since when ? oh yeah, since obama. get a clue ppl.

    3. Re:Counter with honeypots by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      What do you think NK is doing to the US right now?

      They keep baiting Trump, knowing that he will be unable to resist responding with a tweet or vague threat, which only makes him look even less capable of actually doing anything to improve the situation and strengthens Un's position as a player on the world stage.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:Counter with honeypots by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      I hardly think Trump is acting unilaterally here. Strategists are using him as a psychological weapon against Un, who probably believes that Trump has the power to press the nuclear button out of personal pique.

    5. Re:Counter with honeypots by khandom08 · · Score: 1

      ...who probably believes that Trump has the power to press the nuclear button out of personal pique.

      He does. Frightening thought now aint it?

    6. Re:Counter with honeypots by penandpaper · · Score: 2

      They keep baiting Trump, knowing that he will be unable to resist responding with a tweet or vague threat, which only makes him look even less capable of actually doing anything to improve the situation and strengthens Un's position as a player on the world stage.

      Ok, so what is the proper response? How does he respond without improving Un's position on the world stage? Or how does he respond to limit the nuclear capabilities of NK? Considering the last 30-50 years I don't think there has been any response that has worked.

      Besides, if the only response are Tweets or vague threats then that is definitely better than preemptive war.

    7. Re:Counter with honeypots by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0

      Be presidential about it. Avoid pretty insults and idle threats. Stop the antagonistic war games with South Korea. Stick with the sanctions and food aid. Work with China.

      Yes, it's frustrating that more cannot be done. But at least that route does not lead to a catastrophic war. North Korea can be talked to, is open to diplomacy. When it's tried it works, it just doesn't get tired enough.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re: Counter with honeypots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, so what is the proper response? How does he respond without improving Un's position on the world stage? Or how does he respond to limit the nuclear capabilities of NK? Considering the last 30-50 years I don't think there has been any response that has worked.

      Only since George W. Bush started screaming about his Axis of Evil have they been a problem. Before that, unless you were Korean or Japanese, you just didn't care. North Korea was a country you never cared about for any reason whatsoever.

      It was just lines on a map. Now Trump is screaming about them every third week and that is only hurting American interests.

      Besides, if the only response are Tweets or vague threats then that is definitely better than preemptive war.

      But that isn't what Trump wants to be known as, the impotent tweeter.

      Sooner or later, somebody will taunt him and he'll hit the nuclear war button in his underwear.

    9. Re:Counter with honeypots by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      Stick with the sanctions and food aid. Work with China.

      I mean, I agree but hasn't that been tried the last few number of decades with limited to no success? At some point it is a failed policy. Continuing a failed policy is stupid that will be taken advantage of by other foreign entities.

      at least that route does not lead to a catastrophic war

      Does it? It hasn't lowered tensions. It hasn't stopped the rhetoric. It hasn't stopped the posturing. It hasn't limited nuclear proliferation. It hasn't done anything to establish a peace agreement beyond the armistice. Seems like all it has done is buy time for NK to build up so that we are in the situation we are in today. Seems to be the policy of Neville Chamberlain. Are you sure that NK will be content with their current border and drop their idea of unity of the peninsula when they achieve the nuclear capabilities they aspire? Can you guarantee the US will always be there for SK and Japan?

      Perhaps, the way to get China to do more is for Japan and SK to get their own nuclear weapons. It seems that without the UN actually enforcing non-proliferation it is a failed policy that sanctions or food aid will not solve. MAD is a viable alternative that has worked before. It is reasonable that if SK or Japan face a nuclear armed madman neighbor they be armed as well to defend themselves to the extent of any attack.

      Compared to petty insults or threatening tweets... I'll take the insults and threats.

    10. Re: Counter with honeypots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://www.nytimes.com/intera...
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      I must have missed the provocation that happened before Bush took office.

      somebody will taunt him and he'll hit the nuclear war button in his underwear.

      And then that somebody will learn they messed with the wrong dick'n fried beans.

    11. Re:Counter with honeypots by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The war games and aggressive stance have been tried for just as long. When do we say that has failed?

      We need to do one at a time. They are working against each other. The diplomacy is the only thing that de-escalated and prevented war so far. And it's had other successes, like progress on the kidnappings. The joint economic area is another example.

      NK can't do anything about their border. They know that. Their motivation at the moment is MAD with the US and making the most of the opportunity Trump presents.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    12. Re:Counter with honeypots by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      The war games and aggressive stance have been tried for just as long. When do we say that has failed?

      I agree. So if either policy is failed. What's next? Action? Threatening Tweets sound a whole hell of a lot better than anything either you or I have mentioned. They are not constructive but nor has the last 30 years of policy. Again, to your OP what policy will make trump look capable? Obama did the opposite and he looked like a damned fool while acting presidential. Nothing can be done to look capable because there is nothing capable of working that hasn't been tried short of war.

      Their motivation at the moment is MAD with the US

      No matter what we do then they can do that. Sanctions, diplomacy, posturing, or threats be damned. The UN is a toothless animal. Non-proliferation is a failed policy. How many other nations or leaders will take note of that weakness and abuse it for their own ends? Once they get those weapons you cannot remove them. Hooray, Chamberlain in the 21st century where every despot and madman have a nuke.

      had other successes, like progress on the kidnappings. The joint economic area is another example.

      That's good but has done nothing for the underlying problem.

    13. Re:Counter with honeypots by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Are you really saying that starting a war with a tweet is now the best option?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    14. Re:Counter with honeypots by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      No, I said " Tweets sound a whole hell of a lot better than anything either you or I have mentioned. ". My point was that in your OP there is nothing that Trump, or any US president, can do to look capable while not strengthening Un's position in the world stage. Between failed policy that emboldens Un or failed policy that angers Un, threatening tweets are hardly a problem.

    15. Re: Counter with honeypots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is reasonable that if SK or Japan face a nuclear armed madman neighbor they be armed as well to defend themselves to the extent of any attack.

      There is no defense that is not crippling in its expense.

    16. Re:Counter with honeypots by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 1

      Filled with anti-NK propaganda, in the Korean language.

      No, seed the honeypot with "plans" and "manufacturing data" for the new American "quantum wormhole bomb" of infinitely powerful capabilities and that has already been deployed in DPRK territory using "microdrones." Start a snipe hunt that diverts Un's military in hilarious directions until it runs out of resources.

      I don't remember the details, but back in the Cold War US intelligence knew the Soviets were going to steal something in particular at a particular, so they put an altered version for them to steal. They built theirs according to the stolen specs...and it blew up on them as designed. I like your plan, too.

    17. Re: Counter with honeypots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only if the US pays for it, amirite? No wonder Europe can have so many social programs and a smug attitude while chastising the US. God forbid a US president ask NATO members contribute their fair share.

    18. Re: Counter with honeypots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tweets don't help Trump look capable, they make him look incapable of not tweeting like a loon.

      Then one day he throws a Keurig off a building and hits somebody in the head.

    19. Re:Counter with honeypots by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I mean, I agree but hasn't that been tried the last few number of decades with limited to no success? At some point it is a failed policy.

      We haven't had a war with North Korea while following a peaceful policy. We haven't constructively engaged with them, but that's not going to happen any time soon under any footing. I call not having a war a success.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    20. Re:Counter with honeypots by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      What do you mean? We are still at war. An armistice != peace agreement.

      It takes two to make peace as it does to make war. As much as we havn't "constructively engaged" with them they haven't us.

    21. Re:Counter with honeypots by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Sure, legally we're at war. Who cares about legalities nowadays? Certainly not the US (and that's not a new thing either).

      People outside North Korea haven't been killed in any significant numbers by North Koreans since the armistice. I'm calling that a success.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    22. Re:Counter with honeypots by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      And the military build up and nuclear arms? Chamberlain thought his talks with Germany were a success too. Can you be sure that NK won't start an offensive like what happened in 1950? Can you be sure that the US will always be around to help and protect SK and Japan?

      Who cares about legalities nowadays?

      You are right. non-proliferation is a failed policy and the UN is a toothless animal. What should happen with the next despot wanting/getting nukes?

      I don't want war but sometimes it's necessary. I don't know the right answer for NK but the last 30-50 years of policy have failed. Yes congrats, the armistice was successful in reducing the number of killed as is the point of a cease fire when both sides gain no ground. Now we are in a situation where many more people can die to a madman willing and able to kill millions more because he was able to build up the tools to kill more people than before. Hooray appeasement.

      Does Chamberlain policy work in the 21st century when that appeasement will amount to nuclear arms?

    23. Re:Counter with honeypots by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Chamberlain was dealing with a large industrial giant with a large population. We're talking about a small, nearly starving, country. There's a very large difference there. Germany was quite capable of being dangerous to Europe. North Korea is capable of being dangerous to South Korea and Japan (and China, but they're not going that way).

      Another 1950 would inflict tremendous civilian casualties among the South, but it's not at all obvious the North could win. US help, which would be forthcoming, would be decisive. The Japanese Self-Defense Forces are powerful armed forces, and could easily get involved.

      From China's point of view, the problem is that they like having a buffer state there, and such aggression out of it would render it difficult to maintain. They're the ones keeping North Korea afloat, and they have influence. They want to keep North Korea at peace.

      Non-proliferation was a good goal, but it's failing, as might have been predicted. Advancing science means that it takes less and less resources to make a nuke. The first nuclear bomb program was very expensive, a major effort by the richest Allied nation along with scientists from all over Europe included. The Bush invasion of Iraq in 2003 drove in the idea that having nukes was a very good idea if you wanted to stay safe from the US.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    24. Re:Counter with honeypots by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      the world you would create is dangerous. much more so than if the us preemptively attacked nk. i am glad you are not in the position to make those decisions.

    25. Re:Counter with honeypots by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Pre-emptively attacking North Korea kills thousands and thousands of South Korean civilians right off the bat, considering the locations of North Korean artillery and Seoul. Under the present circumstances, it also risks war with China, which is not a good idea.

      We kept the peace with much larger and more powerful countries. As long as North Korea doesn't launch an attack itself, which the Chinese don't want, and which would be disastrous for the North Korean government, we're doing well.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  2. alliance by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Our good friends in Russia are still doing lots of business with North Korea.

    Donald, they're laughing at you, not with you.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/in...

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone's laughing at Twitler, not just the Russians.

    2. Re:alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Found the Democrat/"Progressive" ass hat.

    3. Re:alliance by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      just pay them it's skywriters code!
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    4. Re:alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That’s because everyone knows that Donald’s a dotard.

    5. Re:alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      On the internet, everyone is Russian.

    6. Re:alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, he’s making peace with them by becoming Putin’s fluffer and going out of his way to excuse dictators.

    7. Re:alliance by Desler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you have a pulse.. and a conscious.. you cannot condone the continual violations of human rights.. the epic oppression of the people in his country while at the same time trying to make nice with this terrorist-in-charge.

      Interesting claim since he’s doing just that with China, Russia and Saudi Arabia.

    8. Re:alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bro, someone set up a drone skywriting service that you can post your requests via twitter! Quick! Get some tech bro from Stanford to hit up those Y-Combinator jackasses for some funding! This idea can't lose! Amirite?

    9. Re:alliance by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Don't use drones to write stuff with smoke in the sky, that's moronic.

      Use a swarm of drones and use them as pixels to write something in the sky.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    10. Re:alliance by Miles_O'Toole · · Score: 2

      If by "make peace with Russia" you mean surrender your nation's presidency to Vladimir Putin, then the United States can cross that one off as Mission Accomplished.

      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
    11. Re:alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How's Trump's butt taste down there on Putin?

    12. Re: alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The American preoccupation with Russia and claims without supporting evidence is fascinating, though maybe dangerous.

      Russia is not among the 5 largest importers from North Korea and as for exports to North Korea it was less than $80 million putting them third closely followed by Thailand. Look at the numbers for China.

      Aside from China, a few other countries trade with North Korea as well. Pyongyang also did business with India, Pakistan, Russia, Thailand and the Philippines, according to the Massachusetts Institute of Technologyâ(TM)s Observatory of Economic Complexity citing data as of 2015. North Koreaâ(TM)s top export destinations include China at $2.3 billion, India at $97.8 million, Pakistan at $43.1 million, Burkina Faso at $32.8 million and a handful of other Asian countries at $26.7 million. Imports largely come from China at $2.95 billion, India at $108 million, Russia at $78.2 million, Thailand at $73.8 million and the Philippines at $53.2 million.

      https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/prk/

    13. Re:alliance by Boutzev · · Score: 2

      You forgot one important point. Predictability is what makes your allies stay in line with you. Predictability is what allows you to sign treates (or a deal as some may say) with other countries. Someone with a business background would probably know that an unpredictable partner isn't a partner at all (unfortunately the US president has a doubtable business qualification). When you go unpredictable you get what you are looking for, that is:
      - other countries don't trust you and don't want to be your allies since they are not so sure if you are going to protect them when they need it.
      - other countries refuse to sign any treaties with you since they don't trust you for not breaking it in a few years time

      When you loose your alies you loose what makes the US the leader in world affairs - it's influence.

    14. Re: alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your paranoid an full of the brown stuff.
      Never have american soldiers been closer to moscow than 2017.

      Funny how your banksters can turn you into paranoid bullies.

    15. Re:alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Common interests are what make allies.

      The US has sucked it up everytime our "allies" in Germany sell chemical reactors to Iraq or centrifuges to Iran, or when France takes bribes from Hussein to smuggle weapons into his state, or when Italy dupes the US into helping them seize Qaddafi's bank accounts, or when Turkey supplies weapons to Syrian terrorists. This sort of behavior is very predictable from them, but it isn't very "ally-like".

      The old saying is that nations do not have friends, only interests. Being clear on your interests makes you much more predictable than empty rhetoric ever did.

    16. Re:alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      whatever you say bitch. North Korea has a better standard of living than some places in stupid america.

      In fact, non of your fucking business what North Korea does. Stop poking your stupid nose into other people businesses, monkey.

    17. Re:alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      9/10. It would've been an 8, but I like the "real action by a real leader". Very nice.

    18. Re:alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Found the Russian/GOP funded shill

      Found the Democrat/"Progressive" ass hat.

      It's this kind of stupid fucking shit that makes me hope and pray that humans will get rid of politics before it assures our self-destruction.

      Don't bother trying to put labels like "Trump", "Clinton", or "Obama" on your stupidity. It won't help ANY of you.

    19. Re:alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, the good ol' "-1 disagree"

      Seriously moderators. Just because you disagree with something doesn't mean it should be down voted. This sort of childish behavior on your parts is why people come in here and say that the moderation system is broken. Grow up, just because you're too immature to handle ideas you disagree with doesn't mean the poster should be punished for it.

    20. Re: alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so the statement "lots of business" can only be true if they are the number one trading partner?

      I mean, I get that China is -- far and away -- North Korea's largest trade partner, but #3 and #5 don't sound utterly insignificant.

      You've made a numbers argument that North Korea doesn't care about the trade with Russia because it is dwarfed by their trade with China, but doing so is begging the question as to what constitutes "lots of business".

      In general, just looking at the numbers might be a tolerable metric. But North Korea is far from typical and it is politically very important who they are trade partners with. The more countries they conduct trade with the more it legitimizes the country.

      It can also matter what the trade consists of which those numbers don't give any indication of.

      But, all in all, pointing out that China is a bigger trade partner with North Korea is simply stating the obvious and of no real bearing to the point at hand, namely that we are governed by a fool whose ego is so sensitive that if you can stand saying nice things about him you can twist him around your little finger.

      Which is what China and Russia are doing. Some people in this country have twigged to his narcissistic egotism, but outside of the Republican party there are few who can abide by lowering and abasing themselves to that.

      And even some Republican politicians are starting to say "enough"

    21. Re: alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When they are testing Nuclear weapons and have the range to hit America, then it becomes our business.

      It's like your neighbor who throws rocks everyday. You ignore them UNTIL those rocks become a threat to YOU.

      Get it?

  3. Not to worry--not all attacks will be cyberattacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But this is a technical blog

  4. No shit sherlock by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    of course they are. It would be silly if they weren't. Hell, I'm sure our allies are targeting us and we're targeting them. That's just the nature of these things. The fact that we can read stories about it means NK isn't very good at it.

    Now, watch the news. If you start seeing more and more of these kind of stories about scary things NK is doing that's when you start worrying, because it means our media is gearing us up for war with them. Go look back at media coverage before Iraq/Afghanistan if you doubt me.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:No shit sherlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Keep in mind the fact that US businesses don't give a rat's ass about security, (no need -- C-level just hit their yacht with their golden parachutes and congratulate themselves for a "synergistic optimization" if they get let go. Plus, there are no real regulations that has any effect on companies. Maybe the GDPR, but I'm sure that will be mainly used as a tool to beat down non-European countries, since they often call Google or Microsoft for a kangaroo court trial, but rarely clean their own house. Europa.eu is a good place to visit to see this firsthand.)

      With the view that security doesn't bring in money, it is less about whom is hacking US companies... it is about US companies actually doing something about security. Things like database encryption (which is quite easy to turn on in Oracle and MS SQL server), AD lockouts if too many passwords are guessed (even a 1-2 min lockout can stop an intrusion attempt.), responses to attempted attacks, and other security basics, would go far.

      North Korea can wait in line... there are many people out there guzzling out the goodies from US companies who are happy to let them in, because there will be zero consequences for even a complete compromise (where the enterprise admin accounts on the main forests are pwned.)

    2. Re:No shit sherlock by Miles_O'Toole · · Score: 5, Informative

      Is this something that normally happens here...a person willfully misinterprets another's argument, then advances points that have little or nothing to do with what was actually being discussed?

      rsilvergun pointed out quite accurately that it is possible to track the chances of US military aggression by watching US "mainstream media". More and more stories intended to gin up anger, hatred and fear in the US population with respect to a prospective target means greater and greater chances that the US will attack.

      The record of US news media in such situations is clear and easy to track. For example, in the run-up to the second invasion of Iraq, news and public affairs shows like "Meet the Press", "Face the Nation" and such featured nearly 300 interviews with "experts" who favoured some kind of military action in Iraq. Only three interviews were conducted with people who were unabashedly against any kind of intervention.

      Did you really not know this?

      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
    3. Re:No shit sherlock by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3

      Is this something that normally happens here...a person willfully misinterprets another's argument, then advances points that have little or nothing to do with what was actually being discussed?

      Not just here, it's everywhere now. Instead of having debates people just re-frame and start spooling out their standard talking points.

      I think a lot of them aren't even aware they are doing it, they are just copying people they see making successful "arguments".

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:No shit sherlock by Miles_O'Toole · · Score: 1

      I wish I could disagree with you.

      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
    5. Re:No shit sherlock by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      Does war follow the news or does the news follow war? Unless the war is a spark like a surprise attack then it is a build up until the straw breaks the back. Sure, you can "track" the media and possibly conclude that war is inevitable but you are mixing up correlation and causation. War happens because of multiple events that are news worthy. Big shocker. Should the media not report that stuff?

      The 2nd Iraq war was a buildup. Many things happened until war was inevitable. Those many things were reported on. What's the argument here? Were those things not noteworthy? When does the news not speculate on what something means with experts? elections, war, natural disasters, tragedies, terrorist attacks, etc ad infinitum.

      War is news worthy and is reported on during times before war. That framed as the "media is gearing us up for war" is ridiculous. The media isn't "gearing us up" for anything as they are following escalating tensions that ends in war. Yes, you can look back with hindsight 20/20 and "predict" jack about current events.

    6. Re:No shit sherlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the problem is that the propaganda escalation started before Trump took office, there has been media buildup of anti-North Korea articles for a few years now. Most likely this was geared to justifying budget expenditures with the North Korea bogeyman, not going to war, but our twit-in-chief is so disconnected from reality that he doesn't understand this and has no concept of what would happen if North Korea was pushed into using nuclear weapons.

    7. Re:No shit sherlock by k6mfw · · Score: 1

      , because it means our media is gearing us up for war with them.

      I wonder if the hawks were living in Seoul, would they be still willing to gear up for war? For those clueless Seoul is the major South Korean city that will be flatten from conventional artillery that is within range of NK.

      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
    8. Re:No shit sherlock by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Is this something that normally happens here...a person willfully misinterprets another's argument, then advances points that have little or nothing to do with what was actually being discussed?

      Fairly common, yes, and you're doing a splendid job of it too. The appeal to emotion is a "nice" extra touch on your part.

      ... by watching US "mainstream media".

      I like that you put mainstream media in quotes. Study after study shows that the typical newsroom is 80-90% "progressive"/Democrat. That would be fine except it seems to lead to a skewing of reporting on stories.

      More and more stories intended to gin up anger, hatred and fear in the US population with respect to a prospective target means greater and greater chances that the US will attack.

      This is where you go completely off the rails. Apparently in your mind one cannot approach matters of foreign policy on a rational basis based of facts. No! The only thing in the media is manipulation! One question though, what evidence do you have that the actual intent is to do as you write: "stories intended to gin up anger, hatred and fear in the US population "? Any? Probably not because that isn't what happened.

      Lets look at North Korea. North Korea is still in a state of war with the allied powers. There was only a ceasefire agreed to decades ago, not a peace treaty. North Korea has now stated that the ceasefire agreement is void. They have repeated announced their intention of striking the United States, are building and testing ICBMs, and detonating nuclear weapons. They seem to have succeeded in creating a thermonuclear weapon, an H-bomb. They have shot their missiles over Japan more than once. Is informing the public of these facts "intended to gin up anger, hatred and fear" by the media? No. So how would you handle it? Not tell them at all?

      For example, in the run-up to the second invasion of Iraq, ...

      And what was the "first invasion" of Iraq? Operation Desert Storm, the continuation of UN Security Council authorized actions to remove Iraq of the nation of Kuwait, which Iraq had wrongly invaded and annexed. Is that something you can acknowledge?

      For example, in the run-up to the second invasion of Iraq, news and public affairs shows like "Meet the Press", "Face the Nation" and such featured nearly 300 interviews with "experts" who favoured some kind of military action in Iraq. Only three interviews were conducted with people who were unabashedly against any kind of intervention.

      Even if we assume that to be true, which I doubt, all that it really shows is that there was widespread support, which there was, for military action as a final measure against Saddam's Iraq after its long history of non-compliance, aggression, and corruption. Add on top of that Saddam's gamble about having his government act as if they still had WMD to fool the Iranians backfired. Oh, and here is the kicker, until at least recently there were still warehouses in Iraq with chemical weapons (WMDs) in them, and ISIS may have captured some.

      Did you really not know this?

      It seems I know more about it than you, and I'm not misguided by fringe ideology.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    9. Re:No shit sherlock by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      I doubt there is more than a little chance of that over time. He is far enough on the Left to regularly defend the horror show that is North Korea including stating, more or less verbatim that, "It's not so bad."

      That is a bit too far for even the Guardian.

      Revealed: the gas chamber horror of North Korea's gulag

      How low will you go?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  5. What else would you expect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NK has a bunch of hackers, did anyone expect them to twiddle their thumbs and just sat there doing nothing? Of course they would try to hack and steal secrets! Then of course US military would be one of the targets!

    There is nothing newsworthy about this. Any sane person would also expect the CIA and NSA to be hacking any NK military server they can reach. They would be negligent in their duties if they were not doing that.

    It would be newsworthy if they said the NK hackers trying to get into Alibaba servers instead.

    1. Re:What else would you expect? by sheramil · · Score: 0

      NK has a bunch of hackers, did anyone expect them to twiddle their thumbs and just sat there doing nothing?

      Pretty much all you can do, unless you have computers. Does President Kim let them borrow his when they're on the job?

      You mean to tell me NK has MORE THAN ONE computer?

    2. Re: What else would you expect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Their long range recon forces are apparently well equipped and quite capable.

      Ask sony.

    3. Re:What else would you expect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well we had better start blocking their import of floppy disk fast! ;-)

  6. get your data off the damn internet already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    that shit don't need to be there, for fucking ducks' sake.

    1. Re:get your data off the damn internet already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      that shit don't need to be there, for fucking ducks' sake.

      Everyone thinks they need the internet.

  7. "I could stand on fifth avenue and shoot someone" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "I could stand in the middle of fifth avenue and shoot someone, and people would still vote for me."

    Yes, dear Trump supporter, you're a fucking moron. Even Trump himself thinks you're a fucking moron, and he was right, because he told you to your face, and you still voted for him.

    So why should anyone take seriously anything that comes out of this stupid, worthless, moronic, retarded parody of a brain of yours ?

  8. Seems silly by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Since the USA has enough military capability to "nuke the site from orbit, just to be sure", several times over, this seems like a wasted effort.

    Do you care exactly how many megatons of nuclear warheads were used to eradicate you? Is this so NK can know exactly how much overkill the USA could bring to bear if they wished to do so?

    Honestly, everybody involved knows the standoff is dependent on China and Russia as well as having Seoul within shelling range... almost nothing about the precise American capabilities matters.

    1. Re:Seems silly by rtb61 · · Score: 1, Informative

      Apparently for you, dumping nuclear fallout in massive quantities on Japan, China, Russia and South Korea not a problem. So the fuck what if say millions people from those countries die of radiation poisoning, fuck em they are only commies and slope heads. Their view might be a little different, especially China as a million of their citizens dying from radiation poisoning and tens of thousands of hectares of farming land poisoned might not go down well, in fact so badly, that Honolulu would very likely start to glow in the dark, in return. Likely in response Japan and ally, would evict the US out of Japan and possibly demand trillions in reparations which the US would be hard put to refuse (expect the Japanese to forgive the US for a genocidal nuclear strike on North Korea in say a couple of hundred years or more). The US ability to use nukes in North Korea without North Korea firing first, zero (grow up).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    2. Re:Seems silly by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Since the USA has enough military capability to "nuke the site from orbit, just to be sure", several times over, this seems like a wasted effort.

      This isn't about stopping an American attack, it is about deterring it. If NK can learn enough about our ABM capabilities and counter our defenses enough so that we think they have a chance to take out a few west coast cities, then we aren't going to start a war by attacking them.

    3. Re:Seems silly by Baron_Yam · · Score: 0

      Nice rant, shame it bears zero relation to what I wrote.

    4. Re:Seems silly by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Well actually they do, the amount is significantly less; all of the fission products will be there. If the EMP hits a nuclear reactor(which is much more likely in an airburst), start thinking Fukushima. Russia and China will have serious and legitimate concerns.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    5. Re:Seems silly by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      >This isn't about stopping an American attack, it is about deterring it.

      "everybody involved knows the standoff is dependent on China and Russia as well as having Seoul within shelling range."

      I still don't see the point.

      Everything beyond razing Seoul and the threat of a flood of refugees into China is more or less window dressing. Nobody wants to see that, so the available overwhelming force isn't used to destroy NK.

      NK can learn all they want about US capability - there's simply so much of it relative to NK there's no conceivable adequate defense, and any successful attack on the US mainland would mean North Korea would be flattened and damn the consequences with China and/or Russia.

    6. Re:Seems silly by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      Would would be "fallout" goes into stratosphere and gets distributed around the world. One could calculate a theoretical amount of harm to the populace that might do, but proving any one person had a disease because of it would be impossible.

      You have misconception about EMP, that is from a burst done between certain altitudes. Also, you might want to read about the most recent experiments done on groups of normal automobilles with EMP levels ranging up the highest that could be encounted in an EMP attack. It was very disappointing for the doomsday crowd, out of 100 vehicles a few needed to be restarrted and had spurious dashboard lights on, how annoying and boring for the automobile commuter, HAHA! EMP taking out a reactor will not be an issue if the USA uses nuclear warfare against NK. Ground burst on a reactor would, but would be more sensible to just kill human life.

    7. Re:Seems silly by budgenator · · Score: 1

      I was thinking about an American reactor, California's electrical grid isn't known for it's robustness.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  9. You can't have this by boudie2 · · Score: 0

    The minute NK threatened the use of an electromagnetic pulse weapon the U.S. should have dropped the hammer. You can't have an unstable communist dictator talking that way. It's going way beyond any acceptable line.

    1. Re:You can't have this by IonOtter · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      This presumes a couple of things...

      1. That NK can actually get a real missile off the launch pad.
      2. That NK can actually produce a nuclear weapon that will work properly, and not "fizzle".
      3. That NK can actually get the missile to the appropriate location.

      That's difficult, because...

      1. They're having a very difficult time with getting those missiles to leave the launch pad. It's almost as if something were swatting them down shortly after launch.

      2. NK nukes are very good at shaking the earth in underground tests, but they seem to be weaker than they should be. It takes a real whopper of a nuke to generate a decent EMP.

      3. Getting it over the US is a very, very long trip. And like I said, those missiles keep blowing up for some strange reason.

      Still, KJU makes for a pretty good boogeyman for the rubes that sign the checks!

      --
      [End Of Line]
    2. Re:You can't have this by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      north korea can actually make a fusion weapon? I've only seen yields consistent with a boosted fission weapon. North Korea has no weapons with sufficient power to attack the USA with EMP. It's hot air.

    3. Re:You can't have this by boudie2 · · Score: 1

      While I tend to agree with your analysis, if you're incorrect it will be very difficult to put the toothpaste back in the tube. The longer you wait the worse the eventual outcome will be.

    4. Re:You can't have this by boudie2 · · Score: 1

      I'm not claiming NK can do it, NK is claiming they have the ability to launch an EMP attack. If they're bluffing someone should call them on it.

    5. Re:You can't have this by sheramil · · Score: 1

      1. They're having a very difficult time with getting those missiles to leave the launch pad. It's almost as if something were swatting them down shortly after launch.

      It's called technical incompetence.

    6. Re:You can't have this by gtall · · Score: 1

      Yeah!!! Let's sacrifice the South Korean and Japanese. We'll show them we mean business....oh...wait a minute...they are our allies...maybe we should ask permission first before we rain nuclear fallout on their countries.

    7. Re:You can't have this by johanw · · Score: 0

      We already have a capitalistic deep state threatening NK, so it's only natural they reply in kind.

  10. Two to tango? by AHuxley · · Score: 2

    Why have sensitive mil and contractor data in plain text on random internet facing networks?
    What is US counterintelligence doing?
    Watch the contractor network and use lots of encryption. Compartmentalize projects and data. Just in time from just about any company is not secure.

    The next question for the USA is the quality of its mil, gov and contractor human security.
    Who is around your bases, ports offering mil/contractors pleasure, alcoholic beverages and cash for US secrets?
    Start doing interviews and background reports on all mil officials and contractors.
    Look for new wealth, holidays, police reports of loud parties, home improvements, a new car, unexpected shopping, gifts, changes in personality, boasting.
    Look at the cell phone movements of at risk mil/contractors. Who are they meeting, talking to? What new cell phones do their cell phones stay next to for some time?

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:Two to tango? by Miles_O'Toole · · Score: 2

      I'd be inclined to just drop an appropriately-loaded flash drive or two around sites I was interested in and wait for it to be used where it might do me some good.

      For example, there's a 512 GB drive called the "Patriot Supersonic Mega". What ultra-loyal, flag-waving military person could resist a name like that? Presented in a manner screaming "Unopened Original Packaging", I bet sooner or later it would wind up somewhere useful. If not, oh well. I just wasted a hundred bucks on a failed espionage attempt...hardly a huge investment, given the potential up-side.

      It would even make sense to have a crate or two of them fall off a truck somewhere to be "discovered" and sold by a lucky serviceman to his buddies.

      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
    2. Re: Two to tango? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet humint and physical security is much better than the hairball of commercial computers and networks.

      Plus koreans are easy to spot in the US.

    3. Re:Two to tango? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Apart from Snowden most of the leaks have been CIA/NSA staff just leaving their malware and sourcecode lying around on staging servers for anyone who finds them to pilfer.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  11. Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sounds like the usual government/security-industrial-complex trolling for more funding/authority. Been there, heard that.

  12. Vault 8 has a few things to say about such claims. by Noishkel · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For those not paying attention Wikileaks have revealed extensive technical details about the CIA's ability to force certificates and plants traces into systems to frame people for the actions of the US security agencies.

    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/11/10/cia_kaspersky_fake_certs_ploy/

    While I have no doubt that North Korea would gladly do so, but we need to face a few facts about the ability of the NK's to really do this much damage.

  13. Wait a second... by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1, Funny

    That has to be propaganda. I've read North Korea doesn't even have computers.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
    1. Re:Wait a second... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The picture of the impoverished North Korea as fierce super-villains able to breach and dominate computer networks, and the enormous United States of America, weak, innocent, and feeble and unable to defend itself... does this picture make sense to you?

      It's easy to spot the propaganda and false accusations, if you pull your head out of the sand for a moment.

    2. Re:Wait a second... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I've read North Korea doesn't even have computers.

      Have you noticed how when you see North Korean TV news boardcasts in the west they are low quality analogue 4:3 images? Because NK only has 1960s level technology, right?

      On NHK news broadcasts in Japan they show the full HD 1080i satellite feeds that NK transmits.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  14. Encryption keys anyone. by wolfheart111 · · Score: 1

    Why dont we make it easy for poor old kim. Lets make a little back door for encryption on all our phones. :) I can see him grinning ear to ear if that ever happens. ROFL

    --
    [($)]
    1. Re: Encryption keys anyone. by kaur · · Score: 3, Informative

      All "our" phones are actually Chinese or Taiwanese or South Korean phones.
      They may have all the backdoors in the world and the US would never know.

  15. uh, what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So lead blindly.

    1. Re:uh, what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One for One is twice acknowlege'um'ment

  16. Re:BE a MAN Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Norks" is British slang for breasts.

    Don't nuke the norks.

  17. Re:BE a MAN Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Considering the other story about NASA launching a reactor, those norks will drop off by themselves if anything goes wrong.

  18. Reject Washington war propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only people threatened by North Korea at the North Koreans.

    http://observer.com/2014/12/michael-malice-on-the-magical-world-of-north-korea/

    That is what communism does: makes people poor and destitute. The effectiveness of war propaganda is astounding and disheartening. This is a country which does not have 1/1,000,000th of a chance at being an existential threat to the U.S., and yet the war profiteers are trying to make us all clamor for another stupid and expensive military engagement that will kill countless people.

    http://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/2017/06/29/north-korea-is-desperate-to-avoid-military-conflict-author-michael-malice.html

    https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/how-america-north-korea-could-start-nuclear-war

    1. Re:Reject Washington war propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only people threatened by North Korea at the North Koreans.

      The effectiveness of war propaganda is astounding and disheartening.

      Thank god for Trump! He'll show those bastards what for! #MAGA #BUTHEREMAILS #WHITELIVESMATTER

    2. Re: Reject Washington war propaganda by aliquis · · Score: 1

      I don't know how far you can count but I'm sure someone is capable of counting up to any amount of deaths.

    3. Re: Reject Washington war propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      North Korea is certainly a military threat to the United States and it's allies. Just because an ABM system can shoot down one of their ICBMs does not limit their ability to inflict other damage in other ways. IMO the scariest scenario is NK allying with an adversary of the US and it's allies and giving them a small nuclear weapon to smuggle out and cause mayhem without carrying such a weapon on top of a missile.

      NK represents the first and what will likely be the largest failure of the UN and US policy. Continually ignoring the buildup of weapons and failing to find a solution to the artillery pointed at SK and Seoul, combined with support from two communist regime neighbors, has brought us to this place.

      The solution is not military, however, but it needs to be solved. The correct way must involve the Chinese saving face in this matter, as this is a component of East Asian culture that is immutable. To that end, back channel talks with NK, China and the US should set up a way for denuclearization with mutually supervised checks on both sides, economic aid directed at development for civil purposes, and normalization of relations in exchange for peace. Rhetoric and totalitarian systems from the Stalinist NK government would, over time, be less effective for its populace and result in a natural normalization, and the Chinese could take a more active role in making NK a loose protectorate of sorts.

      No matter what, this problem cannot be ignored. NK doesn't want to be another Libya that denuclearizes and then has regime decapitation foisted on it, and it will eventually act if only because of some misinterpreted act of escalation. If the end goal is peace and prosperity for all sides, then give NK and SK that path and reduce the rhetoric.

    4. Re: Reject Washington war propaganda by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      "IMO the scariest scenario is NK allying with an adversary of the US and it's allies and giving them a small nuclear weapon to smuggle out"

      Yeah, this isn't new or unique to the current confrontation. This is, in fact, the basis for our policy towards NK for decades. Extra points for you when you name the primary and most visible partner of the NK regimes involved.

      "NK represents the first and what will likely be the largest failure of the UN and US policy. Continually ignoring the buildup of weapons and failing to find a solution to the artillery pointed at SK and Seoul, combined with support from two communist regime neighbors, has brought us to this place."

      Amen. Decades of attempted appeasement and waiting for the NK regimes to come to their senses has led us to both the risk of further proliferation and danger to all peoples. The NPT should be more fully expanded to become nonnegotiable, binding on all nations, and specifically include enforcement and preventative measures. Despite the inflammatory rhetoric, the US is not likely to unilaterally use nuclear weapons, not is it, despite the fever dreams of the Left, likely even to use nuclear weapons as a first retaliatory response. We know the consequences of being the first, so far only, nation to actually use nuclear weapons. That is not lost on even the current Administration. Whatever else you may believe, such an act would be taken only after careful deliberation, and that itself makes the act much less acceptable. The US conventional forces are more than adequate to deal any aspiring nuclear state a crushing, fatally overwhelming blow in response, and it is doubtful any other nation would either oppose such a response nor even denounce it.

      This is a failure of the UN, the nuclear capable nations, the NPT, and those nations that support and defend NK brinkmanship. Calling these nations to account is long overdue. Some have regularly, in their own language and in international forums, called for the destruction of the US. Aggression by these nations need not be tolerated, and their actions are being exposed now for us to consider as we move forward through this definitive era. Either we defend freedom or we perish, literally, for the Left doesn't use violence as a last resort, it uses it as the most effective tool to accomplish their goals.

      "back channel talks with NK, China and the US should set up a way for denuclearization"

      True, and this is how diplomacy is traditionally employed. It is done in secret, however, and such silence is useful for opponents of the US, foreign and domestic, to spread doubt and fear, and to obstruct the process.

      "Rhetoric and totalitarian systems from the Stalinist NK government would, over time, be less effective for its populace and result in a natural normalization, and the Chinese could take a more active role in making NK a loose protectorate of sorts."

      Communism kills in two ways - first, the imposition and maintenance requires killing the opposition. Second, the overthrow is usually bloody, a counter-revolution. The North Korean people will have to change things, and that seems unlikely for the moment. China would likely replace the outright NK communism with the laissez-faire Chinese communism is half a loaf, better but

      No matter what, this problem cannot be ignored. NK doesn't want to be another Libya that denuclearizes and then has regime decapitation foisted on it, and it will eventually act if only because of some misinterpreted act of escalation. If the end goal is peace and prosperity for all sides, then give NK and SK that path and reduce the rhetoric.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    5. Re: Reject Washington war propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      find a solution to the artillery pointed at SK and Seoul,

      I am just curious at what point does SK and Japan decide to get nuclear weapons to counter NK threats. They have the capability and it would probably motivate China to act more aggressively toward NK.

    6. Re: Reject Washington war propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you understand how rhetorical language works?

    7. Re: Reject Washington war propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is not about Trump. Hillary and her ilk are still pushing for WWIII with Russia. Obama waged more war even than Bush.

      War is the favorite trans-partisan evil of Washington elites.

    8. Re: Reject Washington war propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      North Korea is practically a third world country. It is no more going to preemptively attacking the United States than a remote tribe from Papa New Guinea invading with sticks and rocks. They are being backed into a corner and threatened in order to flex muscle at China.

      Here is David Stockman, a former Washington insider, giving his take:

      http://original.antiwar.com/david_stockman/2017/07/06/imperial-washington-cool-north-korea/

      Also see http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2017/04/27/phony-hysterics-over-north-korea/

    9. Re: Reject Washington war propaganda by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      North Korea is certainly a military threat to the United States and it's allies.

      It's certainly a threat to South Korea. I'm not at all sure about Japan, and it's not a threat to the US. Not even a Kim is dumb enough to start throwing nukes, because it would result in the annihilation of the North Korean government one way or another.

      IMO the scariest scenario is NK allying with an adversary of the US and it's allies and giving them a small nuclear weapon to smuggle out and cause mayhem without carrying such a weapon on top of a missile.

      We haven't had that issue with Pakistan, and the Pakistanis are not friends of ours.

      No matter what, this problem cannot be ignored.

      Why not? They're not going to do anything too suicidal.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  19. Tip of the iceberg? by petes_PoV · · Score: 1
    If North Korea, a country of 25 million people - most of them scraping a living from subsistence farming - can hack american defence contractors and government facillities, then it is certain that any other country with a desire to, could do the same.

    The only reason we do not hear of all those other countries hacking the US defence systems is either because they don't want to, or because they are better at it (than N.K.) and cover their tracks.

    Rather than thinking that NK represents some sort of technological elite, intent on harming the USA, the government should remember that they are the least capable "power" trying to do this. So instead of defending against them and then thinking that is sufficient, a responsible attitude would be to understand that every other government is doing the same - but without getting caught.

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    1. Re:Tip of the iceberg? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The hacking capabilities of a nation represent the level of effort that goes into it. Very few nations put much effort into cyber warfare capabilities of any sort, so those that do tend to stand out.
      North Korea has spent a crap-ton of money on their cyber capabilities, just like they've spent a crap-ton of money on their nuclear program. That's why they HAVE successes, while nations like Estonia, Sudan, or Indonesia don't.

    2. Re:Tip of the iceberg? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's very simple: America is bullshitting and spreading propaganda and false accusations, because people are willing to believe it. North Korea aren't able to hack into anyone, and they're not trying, period.

    3. Re:Tip of the iceberg? by budgenator · · Score: 1

      I'm sure when the NK government gives you an opportunity to learn to hack American computer systems, you take it. If you find your not suited to the task, you're free to go to the gulag where you will be starved to death while performing hard labor; at least you'll be with your family.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  20. non news - been at us for the last 15 years+ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    if anyone does network monitoring, and IPS/IDS stuff - this has been ongoing for the last 15 years.

    either America media is an idiot, probably, or the media is an idiot for finally reporting what everyone like a teenage with a Linux box with a static IP and fail2ban has installed and monitoring the logs. set don't come back for a year or so.

    just block transient countries from internet access to the US internet network assets and you have your hackers blocked..

    1. Re: non news - been at us for the last 15 years+ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course the norks will never take over a US computer.

      Except if the leader is offended by a cheesy Sony movie...

    2. Re:non news - been at us for the last 15 years+ by gtall · · Score: 1

      OK...new rule, the U.S. will henceforth cut itself off from the rest of the world's internet. By G-d, we'll stop'em. Go get'em Shiva!!! Pass me some ammunition!!

    3. Re: non news - been at us for the last 15 years+ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Going by top definitions, I'm afraid it's tool late, norks have taken over every single US computer.

      https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nork

  21. Re: For reference by wolfheart111 · · Score: 1
    --
    [($)]
  22. news flash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    system crackers target all high value targets

  23. Re:BE a MAN Trump by gtall · · Score: 1

    Radiation...fallout...prevailing winds....cancer in America. See a progression doofus?

  24. I don't believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    access to computers and general knowledge of how to do these things would be scarce if even existant to the NK population. Even the government wouldn't be particularly able to do these things.

    1. Re:I don't believe it by johanw · · Score: 0

      The US propaganda seems to work at you. For the same reason one could think the US police is as incompetent and corrupt as Sheriff Rosco P. Coltrane.

  25. funny official statement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "'weakest links" within the firms, such as Human Resources personnel'

    Bruhaha

  26. Re:"I could stand on fifth avenue and shoot someon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    She lost, get over it! Move on!

  27. Re:Vault 8 has a few things to say about such clai by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... frame people for the actions of the US security agencies.

    Technically for one's allies. Cyber-framing, a power that security agencies are gagging to get, or in some countries, just got, means evidence will be planted for final proof of aggressive behaviour, requiring a retaliatory strike.

    If the person is already non grata (not welcome), one can use smear campaigns and economic/ political/ military bullying. Those last options become more difficult if the victim has a (nuclear) weapon. Hence the desire for a surprise attack, sorry pre-emptive strike, by cyber-warfare.

  28. Ignored N. Korea far too long by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many of our leaders ignored North Korea as just poor dumbass communists with no means of ever being a nuclear power. Obviously while the world was ignoring them they became one of our worst nightmares. I think history repeats itself because we did the same with China too. Just incredible how we focus far to much on just one threat and the rest gather up steam.

  29. BULL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is all propaganda. Slashdot use to be a site where valid data and news could be provided, but recently it's been used as a tool for propaganda in the following topics

    North Korea = Bad
    Guns = Bad
    Nationalism = Bad
    Freedom = Bad

  30. Exactly by bagofbeans · · Score: 1

    Every country with internet infrastructure is attempting to hack, probe, manipulate every other country.

    Why pick on NK?

    Funny how dirty tricks are ok if we do it to them, but oh horror! They're trying to do it to us! Badness! "We" being any first world country.

  31. Re:"I could stand on fifth avenue and shoot someon by rickb928 · · Score: 0

    It would be retarded, even more moronic, to vote for the same old same old. Hillary the unindicted felon, or Jeb the play toy of the Establishment, or Kucinich, the tool of whoever is holding him at the moment? Sanders, avowed socialist?

    Only Crux had my attention, and the Establishment hated him even more than Trump. If you're paying attention, you know the Establishment hates only YOU more than Trump. Either because you are in the way of their total dominance, or because you are a loathsome ignorant shill, beneath contempt for your continued loyalty despite the plain evidence that you also will be destroyed. You deserve their contempt.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  32. Convenience vs Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why the f*ck is this sh*t even online. If it is connected to the internet it is not secure.

  33. LOLWHUT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They can't have hackers. Kim Jun Un hasn't invented the intarwebs yet, but he was part of the only manned mission to space and to the moon. He's a real badass, until Seal Team 6 puts a .50 cal slug through his dome and the world becomes a better place.

  34. Re:"I could stand on fifth avenue and shoot someon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So answer this:

    So what can be said about a people who can't seem to get anything but criminals, psychopaths, and overall scum as presidential candidates ? How did it come to this ? And why the fuck do you, as a people, tolerate this ?

    What can be said about the people of the United States ? At what point do we stop blaming the wolves and start blaiming the fucking sheep ?

  35. Donald Trump is President by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    he's laughing with them and at us.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  36. Re:"I could stand on fifth avenue and shoot someon by rickb928 · · Score: 1

    Because the USA, despite its flaws, is still a pretty remarkable place.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  37. Re:"I could stand on fifth avenue and shoot someon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So that's it ? That's your answer ?

    Sounds more like pathological denial to me than an attempt at finding an explanation to a HUGE, nation-wide major problem that keeps getting worse.

    Won't say I'm really surprised, though, unfortunately.

  38. Re:"I could stand on fifth avenue and shoot someon by rickb928 · · Score: 1

    We could have had Ted Cruz as a Republican candidate.

    But that would have been disaster, for he would have played by the 'rules', and been defeated, and a Clinton presidency would be the end of our democracy.

    This is all in large part the result of the unholy alliance of the Democratic Party, the major media in the US and worldwide, and the global Leftist movement. They have elected twice a man who admitted to a relationship with a junior intern that would have resulted in a high school principal being dismissed in similar circumstances. His wife served as a Cabinet officer, during which their own private foundation accepted millions of dollars in donations from foreign powers in a manner that should raise serious questions about her ability to act int eh best interests of the US. We elected a President of dubious qualifications, and then watched as he ruled by Executive Order, permitted his Attorney General and FBI Director to plainly state that a former Secretary of State violated federal record keeping law, yet refused to prosecute the prima facie case, and was heard telling then Russian President Dmitri Medvedev "After my election I have more flexibility" during a global nuclear security meeting.

    And now the complaints about our current President include unsubstantiated reports that he engaged in unseemly and disturbing acts during a visit to Russia - reports discredited, and on their face not merely irrational but the work of fantasy - that he has enacted Executive Orders undoing previous administration acts, which is legal and not even unprecedented, accused of a cozy relationship with the current President of Russia, and that claimed relationship to be one detrimental to US interests, despite evidence that his predecessor had similar a relationship with the previous Russian President. Our current President's offense? Not kowtowing to the established order.

    We have the President we have for two overriding reasons: First, too many Americans no linger believe either major party acts in their interest, and it should be plain to any moderately curious observers that there is ample evidence for such a belief, and second, because he pledged to do things these Americans wanted done. And he is, in fact, making marked and obvious progress in doing so.

    Our current President is a breath of fresh air, BECAUSE of his uncharacteristically blunt manner, his lack of political polish, and his unwillingness to play by the established insider rules.

    Of course I would not lump our President into the group of " criminals, psychopaths, and overall scum". But given the credible reports of other politicians in the US engaging in frauds and deceits to ensure the results of candidate selection, the obvious money-laundering of one party, the still unresolved matters of a former Secretary of State and the handling of emails, records, and classified information in plain violation of law, the compelling evidence of intelligence gathering by our former President of information about an opposition party's Presidential candidate during the last months of the campaign, acts which should send a chill down every American citizen's spine, the revelations of political organizations denied fair or at least equal treatment by the IRS in an manner that is difficult to explain in any other way than deliberate politically motivated interference, it should be more understandable that our nation suffers from a breakdown in the rule of law inspired, abetted, and promoted by actions from the very top of our federal government.

    American citizens have spoken. A change was demanded. It was made. Our Presidential elections are designed to favor a consensus of states for indeed our nation is named the United States of America. The dichotomy between urban and rural populations emphasizes the foresight of its founders, and is in my opinion necessary, vital, crucial to our survival, for if the cities rule, our nation would disintegrate literally and figuratively.

    The complaints about the qualities of Presidential candidates speaks as much to the Leftist agenda in the US as it does to the general decline in ethics, morality, and the rule of law. But I repeat myself.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  39. So .. they do to us what we do to them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean we complain about the Russians influencing our citizens, but it's ok for US to influence our own citizens. Double standard.
    We complain NK is hacking us, when we hack them.
    We complain China is hacking us, when we hack them.

    Game over. Gone home. Switched off.