Slashdot Mirror


Tech Firms Let Russia Probe Software Widely Used by US Government (reuters.com)

Major global technology providers SAP, Symantec, and McAfee have allowed Russian authorities to hunt for vulnerabilities in software deeply embedded across the U.S. government, Reuters reported on Thursday. From the report: The practice potentially jeopardizes the security of computer networks in at least a dozen federal agencies, U.S. lawmakers and security experts said. It involves more companies and a broader swath of the government than previously reported. In order to sell in the Russian market, the tech companies let a Russian defense agency scour the inner workings, or source code, of some of their products. Russian authorities say the reviews are necessary to detect flaws that could be exploited by hackers. But those same products protect some of the most sensitive areas of the U.S government, including the Pentagon, NASA, the State Department, the FBI and the intelligence community, against hacking by sophisticated cyber adversaries like Russia.

115 comments

  1. I wish... by Narcocide · · Score: 2

    ... that I could be confident our elected officials were at least smart enough not to believe Russian officials also needed root access to all the production machines in order to complete a source code audit.

    1. Re: I wish... by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      But this statement is false. I don't approve of my own government's behavior in this regard either. I would be amongst the ones voting to pardon Snowden. Not that it will ever come to a vote, the poor sod. And, quite ironically, I'm even less able to influence my own government than those of other countries.

  2. wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just wow

    1. Re: wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Root cause of this problem is the political world. Cold war is over, right? We are friends with Russia and China, right? So why shouldn't US companies be able to sell there? But to do that they need to submit source code and blueprints for inspection. Well, if those countries are not really our friends -- and our three letter agencies have this answer -- then we shouldn't be doing business with them.

  3. China does the same thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    China demanded the source code for Microsoft stuff, in order to allow them to do business in the country. This isn't anything new. What needs done is the US to go to F/OSS, where everyone scrutinizes bugs, not the hallowed few who have source code access.

    1. Re:China does the same thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hallowed few? I think you don't quite understand just how many countries, companies, universities, research organisations, 3rd party developers etc have access to the source code for most large scale software. I would bet things like Windows, SAP etc are actually reviewed by as many security skilled personnel as the OSS equivalents.

    2. Re:China does the same thing... by Bert64 · · Score: 2

      All of whom have their own agendas, and are under NDA...
      But the source code of these application is not available to the general public, so independent researchers cannot review it.
      If a government is going to review code for their own use, they will review open code too as they don't need to jump through hoops to get it. Having restricted access to source code just gives an advantage to those who have it, to the detriment of everyone else.

      Also there are various illegal leaks of closed source code. Being illegal, no legitimate researchers will touch them, but those with criminal intent have no such problem and will happily review the illegal leaks looking for bugs they can exploit.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    3. Re:China does the same thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      China demanded the source code for Microsoft stuff

      Every military that runs Windows had access to the source at some point.
      They need to know that they can trust the software so they bring in their own experts, sign an NDA and goes through it. (*)
      It isn't something odd or special. It is just something that has to be done.

      Every military also have to be able to operate in a state of war with outside access cut off. I would be surprised if they don't have the source locked away in a vault with a contract saying that they can't use it.
      In a state of war they can just ignore the contract, pop out the source, do the changes they need and compile.

      So China and everyone else demanded the source code. The process is interesting and deserves an article, but it is hardly news.

      * This doesn't mean that the experts are competent or that they found every little problem, but they aren't going to put critical computers on the internet willy nilly either so it doesn't really matter.

  4. The US gov't shouldn't use open source software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    So if it's wrong/bad for foreign entities to view the source code of software used by the US government, does that mean that the US government should avoid any and all open source software because foreign entities can easily view its source code?

  5. Actual headline: by king+neckbeard · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Here's what the actual headline should be:
    Tech firms let Russia probe software widely used by US government, following same processes US government, and all other governments, use.

    This is a non-story. They try to make it sound like this is some nefarious method to undermine the US government, when the reality is that they're checking to make sure there aren't NSA backdoors.

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    1. Re:Actual headline: by Train0987 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Gotta keep that Russians!=BAD narrative alive at all costs.

    2. Re:Actual headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So much this.
      Every single fucking government inspects the software they use (at least I hope they do for their own sake).
      How is this a story? Only a completely incompetent government would use software in a security sensitive area without vetting it.

    3. Re:Actual headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think most of the world is far more concerned with the access the US demands to source code and what they are using it for. Regardless though as you say this is something every government does to try and make sure less trustworthy countries like the US have not inserted backdoors into the software.

    4. Re:Actual headline: by gweihir · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Indeed. And governments can get access to windows source code as well. It is a good bet that the Russians and the Chinese also have this access.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    5. Re:Actual headline: by freeze128 · · Score: 0

      So if the Russian Government uses Windows 10, does that mean that it's certified by the Russian Government to *NOT* contain an NSA backdoor? If so, then I feel better about using it.

    6. Re:Actual headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you mean Russians==BAD. What you typed is equivalent to saying Russians does not equal BAD.

    7. Re:Actual headline: by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Worse, they used a test operator, not an assignment operator. So the statement says nothing about bad or good, it just takes a true/false value.

    8. Re:Actual headline: by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      You'd think the Congress critters would be grateful for the free penetration testing. It's not like Symantec will only patch the vulnerabilities for the Russian edition.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    9. Re:Actual headline: by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      Let the nerdiness of this comment be an example to all.

    10. Re:Actual headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the real story is Trump is doing this because he hates us. Obama never allowed this because he loves us.

    11. Re:Actual headline: by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      It means they're aware of any backdoors they found and have thought of mitigations for them.
      It also means any they have a war chest of their own 0-day exploits they've found.

      It could also mean if they use it, they do so only to appear to trust it.

      So basically, it means nothing at all and you can't base anything on it.

    12. Re:Actual headline: by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      It means the Russians won't tell Symantec about the vulnerabilities they find.

    13. Re:Actual headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a non-story. They try to make it sound like this is some nefarious method to undermine the US government, when the reality is that they're checking to make sure there aren't NSA backdoors.

      True. It'd be great if ordinary citizens could get the same privilege as foreign governments.

    14. Re:Actual headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Let the nerdiness of this comment be an example to all.
      Let the lack of nerdiness of this comment be an example to all.(FTFY)

    15. Re:Actual headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only thing keeping the Russians!==BAD narrative is the Russians===BAD narrative.

    16. Re:Actual headline: by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      Of course they would, they'd be vulnerable to it the same as everyone else. I know what the assertion is from the critters, but as usual their inability to comprehend technology results in the wrong conclusions being drawn. Security through obscurity isn't...

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    17. Re:Actual headline: by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      Nonsense. 'this' is a void pointer that I can make point anywhere I want, including towards itself.

    18. Re:Actual headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's well-known that they do, as do many Universities. They've had access for many years now.

      This isn't news, it's propaganda.

    19. Re:Actual headline: by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Exactly.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    20. Re:Actual headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if the Russian Government uses Windows 10, does that mean that it's certified by the Russian Government to *NOT* contain an NSA backdoor?

      No. If they would find a backdoor they would just try to block any outside usage of it in their firewalls and then use the backdoor for themselves. (China isn't the only one with firewalls, they are just the only ones that takes it to the extreme.)

    21. Re: Actual headline: by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      Yes, confirmed by all the "reported by FSB" in all the bugfix changelogs, amirite?

  6. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck off, Trump troll.

  7. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Are you a full on retard? The russians are very obviously running espionage campaigns against us.

    This has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton. If we want to secure our shit we should obviously not be giving hackers the source code for our security systems.

    Only a hyper partisan fool would think this makes sense.

  8. Stupidity by DaMattster · · Score: 0

    Stupidity is absolutely everywhere. Yes, let's just give away the keys to the castle. Maybe the US Government will start building its own systems instead of relying on shitty vendors like Oracle or SAP. Systems that have great need for secrecy should be custom developed in house.

    1. Re:Stupidity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Systems that have great need for secrecy should be custom developed in house.

      Systems with a great need for secrecy, yes, should be developed in-house.

      Systems with a great need for security, no, should absolutely NOT be developed in-house.

      It's like home rolling your own crypto algorithm, it only seems like a good idea to those who don't know anything about cryptography.

    2. Re:Stupidity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you are a fucking moron. As much as I hate SAP or ORacle or Apple or Microsoft I would hate it far more for my government to spend trillions of dollars writing their own shitty versions.

    3. Re:Stupidity by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Oh, yes! And I know personally, that *gasp* LINUX is used in federal agencies and banks! They failed to make that source code secret and it is apparently completely open! I was able to just _download_ it!

      In other news, the stupidity-level of your posting is staggering.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    4. Re:Stupidity by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      Stupidity is absolutely everywhere.

      I agree. Perhaps closer than you realize.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    5. Re:Stupidity by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 1

      It's going to be awful hard for the U.S. government to create their own systems that are superior to commercial offerings when they can't acquire or retain talent because the pay is too low and the working conditions suck.

    6. Re:Stupidity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So much this, IT and software development across the government is being outsourced all over the place, it almost never saves money and usually costs a whole lot more. Additionally you have consultants that have no skin in the game, it's just another project to them.

      Especially when it comes to the military and security I believe we should be using our own people. The Marines have their own IT anyway, give them budget and let them build projects using their own experience rather than through some mangled scope of work.

    7. Re:Stupidity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what a joke, I am assuming your post is pure sarcasm as no one could be dumb enough to believe the US military could build this cheaper. You would need to take on at least another trillion dollars to their budget, and even then it will take decades and likely be inferior.

  9. Enough Of The D&C Bullshit by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Of course a defense department looking to use a piece of software is going to inspect it for security. Frankly it's more a sign of Russia's lack of security that they would use US software on their systems than anything else. Security through obscurity isn't security so opening the source is irrelevant to anything from a security perspective.

    1. Re:Enough Of The D&C Bullshit by gravewax · · Score: 1

      since when did SAP become an American company?

  10. Re: Miss Mash's Anti Russian Anal Probe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Lefties don't understand and appreciate just how much their relentless hyperbole hurts their own causes, especially when what they're claiming is obviously nonsensical. Lefties have pushed this 'Russia' narrative so much that normal people just roll their eyes and ignore it. It's the same with things like 'racism', 'Nazis', 'climate change', and 'rape', and 'gender'. The Lefties pushed these agendas/false-accusations so much that normal people no longer care. The real danger of this is that it forces Lefties to resort to pushing far more extreme agendas/false-accusations in order to try to get a rise out of normal people. Their hypocrisy of these Lefties will likely result in them doing some extraordinarily harmful things.

  11. LINUX IS RUSSIAN TREASON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's nothing, Linus Torvalds regularly publishes code that EVERY SINGLE RUSSIAN can access. It's TREASON!

    1. Re:LINUX IS RUSSIAN TREASON! by jon3k · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I'm really surprised so few people on Slashdot understand the difference between open source software (and "given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow") and closed source software being reviewed by a select few actors who have a motive to hide their findings.

    2. Re:LINUX IS RUSSIAN TREASON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's nothing, Linus Torvalds regularly publishes code that EVERY SINGLE RUSSIAN can access. It's TREASON!

      Linus even accepts patches from RUSSIAN DEVELOPERS!111!! He was even born in Finland which very conveniently shares a border with Russia and was part of the Russian Empire at one time!

    3. Re:LINUX IS RUSSIAN TREASON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you think the same "select few actors" turning to reviewing OSS code wouldn't have the same motivation to hide their findings either?

    4. Re:LINUX IS RUSSIAN TREASON! by gravewax · · Score: 1

      I am sure all those reviewing OSS code have nothing but pure altruistic motives. After all if you can't trust the governments of the world then who can you trust!

    5. Re:LINUX IS RUSSIAN TREASON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Other than a few nuts, the rest are propaganda bots from the likes of ShareBlue and similar outfits.

      If you think I'm kidding, we have the emails where they describe what their "nerd virgins" (their words, not mine) are paid to spread their propaganda via social media.

  12. Lack of secure development practice & code rev by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem isn't with the code being available to Russia. The problem is a lack of secure development practices and code review. Minimizing bloat and focusing on doing shit well rather than adding needless functionality or new user interfaces.

    I would love the world to take security seriously. We wouldn't have near the bloat and everything would fit on a floppy disk. We'd still be using chipsets from 1994, but improved for security.

    The terminal would be standard operating procedure and taught in every school. Coding would be taught in every school. Only the elite would ever find a patch accepted however.

  13. Re: Miss Mash's Anti Russian Anal Probe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your troll is weak and stale. You are welcome to try again.

  14. Re:Lack of secure development practice & code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a naive little utopia you've imagine. Quaint.

  15. Re:The US gov't shouldn't use open source software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    > So if it's wrong/bad for foreign entities to view the source code of software used by the US government, does that mean that the US government should avoid any and all open source software because foreign entities can easily view its source code?

    Quite the opposite.

    It's a given that other governments -- especially the powerful ones -- will get to view (and review) the source of _closed_ products as a pre-requisite condition to prevent a software product from having its sales vetoed.

    That way, even if you as a common customer cannot see the code, for such governments effectively all code is open source (Windows, iOS, Photoshop, you name it). It's thus foolish to seek security by obscurity. Hence, why not use open source & Free software and leverage the contributions of developers all over the world?

    It's probably also safer.

  16. Re: So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Against you, stupid sand n1ggers? Good for them, and fuck you.

  17. Re:So what? by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How about you get over Benghazi and her emails? You know the difference between those stories and Russia? The investigations were completed and found nothing.

    If Russia is nothing, then let the investigations complete it and tell us so. Then you can bitch that we're not "over it".

    --
    Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
  18. Yes, so? This is standard practice... by gweihir · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Every large-enough customer can get access to source-code of closed software. This is completely standard and there is nothing nefarious going on here. This only endangers anything US if the US messed up their own review.

    Who writes these demented articles?

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:Yes, so? This is standard practice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who writes these demented articles?

      It's just sour grapes from loser democrats suffering from Trump Rage. Can't do the birther thing anymore, so they came up with this. Just imagine the warpath the republicans would be on against the Russians if Hillary had won!

  19. You people are starting to scare me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've seen too many movies with this same story line not to take note. The one thing in my favor at this point is my advanced age. I don't want to have to see the end result. You are bringing about a true devolution of human society. Shame on all of you!

  20. Re:So what? by Train0987 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Every country with an intelligence agency is running espionage campaigns against every other country. That's what intelligence agencies do, and have done since the beginning of time.

    Claiming the Russians got Trump elected is a cover for the clear corruption of the Clintons and the DNC. It's designed to keep you on the plantation, not convince Trump voters to vote Democrat.

  21. Smart Russians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Well, no wonder. From 3 years ago:

    Russian researchers expose breakthrough in U.S. spying program

    The U.S. National Security Agency has figured out how to hide spying software deep within hard drives made by Western Digital, Seagate, Toshiba and other top manufacturers, giving the agency the means to eavesdrop on the majority of the world’s computers, according to cyber researchers and former operatives.

    That long-sought and closely guarded ability was part of a cluster of spying programs discovered by Kaspersky Lab, the Moscow-based security software maker that has exposed a series of Western cyberespionage operations.

    Stuxnet, the hard drive firmware exploits, last year the upload of malware from a NSA developer, and others discoveries of state developed spyware have definitely made KL and other Russian based software companies targets to be hurt economically.

  22. Easy Solution by perry64 · · Score: 1

    Make all security software open source, so everyone can look at it, and the many eyeballs cause problems to be fixed quicker.

    1. Re:Easy Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure Symantec and all the other multi-million dollar security software companies will be on board with just giving away their code and profits. You do realize the government is currently OWNED by such corporate interests, right?

    2. Re:Easy Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      would achieve very little. Security is hard and the number of people that have the skills to find security flawes in tiny, the many eyeballs meme really doesn't apply to security as the limited pool of resources is the deciding factor not open or closed. Any basic flawes that could be picked up by even good developers is already incorporated into detection tools and scanners, the ones that aren't picked up your average or even skilled developer is not going to have a hope of spotting.

  23. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously, Hillary Clinton lost. Get over it already.

    The only person still talking about Hillary Clinton is Donald Trump.

  24. Re:So what? by Train0987 · · Score: 1

    The Clinton Machine is still talking about her a lot. She's going to run again in 2020.

  25. Somebody's Gotta Say It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    How do you like the global economy now?

  26. Re: So what? by muffen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Claiming the Russians got Trump elected is a cover for the clear corruption of the Clintons and the DNC.

    Putin preferred Trump over Clinton. Putin put his machine to work to help get Trump elected. So far, that's fairly agreed upon. The question is if Trump knew or not.

  27. Re: Muh Leftists! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You sound Ameridumb. Tell us about your Texas schoolbooks.

  28. Re:So what? by BlueStrat · · Score: 0

    Every country with an intelligence agency is running espionage campaigns against every other country. That's what intelligence agencies do, and have done since the beginning of time.

    Claiming the Russians got Trump elected is a cover for the clear corruption of the Clintons and the DNC. It's designed to keep you on the plantation, not convince Trump voters to vote Democrat.

    The reason that all this Russian corruption (and a metric shit-ton of other government corruption/criminality) hardly ever results in anyone going to prison, Agencies/Departments/Bureaus/etc purged, is that *both sides are dirty as hell*. Both sides have taken money from and worked with Russians (and other foreign governments) for their own and their Party's/ideology's gain, and against the interests of the American people.

    The DoJ, FBI, IRS, NSA, and likely more TLAs are corrupt and compromised. They have been reduced to political tools.

    To those in power in both major Parties in the US, we are all cattle which they sell off to the highest bidders, nothing more. The "issues" are simply to keep people angry and distracted from realizing what those in power are actually doing to them, like a magician with sleight-of-hand....always watch the other hand, not the one they want you to watch.

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  29. Re:Lack of secure development practice & code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and all pregnancies that test false for autism will be terminated?

  30. Re:RIP Vile Rat by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 1

    No, you know what, you're right. Seriously, I'm not being sarcastic.

    We should care about Benghazi if Benghazi refers to the terrorist attack against the US Consulate in 2011. But that's not actually what you give a shit about.

    --
    Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
  31. Re:So what? by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 0

    The Benghazi and mishandling of classified information investigations found plenty.

    We found out that Hillary knew Benghazi was a terrorist attack and that Susan Rice went on the mainstream news programs the next day and lied to the American People about it being caused by some amateur video about Prophet Muhammad.

    We found out that not only did Hillary retain classified information on unauthorized, insecure systems, but she gave copies on a thumb drive to attorneys that lacked the proper security clearances to hold the information and we also discovered copies of those emails on Huma Abedin's former husband's laptop. We discovered she had her servers wiped (no, not with a cloth) when she found out she was being investigated. We also found out that despite receiving training on how to handle classified materials she was unable to identify classification marking on documents. Her explanations did not pass the sniff test.

    Why do you believe nothing was found? Because she wasn't charged with a crime?

  32. Re:So what? by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 0

    We'll see. The Clinton Foundation is under investigation and felons are ineligible for public office.

  33. Let's Step Back A Moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Reading this, I was struck by something.

    Why does this story sound alarming? Maybe because the Russians could plant vulnerabilities in the code? Maybe because they could find vulnerabilities and exploit them against us?

    What hit me is that every government has a good reason, an honest and honorable reason to inspect the code of systems it uses. They want it to be safe and reliable. However that also extends temptation to those governments, either to plant vulnerabilities or to discover and not report those vulns. Those are bad reasons, corrupt reasons.

    The next thing that occurred to me is that all these governments are at least suspected of doing the bad things. The Russians, the Americans, the Chinese, ... maybe the Indians...

    And no, I don't think that FOSS is the answer to this. FOSS is a weak response. Our governments are deeply flawed and seem to be, at best neglectful of the best interests of their citizens. At worst they are predatory.

    You could say this has always been true, and that certainly was true of the worst governments. What is appalling is that even the best governments now have this stain on their hands.

    Or is it more true that only America has fallen in this fashion?

  34. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And as usual with right wing partisan political witch hunts based on lies, they will find nothing, and then the likes of you will be endlessly repeating the lie, and making up another stupid conspiracy theory to justify your dishonesty.

  35. Those naughty Russians always up to no good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those naughty Russians always up to no good, now they want to know if there are exploits in software which they propose to deploy into their Government agencies, this is really bad its just made the NSA's job a lot harder, well it would be harder if they were out ward facing and not inward facing.

  36. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Found plenty, bullshit 3 investgations found bugger all. More alt right alt facts from the RWNJs

  37. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    She's still running around peddling her book about being a loser and how Democracy is dying. She was just in Canada.

  38. Re:The US gov't shouldn't use open source software by Altrag · · Score: 0

    The problem isn't that foreign entities can review the source code. The problem is that nobody else gets to, so the foreign entities have the capacity to find bugs and simply not report them. You know, the kind of thing the NSA absolutely never ever would do because the US is so much better than anyone else..

  39. The highest rated commenters are confused by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 1

    Unlikely != Impossible .

    The highly rated commenters all think it's impossible that this access benefits the Russians in nefarious ways. It's not impossible. Basically the point of the article is that greedy companies let Mother Russia send her experts in to examine the code of various programs that the US government also uses so they could get sales in Russia. There are lots of smart Russians. I wouldn't say there is no chance that the Russians could find an exploit in such a code review and just carry it back in their memories and at home hammer on the program until they get it working. Of course the US government could be doing the same thing as a result of their own code review.

  40. Could the Rlussians be Stopped? by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

    I think not. Am I comfortable about, I think not.

  41. Re: Miss Mash's Anti Russian Anal Probe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just have to say it: you Americans are nuts.

  42. Regime change *needed* in Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since when have Russian elections been elections? Putin arrests opponents, bans them, substitutes fake proxy opponents, and even then the votes taleys are fake as fuck. The last real vote they had resulted in Putin losing in the evening, a shutdown on the count due to 'technical difficulties' then when the vote came back, Putin wins..... after that the skew factor is very much larger to ensure there is no repeat.

    WHY SHOULD WE SIT BACK AND DO NOTHING?? Putin is actively attacking our elections, so why should we roll over and take it? Regime change is needed in Russia. Putin has to go, he's the reason Russia is poor, and isolated, he's the threat to the west. Him.

    Partisan people like you always trying to defend Russian attacks mixed with Russian trolls from the troll farm, and you cannot tell which of you is a partisan and which is a troll because you're the same. You look at Fox News, they blow smoke cover for Russian attacks on elections, and then Hannity does a piece with Coulter on why American women shouldn't be allowed to vote... f*king traitors. Wrap themselves in the stars and stripes and then put party over country. Russia can vote in US elections, but American women can't.

    1. Re:Regime change *needed* in Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Regime change is needed in Russia. Putin has to go, he's the reason Russia is poor, and isolated, he's the threat to the west. Him.

      Not really.
      Russia have unwittingly modeled themselves a lot after North Korea. It is the natural state when corrupt populists take power.
      Since the top are too busy robbing the country they aren't solving any of their internal problems and they need an external enemy to blame. It could be EU, USA, Muslims, gays, whatever. When the people are frustrated with the situation their anger needs to be directed somewhere.
      It is comforting to be told that everything is the fault of someone else and that the solution is easy.

      Putin isn't alone in this either, he is backed by the oligarchs. As long as they get to plunder the country they tolerate Putin and his tax on them.
      If Putin is removed then someone else will take his place. Maybe he has prepared for Shamalov to take the position, maybe the oligarchs have their own idea of who they would want there.
      Whoever succeeds him will face the same problem. A country which is plundered by the rich and a population that needs to be distracted.

      The internal political situation demands a war at the border and for that to be possible it is necessary that neither USA, EU or NATO gets involved.
      This means that the next person also will be forced to disrupt the US politics and keep funding the far right in European countries.

      Best case scenario would be that the oligarchs cannot agree on a successor and that you get a civil war, but whoever wins will be the most ruthless psychopath among them so it will kinda be one step forward and two back.

    2. Re:Regime change *needed* in Russia by superwiz · · Score: 1

      Since when have Russian elections been elections? Putin arrests opponents, bans them, substitutes fake proxy opponents, and even then the votes taleys are fake as fuck.

      And all Obama did was illegally listen to the phone calls of the Trump's campaign. Not excusing Putin... don't really care about Putin. But to suggest that the last election was not rigged for Clinton is absurd. Hillary Clinton just happens to be so incompetent that she lost an election despite rigging it.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  43. Re: So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I doubt slashdot has a mass appeal, so likely having little effect on anything happening in real life.

  44. Bleeding eyeballs by stooo · · Score: 1

    Not sure we want to see all this crappy source code.
    Many eyeballs would bleed.

    --
    aaaaaaa
  45. Re:So what? by Miles_O'Toole · · Score: 1

    Nice set of right wing snowflake talking points, comrade. Now why don't you tell us about the 12 MILLION emails Cheney erased.

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

    Diplomats, you say? Russia seems to be having extraordinarily bad luck with its diplomats.

    Russian diplomats keep dying unexpectedly

    Russia's ambassador to Sudan was found dead Wednesday in Khartoum. That's the seventh Russian diplomat to have died since November last year, in addition to an aide to a former deputy prime minister, a lawyer for a Putin-foe, and a former Russian MP.

    Interestingly, among this toll was Vitaly Churkin, Russian ambassador to the UN, in New York, where Donald Trump lives.

  47. as reported by the British Reuters by superwiz · · Score: 1

    Reuters is a British corportation and its US branch exists and operates only as a subsidiary. Its stock trades in the US as a depository share (similar to Alibaba -- a Chinese company). Despite a common language, Britain is NOT part of the US. It has, at times, priorities which are opposed to those of the US (as was clearly evidenced by Britain's Jerusalem embaassy vote in the UN).

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    1. Re:as reported by the British Reuters by Gibgezr · · Score: 1

      Genuinely interested, not trying to be a jerk or anything, just want to know: your point is ...?

    2. Re:as reported by the British Reuters by superwiz · · Score: 1

      That a British corporation is trying to pretend that we should take in the stride as we take other US corporations while it reports on dealings of Russian corporations. Both Britain and Russia are foreign nations with their own interests which sometimes align with ours and sometimes go contrary to ours.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    3. Re:as reported by the British Reuters by Gibgezr · · Score: 1

      we should take in the stride as we take other US corporations

      Can you explain what you mean by that? I'm familiar with the expression "take in stride", but I'm totally lost on what you are trying to express. What are we taking in stride? What about other U.S. corporations do we take in stride? Are you referring to their inspection of software? And what does Reuters being British have to do with the report? Actually, Reuters isn't British: the headquarters are in the U.K., but Reuters is a division of the Toronto-based Canadian media company Thomson Reuters, so it's actually Canadian.

    4. Re:as reported by the British Reuters by superwiz · · Score: 1

      If being Russian should raise a level of suspicions, then so should being British. The fact that British speak the same language as we do does not make them our fellow countrymen.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  48. Re: So what? by superwiz · · Score: 1

    Putin preferred Trump over Clinton.

    Yeah. Ok. That's why he gave hundreds of mllions of dollars of dollars to Clintons in the open. So that he could spend $100k on ads for the Trump campaign. Fuck off, retard.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  49. Re: So what? by superwiz · · Score: 1

    Trump is a Republican. So on the internets that means he has the burden of proving his innoncence, don't you know that yet? Hundreds of millions of dollars given to Clintons are not an indication of Russian influence. Because it's not proven. But an accusation by 17.. ummm 4.. oh, who cares.. ALL intelligence agencies against Trump has to be disproven before it's false. Get with the program or you are a Kremlin spy, too. Go back to performing some gross sexual act of poster's choice.... Ivan!

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  50. Re:So what? by superwiz · · Score: 1

    Putin preferred Trump over Clinton.

    No. Just, no. Not going to happen. Next question.

    You know the difference between those stories and Russia?

    Yes. Those stories are true. And the Russian collusion story is a fabrication made up to divert attention from them.

    The investigations were completed and found nothing.

    No, they found her guilt. And then the Obama-led administration let her off the hook because she knows where the proverbial bodies are buried.

    If Russia is nothing, then let the investigations complete it and tell us so.

    It's been completed a long time ago. It's not even looking at the collusion anymore. It's looking at the abstraction of justice which legal scholars (as opposed to news reporters) don't think is possible in this case. Look in the mirror. You'll see someone defending a criminal enterprise that the Democratic party has become. Live with it.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  51. Re:So what? by superwiz · · Score: 1

    Nice set of right wing snowflake talking points, comrade.

    The comrade is in your mirror. You are carrying water for the neo-communist criminal cartel that is the Democratic party.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  52. Re:So what? by superwiz · · Score: 1

    Funny that she was allowed to leave the jurisdiction. She is still being investigated. That makes her a potential fugitive on the run.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  53. Re:So what? by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 1

    Almost everything in your comment is a big fat lie. The first thing you supposedly quoted from my comment:

    Putin preferred Trump over Clinton.

    I didn't say that. Why lie about something so trivial? Pathetic.

    --
    Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
  54. Re:So what? by superwiz · · Score: 1
    Yeah, that was a missed "copy" in the copy-n-paste. The Slashdot javascript intercepts keystrokes slower than I actually type. There are characters missing from wrods or sometimes full words missing all the time. The quote I was replying to was this:

    How about you get over Benghazi and her emails?

    And, of course, you can't edit your posts after the fact. This is just the format which drives Slashdot. It's what makes it, at times, uniquely psychotic in its own special way.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  55. Re:So what? by superwiz · · Score: 1

    Oh, and just because I copied a quote from a previous comment to which I was replying, doesn't change the fact that you are in the tank for the Criminal Democratic party. Let me tell you something every Libertarian who switched their vote from Johnson to Trump thinks: I kept the criminal Clinton out of office and I sleep fine.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  56. Re:So what? by Agripa · · Score: 1

    How about you get over Benghazi and her emails? You know the difference between those stories and Russia? The investigations were completed and found nothing.

    Go read the results of the FBI investigation into Vince Foster's death and tell me they found nothing.