Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
EU The Military

Germany Calls In Russian Envoy Over Hack Attack (reuters.com) 30

Posted by BeauHD from the new-tools-to-use dept.
In response to a cyberattack on the German Parliament in 2015, Germany wants to impose a European travel ban and asset freeze on those responsible. Reuters reports: Russia has rejected allegations that its military intelligence was behind the cyber attack after media reported that data had been stolen, including emails from Chancellor Angela Merkel's constituency office. State Secretary Miguel Berger told the ambassador that the government would call for the EU's cyber sanctions mechanism to be invoked against those responsible for the attack, said the German ministry in a statement. The EU last year approved a system to freeze hackers' assets in the bloc and banning them from entry.

Federal prosecutors issued an arrest warrant on May 5 for Russian national Dmitry Badin over the attack and the German ministry said there was credible evidence that he was part of the GRU military intelligence service at the time of the attack. "The arrest warrant against Mr Badin was issued on the basis of the strong suspicion that the accused conspired with other hitherto anonymous persons to carry out intelligence activities against Germany on behalf of the secret service of a foreign power," said the ministry. In a statement on Wednesday, the Russian embassy in Berlin said German officials so far had not been able to present facts to underpin the accusations against Moscow.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Germany Calls In Russian Envoy Over Hack Attack More

Germany Calls In Russian Envoy Over Hack Attack

Comments Filter:

  • Will come to nothing (Score:3)

    by vinn01 ( 178295 ) on Thursday May 28, 2020 @09:39PM (#60118980)

    Germany can't present the facts that underpin the accusations without burning their cyberintelligence methods. No way Germany does that.
      I suppose Germany hopes to get a media trial since they can't get a court trial. I doubt Russia cares what German press says. Nothing will come of this accusation.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by rtb61 ( 674572 )

      Too fucking easy. Germany you want to extradite Russians, sit down with the Russian government and negotiate an digital security treaty and an extradition treaty, otherwise, you know like, SHUT THE FUCK UP.

      The Russian government has repeatedly stated they wanted a digital security treaty and extradition and NATO has steadfastly refused. Want something done about it, then for fuck sake Germany do something real about it.

      • Too fucking easy. Germany you want to extradite Russians, sit down with the Russian government and negotiate an digital security treaty and an extradition treaty, otherwise, you know like, SHUT THE FUCK UP.

        The Russian government has repeatedly stated they wanted a digital security treaty and extradition and NATO has steadfastly refused. Want something done about it, then for fuck sake Germany do something real about it.

        Citation needed

        Russia constitution (same as French one and to some extent German one by the way) prohibits extradition of its own citizens. So I will be really interested to see exactly when and where did Russia discuss with NATO suspending its own constitution.

        Disclaimer: according to quite a lot of morons I am supposedly a Russian Troll (probably because I am fluent in Russian - we have reached the ridiculous point when just knowing to read it automatically marks you as suspicious).

  • "Nice"

    'Try'

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:Cyberwarfare (Score:5, Insightful)

      by kot-begemot-uk ( 6104030 ) on Friday May 29, 2020 @01:37AM (#60119394) Homepage

      Can someone with actual knowledge on the subject explain how one state proves another state is behind a specific hacking incident? .

      Disclaimer: I used to work in a CERT and I actually worked in Internet security when it was not fancy and was not politicised (20 years ago).

      The answer to your question is that In 99% of the cases it does not. In 99% of the cases it is attribution on the basis of "we have seen this malware used by X". This is completely and utterly bogus because once malware has been captured, it can be subverted, reverse engineered, repurposed and put to use by whoever captured it. Iran has used a Stuxnet derivative to go after other gulf countries. Russia uses NSA exploits from the EternalBlue toolkit. Everyone is using UEFI exploits and UEFI malware originally designed by the Italians. On top of that, there is a gazillion of crime syndicates which get their copies of state actor malware with a few months after it has been put to use. Some of them actually make it and sell it to nation states. Others get it as a result it being made in Kleptocracies like Russia where the authors moonshine on the side for criminal gangs. And last, but not least, criminal gangs also capture malware which has been put to use, reverse engineer it and repurpose it for themselves.

      There is, however less than 1% of the cases where the malware is BRAND NEW and whoever captures it has managed to trace successfully to origin.

      All in all, you need to read the announcements. If the announcement mentions any "known malware previously used", just bin it. This is someone fishing for "red under our bed" pocket money from the "forever war fund".

    • Generally you can't attribute with any certainty unless the party admits it or someone credible was a witness that comes forward or they happen to have also hacked the hacker. They rely on who they know uses certain malware and methods (guesses), information from the malware like language and compile details. Apart from that it is all just finger pointing and picking who they want to blame.

  • I cannot blame anyone, only myself.

  • I don't remember Germany issuing Arrest warrants for any of the US government for hacking and spying on Germany. Why the double standard?

  • Remember: Dictators worldwide store their money in US banks because they are safe and know their own countries are corrupt (that is, after all, why they sought the power in the first place!) and this is a hedge against loss should a better dictator wander along.

    So there's plenty of cash they hold that can be frozen to coerce compliance.

  • The NSA had already developed tools that can hack a server while leaving clues that point to an adversary of the United States. It was the United States who bugged Angela Merkel's phone during the debate over Iraq in the United Nations. The question, of course, should be, "Has the United Nations Security Council approved these sanctions?" If not, they would be illegal acts of war. In any case, the EU should be welcoming Russia as a trade partner, not following the United States into another useless and expe

  • Constant cyber attacks and open assassinations of the regimes' enemies in Western countries. Putin just keeps escalating slowly, boiling the frog.

    About time the Western world steps up to the plate. I expect the winds to shift once his puppet is out of the White House.

  • “after media reported that data had been stolen, including emails from Chancellor Angela Merkel's constituency office”

    For fcuk sake, it was the Americans doing the hacking of Merkel's email and mobile phone [telegraph.co.uk] as well as the Chairman of the Inquiry [thelocal.de] into the spying by the NSA. As well as spying on the the UN's general secretary [cnet.com].

Slashdot Top Deals

A committee takes root and grows, it flowers, wilts and dies, scattering the seed from which other committees will bloom. -- Parkinson

Close