EU Sanctions Russia Over 2015 German Parliament Hack (zdnet.com) 58
The European Union has imposed sanctions today against Russia for its involvement in the 2015 German Parliament (Bundestag) hack. From a report: Sanctions were levied against the GRU (Russian Main Intelligence Directorate), a military intelligence agency part of the Russian Army, and two of its officers. The two GRU officers were identified as Dmitry Badin and Igor Kostyukov. EU officials said Badin was part of a team of Russian military intelligence officers who hacked the Bundestag IT network between April and May 2015. "This cyber-attack targeted the parliament's information system and affected its operation for several days," the EU said today. "A significant amount of data was stolen and the email accounts of several MPs as well as of Chancellor Angela Merkel were affected." Kostyukov was sanctioned for his role as First Deputy Head of the GRU. EU officials said Kostyukov commands the 85th Main Centre for Special Services (GTsSS), also known as Military Unit 26165, but more commonly known in the cyber-security industry under the hacker codenames of APT28, Fancy Bear, Sofacy, or Strontium.
Lol. (Score:2)
Re:Lol. (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually sanctions against individuals in Russia has in the past worked much better than sanctions against the country. It seems influential people don't like being sanctioned.
Though I am not sure this will work. How influential are these two targeted individuals?
Security 101 (Score:3)
There is no such thing as perfect security, electronic or otherwise. You just have to make the cost of breaking the security higher than the value received from breaking it.
There are two problems here, however. One is the assessment of value, especially since the attacker doesn't know what the information is until after the security has been breached. The other thing is the time. It's really hard to assess the costs in advance to prevent the breaches, but that's much better than trying to fix the damage aft
Re: (Score:2)
How would "sanctioning" a foreigner in his own country that is not your vassal even work?
What exactly would that entail. For him. In the real world.
Re: (Score:1)
How would "sanctioning" a foreigner in his own country that is not your vassal even work?
Many Russians want to shift embezzled wealth to the West. If they can't get their loot out, then they can lose everything if the political winds shift.
But this is still mostly symbolic. If Germany was serious, they would stop buying Russian gas. For what they spent on Nord Stream 2, they could have built several tanker terminals to import LNG from America or Qatar.
Re: (Score:2)
But instead we're likely to 'sanction' the Kremlin's foreign policies by letting Nord Stream 2 complete and shoving billions of € up the Kremlin's ass in the future.
Re: (Score:2)
It says that the EU imposed sanctions, not Germany
Banana, banana.
Re: (Score:2)
This demonstrates utter ignorance of what EU and Germany are. Distinction cited above is supremely relevant.
Re: (Score:2)
This demonstrates utter ignorance of what EU and Germany are. Distinction cited above is supremely relevant.
Here's how the EU works:
1) There are rules.
2) Germany can ignore the rules.
3) Everyone has a say.
4) Germany decides.
5) The Parliament debates policy.
6) Frankfurt dictates actions (Berlin might be consulted but it's just the Democratic end of things, so it's not very important).
Re: (Score:2)
On foreign policy, France is the dominant one, not Germany.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Lol. (Score:5, Interesting)
After EU confiscated foreign (read: Russian) bank accounts in Cyprus to bail out its banks, this sort of activity changed in a fairly significant way. While Russian elite continue visiting and living in many European nations, they are far less interested in storing their money there today.
But people sanctioned are not Russian elite. They're GRU officers. Such people are thoroughly vetted for interests like "money abroad" and "plans to live abroad". It's exceedingly unlikely they have either to any significant degree.
Re: (Score:2)
"Actually sanctions against individuals in Russia has in the past worked much better than sanctions against the country. It seems influential people don't like being sanctioned."
Sure, but saying to 3 Russian civil servants:
"If your wife ever wants a bank credit for a car in the EU, you can forget it!"
might not impress them very much, perhaps good for a few funny lines at a party.
Wow (Score:1)
Very intelligent and useful
Putin needs a paddlin' (Score:3)
Someone just needs to take that boy over the knee and give him a good spanking. He's been a very naughty child.
Serious question for any Russians here: why do you guys love to bend over and take it from any two bit dictator that comes along? Do y'all have daddy issues?
Re:Putin needs a paddlin' (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
And the answer is the same here: power hungry sociopaths who are not afraid to break any rule or ethical norm in pursuit of power.
We have the technology now to screen for sociopathy in the womb and abort the parasites before thy are born. Sure, it seems drastic, but not when you look at the untold human suffering they have caused over the millennia.
Re: (Score:2)
the old Winston Churchil quote sums the problem up quite well "The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter". those Average voters (uneducated, uninformed and easily bought) are what allows the scum to rise to the top.
Re: (Score:1)
But somehow many also also convinced that it can only get worse, because everyone else is worse.
Especially other countries governments being all hypocrites and worse. They dislike everyone else just a bit more than their own government.
So they prefer to be treated badly and lied to by one of their own instead of someone foreign.
You get yo
Re: (Score:2)
Serious question for any Russians here: why do you guys love to bend over and take it from any two bit dictator that comes along? Do y'all have daddy issues?
In 1992 an elective system in western fashion was established in Russia, so only pro-western candidates like Yeltsin and Putin have any chance in it. That's how. Elective might have been useful a couple centuries ago but now so many weaknesses in it are known that only people who are best at gaming it can win, which is people with western connections who were taught there. They're only good for working as viceroys in foreign interest. True democracy works from bottom to top, not the other way around. Having
Re: (Score:2)
So, erm, why was there no true democracy when Russia was communist?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh come on. Give me a reason why we can't have a real democracy. We could have a true participatory democracy if we wanted to. But of course, that would put more power into the hands of the common man, and less power for the already powerful. So they fight it, tooth and nail.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So we should give control to just a small subset instead of allowing everyone to participate?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not talking about elective democracy, I was trying to discuss the idea of true participatory direct democracy. Everyone in a particular administrative region gets to vote on every bill put forth in that region. No representation, no elections. one person, one vote on every issue.
If you don't like representative democracy, and you don't seem to want participatory democracy, the only other options are some form of consensus based system (impossible, even with formal consensus based rules, on anything exce
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you refuse to discuss non representative, direct democracy?
Let me try again.
I am not talking about elective systems. Never have been, in this entire thread.
I am talking about direct democracy. Can you please at least acknowledge that I am attempting to talk about that instead of trying to change the subject back to your critique of representative democracy? I am not interested in discussing that subject.
Have I made myself clear?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why would that need to change? As we all know from "Schoolhouse Rock," anyone can propose a bill in our current representative democracy. You just need to get an appropriate amount of signatures. Why in the world would you assume the necessity of a dictator to set an agenda?
For that matter, if you prefer consensus based decision making, who proposes new rules in that system?
In the actual, real world consensus based organizations I've been involved with, anyone can propose new agenda items. http://www.conse [consensus.net]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Slippery slop fallacy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A generic complaint about the system using 2,000 year old analysis deserves a generic response. But sure, nothing will ever be perfect or future proof. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try.
Blind cynicism does not make you appear wise. It's the laziest philosophy, just an excuse to throw up one's hands and give up. Most of us outgrew it in college.
Re:Putin needs a paddlin' (Score:4, Informative)
As their immediate Western neighbour fluent in their language, I can answer that one for you. In modern Russia, they don't have a dictator for domestic issues. The people who are actually "bending over and take it from two bit dictator" in relation to Putin are us Westerners. Domestically, Russian opposition is alive and well. It's just really, REALLY anti-West compared to Putin and "his" United Russia party. Which is why Western pundits like to pretend that Navalny is a "Russian opposition leader". He's basically a sole figure in Russian mainstream politics that is less antagonistic toward West than Putin.
But Navalny being an opposition "leader" is a notion so laughable, Navalny himself pretty much openly admits it on their website. In recent elections his core message to Russians was that "they need to unite the opposition and vote for anyone, be it Communists, LDPR or Just Russia, as long as it's not United Russia".
For the record, those are the three large opposition parties in Russia. First one is the reconstituted Soviet Communist party. Second is the far right party thinking that all nations of Soviet Union and Russian Empire should be annexed back into Russia. And third is about half the size of other two and is more or less Social Democrat for fiscal policy with a significant streak of hardline nationalism.
So not much dictatorship there. It's just that all of them pretty much agree with Putin on key foreign policy issues, though 2/3 think that Putin just doesn't go far enough. And if you think that is somehow weird, remember the "large wins for opposition in local elections with several Siberian towns seeing a single member of Navalny's coalition get elected"?
Yeah. The opposition party that actually won those is LDPR that saw massive gains. Russians in Siberia think that Putin is far too lenient with us Westerners.
As for why, I suspect the reason is their history. Russia is by far the most invaded nation on the planet. Poles come a very distant second in that tally, and look at their behaviour when it comes to Russians and Germans to understand how Russians view us. For someone residing in US, the entire concept of getting conquered by outsiders as a matter of routine is an utterly alien concept because of geography. For Russians, that's a norm. Either they push against outsiders, or they get conquered again. In the past, that included things like the reason why "slav" was the origin word for "slave" in English language. And right now, they see themselves being pushed by outsiders on almost all borders. Something that their very culture has a very specific adaptations for.
A good example here is the much talked thing about recent unrest in Khabarovsk. Western media sold that as "Russians rising up against Putin". As usual, absent is concept of "why?" The actual reason? Putin conceded two key islands to China back in 2008-2012 for strategic reasons. Those islands sit right on the approach of Khabarovsk as river Amur passes the city, and proved absolutely critical to its security during Sino-Soviet war in the 1960s. Basically everyone in the city and their dog was against it. The city has been a LDPR stronghold ever since, including LDPR mayor and almost entirely LDPR legislative assembly. As was the entire region. If I remember correctly, their regional legislative had a grand total of zero United Russia elected people in last two elections. It was absolute majority LDPR with some minor presence from Communists and Just Russia. Their Siberian gains in last elections were simply an extension of that spirit progressing westward from Russian Far East.
When you recall that Russia is a Federation with domestic affairs concentrated in the regions rather than Moscow, you'll comprehend that Putin is about as far from dictator as one can get in reality. Not only does he lack the legislative power in many key regions as his party is basically absent from its legislative structures there, but his central government has very limited options on how to manage these regions. It c
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
>because he ensures elections are rigged to make sure he always gets elected and that opposition are repeatedly killed or jailed.
Which is a fantasy borne out of rich imagination of Western media pundits. In reality, opposition are alive and well. They just overwhelmingly conform to Russian zeitgeist and are corrupt and extremely anti-West.
Navalny's problem is that he's anti-corruption. That makes him anti-every Russian leader in power. Because they're all corrupt. And so, he and his organisation are univ
Re: Putin needs a paddlin' (Score:2)
Thank you. This is very informative.
Re: (Score:2)
Spying on foreing adversaries is literally the job of intelligence agencies so in this case all sides are behaving very much like adults.
Re: (Score:2)
Killing other countries' spies is also the literal job of intelligence agencies. Just "Putin" that out there. Heck, looking at our history, we kill a lot of world leaders too. What's novichok for the goose is novichok for the gander.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know about you but our government - the victim in this particular case - usually jails caught spies. Our BND failed to do its job again, the bloody dunces.
Re: (Score:2)
But lately I've seen more and more people becoming aware that the Kremlin is not their friend.
Re: (Score:2)
Problem is, as long as strong Poland exists, Germany and Russia are natural allies. It's only when Poland is weak or gone that they become competitors.
It's why Poles aren't fans of either nation. And why now that US is retreating from being a guarantor of pan-European security, old alliances must be dusted off as nations in Europe begin taking their national security back into their own hands.
Re: (Score:2)
Show me on this doll where Pole touched you.
Re: (Score:2)
Officially Poland is an ally, although of course you'll find plenty of humanitarian criticism because of recent political developments inside of Poland, like making all abortions illegal, removing sex ed from schools, anti LGBT and that stuff.
Most of that overlaps with the values that the "right" (German version) holds itself. Which also overlaps with some of the values the Kremlin has propagated in the recent past.
There are certainly th
Re: (Score:2)
I'm talking geopolitics, not political show put for the masses in the cultural zeitgeist such as "but gays". Latter is largely irrelevant for the former.
In the former, nations don't have permanent friends, they merely have interests. That sometimes align and sometimes don't. And if Poland is strong enough, then its immediate neighbours of Germany and Russia become its natural enemies, because there are no natural barriers to military advancement from either side. It's why strong, stable Polish state has onl
Good. Now sanction Merkel's phone hack. (Score:3)
And stop sucking US cock, you insufferable lackeys!
(DISCLAIMER: I'm German. I might be the exception on this US site, but here, in Germany, most of us think that.
Hell, our attourney general confused the NSA with the NASA in a true "series of tubes" event, that displayed the full extent of the senility for which he was chosen. And the clown who flew over to "investigate", came back and just "declared" that "there is no surveillance". There even was a meme about him declaring silly things, in the vein of Kim-Yong Whatever looking at things.
Oh, and don't dare putting me in the Putin corner. That psychopathic Gollum is just as much a massive piece of shit. So would you kindly *fucking* think beyond that "If you are not with us you are against us" bullshit. Our N a z i s and the Soviets invented that shit, you know? I'm simply contra ALL assholes, and your country has some of the top assholes in the world too. Doesn't mean that extends to you or what you cherish.)
The Kremlin is shivering! (Score:3)
Wait, if the Russians cut off their supply of natural gas, it'll be the Europeans shivering. And here it is October.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Shivering? LOL
I'm European and the lowest temperature I suffer is +5 celsius degrees.
So... maybe you should learn what being European means before speaking high.
Re: The Kremlin is shivering! (Score:2)
The typical American looks at a map and sees that the southernmost parts of Europe are about our middle latitudes. Spain is about the same latitude as West Virginia. Hence the whole freezing bit. Y'all are up near the north pole.
Re: (Score:1)
Sorry to point the ignorance of the typical American (or deficiencies in teaching geography and climate altogether in the USA educational system), but I live in Spain (continental part, not Canary Island, which are even hotter) and we all DO NOT freeze. There are parts colder and parts hotter.
Being in the same latitude doesn't mandate the climate. It's only other point to be taken into account when classifying the climate.
Re: (Score:2)
So first the Russian's will never cut the gas unless the're at war, proof of this is when the cold war was at it's highest, Moscow still kept the pipes flowing, Moscow likes money, Moscow knows that being a better service provider is better then stomping their feet and making threats about cutting off gas, Russia doesn't shoot itself in the foot very often, and when it does it learns from it.
Second being effient and reliable is more important to the Russian's then using the US approch to everything (sanctio