SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Last week, The Wall Street Journal dropped a bombshell when it reported that Russian government hackers located confidential National Security Agency material improperly stored on an employee's home computer with help from Kaspersky antivirus, which happened to be installed. On Tuesday, The New York Times and The Washington Post provided another shocker: the Russian hackers were caught in the act by spies from Israel, who were burrowed deep inside Kaspersky's corporate network around the time of the theft.
Ars Technica: How Kaspersky AV reportedly was caught helping Russian hackers steal NSA secrets
The New York Times: How Israel Caught Russian Hackers Scouring the World for U.S. Secrets
The Washington Post: Israel hacked Kaspersky, then tipped the NSA that its tools had been breached (archive)
Previously: Kaspersky Lab and Lax Contractor Blamed for Russian Acquisition of NSA Tools
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Saturday October 14 2017, @01:31AM (7 children)
These computers are running Windows, that's what.
Using Windows to do official government business or store classified or sensitive information should be prosecutable as treason.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Saturday October 14 2017, @02:50AM (5 children)
Bingo. My operating system is pretty secure without the need of an antivirus. Note that I don't claim that it is totally secure - only that it is more secure than Windows. Note that I don't claim that it can't be hacked. It's just a tougher to hack than Windows. In fact, I'm not aware of any operating system that is easier to hack than Windows. The single most secure thing you can do with Windows, is to encrypt it. But, then you're relying on an encryption program to keep you secure, because Windows is so insecure. And, even with encryption, Windows is busily communicating with unencrypted servers and peers all the time. Phhht - so much for encryption!! And, meanwhile, Microsoft pushes forced updates, and monitors your machine at all times, going so far as to push targeted advertising onto it. Geeez, Louise, Windows secure? About the only thing a person could do to make it less secure, would be to install some random anti-virus that reports back to the NSA.
Tell me, Grishnakh, how do we get people to wake up and smell the coffee? I'd have thought the bacon frying would be enough to wake people up, but, no, they just keep sleeping.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Saturday October 14 2017, @02:59AM (4 children)
Tell me, Grishnakh, how do we get people to wake up and smell the coffee?
I have absolutely no idea. I wish I knew.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 14 2017, @03:32AM (3 children)
If Equifax doesn't do it, there is no hope.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by pTamok on Saturday October 14 2017, @09:07AM (1 child)
If there is hope, it lies in the proles, because only there in those swarming disregarded masses, 85 per cent of the population, could the force to destroy the status quo ever be generated.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 14 2017, @04:09PM
Until they stop staring at the likes of the kardashians, and responding to advertising telling them what to think and what to look like...
I would suspect we've already lost. And that most of us are proles anyway -- in our own way. no one here is at the top.
you'd have thought previous major disclosures would have caused a greater response... but it looks like that since there is no dislike button, everyone seemed to like it if they registered an opinion at all.
the fact that so many are on opiods and legally made dependent upon them seems to be just another means to keep the masses in check. oh and then take aware their health care after they are addicted? they'll be too weak to rebel!
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Monday October 16 2017, @09:40AM
Not quite the same thing.
Even if I persuaded everyone I know to move away from Windows, how would that protect them from the incompetence of Equifax?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 14 2017, @09:58AM
It's not just Windows that is the problem, but proprietary software in general. Why is our government relying on software that it is not in full control of? Governments should only use software that respects the freedom of its users: Free Software. This has practical benefits (you can improve it, you're not dependent upon a single company to modify it, bugs are more easily spotted, etc.), but more importantly, the government should be promoting freedom, independence, and education, which are things that proprietary software does not allow.
If no Free Software exists for a specific purpose, the government should make it and release it for the benefit of all. Even if the software must remain secret for a time, it can still be Free Software from the government's point of view.