5 ms·
Good for them. Here we hear a lot about Chinese, Israeli, or NK hackers but not often Indian ones.
by lmz 2y ago
Good for them. Here we hear a lot about Chinese, Israeli, or NK hackers but not often Indian ones.
- alephnerd 2y agoThere are plenty of these organizations globally. I'd say most major non-European countries have a public-private partnership model for offensive security operations There's a reason why most countries didn't join the Budapest Treaty for Cybercrime.
- userbinator 2y agoThat's because what you hear depends a lot on the political climate, and more specifically what the media want you to think.
- boomboomsubban 2y agoWhich makes me wonder who Appin pissed off.
- alephnerd 2y agoNo one. It was organically detected by the threat hunting team at a cybersecurity company called SentinelOne. Most cybersecurity vendors have a dedicated org to threat hunting and blue teaming for a mix of marketing and keeping parity with exploit developers.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- Dah00n 2y agoDo they aim their "organic detection" equally against every single country, including the US? Or are they inherently biased?
- EdwardDiego 2y agoThat's rather bad faith.
- kelipso 2y agoNot really. It’s human beings who choose who to focus on and with how much scrutiny, who decide on what to follow up on when given a list of hits, etc. All humans act based on the political climate and it’s naive to think otherwise.
- libertine 2y ago> more specifically what the media want you to think What media are you referring to, and how are they coordinating?
- theWreckluse 2y agoThe coordination emerges for second order reasons, sometimes as simple as what the people want to hear even.
- libertine 2y agoSo after all there's no coordination, it's about what different media outlets perceive as newsworthy and of value to people. Is this what you mean? Because "coordination" means that there's an effort to make different parts of a system work effectively as a whole.
- esperent 2y agoA recent example: as you might have heard, the CEO of an insurance company was shot. As I'm not from the US, the most interesting thing to me about this killing is that a significant amount of the population thinks that the killing was justified. I've seen numbers like 60% of young people support his actions. If you go on reddit, you'll see that he has a huge amount of support there. Now, I don't personally know what to think about all this,. although my gut reaction is that violence is rarely a good solution. But one thing I am sure of: the public reaction to this killing is incredibly newsworthy. Possibly will go down in history as the starting point of a revolution levels of newsworthy. How much reporting on this aspect of the killing have you seen in the media? Especially in the first couple of days. Barely a whisper. When people talk about manufacturing consent and controlling the narrative, this is the kind of thing they mean. In a healthy press, in a healthy society, there should be a ton of discussion happening about this, why so many people are so upset and angry with their situation that they're willing to support a killing in broad daylight, what can be done to fix these issues, how this should be a wake-up call that deep changes are needed, and so on. Do you see that happening anywhere in the established media? The coordination doesn't require some shadowy network of media moguls making phone calls. Although I'm sure that is happening a bit since there are hardly any independent newsrooms anymore.
- rightbyte 2y ago[flagged]