Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Saturday October 14 2017, @12:49AM   Printer-friendly
from the proactive-data-recovery dept.

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


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 15 2017, @06:38AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 15 2017, @06:38AM (#582565)

    It sounds like your objection to those things is that they are unconstitutional. We can amend the constitution.

    28. Congress shall provide for mass surveillance upon the populace.

    29. The president may wage war upon any entity, without restriction, solely at his discretion.

    30. Drugs and their precursors, and the use or sale or manufacture thereof, may be prohibited by any branch of government of any state or of the union.

    31. The rights reserved to the people by this constitution are not so reserved anywhere within a facility which supports the operation of aircraft.

    There you go. Get those into the constitution, and your complaint is resolved.

  • (Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Monday October 16 2017, @12:57AM

    by Anal Pumpernickel (776) on Monday October 16 2017, @12:57AM (#582852)

    It sounds like your objection to those things is that they are unconstitutional.

    Wrong. They're also deeply unethical. I would be opposed to them no matter what.