https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/01/the-download-on-the-dnc-hack/ Gaining sufficient public support for a conclusion that other countries are responsible for hacking important U.S. assets can be difficult – even when the alleged aggressor is already despised and denounced by the entire civilized world. The remarkable hacking of Sony Pictures Entertainment in late 2014 and the Obama administration’s quick fingering of hackers in North Korea as the culprits is a prime example: When the Obama administration released its findings that North Korean hackers were responsible for breaking into SPE, few security experts I spoke to about the incident were convinced by the intelligence data coming from the White House. That seemed to change somewhat following the leak of a National Security Agency document which suggested the United States had planted malware capable of tracking the inner workings of the computers and networks used by the North’s hackers. Nevertheless, I’d wager that if we took a scientific poll among computer security experts today, a fair percentage of them probably still strongly doubt the administration’s conclusions. If you were to ask those doubting experts to explain why they persist in their unbelief, my guess is you would find these folks break down largely into two camps: Those who believe the administration will never release any really detailed (and likely classified) information needed to draw a more definitive conclusion, and those who because of their political leanings tend to disbelieve virtually everything that comes out of the current administration. Now, the American public is being asked to accept the White House’s technical assessment of another international hacking incident, only this time the apparent intention of said hacking is nothing less than to influence the outcome of a historically divisive presidential election in which the sitting party lost. It probably doesn’t matter how many indicators of compromise and digital fingerprints the Obama administration releases on this incident: Chances are decent that if you asked a panel of security experts a year from now whether the march of time and additional data points released or leaked in the interim have influenced their opinion, you’ll find them just as evenly divided as they are today.
I am really liking this blog. Read a lot of it lately. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...le-us-government-want-war-–-their-sales-pitch Very Powerful People In The U.S. Government Want War – This Is Their Sales Pitch The rising hysteria about Russia is best understood as fulfilling two needs for Official Washington: the Military Industrial Complex’s transitioning from the “war on terror” to a more lucrative “new cold war” – and blunting the threat that a President Trump poses to the neoconservative/liberal-interventionist foreign-policy establishment. By hyping the Russian “threat,” the neocons and their liberal-hawk sidekicks, who include much of the mainstream U.S. news media, can guarantee bigger military budgets from Congress. The hype also sets in motion a blocking maneuver to impinge on any significant change in direction for U.S. foreign policy under Trump. – From the post: Who Benefits from War with Russia? One of the main reasons I opposed Hillary Clinton so vehemently, was I felt she embodied the neocon, neoliberal, military-intelligence-indsutrial complex’s burning desire for a global confrontation with Russia, as well as continued disastrous imperial adventures all over the world. Many of us hoped that with her loss, cooler heads would prevail and the American public might receive a much needed respite from never-ending war. This has not happened. If anything, those in the Hillary camp have become even more aggressive and unhinged in their bloodlust, and appear willing to do “whatever it takes” to start a fight that will result in unimaginable devastation for the American public. This has become such an overwhelming concern to me, I felt the need to discuss what those of us who wish to avoid this outcome must do.
Yep. But I don't even think the correct language is being used. It's not much of a hack to breach the non security of these puny systems we all use these days. So I think it is childish to raise hell about these transgressions that the democrats want raise hell about. These systems function fine for our every day work but they lack the hardware for full security, like storage protection, authorized execution library support, secure data base support. That takes main frames if you are serious, back end system fronted by this stuff we use, where authorized personnel have the tools to protect data. Only the cheap get hacked, I haven't heard of a Bank getting hacked yet. Now they secure the data or they are fined damn soon by the Federal reserve and probably out of bussiness in a heart beat because the lost a pile of money. I don't see any serious people talking about this. Much bloviating by the hurt, crying wolf!
To neocons and neo liberals, war is "economic stimulus" AND a way to distract the voters while they fill their pockets with tax dollars funneled to them from the companies who benefit from war. And as far as preventing it goes, well.....good luck with that. Having said that, I don't advocate turning our backs on either Russia or China.....
I didn't see which bank or where it was identified. There are some banks in the world that don't run the secure stuff and I sure would know all of them. But the one's that do, like B of A, Security, Lloyd's Society General, Morgan.. I doubt they get hacked. Their customers with online access may get hacked and there by provide a portal to an account can happen, but whole sale access to vault sure would be hard.
A wise man once said, "trust but verify." Once the USSR fell, he stopped calling them an evil empire. Guess what? The USSR has still fallen. Russia has indeed been troublesome for us, but our paths haven't really crossed. They have their own internal terrorism issues and we've meddled in those. Long before terrorism was such a big problem for us. They used their veto in the UN to block taking out Saddam as an international matter. So did China. China holds a lot of our debt. We're already at a huge disadvantage right there. Thanks Obama. I find it hard to get all bent out of shape about them spying on us because we do the same. http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-spy-net-on-israel-snares-congress-1451425210 (US caught spying on France, Germany, Israel, and others) How about WaPost? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...h-elections-elsewhere/?utm_term=.35a11ba19c7c The long history of the U.S. interfering with elections elsewhere Maybe we could start by offering to stop spying on each other. I'd rather have peace than the alternative.
http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/28/technology/security/bank-hack/ Hackers have managed to break into 7 of the top 15 banks. Here's what you need to know. What happened? Some of the biggest banks -- including JPMorgan Chase (JPM) -- were recently hacked. The attackers used never-before-seen malware to break into the banks' computer systems, according to someone with direct knowledge of the investigation. And the hackers got in deep enough to delete or manipulate bank records.
Well, I can't tell from this article what happened, but it sounds like access was acquire via customer portals where the customers were hacked. Funny, I know B of A runs my system on the back end and not hacked. Now what the hell is Morgan spending millions on to prevent it? The say they have been but how? Something not straight up here.
The only way to be truly secure is to keep your computer from being connected to the internet in any way at all. And don't let anyone at all touch the computer. Even copying files from a computer connected to the internet to one that isn't risks bringing a virus along with it.
OR.....keeping your own private illegal email server in your basement and hiding it from the Government who typically have a Cyber security team in each agency. Oh wait.... Democrats don't like to hear about that.... Complain about hacking; yet give no fucks about officials going rogue with their own IT equipment. Makes sense! LOL
Oh my, part 2. http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/06/us/politics/donald-trump-wall-hack-russia.html Mr. Trump, who has consistently expressed doubts about the evidence of Russian hacking during the election, did so again on Friday. Asked why he thought there was so much attention being given to the Russian cyberattacks, the president-elect said the motivation was political. “They got beaten very badly in the election. I won more counties in the election than Ronald Reagan,” Mr. Trump said during an eight-minute telephone conversation. “They are very embarrassed about it. To some extent, it’s a witch hunt. They just focus on this.” The president-elect also noted reports this week that the D.N.C. had refused to give the F.B.I. access to its computer servers after they were hacked. “The D.N.C. wouldn’t let them see the servers,” Mr. Trump said. “How can you be sure about hacking when you can’t even get to the servers?” The D.N.C. has previously said that the law enforcement agency had not asked to examine the computers. A senior law enforcement official said the F.B.I. had repeatedly emphasized to the D.N.C. the necessity of obtaining direct access to servers and data. The F.B.I. was rebuffed and had to rely upon a third party — a computer security firm brought in by the D.N.C. — for information. He also said that the hacking of emails from the D.N.C. and top campaign officials for Mrs. Clinton had revealed that Mrs. Clinton received advance notice of debate questions and “many, many other things that were horrible.” “How come nobody complains about that?” Mr. Trump said, referring to a tip that a CNN commentator and Clinton supporter, Donna Brazile, gave to Mr. Podesta ahead of a Democratic Party presidential debate in Flint, Mich.
Who is James Clapper? Director of National Intelligence. Remember this? http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2014/mar/11/james-clappers-testimony-one-year-later/ It was an exchange made famous not because of what was said at the time, but because of what Americans discovered later. At the tail end of a rare open session of the Senate Intelligence Committee on March 12, 2013, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., asked National Intelligence Director James Clapper whether intelligence officials collect data on Americans. Clapper responded "No, sir," and, "Not wittingly." In the following months, a series of news stories fueled by leaks from former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden revealed that wasn’t the case. Reports showed the government was collecting and storing bulk metadata of American phone records, and had methods for capturing a vast amount of email and Internet data as well. A year later,Clapper’s testimony represents one of the great, and unfortunate, holes in timely fact-checking. The challenge in discerning whether those with privileged information, particularly on matters of national security, are speaking truthfully in public is a difficult, if not impossible, task.
The american people celebrated Trump's win, too. This has got to be one of the most sketchy and awkward claim of evidence of hacking.
