3 ms·

Could someone with better forensic understanding help explain this a little better please? How does one not only trace back the hack to originating computer, bu

Could someone with better forensic understanding help explain this a little better please? How does one not only trace back the hack to originating computer, but also figure out who was sitting behind that machine. Also, who hired that person to sit behind that machine and perform said hacks. Is this possible within the realms of digital forensics? Or does this imply alternate sources of intel? Just curious as to why these hackers are competent enough to hack multi-billion dollar industries but not competent enough to at least hide their employer if not themselves?

salesguy222 10y ago
In my opinion, no, digital forensics cannot prove these things 100%. The prosecutors and agencies involved can only string together evidence in an attempt to convince a non-technical jury (or tribunal) to see things that aren't there explicitly, but could be implied. For example, a machine with photos of me and some of my financial documents might be used to hack someone, and my MAC address and IP show up in the "hacking evidence". Depending on how motivated the prosecutors are to charge me personally, you will either see me in trouble, or you won't. In my opinion, if you aren't politically well connected, your ability to evade indictments and eventually convictions is non existent in the face of someone as powerful as the DOJ
- itchyjunk 10y ago
  So tracing the the computer, hacking the webcam, getting the face, getting into the persons back account, following the money trail to FSB is more of a Hollywood hack and not reality than? I ask because I no longer have a feel for what is possible and what is fantasy. Especially how machine learning and what not comes into play if it does. [1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5ghK6yUJv4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5ghK6yUJv4
  - salesguy222 10y ago
    Sorry, I'm on mobile right now and I can't watch your link. Please do help me though: Are you saying that in the case of this Yahoo hack, this is the evidence that has been obtained? Or is this a general link about what authorities are able to do? Because if so, then yes, I personally would say this is enough to reach a guilty verdict. They deserve it if they were dumb enough to show their face and receive on the books payment from a shady authority. But too often, someone's machine is implicated with the kind of flakey technical evidence that is used to extort a confession or a plea bargain.
    - itchyjunk 10y ago
      Ah, this is nothing specific. Just wild speculations on how one might be able to figure out the person behind a hack.
empath75 10y ago
The FBI and NSA have other means of tracking people down.
finid 10y ago
Moles and informants inside the hacker groups.
- r00fus 10y ago
  aka HUMINT [1]. You know the kind that big agencies find too boring in lieu of the sexy automated (and immoral) "spy on everyone all the time". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_intelligence_(intelligence_gathering) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_intelligence_(intelligen...

salesguy222 10y ago

In my opinion, no, digital forensics cannot prove these things 100%. The prosecutors and agencies involved can only string together evidence in an attempt to convince a non-technical jury (or tribunal) to see things that aren't there explicitly, but could be implied. For example, a machine with photos of me and some of my financial documents might be used to hack someone, and my MAC address and IP show up in the "hacking evidence". Depending on how motivated the prosecutors are to charge me personally, you will either see me in trouble, or you won't. In my opinion, if you aren't politically well connected, your ability to evade indictments and eventually convictions is non existent in the face of someone as powerful as the DOJ

itchyjunk 10y ago
So tracing the the computer, hacking the webcam, getting the face, getting into the persons back account, following the money trail to FSB is more of a Hollywood hack and not reality than? I ask because I no longer have a feel for what is possible and what is fantasy. Especially how machine learning and what not comes into play if it does. [1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5ghK6yUJv4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5ghK6yUJv4
- salesguy222 10y ago
  Sorry, I'm on mobile right now and I can't watch your link. Please do help me though: Are you saying that in the case of this Yahoo hack, this is the evidence that has been obtained? Or is this a general link about what authorities are able to do? Because if so, then yes, I personally would say this is enough to reach a guilty verdict. They deserve it if they were dumb enough to show their face and receive on the books payment from a shady authority. But too often, someone's machine is implicated with the kind of flakey technical evidence that is used to extort a confession or a plea bargain.
  - itchyjunk 10y ago
    Ah, this is nothing specific. Just wild speculations on how one might be able to figure out the person behind a hack.

empath75 10y ago

The FBI and NSA have other means of tracking people down.

finid 10y ago

Moles and informants inside the hacker groups.

r00fus 10y ago
aka HUMINT [1]. You know the kind that big agencies find too boring in lieu of the sexy automated (and immoral) "spy on everyone all the time". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_intelligence_(intelligence_gathering) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_intelligence_(intelligen...