Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[origamiscienceguy]

How could they possible know it came from russia?

[hector13]

The code used, apparently.

[origamiscienceguy]

But the laptop with the code was in no way connected to the power grid...

[smjjames]

That and that they found it after they recieved an alert that the Department of Homeland Security sent out an alert to utility companies.

WaPo article.

But the laptop with the code was in no way connected to the power grid...

It was still a laptop belonging to the company, at least I think that's the implication. So, it could be the CEO's personal laptop.

Anyhow, reading both of them again, it seems like it's the same kind of phishing or malware download attack than anything particulary sophisticated. There is a lot that they don't know right now, when it happened, why (intent), and how.

[hector13]

Stands to reason that individual computers on their network will use the same or similar security to the stuff controlling the grid, though.

Russia was alleged to have used hacks to affect the Ukrainian power network at the start of the year, which cut power to ~225k customers.

[origamiscienceguy]

This is just me, but it seems that they are grasping at strings here trying to find evidence of russian hacking...

[smjjames]

This is just me, but it seems that they are grasping at strings here trying to find evidence of russian hacking...

Probably the lack of information that would be gained from a full investigation rather than an initial scan.

[hector13]

Part of the issue with revealing evidence publicly is that it could point to how the evidence was gained.

I'm not sure the US wants to reveal how their cyber defenses work.

[smjjames]

I know, which is part of the problem with news reports on that. The intelligence services want to be as vague as possible, but with the low trust Americans have with the media, being vague and all 'fear, uncertianity, and doubt' doesn't help with gaining trust.

And CNN really needs to do better quality articles, more WaPo and NYT quality.

[Baffler]

I know, which is part of the problem with news reports on that. The intelligence services want to be as vague as possible, but with the low trust Americans have with the media, being vague and all 'fear, uncertianity, and doubt' doesn't help with gaining trust.

Yeah, I'm inclined to think that the intelligence agencies just don't get to be trusted without good hard evidence to back up what they're saying. They have too strong a history of telling outright lies to the American public for anyone in their right mind to take what they say on faith.

[smjjames]

I know, which is part of the problem with news reports on that. The intelligence services want to be as vague as possible, but with the low trust Americans have with the media, being vague and all 'fear, uncertianity, and doubt' doesn't help with gaining trust.

Yeah, I'm inclined to think that the intelligence agencies just don't get to be trusted without good hard evidence to back up what they're saying. They have too strong a history of telling outright lies to the American public for anyone in their right mind to take what they say on faith.

Like how they did the causus belli for the second Gulf War. Though that was less an outright lie than being fooled.

It's even harder with cyberspace because, unless you catch the person doing it, all you have is data and code, which, well, how do you make hard evidence out of that without compromising sources, methods, etc. Not like they'd have physical evidence to show the public.

I guess one way would be to have a known trusted politician or have those on both sides of the aisle confirm that it was Russian, but then, politicians.

[Phmcw]

Newsflash : nations are constantly probing each other defenses all the time and can sometime reveal embarrassing informations on peoples and organisations that they don't like.

[smjjames]

Newsflash : nations are constantly probing each other defenses all the time and can sometime reveal embarrassing informations on peoples and organisations that they don't like.

I know. Was just saying that the whole 'cloak and dagger'ness of espionage makes it difficult to gain the publics trust when the intel agencies need to tell the public something.

The whole 'Hey we found something, but we're not 100% sure of the intent or when' of the article doesn't help much either.

Although this seems like the kind of thing that they'd not want the media to blurt out, but what do I know.

[Wolfhunter107]

This is just me, but it seems that they are grasping at strings here trying to find evidence of russian hacking...

"We found Russian code" doesn't sound very much like grasping at straws to me.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

There's no public proof for this, but there is public proof for the DNC hack. In that light, and that of the attack itself being public, it's a plausible thing to believe happened.

Regardless, I find all this hilarious in light of the months and months of baseless hysteria about Clinton's alleged desire to war on Russia. The rift between Trump and Congress begins, and they aren't even in session yet.