Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Thursday August 17 2017, @04:33AM   Printer-friendly
from the hack-this dept.

The New York Times reports In Ukraine, a Malware Expert Who Could Blow the Whistle on Russian Hacking :

KIEV, Ukraine — The hacker, known only by his online alias "Profexer," kept a low profile. He wrote computer code alone in an apartment and quietly sold his handiwork on the anonymous portion of the internet known as the Dark Web. Last winter, he suddenly went dark entirely.

Profexer's posts, already accessible only to a small band of fellow hackers and cybercriminals looking for software tips, blinked out in January — just days after American intelligence agencies publicly identified a program he had written as one tool used in the hacking of the Democratic National Committee.

But while Profexer's online persona vanished, a flesh-and-blood person has emerged: a fearful man who the Ukrainian police said turned himself in early this year, and has now become a witness for the F.B.I.

It's an in-depth review of several people, hacking groups, Russian organizations, and delves into hidden sites where malware can be bought and sold. In this case, it is claimed that Profexer wrote a program to exfiltrate information from a hacked machine, made a free copy available, but charged for updates/training. The claim is that Russia made use of his program, among others, and then practiced using it on Ukraine. Images of servers used in Ukraine voting are being reviewed.


Original Submission

Related Stories

“Disabling Cyberattacks” Are Hitting Critical US Water Systems, White House Warns 36 comments

https://arstechnica.com/security/2024/03/critical-us-water-systems-face-disabling-cyberattacks-white-house-warns/

The Biden administration on Tuesday warned the nation's governors that drinking water and wastewater utilities in their states are facing "disabling cyberattacks" by hostile foreign nations that are targeting mission-critical plant operations.

"Disabling cyberattacks are striking water and wastewater systems throughout the United States," Jake Sullivan, assistant to the president for National Security Affairs, and Michael S. Regan, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, wrote in a letter. "These attacks have the potential to disrupt the critical lifeline of clean and safe drinking water, as well as impose significant costs on affected communities."

[...] The letter extended an invitation for secretaries of each state's governor to attend a meeting to discuss better securing the water sector's critical infrastructure. It also announced that the EPA is forming a Water Sector Cybersecurity Task Force to identify vulnerabilities in water systems. The virtual meeting will take place on Thursday.

"EPA and NSC take these threats very seriously and will continue to partner with state environmental, health, and homeland security leaders to address the pervasive and challenging risk of cyberattacks on water systems," Regan said in a separate statement.

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.
(1)
  • (Score: 4, Touché) by julian on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:09AM (34 children)

    by julian (6003) Subscriber Badge on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:09AM (#555142)

    See title

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:21AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:21AM (#555147)

      No one actually cares about whether elections could be hacked it seems, if they did you would see discussion of securing the voting machines. That has been my takeaway...

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:24AM (12 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:24AM (#555148)

      Nonsense! All we're getting is still hearsay.

      American intelligence agencies publicly identified a program he had written as one tool used in the hacking of the Democratic National Committee

      More lies. The DNC was not hacked! The democrats lost because they suck.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:46AM (11 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:46AM (#555156)

        What is going on? First we were attacked by neo-nazis, neo-confederates, and neo-libertariantards, but now this? What are we supposed to infer from this, other than the election was hacked, Donald Trump is the Anti-Clinton, and that the FBI now has in its hands enough evidence to prove that Donald Trump, his sons and associates, committed high treason against the United States of America, in order to make more money. I await impeachment. Life imprisonment for the entire Trump Klan, especially Tiffany. Oh, you think she had nothing to do with this, since she is the only Trump spawn of an American? Hmm, maybe that is a point. OK, leave Tiffany out of this. Besides, what kind of Russian operative would have the name, "Tiffany"?

        (jmorris, on the other hand, sounds just like the name a Russian operative might have on a discussion list on the internets. Hmmm. Or "khallow". And of course, such a username as "Runaway1956"? To local? To specific? To tied to his Daddy whomping his ass? Perfect Russian operative codename! )

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @06:11AM (10 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @06:11AM (#555165)

          What are we supposed to infer from this, other than the election was hacked

          What do you mean when you say "the election was hacked"? Because as far as I know, the worst-case scenario is that Russia leaked DNC emails to Wikileaks, they released it to the public, and then the public reacted to those emails; that had some degree of effect on certain people's voting choices. But the DNC emails should've been public anyway, and so should RNC emails. Unless you have evidence to show that the actual vote counts were altered, saying that the election was hacked is absolutely ludicrous and misleading.

          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Thursday August 17 2017, @09:03AM (4 children)

            by GreatAuntAnesthesia (3275) on Thursday August 17 2017, @09:03AM (#555193) Journal

            Well, the public also reacted to fake news presented as truth by Trump and his associates. [theguardian.com]

            • (Score: 3, Informative) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Thursday August 17 2017, @01:40PM (2 children)

              by GreatAuntAnesthesia (3275) on Thursday August 17 2017, @01:40PM (#555286) Journal

              Flamebait? The discussion was whether or not releasing the DNC emails qualifies as "election hacking." I countered with a slightly different (but related) and equally controversial strategy that fed into Trump's victory. If the email release is "hacking" then this almost certainly is. I included a link to an article from a respectable news source to back up my assertion. I fail to see the flamebait.

              Did I touch a nerve? Could it be that Trump's defenders are as thin-skinned as he is?

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @04:10PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @04:10PM (#555386)

                Mods have turned to absolute garbage. Pay no mind.

              • (Score: 2) by Fluffeh on Monday August 21 2017, @03:15AM

                by Fluffeh (954) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 21 2017, @03:15AM (#556856) Journal

                It sometimes takes a while for mods to be corrected from obvious shills. They normally come good in the end though.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @09:30PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @09:30PM (#555576)

              That is still not "election hacking".

          • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday August 17 2017, @04:15PM (4 children)

            by DeathMonkey (1380) on Thursday August 17 2017, @04:15PM (#555389) Journal

            the worst-case scenario is that Russia leaked DNC emails to Wikileaks,

            And how did they get those emails? That's right, HACKING. It's not a difficult concept.

            • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @04:37PM (2 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @04:37PM (#555403)

              None of that has been proven, or even cross examined. Show yer evidence or shut the fuck up! It's not a difficult concept

              • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday August 17 2017, @04:59PM (1 child)

                by DeathMonkey (1380) on Thursday August 17 2017, @04:59PM (#555427) Journal

                Evidence...

                We'll see it at the trial. The FBI is not in the habit of disclosing it's methods and findings while an investigation is ongoing.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 19 2017, @02:14PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 19 2017, @02:14PM (#556358)

                  Well, maybe you should until the trial before going off with all the wild accusations. Assange says it didn't come from the Russians, and he is a lot more believable than any of the mass media right now. Whether the actual truth comes out in the trial, we may never know. A lot of people would unintentionally get caught in that net, so they won't reveal too much. They will throw somebody under the bus and call it a day. And the democrat/republican party won't lose a single vote over it.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @09:33PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @09:33PM (#555578)

              Don't be an idiot. Even though hacking was required to get the DNC emails, describing this as "election hacking" is extremely misleading since it makes many people believe that the vote counts themselves were altered. There was a poll a while back that apparently showed that many democrats believed that the election itself was hacked (like votes being changed from Clinton to Trump). Throwing around phrases like 'The election was hacked!' is supremely misleading and, frankly, dishonest.

              Say that cracking was used to get the DNC emails, but don't say that the election was hacked. That is not so difficult to comprehend.

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by frojack on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:41AM (11 children)

      by frojack (1554) on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:41AM (#555154) Journal

      It was the New York Times. You seem to have mistaken it for a reliable source.

      http://canadafreepress.com/article/new-report-sorry-dems-there-was-no-russian-hack-it-was-an-inside-job [canadafreepress.com]

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 2, Informative) by Whoever on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:47AM (8 children)

        by Whoever (4524) on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:47AM (#555157) Journal
        • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @06:08AM (6 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @06:08AM (#555164)
          A whole article based on a single weak premise. Those timestamps could be created by copying the files at a later point at a different location.

          That said, I see little evidence that what was leaked was not true. So I find it amusing if the Russians are actually behind this and were attempting to influence the voters with the _truth_ (albeit obtained illegally). And that's somehow "hacking the election".

          In contrast much of the US "mainstream news" and "polls" were trying to influence the voters with lies.

          Funny if the Russians were committing acts of vigilante journalism while the Americans were busy doing propaganda.
          • (Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @10:56AM (5 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @10:56AM (#555223)

            That said, I see little evidence that what was leaked was not true. So I find it amusing if the Russians are actually behind this and were attempting to influence the voters with the _truth_ (albeit obtained illegally). And that's somehow "hacking the election".

            Ah, but you see, the problem is that it was true. What, you thing R's aren't doing the exact same shit? The difference is that with D's now there was proof, and they're too incompetent to effectively deny the truth and redirect the attention to something else (that's what the Pussy-grabber in Chief is really good at). If both side's shenanigans were leaked, the outcome may have been different, although I still wouldn't bet on it (again, D's are incompetent).

            If the hackers also targeted RNC, but it turned out they did nothing bad so there was nothing to leak, then you'd be right.

            But if you tell only half of the truth, it's still deception.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @02:24PM (2 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @02:24PM (#555321)

              You proceed from an unproven assumption then. Unless you have indications that the persons responsible for infiltrating the DNC email server ALSO infiltrated the RNC, there is no "telling of half of the truth" then. You cannot tell what you do not know. The only provable knowledge you have is that the DNC was hacked. Everything else is conjecture. The whole ordeal smacks of sour grapes that the DNC was caught with its pants down. Voters who were persuaded to vote for Trump by knowing the truth of the DNC were obviously not really DNC supporters in the first place.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @03:19PM (1 child)

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @03:19PM (#555358)

                Unless you have indications that the persons responsible for infiltrating the DNC email server ALSO infiltrated the RNC, there is no "telling of half of the truth" then.

                Uh, yes there is, that's the point. I'm saying they didn't hack the RNC (or if they did, they didn't release the information), and the entire problem is in the target selection. As in, why hack the DNC and not the RNC?

                I can think of two possibilities:
                1) It was just a coincidence, the hacker stumbled upon some info that enabled the hack, and they released the info out of the goodness of their hearts.
                2) The hacker wanted to bring the Democrats down to help Trump and/or Republicans, so they explicitly targeted the DNC to get dirt on them.

                If it was one person or a small group acting on their own, it could be either one of those. However, if it was a nation-state (Russia or whoever), I really don't see #1 as all that likely.

                (Also, just to be clear: I dislike both parties, but the Dems are closer to my position on most issues. I find the Dems clearly incompetent, and often hypocritical. However, I find Republicans completely despicable. For me, voting for Dems would be like stepping in shit barefoot; voting for GOP like bathing in it; and voting for Trump like diving in.)

                • (Score: 2) by Oakenshield on Thursday August 17 2017, @06:38PM

                  by Oakenshield (4900) on Thursday August 17 2017, @06:38PM (#555490)

                  I can think of two possibilities:

                  1) It was just a coincidence, the hacker stumbled upon some info that enabled the hack, and they released the info out of the goodness of their hearts.

                  2) The hacker wanted to bring the Democrats down to help Trump and/or Republicans, so they explicitly targeted the DNC to get dirt on them.

                  3) They attempted to hack the RNC and were unsuccessful.

                  4) Releasing only one side to pit both sides against each other (one blaming the other and the other indignantly defending against conjecture) preventing any united front forming against any perpetrators.

                  5) For the Lulz

                  There is no shortage of possibilities or guessing.

            • (Score: 2) by Sulla on Thursday August 17 2017, @03:28PM (1 child)

              by Sulla (5173) on Thursday August 17 2017, @03:28PM (#555363) Journal

              I think it is a shame that both weren't hacked so that we could see that, but as it were we were unfortunately only provided the truth about one of our two corrupt parties. What would you prefer us to do, ignore the criminal things included in the emails because "the other side does it too" instead of delivering a sizeable blow to their organization as punishment when we discovered it?

              I would love to see the RNC hacked and similar information released. I suppose the fun thing we would see from the RNC is the panic that their goal of getting rid of the outside candidate failed because Trump still won the primaries.

              As it is all we had was the DNC going out of its way to stomp out Bernie and give the finger to all of his supporters. I still want to know why paper ballots in Louisiana were +1 in Bernie's favor but electronic was +~5 Hill, when electronic voters should have been stronger Bernie and paper stronger Hill.

              --
              Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:30PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:30PM (#555449)

                What I find fun is they brought Trump upon themselves. They HYPED the hell out of him right until it was clear he had the RNC nomination. Then turned on him. I watched it in real time.

                Pied piper spectacularly blew up in their face. Now They are playing the 'nazi' card to the hilt. Both of these terms are from their leaked emails. That was downloaded at 20MB (not megabit) per second. Either they have a decent network or someone copied it to a USB drive. Which is how wikileaks said they received it.

                What is more likely a disgruntled burnout was pissed at how they were cheated or rando russian guy blew it all up?

                What is more amazing is people are not mad about what was leaked but that it was leaked at all. That is the sad thing. The shit going on in those emails should get some people in jail or at least an investigation. To pretend these are the people who should be leading us is really stretching the idea that Hillary was a good candidate.

                The DNC does not want to face facts. They ran a shitty unlikable candidate (much like the RNC did for Mcain and Romney). For nearly a month she basically did not do anything and costed on the rest of the DNC doing her job. There were tons of people voting against Trump and for the 'hillary I guess' votes. Yet Trump was filling stadiums by himself (and still is). She couldnt fill a gymnasium unless she trotted out some celebrity to draw in a bit of a crowd for her. She was just unlikable. Once the DNC can accept that fact they will figure out why they lost.

        • (Score: 1, Disagree) by hemocyanin on Thursday August 17 2017, @02:01PM

          by hemocyanin (186) on Thursday August 17 2017, @02:01PM (#555307) Journal

          The Washington Post has devolved into nothing but a contractor for printing Establishment-DNC press releases. I have it /etc/hosts.

      • (Score: -1, Redundant) by aristarchus on Thursday August 17 2017, @06:08AM (1 child)

        by aristarchus (2645) on Thursday August 17 2017, @06:08AM (#555163) Journal

        You know, just fuck you, frojack! You are supposed to be my friend! You are supposed to stand up for real journalism! But now this. Man, are you so far gone that you cannot see that Trump is a deep plant Nazi from before you were even born, and you are playing right into it? Frojack! Frrrooojack! Give us a sign, bro! Let us know that this was a "hostage post"! Blink twice if they are threating to cut off your johnson! We will understand!

        Well, the Millitanty Bunntard may not understand, but he is so far gone to the "other" side. . . . .

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by aristarchus on Friday August 18 2017, @08:41AM

          by aristarchus (2645) on Friday August 18 2017, @08:41AM (#555774) Journal

          Fucking frojack is "redundant"? Well, I guess I shoulda seen THAT coming, so to speak.

          Meta question: Are the Republicans now the party of white racism, or not? Somebody explain it to me.

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @07:43AM (4 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @07:43AM (#555177)

      So your stance is, we should assume everyone is guilty and run around lynch mobbing anyone we decide is guilty in advance?

      HELL YEAH.

      Sign me up! So progressive and enlightened the future is!

      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday August 17 2017, @12:50PM (3 children)

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday August 17 2017, @12:50PM (#555263) Journal

        So your stance is, we should assume everyone is guilty and run around lynch mobbing anyone we decide is guilty in advance?

        Because the only rational reaction when you learned the truth behind the deception is to organize a lynching mob, right?

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @04:59PM (2 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @04:59PM (#555426)

          That seemed to be the 'lefts' idea of it. See BLM and Antifa and Resist. With their pre-cut out and pre-printed signs and bused in groups of agitators.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @06:38PM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @06:38PM (#555491)

            You can tell the crazies by their use of radio show talking points. Bonus points for mixing them up. Burn in flames nazi apologist.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @08:47AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @08:47AM (#555775)

              Speaking of burning in flames, fricking Nazi witches! I am more in favor of tar and feathers, and running out of town on a rail. For one thing, if we make a mistake, we can turpentine off the tar, and take them off the rail. On the other hand, burning the nother-fucking MRA Nazi White supremacy libertarian Right-wing nut-job Republican may set an example for the rest of the brain-damages sociopaths that we have to deal with, or at least give them the idea that overt racism is bad for business.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @01:57PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @01:57PM (#555299)

      Way too easy and one-sided. Are you willing to bet money on it?

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @04:56PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @04:56PM (#555422)

      Why? After the shit fit you guys have show for the past 9 months because you lost? Don't think so. I *MIGHT* apologize if the Clintons were right there with him. If what she did is 'who cares' then why do you care what Trump 'might have done'. Every single hack/russian/nazi/recall hope the media has given you has turned out to be a hoax. Why would this be any different?

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:11PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:11PM (#555436)
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:37AM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:37AM (#555151)

    They should read all of our email, but we should read none of thier's? Good one. I for one enjoy the view of this rotting carcase.

    • (Score: 3, Funny) by aristarchus on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:52AM

      by aristarchus (2645) on Thursday August 17 2017, @05:52AM (#555158) Journal

      frojack, reading all the email, even his own. Kind of an Steve Bannon fan. Sucking your own email. No outside proof required. So far inside the bubble that the deep state makes sense, and they are coming for you. Run, frojack! Run! Get the hell out while there is still time! Don't you see that eventually they will make a Nazi of you? I do not want my friend frojack turned into a Nazi. Please take jmorris instead. Or even khallow, but I pause, because he is so young an naive. khallow, swim towards the frojack! Please! If you do, we can save you both! Oh, no! NO! MY GOD, NOOOOOO!

      Damned Nazis, they leave no innocents behind. In our next encounter, I will not be so kind.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @06:41AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @06:41AM (#555168)

      Well, someone should read my email, because I don't. I just read the subject title, then reply with preconceived abortions of logic.

      It's a skill I learned on the other site.

  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @09:58AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @09:58AM (#555204)

    All the gnashing of teeth over the Russian "hacking" (despite no evidence) and still... totally ignoring the vile crap aiming at Bernie that was exposed in the DNC...

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @11:00AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @11:00AM (#555224)

      I'm assuming the immediate teeth-gnashing priority is on the one in the White House (well, at least occasionally), not on the one wandering the forest.

  • (Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @12:22PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @12:22PM (#555251)
    He's gonna get clintoned.

    Two shots in the back with a barbell, stuffed in a sack and dumped on the beach.

    It will be ruled a "suicide". Because anyone willing to testify against the democrats clearly must be suicidal...
    • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @06:41PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 17 2017, @06:41PM (#555494)

      Paranoid schizophrenia, you got diagnosed here first.

(1)