What did they hack and how did they “get in”?
Contrary to the title, there is little “how” and mostly “what”.
What did they hack and how did they “get in”?
Contrary to the title, there is little “how” and mostly “what”.
Although I don't know, I think this story was released for exactly that purpose, to improve public support for the NSA and Cyber Command. With Snowden being in the news lately I'm sure they're looking for opportunities to run cool war stories to balance out their image.
One of them is Twitter. "identified accounts" but they aren't shut down or shunted. Why's that?
Simple - once you identify a target and they're vocalizing their thoughts, why do you want to limit and censor them? allow them to post, collect metadata and help it tie together other pieces of the puzzle.Browser ident, time, date, time of access, ip address, etc.
Meanwhile you'll see in the article a different reason as to inaction.
> They even had file sharing through them. "If we could take those over," Neal said, grinning, "we were going to win everything."
Then see some public CVE's around that time, such as:
> CVE-2015-5474: BitTorrent and uTorrent allow remote attackers to inject command line parameters and execute arbitrary commands via a crafted URL using the (1) bittorrent or (2) magnet protocol.
> Project Zero 2018: Simply put, those JSON-RPC issues create a vulnerability in the desktop and web-based uTorrent clients, which both use a web interface to display website content. An attacker behind a rogue website, Ormandy said, can exploit this client-side flaw by hiding commands inside web pages that interact with uTorrent’s RPC servers. Those commands range from downloading malware into the targeted PC’s startup folder or gaining access to user’s download activity information.
And the remote code execution via media files / video virus (Hollywood movies, porn) https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-5842... .
So you have file sharing going on, and can remote code execute, if: you get the target to visit a website you (partly) control, you get the target to click a (.torrent) link you crafted, you get the target to download a manipulated video file, compromised (Adobe) software, or cracked game with the payload. These if's are for a military that can easily DNS hijack, spoof (update) certs, ask help from allies who control 25% of all internet advertisements, set up convincing websites targeted to the region, or reroute internet traffic.
Get a TS/SCI and go work for CyberCommand if you want to be in the know.
It would be naive to require that all government information is shared with the public, but we should maintain robust oversight on all clandestine activities and give that oversight teeth to correct problems when such activities to too far. My 2c.
Why would you publicly inform your enemy of a vulnerability?
Had had one and exactly one story he was allowed to share with us, and that was incredibly vague like the article. "We infected the target's mother's PC, when the target was fixing the machine we had an asset fake a crisis prompting the target to (stupidly) access a target machine from the mother's infected PC." As he explained, this was all he was authorized to share. The reality is there is very little they can share without prior clearance from the agency, and this is a non-trivial process.
Disclaimer: I had a security clearance when I was in the Army.