One Article Review
| Source |  Errata Security |
|---|---|
| Identifiant | 284726 |
| Date de publication | 2017-01-03 21:33:01 (vue: 2017-01-03 21:33:01) |
| Titre | Dear Obama, From Infosec |
| Texte | Dear President Obama:We are more than willing to believe Russia was responsible for the hacked emails/records that influenced our election. We believe Russian hackers were involved. Even if these hackers weren't under the direct command of Putin, we know he could put a stop to such hacking if he chose. It's like harassment of journalists and diplomats. Putin encourages a culture of thuggery that attacks opposition, without his personal direction, but with his tacit approval.Your lame attempts to convince us of what we already agree with has irretrievably damaged your message.Instead of communicating with the America people, you worked through your typical system of propaganda, such as stories in the New York Times quoting unnamed "senior government officials". We don't want "unnamed" officials -- we want named officials (namely you) who we can pin down and question. When you work through this system of official leaks, we believe you have something to hide, that the evidence won't stand on its own.We still don't believe the CIA's conclusions because we don't know, precisely, what those conclusions are. Are they derived purely from companies like FireEye and CloudStrike based on digital forensics? Or do you have spies in Russian hacker communities that give better information? This is such an important issue that it's worth degrading sources of information in order to tell us, the American public, the truth.You had the DHS and US-CERT issue the "GRIZZLY-STEPPE" report "attributing those compromises to Russian malicious cyber activity". It does nothing of the sort. It's full of garbage. It contains signatures of viruses that are publicly available, used by hackers around the world, not just Russia. It contains a long list of IP addresses from perfectly normal services, like Tor, Google, Dropbox, Yahoo, and so forth.Yes, hackers use Yahoo for phishing and malvertising. It doesn't mean every access of Yahoo is an "Indicator of Compromise".For example, I checked my web browser [chrome://net-internals/#dns] and found that last year on November 20th, it accessed two IP addresses that are on the Grizzley-Steppe list: No, this doesn't mean I've been hacked. It means I just had a normal interaction with Yahoo. It means the Grizzley-Steppe IoCs are garbage.If your intent was to show technical information to experts to confirm Russia's involvement, you've done the precise opposite. Grizzley-Steppe proves such enormous incompetence that we doubt all the technical details you might have. I mean, it's possible that you classified the important details and de-classified the junk, but even then, that junk isn't worth publishing. There's no excuse for those Yahoo addresses to be in there, or the numerous other problems.Among the consequences is that Washington Post story claiming Russians hacked into the Vermont power grid. What really happened is that somebody just checked their Yahoo email, thereby accessing one of the same IP addresses I did. How they get from the facts (one person accessed Yahoo email) to the story (Russians hacked power grid) is your responsibility. This misinformation is your fault.You announced sanctions for the Russian hacking [*]. At the same time, you announced sanctions for Russian harassment of diplomati |
| Envoyé | Oui |
| Condensat | 20th about access accessed accessing activity addresses again agree alisa all already also america american among analyze announced appears approval apt28/apt29 are around attacks attempts attributing available bad based because been beg believe better browser but can case causes cert checked chose chrome://net cia claiming classified cloudstrike command communicating communities community companies compromise compromises conclusions confirm confused confusing confusion consequences contains conversely convince could couple culture cyber damaged dear degrading derived details dhs dhs/us did digital diplomatic diplomats direct direction does doesn don done doubt down dropbox dukes/cozybear elect election email emails/records encourages enormous esage especially even events every evidence exactly example excuse expelled experts extra facts fault feature finance fireeye forensics forth found from fsb full garbage get give given google got government grid grizzley grizzly groups gru hacked hacker hackers hacking hacks had happened harassment have hide his how huge ignore important incompetence indicator individuals/organizations influenced information infosec infosec/cybersec instead intent interaction internals/#dns involved involvement iocs irretrievably isn issue its journalists junk just know lame last leaks left like list list:no long look makes making malicious malvertising mean means message might minor misinformation more most name named namely narrative new normal not nothing november now numerous obama obama:we office officers official officials one opposite opposition order other own people perfectly person personal phishing pin possible post power precise precisely president press pro problems prominently propaganda proprietor proves public publicly publishing purely put putin question quoting rather really regards release report reporting responsible russia russian russians same sanctioning sanctions seems selected senior sense services shevchenko show signatures slipshod sole somebody something sort sources spies staff stance stand stands steppe stop stories story such support system tacit target technical tell than then there thereby these those through throw thuggery time times tor trump truth two typical under unnamed use used vermont viruses want washington web weeks weren what when who why willing with has without won work worked world worth yahoo year york you your your responsibility zorsecurity |
| Tags | |
| Stories | Yahoo APT 29 APT 28 |
| Notes | |
| Move | 
|
L'article ne semble pas avoir été repris aprés sa publication.
L'article ne semble pas avoir été repris sur un précédent.