[HN Gopher] I'm the hacker that brought down North Korea's Inter...
___________________________________________________________________
I'm the hacker that brought down North Korea's Internet for over a
week. AMA
Author : consumer451
Score : 139 points
Date : 2024-06-19 05:18 UTC (17 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (old.reddit.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (old.reddit.com)
| paganel wrote:
| Why isn't he in prison? I mean, going by the West's own laws, or
| the spirit of them, anyway. Unless he is part of said West's
| Armed Forces, in which case this would get really close to a
| _casus belli_.
| ajsnigrutin wrote:
| Because the "rules based order" means a diferent set of rules
| for different situations.
|
| If it's something "we like", then it's ok, if not, then prison.
|
| Same for geopolitics... in one case, we care about teritorial
| integrity, that minorities should not seced, and in others we
| help with the breakup of countries... well.. or in some cases,
| we act is if nothing is happening at all, and noone wants to
| break away at all :)
| pacija wrote:
| Ajse Crbine retsi im kako stvari stoje, ja pokushavam al sam
| uvek flegd :)
| derelicta wrote:
| No no no, ofc its morally justified to do such thing against
| impoverished nations! After all, if they are subjected to
| famine-inducing embargoes, they probably deserve it!
| dyauspitr wrote:
| Self imposed poverty due to the authoritarianism. They're the
| bad guys, we care less if bad things happen to them.
| Keirmot wrote:
| Because one of the 3 basic principles of sovereignty (as is
| understood by western political philosophy, known as
| Westphalian sovereignty) is that there is no other authority
| inside a State's borders except its own.
|
| This means no other country has jurisdiction in North Korea,
| besides, there's also no incentive to help in case DPRK asks
| for help.
|
| France doesn't investigante crimes that happen in Spain,
| Portugal doesn't investigate crimes that haven in Canada, the
| USA doesn't investigate crimes that happen in Germany, etc...
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _western political philosophy, known as Westphalian
| sovereignty) is that there is no other authority inside a
| State's borders except its own_
|
| You're citing centuries-old political philosophy, only
| remnants of which remain in our world [1].
|
| The West that arose after WWII and through the Cold War is
| decidedly non-Westphalian. Concepts like human rights, non-
| proliferation and self determination are non-Westphalian. The
| Nuremberg trials were anti-Westphalian.
|
| The closest modern analogues to (and proponents of)
| Westphalian philosophy are Russia, China and North Korea.
|
| [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westphalian_system
| OKRainbowKid wrote:
| These "proponents" seem less strict about applying this
| philosophy to states other than their own.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| The Westphalian treaties gave France, Sweden and later
| Russia the explicit right to intercede to guarantee the
| Imperial constitution [1]. (Westphalia was concerned with
| the Holy Roman Empire.)
|
| Westphalian sovereignty as a historical concern is a myth
| [2].
|
| [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guarantor_of_the_impe
| rial_co...
|
| [2]
| https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-
| organi...
| klausa wrote:
| >France doesn't investigante crimes that happen in Spain,
| Portugal doesn't investigate crimes that haven in Canada, the
| USA doesn't investigate crimes that happen in Germany, etc...
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpol
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europol
| joecool1029 wrote:
| Remember this guy didn't fly to DPRK, he committed what could
| be considered crimes under CFAA while on US soil? (CFAA
| written broadly enough that taking a country offline could be
| considered to affect foreign commerce/communication of the
| US)
| sitkack wrote:
| The FBI has offices around the world.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _Why isn't he in prison?_
|
| Not an enforcement priority for the same reason a lot of
| domestic abuse goes unprotected: the victim is uncooperative.
|
| > _going by the West's own laws, or the spirit of them, anyway_
|
| Pyongyang and prosecutors would have to show he attacked a
| "protected computer" under the CFAA [1]. Given the two routers
| he allegedly overwhelmed were internet connected, that
| shouldn't technically be hard under _Trotter_ and _Kane_. But
| it _would_ be a novel expansion of interstate commerce to
| encompass a country with whom Americans cannot legally trade,
| _i.e._ do commerce.
|
| Put another way, North Korea's status as a sanctioned country
| might put this into a legal grey area--it might not be
| criminally punishable. To settle that question would take a lot
| of prosecutorial resources. It's not clear those are well spent
| on a case where the witness won't cooperate.
|
| [1] https://www.coreyvarma.com/2015/01/what-is-the-computer-
| frau...
| saagarjha wrote:
| Privateering is back, baby!
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _Privateering is back_
|
| Good point: a final hurdle inhibiting criminality is his
| lack of profits. No disgorgeable gains. That means you're
| only left with damages, which again, requires the victim's
| cooperation to assess.
| Sabinus wrote:
| It's already back, Russian, Chinese and North Korean
| hacking groups receive state funding and cover.
| teekert wrote:
| I can imagine he did piss of some agencies? I mean other
| states could have mapped NK's whole infra, made a plan to
| take down NK's internet when "needed" (i.e. in case of some
| event)... Then some dude triggers it just for fun...
|
| Some things are too big to just mess around with, I would
| feel extremely vulnerable having pulled such a stunt.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _can imagine he did piss of some agencies_
|
| Sure. But OP asked why he isn't being arrested. Plenty of
| people piss off the IC when they publish _e.g._ long-
| coveted (and independently discovered) zero days, or write
| an expose on something an agency was hoarding for
| interagency political value.
| spiritbear14 wrote:
| or easily spy on ALL internet traffic, which they probably
| do anyway
| sim7c00 wrote:
| there is a lot of 'looking the other way' when it comes to
| people hacking 'adversaries'. Just look at people going at
| russia's network now. western authorities arent exactly busy
| trying to stop that. i imagine similar priorities for NK,
| china and other places.
| jauer wrote:
| "the West" has to keep some degree of not officially caring to
| avoid being backed into a policy corner and has no incentive to
| take law enforcement action when threat actors in those other
| countries operate with impunity.
|
| We're already well into causus belli territory with NK, but
| nobody wants to go there:
| https://x.com/tarah/status/1798036415932187127
| ImPostingOnHN wrote:
| That link doesn't really explain what exactly it's talking
| about, it's a single reply with the original post invisible
| and all replies invisible. It speaks of a cyberattack without
| mentioning which one.
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| Has NK asked to extradite him? Maybe a swap for the sony
| hackers?
| DocTomoe wrote:
| Don't worry, the North Koreans, if sufficiently pissed, will
| take care of him.
| csomar wrote:
| > Why isn't he in prison?
|
| He very much could, if politics changed. The US hates NK not
| because they are authoritarian but because they are not
| aligned. If they were to be aligned, and this guy didn't act on
| proper authorization, he could find himself in hot waters in
| the USA.
|
| Plus he might have broken a bunch of "international" rules
| which could see him in trouble if he was to travel to some
| countries.
|
| It is really reckless; but then there is a good chance he was
| acting behind some agency.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _there is a good chance he was acting behind some agency_
|
| Almost certainly not. The vector would have been saved. And
| he wouldn't have maintained this public profile _ex post
| facto_.
|
| Consider, for example, taking it down during today's state
| visit? (After you've quadruple checked that the Russians have
| independent connectivity.)
| EasyMark wrote:
| It would take someone that wanted to prosecute him. If his
| story is real he deserves a medal and possibly a job at the
| NSA/CIA instead of a court date.
| cryptica wrote:
| The hacker doesn't understand what they're getting themselves
| into, especially bragging about it. The hard part about going up
| against an entire nation/state is that it's relentless. The state
| never gets tired and never runs out of money, they could setup a
| team of people to 'work' on that individual and also potentially
| his present and future family members for a very long time. They
| can keep replenishing their teams with more people. The state
| always has a few people to spare for high-exposure targets. The
| leaders of that state might even forget about the existence of
| the individual but the operation will keep going until it's
| canceled... But since they forgot about the operation in the
| first place, it will keep going until there is some kind of
| broader administrative restructuring, cost-cutting or
| something... Which could be a long time away. Few things are more
| terrifying than totalitarian state bureaucracy.
| anonzzzies wrote:
| Yep, it seems way too many people know who he is irl. I would
| be not sleep well for the coming decade at least.
| cryptica wrote:
| Yeah and North Korea is known for punishing family members.
| It's just foolish to brag like that. Probably worse than the
| hack itself.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| Eh, he's probably safer than if he'd hacked a cartel. North
| Korea isn't known for its tradecraft in the United States.
| heywoods wrote:
| While it's true that North Korea's tradecraft within the
| U.S. might not be as sophisticated as some fear, the
| situation isn't so straightforward. Given the significant
| public exposure of this case and the individual's prior
| connections within the U.S. government, NK would need to
| carefully weigh their options.
|
| I would wager that if NK would attempt to harm this hacker
| it would be through using third parties like cartels or
| local gangs. This could offer NK plausible deniability and
| physical access to the target, but it also complicates
| their operational control and increases the risk of
| exposure. The calculus for NK would include considerations
| such as:
|
| - The individual's public and former government status,
| which might provoke a stronger U.S. response if harmed. NK
| would have to vet the hackers assertions that he still has
| meaningful and significant contacts within the USG. - The
| cost and complexity of outsourcing such an operation
| discretely. - The types of U.S. responses that might
| follow, from diplomatic measures to cyber counterattacks.
|
| While an attack via third parties is plausible, and given
| these factors which I am sure there are others I haven't
| considered, it would require NK to balance the benefits
| against the potential repercussions and the likelihood of
| successful attribution. But I am very confident that if
| they do follow through it will be using a cartel or local
| gang as proxy for the reasons I mentioned.
|
| P4x's public disclosures and technical skills make him a
| unique target, but as he himself noted, the operational
| capabilities of North Korea within the U.S. are limited.
| It's a nuanced threat landscape where indirect methods
| might be considered but are not guaranteed to succeed
| without significant risks.
| burrish wrote:
| Yep and I mean... don't we all remember the assassination of
| Kim Jong-nam outside of North Korea in a Malaysia airport ?
|
| who know if NK will do it again, but showing his identity so
| that NK know who they should target is really stupid
| Kindling7257 wrote:
| Redditors will do literally anything for social validation
| Dalewyn wrote:
| Someone engrossed in digital foolery not understanding how the
| real world works is so stereotypical I wonder if there's more
| to this.
|
| Incidentally for anyone who's actually paying attention, the
| first rule in covert actions is being and staying
| inconspicuous. The real world isn't like Hollywood where people
| working in the shadows can become celebrities as a side gig.
|
| I hope this guy has a really good security detail now that he
| painted such a biglyarse target on himself. God damn, man.
| netsharc wrote:
| > the first rule in covert actions is being and staying
| inconspicuous.
|
| Some hacker movie said the problem is when you brag about it,
| and you desperately want to... and just looking at his post
| with the edits, he really is metaphorically jerking off to
| how awesome he is.
|
| Holy frakk, he's even posted his face on that post. GOD DAMN!
| I half look forward to reading about how 2 women were fooled
| into pranking^W assassinating him (1). I hope dude isn't
| thinking of travelling to Asia anytime soon.
|
| 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Kim_Jong-
| nam#...
| cryptica wrote:
| 100%. Maybe he will get a job with US intelligence or
| something, that could provide some safety. People should take
| this stuff seriously. As you say, it's not like in the
| movies. Hollywood continuously trivializes the enormous power
| wielded by states. There are some enemies you really don't
| want to make.
| verisimi wrote:
| Nothing about this ama/article suggests that NK is anything but a
| Potemkin country - a false baddie for others to hide behind. The
| NK idea is useful to agencies, in certain circumstances.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _Potemkin country_
|
| Maybe they're another Russia, their tanks and artillery all
| crumpets. But maybe not. They have a lot of them on paper [1].
|
| [1]
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_of_the_Kor...
| bagels wrote:
| They have missiles and nuclear weapons.
| golergka wrote:
| He contradicts himself left and right. In one comment, he writes
| that they will never come after him, in another that he's
| seriously concerned. He writes that he has a lot of serious
| connections in the DoD up to the highest level, and then explains
| that he has a way to stop any attack from NK, but nobody will
| even listen to him.
| throwaway8877 wrote:
| The last two points are not contradictory.
| rl3 wrote:
| If only those stupid bureaucrats who have probably maintained
| persistence inside NK networks for the past two or three
| decades would just listen.
| londons_explore wrote:
| Such an attack is, IMO, morally dubious.
|
| North Korea is a poor country with millions of starving citizens,
| and rather than sending food aid, you broke down their only comms
| to the rest of the world?
| throwaway8877 wrote:
| They are heavily sanctioned criminal country that is openly
| aiding a genocidal regime. If anything is then your comment is
| morally dubious.
| gorbachev wrote:
| Yes and no.
|
| Only the elite in that country has access to the Internet. The
| starving citizens do not have access to the Internet, and even
| if they do/did, they're so heavily monitored the minute they
| even glanced at something controversial they'd be shipped to a
| concentration camp.
| csomar wrote:
| > Only the elite in that country has access to the Internet.
|
| Sure, but then the overall population might be depending on
| it indirectly.
| kjkjadksj wrote:
| How much did you indirectly depend on Golf Digest when
| President Trump was reading it in office?
| herbst wrote:
| It depends what the 'hacker' took down. They have their own
| intranet that is available for more or less all citizens
| since 2022
| terryf wrote:
| The starving, and heavily repressed citizens do not have access
| to the internet in NK. This attack did not affect any of them
| to any extent.
|
| Whom it did affect a bit, hopefully, were the people complicit
| in the repressive dictatorship that runs the country.
|
| The repressive dictatorship that engages in, among many other
| bad things, scams and online fraud to partially finance the
| country. For this they of course use the internet. So, taking
| them off-line for a week may have prevented someone from
| getting scammed. Good result.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _attack did not affect any of them to any extent_
|
| Probably didn't. Can't say definitively. Shipments of
| critical resources could have been disrupted, _et cetera_.
|
| Doing this with zero context was probably reckless by this
| hacker. It also likely had zero real-world consequences.
| onion2k wrote:
| _Good result._
|
| There's rarely such a thing as a clear, objectively simple
| 'good result' for this sort of action because outcomes have
| knock-on effects. For example, if the North Koreans
| responsible for maintaining internet access were executed
| over this that diminishes the result significantly.
| golergka wrote:
| Good point, but the original comment was about whether the
| hacker was morally dubious, not the outcomes. If a bad
| actor does bad things because of what you did, you're not
| morally responsible for it -- he is.
| smangold wrote:
| I agree with that statement. What's the point in embarrassing
| that regime. Some IT guys might get in pretty serious trouble
| now. Good that you found out though, impressive work.
| pineaux wrote:
| I dont agree. Did you send food aid to North korea? And if you
| did, are you sure it was not used to feed the guards? I find
| sending food instead of trying to destroy the regime a morally
| dubious thing to do for exactly this reason...
| af78 wrote:
| Food aid rarely reaches the people who need it. The North
| Korean regime is notorious for diverting aid, or selling to
| finance its nuclear program. Responsible food distribution
| requires careful monitoring, which the regime rejects.
| https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSSEO369467/
| ToucanLoucan wrote:
| Any attack on any sufficiently large structured system will
| indirectly harm those who depend on it, irrespective of how
| unjust, dangerous, and/or corrupt it might be. That does not
| make resistance inherently immoral. If we permit these
| institutions to take their subjects as hostages and refuse to
| confront that kind of monstrous behavior for what it is, we
| permit those institutions to continue abusing their populaces
| forever because they will never stop of their own volition.
|
| Every resistance action carried out by every resistance group
| against tyranny throughout history has been washed in the blood
| of people who did nothing wrong.
| gameman144 wrote:
| It's not like he went in out of pure malice or anything though,
| they were trying to hack him first. Not saying it's some
| morally pristine thing, but it definitely communicated what it
| was trying to communicate.
|
| As an analogy, we should have empathy for homeless people stuck
| in poverty, but if one of them continually bikes to your house
| and tries to break in, is it morally dubious to eventually take
| their bike chain rather than just shooing them away each
| attempt? I imagine the moral razor would fall on similar lines.
| squigz wrote:
| Regarding your analogy: I think it would be more like taking
| the bikes of every homeless person as opposed to just the
| one. Would that make it more or less morally dubious?
| squigz wrote:
| To those downvoting, I'd certainly be curious to hear why.
| throwaway8877 wrote:
| So if it was down, how did it affect global security metrics?
| aorloff wrote:
| Is anyone mining bitcoin in DPRK ?
| EasyMark wrote:
| I highly doubt that, it's quite a lot for the system to power
| the 1% elites, the palace, and the ballistic missile factories.
| aorloff wrote:
| Which is why it would be so interesting
| WesternWind wrote:
| I'm unsure on the ethics of this.
|
| Yes only the elite have the internet, but also the internet is
| likely used internally for communication, which is important for
| resource distribution.
|
| I don't give two shits about the elite in NK, but the starving
| folks living there have my deepest sympathy.
|
| I'm lucky to have a lot of advantages, and I can't help but see
| many of them as an accident of birth.
| joecool1029 wrote:
| > I'm unsure on the ethics of this.
|
| I think I can make it simple. Would love to hear of any cases
| refuting this.
|
| If the country is on the US State Department's 'Sponsored'
| program list (currently DPRK, Iran, Sudan, and Cuba) it doesn't
| count. Florida terrorism ok, you get a pass and called a hero:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Posada_Carriles
|
| Comparing to other more recent Florida originated attack on
| against a poor country, the assassination of Haiti's president.
| Haiti is not on that country approval list, go directly to
| jail: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/four-florida-men-arrested-
| plo...
| KoolKat23 wrote:
| So basically the elites are using the internet to control
| (feeding) the starving folk.
|
| No internet means less control. Brings them closer to the
| starving folks level, more chance of actually being a "people's
| republic" then. There's not much government worth salvaging in
| that country, basically an army.
|
| The only loss would be them improving their security now. Other
| world governments may have left that vulnerability untouched
| purely in case they need to use it at a later stage.
| codezero wrote:
| The only person responsible for the starving people in NK is
| their dictator that keeps them in those conditions.
| vasco wrote:
| These supposed messages between him and the state department lead
| me to believe it's either all or mostly exagerations or lies:
| https://imgur.com/a/s-lX6inGA
|
| Maybe it's just my lack of knowledge of some regionalism, but
| doesn't it seem very odd that a technical person would use "in
| the open source", to refer not to code, but to a PR article on
| some news website?
| shzhdbi09gv8ioi wrote:
| See OSINT. It's well established terminology.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_intelligence
| vasco wrote:
| Thanks, never heard this in just technical circles but
| haven't been close to any security work.
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| It's a weird term. My impression is that it mostly means
| "randos LARPing spies", though there's a commercial angle
| too, it being to intelligence what PMCs are to the military.
| May or may not be called after "Open Source Publishing,
| Incorporated", featured here: [0].
|
| --
|
| [0] - https://irp.fas.org/congress/2005_hr/062105jardines.pdf
| red-iron-pine wrote:
| it is not a weird term, and is absolutely a thing. a big
| deal in 2024, really.
|
| back in the day it was just "reading the newspapers and
| talking to the local cab drivers", but on 2024 you're
| scanning forums and social media, on top of news sites.
|
| go to a military-related subreddit and start asking
| questions about stuff, and you'll eventually get an expert
| to chime in. Make wrong & stupid claims and then have them
| slap you down and spill some details -- that's how they got
| dudes to release classified tank info in Warthunder.
|
| dudes in Palestine and in Ukraine are getting killed
| because they post selfies and tweets that have GPS
| coordinates in the metadata. Not hidden behind any top
| secret firewall, easy to find if you're checking VK or
| Instagram, but very real implications for dropping bombs.
|
| OSINT is also absolutely a thing in Cyber, where you can
| get a lot of details about a target by reading their press
| releases -- "Corp X signs big new deal with Oracle" --
| which can give you a new attack surface. Phishing, on a
| long, broad timeline, has a very high success rate, so go
| onto Linkedin and start connecting to people. Figure out
| their tech stack, create a Sales Guy account, and start
| reaching out to Architects and Managers, and then map out
| the teams that might have elevated access...
| jolmg wrote:
| > OSINT is also absolutely a thing in Cyber
|
| First time I see "cyber" used as a noun. Is that short
| for "cyberspace", i.e. the internet, or is it something
| else?
| cwillu wrote:
| Five-sided thought is a hell of a drug, are you _sure_
| you want to know?
| Suppafly wrote:
| the military uses it to describe all things relating to
| the internet, the rest of us used to use it to mean
| cybersex, which why you mostly only ever hear it from
| military folks and c-suite type people now and the rest
| of us kinda chuckle under our breath every time they
| mention it.
| rightbyte wrote:
| Ye they are larpers that sell security consulting etc.
|
| It is a scam. Especially attribution of hacks to states
| that are on the Washington shit list. There is just no way
| to know.
| jjmarr wrote:
| https://www.foreignaffairs.com/world/open-secrets-ukraine-
| in...
|
| To summarize, there are many people in government who are
| interested in open source intelligence.
|
| Traditional sources of intelligence are gathered with
| secret means and therefore must be restricted in
| distribution to prevent burning the source. This means you
| can have the best possible intelligence but be unable to a)
| act on it or b) distribute it to people who can.
|
| The value proposition of using open-source intelligence is
| that you can distribute it very widely to decisionmakers
| since it's already "out in the open". Intelligence isn't
| about hoarding secrets for the sake of such; it's about
| getting information to people who can use it.
|
| The political issue is that people assume that "secret =
| higher quality" when there's no inherent value to secrecy.
| So, spy agencies overinvest in secret-gathering, get a ton
| of info, and are unable to do anything with it.
|
| Meanwhile, if someone posts a tank manual on the WarThunder
| gaming forums you can give that to every soldier that might
| encounter that tank.
|
| This is doubly important in tech because many big tech
| companies play a significant role in national security but
| cannot get intelligence that would help protect them, and
| by extension, American interests.
| everforward wrote:
| I was getting kind of similar vibes. When they reveal the
| story, it's basically "traceroute identifies 2 choke point
| routers, and I DDoSed them with traffic".
|
| That's cool and neat for guerrilla warfare, but I would assume
| the NSA and DoD are already aware of that possibility? I
| wouldn't even be surprised if they saw the DDoS happening on
| network monitoring tools. Why clandestine meetings for that?
|
| I get why the media is interested, it's an awesome story.
| vasco wrote:
| I imagine the NSA has a fully mapped out network layout for
| most major foes continuously updated in some sort of
| inventory database but for enemies, the same way they track
| large military gear and in which bases its at for their
| enemies. So yeah this seems very strange.
| csunbird wrote:
| NSA and similar agencies are probably even mad at him,
| because he exposed the weakness that they could have
| exploited when needed, which is probably now patched.
| sim7c00 wrote:
| i hope no poor IT engineer in NK and his family for 10
| generations isnt going to be sent to workcamps because of this
| joke.
| codezero wrote:
| The only person to blame for that behavior is the chaotic and
| capricious dictator taking these actions against the population
| he is oppressing.
| 1234554321a wrote:
| It's legal to hack North Korean infrastructure? Might be a good
| way to test out your hacking skills.
| kjkjadksj wrote:
| Sounds like a terrible way. One screw up, and then you have one
| of the worst nations on earth in every metric with an axe to
| grind against you. No thanks. Meetups in Vegas hotels seem a
| lot safer and more fun to practice hacking skills.
| INTPenis wrote:
| The thing I took away from this is that Putin is visiting a
| country with two routers running their whole internet, and these
| are his partners.
| instagraham wrote:
| How much exposure of the regular internet do North Korean hackers
| have? What are the odds of turning them?
| Sabinus wrote:
| None. This was a middle finger to the NK State apparatus and
| that's about all.
| sureglymop wrote:
| I think this was a pretty stupid joke. Especially if the OP
| is an individual. Making a nation state your adversary as
| merely a sole individual is something you never ever want to
| even risk. Any rational human being (not just hacker) would
| know or recognize that. Very often it is ego that directly
| leads to doing irrational actions like this.
| rpdillon wrote:
| North Korea was already targeting him. The hack was in
| retaliation.
| codezero wrote:
| Not true, there are/were North Korean hackers actively using
| platforms like Hackerone and other lesser known SaaS that
| haven't implemented KYC for training.
| Sabinus wrote:
| >Like many other US hackers and security researchers, Caceres had
| been personally targeted by North Korean spies who aimed to steal
| his intrusion tools. He had detailed that targeting to the FBI
| but received no real government support. So he decided to take
| matters into his own hands and to send a message to the regime of
| Kim Jong Un: Messing with American hackers would have
| consequences. "It felt like the right thing to do here," Caceres
| told WIRED at the time. "If they don't see we have teeth, it's
| just going to keep coming."
|
| Indescribably based.
| akira2501 wrote:
| Hardly. He's creating tools that interest state actors with no
| real means of defending himself or the tools. If he's that
| concerned he could just destroy the tools, but he wants to have
| his cake and eat it too.
|
| Then, in response to what should have been an obvious outcome
| to his actions, he commits what should be described as a "crime
| against humanity" against the entire communications
| infrastructure of a foreign country with nuclear weapons.
|
| There is nothing based here. This is stupid with a tinge of
| greed and ego mixed in.
| valianteffort wrote:
| Glad someone is saying this. Some obnoxious moron putting
| countless lives in danger to virtue signal has gotta be a new
| low on the internet retard scale.
| consumer451 wrote:
| Whose lives did he put in danger?
|
| Also, if the entirety of the US goverment will not protect
| you from foreign state-sanctioned personal attacks, what
| should one do? Just sit there and take it, even if one
| could stop it?
|
| > The State Department has a thing called "Rewards for
| Justice" and they talk extensively about the NK problem and
| how we're being hacked all the time. They pay millions for
| information. I told them "I don't want any of your money, I
| want you to know who I am [insert wired article here] and
| that I can listerally make any attack coming from the
| country North Korea stop in its tracks within minutes. Let
| me grab their response:
|
| > https://imgur.com/a/s-lX6inGA
|
| > Just be ready to be fucking infuriated. They have a bunch
| of shit about how we need to take on the NK cyber threat. I
| literally give them a SOLUTION and they say it's not within
| their purview, go to other intelligence agencies. I told
| them I FUCKING DID. No response since.
|
| https://old.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1divlp3/im_the_hacke
| r...
| valianteffort wrote:
| If North Korea took down US infrastructure we would
| consider it an act of war. The dange of exposing your
| devices to the open internet should be well understood by
| this so-called "hacker".
|
| For him to unilaterally decide to commit an act of war
| against a foreign nation means he should also be held
| accountable for it in international criminal court.
|
| Were this any other two nations you might have a
| different tone. But these are the facts of the matter. He
| played with fire and if he winds up dead because of it he
| only has himself to blame. The only people I am concerned
| about is anyone else now facing danger because of his
| idiotic actions.
| consumer451 wrote:
| He did not commit an "act of war." He is an individual,
| who tried to cooperate with his government and was
| denied.
|
| Meanwhile NK offense regularly attacks him on a nice day,
| and on every other day installs ransomware on US hospital
| infrastructure, putting actual lives at risk... All this
| guy did was shut down their capability to do so.
|
| I am unaware of any law that he broke. IMO, he also did
| not do anything immoral.
| mewpmewp2 wrote:
| But foreign nations are already constantly trying to hack
| each other.
| akira2501 wrote:
| > what should one do?
|
| Examine how their own actions were a large part in
| creating this particular outcome? Then question if
| they're worth continuing under such circumstances?
|
| > No response since.
|
| Yea, maybe diplomats should lead the charge, and not self
| important hackers with a desire to "shut down the
| internet" in a fit of nerdy rage?
| linearrust wrote:
| > '"It felt like the right thing to do here," Caceres told
| WIRED at the time. "If they don't see we have teeth, it's
| just going to keep coming."'
|
| Ask yourself. Do 'hackers' talk like this or
| military/government employees?
|
| Also ask yourself, is WIRED a 'hacker' friendly magazine or a
| government affiliated state media?
|
| Some top WIRED offerings
|
| 'Former FBI Agent Explains How to Read Body Language...'
|
| 'Former CIA Chief of Disguise Breaks Down 30 Spy Scenes
| From...'
|
| Not to mention reddit and reddit AMAs been used by government
| agencies to push an agenda.
| consumer451 wrote:
| The actual content of his AMA makes the whole US government
| apparatus look inept.
|
| Ask yourself, is this something that a US government agent
| would do?
| akira2501 wrote:
| > Ask yourself. Do 'hackers' talk like this or
| military/government employees?
|
| He said thought his tools would be "stolen?" Then this is a
| lame manufactured pretext which makes it worse. It also
| makes his actions and broadcasting them _more_ of a crime.
|
| I'm not sure what your point is here.
| imadj wrote:
| Related:
|
| North Korea hacked him, so he took down its internet -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30180566 - Feb 2022 (238
| comments)
| operator2140 wrote:
| Talk about delusions of grandeur. He knocked a few public facing
| HTTP hosts offline, amazing! I can "a bring down North Korea's
| internet" aka a few public hosts for a week too if I rent Lizard
| Squads stresser for $400 a week. What's supposed to be impressive
| about that?
| resolutebat wrote:
| No, he knocked out the two routers serving the _entire
| country_. NK sites were inaccessible to the outside world, and
| outside sites were inaccessible to NK.
| voidUpdate wrote:
| I'm a little confused by the news stories about this. Did he take
| down their country-wide network, or just the few lines in and out
| of the country? It seems like he just hit a few NK websites and
| they everything stopped responding to him. Its like cutting the
| uk-europe power links and saying you took down all of the UK's
| power infrastructure
| resolutebat wrote:
| Only the lines in/out. NK has their own intranet which is
| completely separate from the global internet, which was
| presumably entirely unaffected by this.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kwangmyong_(network)
| voidUpdate wrote:
| So not really much effect on the system then, overall
| doublerabbit wrote:
| > North Koreans often find it more convenient to access sites
| by their IP address rather than by domain name using Latin
| characters
|
| Don't blame them. Enom fee's are extortionate. And when DNS
| breaks it still works.
| efilife wrote:
| I'm shocked that he shows his face and identifies himself
| willingly
| mianosm wrote:
| Big "lifelock" vibes...and if I understand it correctly, that
| lifelock character has had his identity successfully stolen and
| impacted multiple times.
|
| Sometimes the person who says "I'm really smart, like mensa
| level", does some really ignorant and stupid things.
| washadjeffmad wrote:
| Sometimes you're also just hoping to find someone or
| something out there that interests you.
| jrexilius wrote:
| I worked with him briefly on another project and he was pretty
| comfy and open about the whole thing. In fact I think I
| remember him mentioning doing a talk at a conference about it.
| He's a genuinely nice guy and fairly laid back about things. NK
| regime maybe is annoyed with him, but there is an almost zero
| probability of them being able to do anything other than
| digital harrassment to him.
| influx wrote:
| Considering they have performed assassinations outside of
| their soil, I would be slightly concerned.
| jrexilius wrote:
| There are a couple good points in the linked Wired article, such
| as the fact that the Russians, Chinese, Iranians, and North Korea
| are already escalating attacks on civillian and commercial
| targets and our restraint isn't being matched.
|
| I fully understand why the US and partner governments won't be
| able to respond in kind, but there is certainly a lot more that
| could be done in that domain.
| kjkjadksj wrote:
| There are people that are in offensive cyber security in the US
| government, but realistically they have a bit more moral
| compass than the other state level actors that try and bring a
| hospital to its knees for the grand goal of making america look
| stupid for the nationalistic few who might actually care about
| that sort of thing. There's a saying we have here about never
| wrestling a pig in the mud: you will both be dirty but the pig
| will like it.
| whaleofatw2022 wrote:
| > that try and bring a hospital to its knees for the grand
| goal of making america look stupid for the nationalistic few
| who might actually care about that sort of thing
|
| That the public believes this is our biggest problem from an
| international policy perspective... (as far as this topic,
| that is)
|
| These governments are turning a blind eye, if not quietly
| supporting such because of the sheer economic and social
| damage.
|
| I know a local hospital group paid 22mil in ransom on top of
| a lot of days where stuff barely got done.
|
| Iirc United Health said a recent attack was probably 900
| million in total costs to them?
|
| It adds up.
| redeeman wrote:
| > but realistically they have a bit more moral compass than
| the other state level actors
|
| yeah, some of those governments have even admitted to spike
| their own citizens with LSD to see what happens, and
| COUNTLESS other things. oh....
| rightbyte wrote:
| When the Soviets shoot down airliners it is becouse they
| are evil. When we do it is an accident. Just cheer the
| parade...
| sirspacey wrote:
| Having worked in this space a while back, _every_ federal gov
| digital service experiences nation-state intrusion attacks
| daily and in the 1,000s on the low end. Our gov digital
| infrastructure has been born under the weight of constant
| attack.
|
| Responding in kind has minimal value because it's not a
| deterrent.
| linearrust wrote:
| > There are a couple good points in the linked Wired article,
| such as the fact that the Russians, Chinese, Iranians, and
| North Korea are already escalating attacks on civillian and
| commercial targets and our restraint isn't being matched.
|
| Imagine what we are doing to the russians, chinese, iranians
| and north koreans and everyone else. Far worse.
|
| > I fully understand why the US and partner governments won't
| be able to respond in kind
|
| You really think our government isn't doing much worse to
| russia, china, iran and north korea? You are talking about a
| country that nuked civilians and is helping assist in a current
| genocide...
|
| '"It felt like the right thing to do here," Caceres told WIRED
| at the time. "If they don't see we have teeth, it's just going
| to keep coming."'
|
| Who the fuck talks like that? Oh that's right, military or
| government employees. Not hackers.
|
| WIRED is where spooks and the fbi agents have their press
| outings...
|
| Some top WIRED offerings
|
| 'Former FBI Agent Explains How to Read Body Language...'
|
| 'Former CIA Chief of Disguise Breaks Down 30 Spy Scenes
| From...'
|
| It's almosts like the WIRED is part of state media.
| JudasGoat wrote:
| Wired story. https://archive.ph/vmQE3
| rendall wrote:
| >> _JDdoc: Once you knew you had access, did you make a point of
| saying "I'm IN!" out loud, even if no one was in the room with
| you?_
|
| > _dotslashpunk: lol, no I only say that during either sex or
| when I 'm able to join a meeting successfully with my microphone
| and speakers actually working. Both are rare._
|
| Talented _and_ funny. He 's wearing his new found fame well.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-06-19 23:02 UTC)