5 ms·

Does anyone here know of a single infosec professional who thinks DPRK committed the attacks?

walshemj 12y ago
Certainly the evidence as described and the way NK has presented indicates its a strong possibility. If you act like a mad man (in terms of diplomacy) don't be surprised if people assume the worst.
- sroerick 12y ago
  What evidence? Do you mean the FBI press release?
  - walshemj 12y ago
    As described in the press release id be minded to think that NK is a strong possibility.
  - pdabbadabba 12y ago
    This is quite a challenge you've set for us. You claim that there are no infosec professionals who think NK did it. Exclude, apparently, the FBI from the universe of infosec professionals. And then refuse to credit the description of the evidence provided by the FBI, literally the only organization likely to have direct access to the evidence. I'm not saying that the FBI is totally trustworthy on this, but it's one thing to distrust them and quite another to accord no epistemic weight at all to their claims about the evidence. While they may have ulterior motives, they (and NK itself) are also the ones best positioned to tell us the truth, if they choose to do so. And while, again, one should not take it on faith that the FBI always tells the truth, I'd trust them over the NK propaganda apparatus any day of the week.
    - sroerick 12y ago
      I made no such claim. I'm no expert in this regard, and my knowledge base should be understood here as a layman's. I read the FBI report, and while I'm sure that there is plenty left out of the report, their diagnosis was based largely on first, structural and tactical similarities to other, earlier DPRK attacks, and second, North Korean IP addresses that were pinged by the malware. Both of these, to my layman's understanding, seem easily falsifiable. All I stated is that within my own circles and based on the infosec figureheads I follow, that I have not seen a single individual who claims to have been convinced that this is indeed a DPRK attack. Because I'm obviously somewhat filter bubbles, I was asking for individuals whose opinion I could get which would help me expand my own filter bubble. Dave Aitel has been raised as a counter example, and while he's certainly not unbiased, it's tough to find people in this field who are in fact unbiased, so I'm grateful to hear his opinion. I'd like to find more counter-opinions.
- crdoconnor 12y ago
  >If you act like a mad man (in terms of diplomacy) In terms of diplomacy this is simply how they are presented by the western media to a largely credulous western audience. If they were truly as irrational as they are presented the North Korean government would have stopped existing decades ago. Mad men are not good at self preservation. Never mind being able to develop heavy industry, nukes and a minor space program all while under sanctions.
comex 12y ago
Does anyone know of a single infosec professional (who's talking) who has access to the details of the evidence the FBI summarized in claiming North Korean involvement? Given this news, maybe the FBI was wrong. But the "professionals" in the doubt squad were mostly just guessing along with the rest of us.
- sroerick 12y ago
  Sure. Everyone is guessing. But is there anyone who is qualified to make guesses who is not in the "doubt squad" One name. Seriously just one name.
  - pdabbadabba 12y ago
    ...the FBI? Do they not employ quite a number of infosec professionals?
    - sroerick 12y ago
      Of course they do. And look, I really try not to shout conspiracy at everything. But the FBI is relatively new to the Cybersecurity game. CNN yesterday was showing "MPAA cyberterrorism experts". The links to DPRK seem tenuous at best. So in this context, when the organization who blackmailed Martin Luther King says something, I'm going to try to seek independent confirmation. All the security professionals who I follow on the internet has either expressed doubts or outright disbelief that DPRK is culpable for this attack. Obviously, I'm in a bit of a bubble, so I'm trying to find independent people outside of my circle who agree with the FBI line.
      - waterlesscloud 12y ago
        The FBI has been in cybersecurity for a couple decades now.
        sroerick 12y ago
        Ah, that's absolutely true, and I should clarify: My understanding of FBI cybersecurity is that until very recently, they were primarily responsible for domestic cybercrime. Responding to "Cyberterrorism", to my knowledge, is something that has happened much more recently. I, of course, am no expert in this regard, which is why I'm seeking out expert opinons! If you have more info I'd really appreciate having some more stuff I can take a look at.
dmix 12y ago
Yes Dave Aitel from Immunity Inc said it was DPRK from the very beginning when most infosec people thought otherwise. He was on a podcast talking about it yesterday: https://threatpost.com/dave-aitel-on-the-sony-hack/109988 https://threatpost.com/dave-aitel-on-the-sony-hack/109988 But he sells offensive security tools to goverments and corporations, so he is not without bias. Actually this might be more in support of the OPs comment regarding gov support rather than refuting infosec peoples stance.
- sroerick 12y ago
  Thank you! I've been asking this question for 3 days and haven't been able to get any response. As you said, there's a bit of a conflict of interest here, but you'd be hard pressed to find someone who isn't biased. I do think this supports OPs comment.

Certainly the evidence as described and the way NK has presented indicates its a strong possibility. If you act like a mad man (in terms of diplomacy) don't be surprised if people assume the worst.

sroerick 12y ago
What evidence? Do you mean the FBI press release?
- walshemj 12y ago
  As described in the press release id be minded to think that NK is a strong possibility.
- pdabbadabba 12y ago
  This is quite a challenge you've set for us. You claim that there are no infosec professionals who think NK did it. Exclude, apparently, the FBI from the universe of infosec professionals. And then refuse to credit the description of the evidence provided by the FBI, literally the only organization likely to have direct access to the evidence. I'm not saying that the FBI is totally trustworthy on this, but it's one thing to distrust them and quite another to accord no epistemic weight at all to their claims about the evidence. While they may have ulterior motives, they (and NK itself) are also the ones best positioned to tell us the truth, if they choose to do so. And while, again, one should not take it on faith that the FBI always tells the truth, I'd trust them over the NK propaganda apparatus any day of the week.
  - sroerick 12y ago
    I made no such claim. I'm no expert in this regard, and my knowledge base should be understood here as a layman's. I read the FBI report, and while I'm sure that there is plenty left out of the report, their diagnosis was based largely on first, structural and tactical similarities to other, earlier DPRK attacks, and second, North Korean IP addresses that were pinged by the malware. Both of these, to my layman's understanding, seem easily falsifiable. All I stated is that within my own circles and based on the infosec figureheads I follow, that I have not seen a single individual who claims to have been convinced that this is indeed a DPRK attack. Because I'm obviously somewhat filter bubbles, I was asking for individuals whose opinion I could get which would help me expand my own filter bubble. Dave Aitel has been raised as a counter example, and while he's certainly not unbiased, it's tough to find people in this field who are in fact unbiased, so I'm grateful to hear his opinion. I'd like to find more counter-opinions.
crdoconnor 12y ago
>If you act like a mad man (in terms of diplomacy) In terms of diplomacy this is simply how they are presented by the western media to a largely credulous western audience. If they were truly as irrational as they are presented the North Korean government would have stopped existing decades ago. Mad men are not good at self preservation. Never mind being able to develop heavy industry, nukes and a minor space program all while under sanctions.

comex 12y ago

Does anyone know of a single infosec professional (who's talking) who has access to the details of the evidence the FBI summarized in claiming North Korean involvement? Given this news, maybe the FBI was wrong. But the "professionals" in the doubt squad were mostly just guessing along with the rest of us.

sroerick 12y ago
Sure. Everyone is guessing. But is there anyone who is qualified to make guesses who is not in the "doubt squad" One name. Seriously just one name.
- pdabbadabba 12y ago
  ...the FBI? Do they not employ quite a number of infosec professionals?
  - sroerick 12y ago
    Of course they do. And look, I really try not to shout conspiracy at everything. But the FBI is relatively new to the Cybersecurity game. CNN yesterday was showing "MPAA cyberterrorism experts". The links to DPRK seem tenuous at best. So in this context, when the organization who blackmailed Martin Luther King says something, I'm going to try to seek independent confirmation. All the security professionals who I follow on the internet has either expressed doubts or outright disbelief that DPRK is culpable for this attack. Obviously, I'm in a bit of a bubble, so I'm trying to find independent people outside of my circle who agree with the FBI line.
    - waterlesscloud 12y ago
      The FBI has been in cybersecurity for a couple decades now.
      - sroerick 12y ago
        Ah, that's absolutely true, and I should clarify: My understanding of FBI cybersecurity is that until very recently, they were primarily responsible for domestic cybercrime. Responding to "Cyberterrorism", to my knowledge, is something that has happened much more recently. I, of course, am no expert in this regard, which is why I'm seeking out expert opinons! If you have more info I'd really appreciate having some more stuff I can take a look at.

dmix 12y ago

Yes Dave Aitel from Immunity Inc said it was DPRK from the very beginning when most infosec people thought otherwise. He was on a podcast talking about it yesterday: https://threatpost.com/dave-aitel-on-the-sony-hack/109988 https://threatpost.com/dave-aitel-on-the-sony-hack/109988 But he sells offensive security tools to goverments and corporations, so he is not without bias. Actually this might be more in support of the OPs comment regarding gov support rather than refuting infosec peoples stance.

sroerick 12y ago
Thank you! I've been asking this question for 3 days and haven't been able to get any response. As you said, there's a bit of a conflict of interest here, but you'd be hard pressed to find someone who isn't biased. I do think this supports OPs comment.