Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Security Technology

Russian Hackers Continue With Attacks Despite Biden Warning (bloomberg.com) 104

Posted by msmash from the tussle-continues dept.
Security researchers say they have uncovered an ongoing hacking campaign carried out by suspected Russian spies who are continuing to stage attacks amid U.S. pressure on the Kremlin to curtail its alleged cyber-intrusions. From a report: The California-based cybersecurity firm RiskIQ Inc. said in a report released on Friday that it had uncovered more than 30 command and control servers -- used by cybercriminals to send orders to compromised networks or receive stolen data -- associated with the state-sponsored hacking group, which is known as APT29 or Cozy Bear. The group is using the servers to deploy malicious software named WellMess, according to RiskIQ. APT stands for "advanced persistent threat," and is a term often used to describe state-sponsored hacking groups.

In July last year, government agencies from the U.S., U.K., and Canada, said that APT29 was "almost certainly" part of the Russian intelligence services and accused it of hacking organizations involved in the development of the Covid-19 vaccine and stealing intellectual property. The same group was also allegedly involved in the 2016 hack on the Democratic National Committee and the breach of SolarWinds, which was disclosed last year, according to U.S. officials. The Russian embassy in Washington referred to an earlier statement, in which it urged journalists to stop "sweeping accusations" and said it was confident that discussions with the U.S. related to cyberspace would "improve the security of the information infrastructure of our countries."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Russian Hackers Continue With Attacks Despite Biden Warning More

Russian Hackers Continue With Attacks Despite Biden Warning

Comments Filter:

  • In Soviet Russia we warn you!

  • What? How? (Score:4, Funny)

    by groobly ( 6155920 ) on Friday July 30, 2021 @11:47AM (#61638547)

    How can that possibly be? Biden didn't scare them straight? Surely that must be a typo.

    • Re:What? How? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Friday July 30, 2021 @11:58AM (#61638613)

      It is still better than thanking them for doing it to us.

      • Actually, making threats and then failing to back them up could be comparably bad to thanking them for "doing it to us". But we don't know that, either.

        The problem with covert action these days is that it's getting too hard to plausibly deny things. Isn't there some way that being a lesser liar could be a good thing?

        Oh well. Does anyone have a better reference than Cyber War by Richard Clarke? It's gotta be regarded as obsolete by now, but I still haven't found a better overview (and I've read many).

        (But

    • "How can that possibly be? Biden didn't scare them straight? Surely that must be a typo."

      He "almost certainly" did scare them straight.

      • "How can that possibly be? Biden didn't scare them straight? Surely that must be a typo."

        He "almost certainly" did scare them straight.

        The US sanctions are in fact hurting Russia pretty badly, and Putin would indeed like to get rid of them (despite Putin proclaiming the opposite, that the sanctions have no effect at all.)

        The problem is that the U.S. is already sanctioning Russia, and has been since the Ukraine invasion in 2014. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/IF... [fas.org] Short of actual acts of war-- and nobody is suggesting that, or anything like that, the U.S. is running short of new ways to sanction Russia.

        Here is the current status:
        https:// [whitehouse.gov]

        • There are quite a few sanctions that can be enacted...

          no need for war at all..

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by rtb61 ( 674572 )

          Yeah what ever. Clearly the sanctions had allowed Russia to develop it's own industries, free from competition. Now that was a sound move on the part of the west, yep, uh huh. All too late now, that horse has bolted and they are continuing to develop independently from the west. That independent part, well, they have lots of resources and they are building their industries for local supply free from competition, except from China.

          In fact I do not get the latest bout of propaganda at all, it is like the US d

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      That's a reasonable step: give them a stern and clear warning. If they ignore it, then start hacking back, and/or kidnap their hackers.

    • It's not just Biden, but other national leaders that are concerned about persistent hacking. So, tell any company routing traffic through Russia to stop routing. No, you won't get all traffic, but if you hit major communication routes, it might make traffic in+out of Russia slower and more expensive .

      Perhaps increasing Russian costs of staying connected to the internet will get some official Russian attention put on stopping Russian hacking groups.

  • Putin versus Biden (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I am sure Putin is afraid of a warning from Biden.

  • The US must remove Vladimir Putin from power, and remove every one of his associates in order as they take the mantle. Expand that directive to include the top leadership in all Putin-allied governments as necessary.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Entrope ( 68843 )

      Yeah, that worked so well... Uh... In Iraq? Afghanistan (the US time, not the Russian time)? Panama?

      Give me a minute, I'm sure a good example will come to mind....

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Jzanu ( 668651 )
        How about the occupation of Japan and Germany, Mr. What About-ism? Removing a dictator is easier than military occupation, but occupation can work too.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Entrope ( 68843 )

          The Shouwa Emperor remained on the throne until his death in 1989. We very specifically avoided the kind of approach you suggest, in order to avoid totally destabilizing Japan. We dictated a new constitution and a lot of other changes, but we did not kick out the emperor or most of his advisors.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Jzanu ( 668651 )
            You know very well that the Emperor was just a figure head with no actual power. Since the Japanese occupation of Korea the navy and army ran every part of policy. The displacement of the militarist government is what brought peace in practice. Otherwise factions would have continued attacks for decades - see the hold outs.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Entrope ( 68843 )

              No, he was very much the one deciding when to continue the war and when to surrender. He decided to surrender after we nuked two of his cities. Do you think Russia would respond the same way?

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by Jzanu ( 668651 )
                The Emperor barely was able to surrender. The militarists nearly refused the treaty overruling him and imprisoning him. Really, it was that close and and the continued war would have been a long slog, because the US had problems with atomic bomb production. The third one failed and the threat of more at the time was a deception. Thankfully it worked and millions of lives were saved by it.

                • If you're referring to the attempt to kidnap the Emperor before he could order the unconditional surrender, that was some mid-level officers, and they never got very far with their plot. He did overrule members of the cabinet, who voiced strong disapproval of the unconditional surrender, but he won out because, well, he was the Emperor. At the end of the day, the buck stopped with him, though the US and Japanese governments put a lot of effort after the fact into minimizing his role.

            • Uh, no. In the final days of WWII, Emperor Hirohito basically took direct control, and after Nagasaki, ordered his cabinet to unconditionally surrender. Prior to that, members of the cabinet had wanted a negotiated surrender (in part to protect the Emperor, who they were certain the US would forced to be removed, and in part to cover their own asses), and indeed, even after Hiroshima that debate still went on. But after Nagasaki, the Emperor ordered the unconditional surrender on his own personal authority.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by Jzanu ( 668651 )
                That is a way of seeing things, but all of this is geeky aside for the point I was making. The occupation destroyed the aggressive militarist government and imposed peace. If not for the US assaults destroying the navy and the power of the militarist government there would have been no surrender.

                • I'm not denying that, what I'm saying is that the Emperor, at least in the final days, had considerable power. He wasn't merely a figurehead. How much authority he held for much of his pre-surrender reign is hard to measure, but there is some evidence out there that he was fairly approving of Japan's military aspirations.

                  • Re: (Score:2)

                    by XXongo ( 3986865 )

                    what I'm saying is that the Emperor, at least in the final days, had considerable power. He wasn't merely a figurehead.

                    And what the other comments are saying is that this point is not at all universally accepted by historians, many of whom say that he was merely a figurehead.

                    How much authority he held for much of his pre-surrender reign is hard to measure

                    But you just confidently stated the opposite, that he had "considerable power".

          • also, we nuked them first to take away their will to fight. That will work wondrously on the Russians who also have no nuclear capability, yeah?

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Jzanu ( 668651 )
              Putin has destroyed the Russian arsenal. Their missiles are obsolete, decrepit, and unable to be launched in practice. That is why they only attack weak countries. So far. These hacks are the weak underhanded version of those attacks where they do not have to show that their armies are made of rust and can not perform organized operations.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by deKernel ( 65640 )

                I would like to why you believe their missiles are unable to be launched in practice.

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by Jzanu ( 668651 )
                  Putin view Russians as disposable, so MAD is not an actual deterrent in his decision processes. Yet, he has not launched any nuclear weapons against any foes, despite 4 wars in Chechnya that were brutal and genocidal in every other facet. Despite the occupation of Crimea and standoff with the Ukrainian army. Despite the failure to annex Syria due to Turkish intervention. Despite the failure to occupy Libya due to Turkish intervention. And so on and so on. These occasions were small failures demonstrating th

                  • Re: (Score:2)

                    by XXongo ( 3986865 )
                    I disagree with your premise, which seems to be "Putin is suicidally stupid, so clearly he would use nuclear weapons at the least provocation against the most minor targets."

                  • Re: (Score:2)

                    by deKernel ( 65640 )

                    So your proof is YOUR speculation. Gotcha. Basically everyone just needs to ignore your comment and move on.

                    • Re: (Score:1)

                      by Jzanu ( 668651 )
                      This is called analysis. And I can tell I've upset a lot of the Russian paid stooges here. That is also very obvious and I'm glad to have done it. You should all collaborate and kill Putin to save Russia.

                    • Re: (Score:2)

                      by deKernel ( 65640 )

                      "Analysis" through the eyes of a fool has a street-name and that is idiocy, but whatever. Please put more foolish and moronic statements out here, but I really need a good laugh since it is Friday.

                      Commence rambling in three....two...one....

        • Removing a dictator is easier than military occupation, but occupation can work too.

          Removing, is easier?

          Putin would let 1,000 nukes off the chain before that happens.

          You should know this, because the response would be the exact same if that kind of threat were made against the US President and the United States from a foreign power. Especially a communist one.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Jzanu ( 668651 )
            The problem with that assumption is that Putin has raided the Russian state so badly and for so long that their military force has fallen apart. Aside from the rare demonstration that is piece d together like a Tsarist painted egg, Russia is less of a nuclear power than Israel. It can not fuel or launch more than a dozen weapons, if even that many. Putin's Russia also can not face a 1st world country, that is why they hide behind deflection and attack weak third rate powers instead.

            • You make up nonsense out of your ass. Russia has 4300 active nuclear weapons ready to go. We'll believe U.S. intelligence over your ignorance.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by Jzanu ( 668651 )
                I am not the one starting a nuclear war or using the claims as a basis for deflection. These hacks are Russia's attacks against the US that admit they can not fight any other way.

                • I am not the one starting a nuclear war or using the claims as a basis for deflection. These hacks are Russia's attacks against the US that admit they can not fight any other way.

                  Deflection is Communist 101, and "these hacks" are how the world's superpowers attack each other today, because none of them would tolerate a ground attack, and you know it. Red Dawn was a fucking movie.

                  You're delusional if you think that country has a "dozen" nukes. If they were that weak, Israel would be taking them over.

                • Russians attack with malware without reprisal and gain wealth and intelligence. No downside as with nuclear war, which Russia is more than capable of doing, U.S. intelligence reports they are modernizing their arsenal. Russia continues to spend $65 billion on military, that is not where any budget cutbacks are. Spending grown 175 percent since year 2000

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by DarkOx ( 621550 )

              Did you watch the shit show that was the European powers trying to participate the Libya operation, after having not done a whole lot better in Afghanistan over the years?

              Putin's Russia would likely be quite successful against the first world powers. If the NATO was not a thing and the United States elected to just sit it out. (strategically that will never happen NATO or no NATO) but Russia even if they have to use a lot of now almost comically obsolete equipment; I'd still give them pretty good odds for r

        • That isn't whataboutism. It's pointing out that every time the US has meddled with other countries the outcome was worse for everyone involved.

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by Jzanu ( 668651 )
            I do understand the perspective embodied in your comments, I simply disagree with it based on its relatively narrow focus. In principle, any country attacked by Russia needs to fight it to knock back Putin's designs for a Fascist Holy Russia that would replace Eastern Europe with something approaching the Nazi state. This is beyond the time for stepping lightly, because Putin is pushing outward already and pushing harder the longer it goes before he meets actual military resistance.

        • Recently read an interesting book on those two examples, Upheaval by Jared Diamond. Spoiler: He basically argues Germany is doing better by accepting reality and the blame while Japan is still struggling with legacy denial (and projection?).

          Interesting example of the legacy last night. Watched an amusingly panic-stricken press conference in Tokyo by Suga. He can't even get the reporters to follow his rules as he begs all of the Japanese in Kanto to play his game? But much more importantly, he hasn't yet f

          • Well, there are some differences. With Germany, Allied forces could basically force many Germans to view the death camps and other actions of the Nazis, so it was much more visceral for the German people. With Japan, some of the most significant war crimes were committed in China, the Korean Peninsula and other occupied parts of Asia. There was no way to parade Japanese citizens in front of the activities of Unit 731.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by shanen ( 462549 )

              Yes, but I believe most of the worst German atrocities sites were outside of Germany, too.

      • South Vietnam (late 1960s) Guatemala (banana republics, mid 20th century)

    • The US must remove Vladimir Putin from power, and remove every one of his associates in order as they take the mantle. Expand that directive to include the top leadership in all Putin-allied governments as necessary.

      Why?

      And how?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Jzanu ( 668651 )
        These attacks are the first-world directed prong of Putin's campaign to reform Russia as a Fascist and corrupted theocratic state, using the Orthodox church that he has already reformed around himself. Putin's Russia is the rising threat that must be neutralized while it is in Czechoslovakia, to put it more bluntly, but it is still weak enough to defeat before millions die. As to the how, just a few points because I am not a general or a wargammer. The EU has a larger air force, Poland has arguably the best
    • The US must not do anything, they're bog hypocrites for warning/blaming/pointing fingers at others, but in the meantime doing it themselves. Nuclear weapons, hacking, interfering with other countries governments, kidnapping people, holding people with tramping all over their rights, and the list goes on and on and on.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Dusanyu ( 675778 )
      I can give you one reason, not World War 3

    • Do you want open warfare? Because that's how you get open warfare.

    • I'm sure we can all agree that having a nation with thousands of nuclear weapons in complete disarray fighting over who is in charge would be in everyone's best interests. What could possibly go wrong?

  • Heh, this shit never ends...

  • Something like the ban on chemical weapons is needed here.

    Nations need to take responsibility for the behavior of their citizens. If its proven a US or any other country's citizen intentionally broke international law, the nation should pay for the damage and both recover money from the wrongdoers and "rehabilitate" them. Same thing for every other country.

  • Iraq (Score:2)

    by pele ( 151312 )

    Iraq had nukes, 23 of them. Almost cetainly. Tony just couldn't find them, but they WERE there. Somewhere.

  • Look, sometimes the bad guys are out to get you.

    Like right now.

  • At some point, why not put fake data and code that would either not work, break stuff, or send researchers down blind alleys? It's not like they can blame you if they steal some code that breaks sone vital system, or results in a much less effective vaccine.
  • Not listening to those in authority about doing something evil. That's criminal!

  • Since Biden's warning was basically, "Stop, or I'll say 'stop' again."

  • His porn is already out there, and he's known for being shady. Though if President Biden fears that much worse is out there, stuff with financial implications that could hurt his wallet and reputation, then yeah, Russia might figure it has some leeway. Thank god we have a squeaky clean VEEP waiting in the wings. Just kidding, but her financial situation is unlikely, imo, to be all that ripe for Russian hackers. Her method of advancing her career is well known, yet oddly gets a pass from her party's feminist

Slashdot Top Deals

Some people manage by the book, even though they don't know who wrote the book or even what book.

Close