DPRK has a reputation for using assassination and kidnapping on foreign soil. It’s probably not as bad as taking on a Mexican drug cartel, organized crime, or Donald Trump, but it’s still something I’d probably want to keep on the DL.
Nowhere did I imply that the DPRK’s practices justify the attack - that’s left to individuals to think about for themselves. I was saying that their tendency to engage in covert ops against individuals outside of their own borders means that, if I were the hacker, I wouldn’t want my name publicly known. The same goes for the US - even more so. I would expect that someone who managed to disable significant parts of the US internet infrastructure not to then immediately publish their identity.
Something tells me the last thing the world needs from a cybersecurity standpoint is a leaner, meaner Pentagon that can launch cyberattacks faster than they can assess the likely impact
In the article it states the average lead time for a Pentagon-organized cyberattack is six months.
The main point of the article is that this guy is basically trying to push the Pentagon to be more like him, a guy who took personal offense when a North Korean hacker tried to drive-by hack him then took the entire country offline without first considering whether or not they might retaliate against an actual lone wolf attacker, or whether this is a rational response as an individual to the existence of organized nation-state attackers.
Basically, he’s lucky the Pentagon took an interest in him. The article points out that the officials he shared his attack with were well aware the main reason they couldn’t do something similar is literally just bureaucracy. He’s not offering anything new on a technical level, he just wants the Pentagon to shoot from the hip more often and worry less about the consequences of their actions.
TBH, probably everybody in the world would prefer the slower, less aggressive Pentagon we have now rather than one that goes around picking fights with every nation-state and group that pisses it off for like, any reason.
Vigilante hacker attacks foreign nation internet infrastructure on behalf of the U.S. without the U.S.'s consent and wants to encourage the U.S. to perform more similar cyber attacks, but witout the approval of the chain of command, without thinking of the repercussions on international relations.
I don’t know, but this doesn’t sond likea good idea.
It sounds like a Hollywood movie. “Hacker tattoos”? Single person took on an entire country? I dunno, something about this is off, like it’s too juicy of a story for Wired to scrutinize it properly and there’s really more (or less) to the story.
Yeah, especially since the NSA or FBI or CIA has never accepted the dude’s methods. And he’s the only one giving his own testimoy about all of this. It’s weird.
Yeah good point on the anger glasses. He sounds like an agressive type of dude. Says he worked for Blackwater? The mercenaries company known for their crimes against humanity in Iraq, if I’m not mistaken? What normal person would want to work there?
I might need to go back and find sources but I could have sworn I read a thing that had Kim directly saying that it isn’t allowed among the general populace because it’s full of US propaganda. Same reason why jeans aren’t allowed.
Edit: I want to clarify that I would prefer the general populace had the internet so they could more easily educate themselves but AFAIK they don’t.
Not trying to change your mind but if the general public has internet it’s definitely just intranet. There’s no way they’re getting anything close to what we would recognize as the internet. Maybe I’m buying propaganda but I just can’t fathom the possibility.
lol, it’d undermine my argument if I was, wouldn’t it? Not sure if you’re being intentionally dense or just… obtuse. But here’s some further reading for you, you do you budnik.
Internet access is available in North Korea, but is only permitted with special authorization. It is primarily used for government purposes, and also by foreigners … Online services for most individuals and institutions are provided through a free domestic-only network known as Kwangmyong, with access to the global Internet limited to a much smaller group.
Are you laboring under the false impression that the average citizens of North Korea have, forget regular, but ANY access to the internet? Carpet bombing doesn’t work if you’re already a ghost.
No. No I’m just calling out that this particular cyberattack was not as impactful to the everyman of North Korea as it would fit any other, more modernized country. Your point gains more validity the more networked a country is.
The article is paywalled. Did you read all of it? Does it specifically quote the author as saying “I want the same baseline response. Doesn’t matter who I attack”? Because I didn’t see that, but I didn’t bother to bypass the paywall. If you did and it’s in there, cool, guys a weirdo. If not, quit making up shit to fill out your narrative. You don’t know any better than anyone else unless you asked him or are him.
Well, bless your heart. I can remember when I used to mistake stuff like this as the want for people to talk with me; we’re not so different after all.
DDoS’ing a nation is effectively carpet bombing citizenry for government actions when you should be taking a scapular approach to threat actor countermeasures.
my understanding is that the only NK citizens that have access to the actual internet is microscopic and concentrated in information warfare / scams.
Add comment