Hacker News Reader

Comment by opqpo | Hacker News Reader

The one this fake story was designed to make you think it is behind it

Do you have any evidence that FireEye’s report is inaccurate or misleading?

You are making an outlandish claim, that the BBC is lying in conjunction with FireEye. Back it up with evidence, or abstain from gaslighting please.

Do you have any evidence that FireEye’s report is accurate and not misleading? they are the ones that claimed it in the first place.

Also what do you think is more plausible for a western cybersecurity company's bottomline? make Russia innocent or make it guilty? especially when you got the backing of all western governments and media.

FireEye has provided their own evidence[1]. BBC has strong editorial guidelines for dealing with evidence from third-parties[2]. You, however, have provided nothing but conjecture and redirection.

Can you substantiate your claim? If not, it’s fair to classify your comments as obvious attempts to gaslight HN’s readers.

1: https://www.fireeye.com/content/dam/fireeye-www/blog/pdfs/Gh... 2: https://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines/accurac...

Literally there is ZERO evidence in the report. It's all pathetic nonsense "ghostwriting" about a few accounts upvoting each other on some blogs. The company and others have every incentive to blame these pathetic "ghostwriting" nonsense on Russia to make profit and be relevant. They have no reason whatsover to not do that. Even mentioning that they have no clear evidence against Russia means bad for their business.

They need to update their response book, at this point it becomes too predictable

Wow, how clever. So are you saying Russia never do these types of operations, or do they, but only sometimes? If so, I'd love to know how you can tell the difference.

Russia would know that any fake stories it posts after hacking the BBC will be immediately taken down and corrected. Not only that, but it lets Western governments know Russia has that capability and take measures to counter it. There's a lot more damage they could do with hacked news sites than just "discrediting NATO." They get little or no benefit out of a hack like this.

On the other hand, if this thread is any indication, domestic intelligence agencies which want to foment anti-Russian sentiment can get a lot of mileage out of the idea this is another dastardly cyberattack by the Russkies.

The killing of Russians in the UK and Germany (and elsewhere) was also by domestic intelligence agencies? And the BND and MI6 cooperated on these killings? Otherwise Western governments would know GRU capabilities?

Russia has a strong interest in and pattern of silencing regime critics, so no, I think those killings were almost certainly carried out by Russia.

I'm not sure what their interest would be in using this once-and-done hack to post a bunch of articles about NATO that no one will even read.

Bingo

Reply on news.ycombinator.com