Russian Cyberspies Blamed For US Election Hacks Are Now Targeting Macs (computerworld.com) 251
You may recall "APT28", the Russian hacking group which was tied to last year's interference in the presidential election. It has long been known for its advanced range of tools for penetrating Windows, iOS, Android, and Linux devices. Now, researchers have uncovered an equally sophisticated malware package the group used to compromise Macs. From a report on ComputerWorld: The group -- known in the security industry under different names including Fancy Bear, Pawn Storm, and APT28 -- has been operating for almost a decade. It is believed to be the sole user and likely developer of a Trojan program called Sofacy or X-Agent. X-Agent variants for Windows, Linux, Android, and iOS have been found in the wild in the past, but researchers from Bitdefender have now come across what appears to be the first macOS version of the Trojan. It's not entirely clear how the malware is being distributed because the Bitdefender researchers obtained only the malware sample, not the full attack chain. However, it's possible a macOS malware downloader dubbed Komplex, found in September, might be involved. Komplex infected Macs by exploiting a known vulnerability in the MacKeeper antivirus software, according to researchers from Palo Alto Networks who investigated the malware at the time. The vulnerability allowed attackers to execute remote commands on a Mac when users visited specially crafted web pages.Further reading on ArsTechnica.
What? (Score:4, Interesting)
WTF. Is someone from a Russian IP address emailing mac owners saying they are from Apple and asking for their passwords?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
WTF. Is someone from a Russian IP address emailing mac owners saying they are from Apple and asking for their passwords?
It has yet to proven the Russians had any affect on the outcome of the US Presidential Election 2016. Hillary was the worst candidate the Democrats could have fronted. I would have liked President Trump to have kept NSA Flynn and then working with the Russian Government plan and deliver a bunker busting bomb on the parliament buildings of North Korea in response for their repeated missile launches. Sadly Trump is succumbing to Washington, DC's, "business as usual." Sad.
Russian hacking (Score:3)
It has yet to proven the Russians had any affect on the outcome of the US Presidential Election 2016. Hillary was the worst candidate the Democrats could have fronted. I would have liked President Trump to have kept NSA Flynn and then working with the Russian Government plan and deliver a bunker busting bomb on the parliament buildings of North Korea in response for their repeated missile launches. Sadly Trump is succumbing to Washington, DC's, "business as usual." Sad.
Also, the issue at hand during and after the election was not that Russians were hacking the votes, but that Julian Assange was getting his leaks from the Russians, and putting it out daily at their behest. It was never the argument that they were actually breaking into voting machines to alter anything: in fact, when Trump was the one alleging that the elections were rigged, it was President Obama who pointed out that each state had their own voting systems, including states run overwhelmingly by Republi
Re: (Score:2)
Shouldn't the Russians be acting like the US was Belarus or Tajikistan instead, if the Dems were correct in portraying Trump as a vassal of Putin?
At least the sources I use aren't claiming that Trump is a vassal of Putin - they're claiming that Trump is Putin's pawn.
It's been apparent for years that Russia has been trying to pick a real fight with the US or the EU, the usual reason given being that Putin needs to distract a restless Russian population from local issues particularly corruption. Putin getting Trump elected is seemingly a big win if all these things are true - Trump certainly seems far more likely to get into a war with Russian than ...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, as a completely fabricated story without any basis in fact or proof. This was a democrat talking point and was denied by Assange multiple times.
The DNC attack used twitter and photos posted to algorithmically generated accounts to exfiltrate data. The algorithms and encryption keys were identical to other attacks attributed to the Russians, most notably the JCS and White House Executive office attacks.
The attackers honored Russian government holidays and working hours compatible with people working in Moscow or St. Petersburg.
Word documents provided by Wikileaks were produced on a machine with a version of MS Word registered to the Russian Governm
Re: (Score:2)
It has yet to proven the Russians had any affect on the outcome of the US Presidential Election 2016.
This is irrelevant unless you think the discussion is about the legitimacy of the president. It's not. What matters is whether there was Russian involvement and how to prevent future attacks of this kind on democracy.
Whether the attempt was successful or not is impossible to prove in practice anyway.
Re:What? (Score:5, Insightful)
You'll have to excuse me for not falling for this now, the way I didn't fall for it 30 years ago.
Was It Goebbels or Alinsky... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I thought it was Trump ...
I could be wrong but that's what people are saying.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course the paranoia got absurd. Worrying about commies infiltrating (gasp) HOLLYWOOD to BRAINWASH OUR CHILDREN INTO BECOMING COMMIES THROUGH MOVIES was idiotic on
Re: (Score:2)
I don't agree with blanket statements applied to any group, whether a culture, religion, county, political party, what-have-you...
The difference between the statements "those commie bastards" and "those election-hacking Russians" is pretty stark, especially in scope. Those "commie bastards" was intended to instill mistrust in anyone who was communist, associated with communists, etc. Now, 30 years ago, if someone had said "the KGB is spying on us" would you treat that statement with the same disdain?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile, the NSA was doing whatever they could to increase the LULZ, because LULZ and a paycheck are all NSA employees give any fucks about.
Re: (Score:3)
Melania is from Slovenia, you moron.
Re: (Score:3)
Slovenia was communist, and it was part of Yugoslavia when Melania was peddling her ass over there. While Yugoslavia was technically an "independent" state, it was really just a satellite of the USSR.
You could have done without the disgustingly derogatory remark about Melania's ass. Way to keep it classy. Also, USSR is NOT Russia, Yugoslavians are NOT Russians. They were VICTIMS of the failed socialist empire, and escaped as soon as they could. Claiming someone from Slovenia is Russian is like claiming everyone in Tibet is Chinese.
Re: (Score:2)
Why does Russia... (Score:3)
Here's a possibility: So people like you will think that Russia isn't connected to Trump's election.
It's called "maskirovka. [wikipedia.org]"
(I'd have written "maskirovka" correctly, but, Slashdot's code is still stuck in the 1980's and can't display very much beyond ASCII. And the new
Re: (Score:2)
I would say in return that "conspiracy" is not something we can rule out as far as the Trump operation goes, nor for recent actions of Russia. Not at this point, anyway.
The word "conspiracy" gets a bad rap from Elvis, 100 MPG carburetors, etc. But that doesn't mean that there aren't real conspiracies. It doesn't mean that real attempts at misdirection aren't possible, or ongoing. It doesn't mean that ultimate and/or intermediate objectives are not being masked or hidden. It doesn't mean that people who clai
Re: (Score:2)
Because traffic was backed up on I-95 going into Washington DC.
Re: (Score:2)
The major thing Russia wants from the US is lack of interference, and so far, that's exactly what Trump has given them.
You mean, in the whole 3 weeks he's been president? Would you have more respect for the man if we were already in a war with Russia?
The irony of the vulnerability... (Score:5, Interesting)
"...Komplex infected Macs by exploiting a known vulnerability in the MacKeeper antivirus software...
Oh, the irony of an antivirus program running on a BSD-based OS being the vulnerability.
Yes, Mr. Anti-Vendor, please sell me another wonderful solution you think I need...
Re:The irony of the vulnerability... (Score:5, Interesting)
MacKeeper already had a bad reputation, this only reinforces it.
Re:The irony of the vulnerability... (Score:4, Informative)
Bad reputation? That's an understatement. It's an outright scam. If I see it on a system, that gets removed immediately - no questions asked. Even if it was a paid-for version.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
MacKeeper? (Score:3)
Wait, that's a legit company? I assumed it was a virus. It always pops up anytime I visit any sketchy site with the most obnoxious ads.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, that's a legit company? I assumed it was a virus. It always pops up anytime I visit any sketchy site with the most obnoxious ads.
Tends to question the legitimacy of the rest of the Anti-Vendor market, doesn't it...
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, the irony of an antivirus program running on a BSD-based OS being the vulnerability.
Should have installed Windows Defender
Re: (Score:3)
Windows Defender works well on Macs - it just sits there. Doesn't waste cycles. Doesn't add to vulnerabilities. No visual clutter. No annoying messages.
What's not to like?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, the irony of an antivirus program running on a BSD-based OS being the vulnerability.
FreeBSD runs on a Mach microkernel?
Re: (Score:3)
FreeBSD runs on a Mach microkernel?
Darwin in OSX is derived from 4.4BSD.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
AV software is still useful on Unix systems. In fact even most Windows malware these days runs on the normal user account, e.g. ransomware only needs user permissions to encrypt your personal files.
Scanning incoming email for exploits against the email client is still a good idea, for example. Is Apple's email client sandboxed like a web browser?
Let's be clear on what we mean by election hacking (Score:5, Insightful)
They sent John Podesta a bogus email, and he clicked the link. Because of that, we now know the entire DNC plotted against Bernie. The only actual "election hacking" that took place is how the democratic party apparatus chose and coronated the only possible person who could lose to Donald Trump (of all people).
But blame Russia.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
First, why we care that the DNC was being hacked is because that's the exact same thing Watergate was about, except that Watergate was a physical break-in to wiretap the DNC, rather than hacking their emails, but for the same exact purpose - to look for anything that could be released that would make the political opposition look bad. The fact that it was R
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
It's amusing that the structure of the Democratic Party is anti-democratic, but then again, the Republican party isn't terribly republican most of the time.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, get serious. The whole "superdelegate" apparatus exists only to thwart the will of the voters.
This is in fact 100% true. The theory behind it is that "the voters" in a primary could easily be people who just became Democrats this week (or in some states aren't even Democrats at all), don't give a crap about the party, or even want to actively sabotage it. Remember that primaries are the parties picking their standard-bearer, not the USA at large picking theirs. Superdelegates are elected officials (Governors, Senators, etc.) with at least some proven investment in the party itself. In recent history
Re: (Score:2)
"Oh, get serious. The whole "superdelegate" apparatus exists only to thwart the will of the voters."
It's how parties work. They try to ensure that popular passions dont overwhelm the party based on emotions. Kind of like how republics work. They reflect the will of the people "smoothed out" over time -- just not when they are pissed off over something that recently occurred and likely to make poor choices until anger fades and they can make choices based more on ideals thought than feelings and reactions
Re: (Score:2)
As does the electoral college. That was created because the elites (say, the Founding Fathers) realized that giving voting control to the peasants might not have been such a good idea, so the electoral college was created in order to better represent their (the elites) interests. The members are unelected and while they only have one job, they have screwed it up.
Re: (Score:2)
Thats true but they were also used as a club.... that, along with the collusion with the major media outlets (providing access in return for not covering Bernie, always displaying the electoral count with super delegates to make people feel like voting for him was hopeless and providing Hillary with the questions to a debate ahead of time).
If super delegates didn't exist at least part of that collusion would have been considerably less effective and we might have had a different outcome... and of course tha
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Let's be clear on what we mean by election hack (Score:5, Informative)
Clinton got debate questions in 2 debates, from CNN.
Clinton did fund raisers with down-ticket people. There is a cap (a couple thousand) that someone can donate to a candidate. The DNC set her up with numerous other Congress runners so the cap was number of people * cap, then Clinton took 98% of what was donated in that event. A rule the DNC recently wrote into the law obviously intending to do this. The DNC refused to help Sanders in the same way.
The DNC would give stories to "favorable journalists" to smear Sanders a week before primaries in states.
They ALSO had the superdelegates if needed.
You should be SHOCKED that the press worked so closely with Clinton to torpedo Sanders (unreported donations and illegal for media to do so). You should ALSO be shocked the DNC rewrote campaign finance laws to abuse them the way they did, I doubt you could find anyone who says that is fair.
Re: (Score:2)
except that she 1) did so in her CNN contributor capacity (and got fired from it over), 2) it was a blatantly obvious question that anyone should have seen coming (Debate in Flint MI, gee, think they're gonna ask about the water crisis? Duh), and 3) CLINTON FLUBBED THE QUESTION ANYWAY
So it wasn't an attempt to steer the primary because 1) she had the foresight not to send it from her DNC email account, 2) it wasn't a very good idea, and 3) it didn't work very well? Come on.
And even putting all that aside, it was a pattern, not an isolated incident [slate.com].
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Trump *did not* enter the race as a favour to Hillary.
And the parent is correct about the DNC promoting the shittiest RNC candidates (like Trump) in order to set the GOP up to fail. Google "pied piper candidate".
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know if it actually happened, but there was encouragement by some democratic activists to participate in open GOP primaries to ensure DT was the candidate due to his weakness as a candidate (IIRC, RMV, YMMV). I, personally don't have a problem with that, because open primaries are stupid to begin with.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know if it actually happened, but there was encouragement by some democratic activists to participate in open GOP primaries to ensure DT was the candidate due to his weakness as a candidate (IIRC, RMV, YMMV). I, personally don't have a problem with that, because open primaries are stupid to begin with.
Nothing to stop someone registering with a party they dislike to try impact the primary of a rival. My own personal opinion is that George Washington was correct in his assessment that political parties are a bad thing for democracy and that they should be avoided.
I would rather see a situation where there are no party primaries (at least no primaries that receive government money. Most states only fund the top two parties which encourages the ridiculous two-pole scenario we have today). If private parti
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing to stop someone registering with a party they dislike to try impact the primary of a rival
Oh, for sure. But then you're giving up a voice in your own party, so it can go against enlightened self-interest.
Re: (Score:2)
True, although, it could still happen. At least half the time there is a currently sitting president, whose nomination is almost 100% assured. The rest of the time one party might be more settled than another; for example, I don't think many people thought Hillary would lose the democrat nomination, but the republican nomination was very much up in the air.
The next election, Trump is almost guaranteed to win republican primary as sitting President, republicans might as well try influencing the democrat pr
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm an independent. In general I hate both leading parties.
That said, I particular didn't like Ted Cruz, who looked likely to win the nomination at one point. I considered registering as a republican and voting in my state's primary FOR Trump thinking America wouldn't be so stupid to elect Trump if he beat Cruz to the nomination. My feeling that Hillary, as horrible as she would be, couldn't possibly be as bad as Cruz. (Kasich and Lessig looked the least worst from each party to me).
In hindsight, I'm gl
Re: (Score:3)
the democrat apparatus also stuffed the ballot box for Trump during the primaries
Got a source for that? I know that Trump entered the race as a favor to Hillary to sow discord in the Republican ranks, but I haven't seen any evidence that the apparat did anything more for him than give him round-the-clock news coverage that starved out his rivals.
-jcr
That's a really amazing conspiracy theory, given that he was so successful that he defeated her majesty, and ended up in uniting all Republicans behind him after the elections. As Jonah Goldberg pointed out, the 'Never Trump' movement is dead (at least on the GOP side), and all Republicans are happily working w/ him. As for the GP's claim that he's a democrat, he may have been once upon a time, but that's ancient history. None of the Trump derangement Dems anywhere in the country are even remotely re
Re: (Score:2)
FFS, I live near one of the biggest hives of Trump fans, and there were countless people around here that wanted to
Re: (Score:2)
FFS, I live near one of the biggest hives of Trump fans, and there were countless people around here that wanted to vote for Sanders, but voted for Trump to keep Hillary out.
Actually a lot of Sanders supporters said that Trump was their second option because if Sanders didn't make it they wanted to shake up the whole system. A lot of people voted against Hillary rather than for Trump. Basically having a two party system and the electoral system in the US gave us Trump.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The attack ads practically write themselves. All they had to do was point out that Chavez, in Venezuela, was an actual Socialist, and look how well Venezuela is doing, and Bernie will do for America what Chavez did for Venezuela. Repeat at high volume for 3 months. Heck, look at how well the attacks claiming Obama and Bill Clinton were Socialists worked, and they were nowhere near socialism.
Bernie, unlike Hillary, would've lost the popular vote too.
I don't know where you get this crap. If the DNC had not actively worked against Bernie and he had won the nomination, the entire Democratic apparatus would have put everything behind him. What swayed the election this time, as it very often does, is simply turnout. ALL the every-election voters would have come out and voted for their side (R/D), just like they did in this election. What matters is who had the enthusiasm of the voters in order to drive turnout. In this election, that went to Trump, but if
Re: (Score:2)
That wouldn't have made any difference. This election was a vertical election, where Trump and Sanders were on one end, and Clinton and Cruz on the other. Republican candidates like Cruz, Rand Paul, even Jeb tried to point out how heretical Trump was on things like Eminent Domain, which Trump actively supported. That didn't do a thing to hurt him amongst Conservatives. Similarly, Bernie's socialism wouldn't have hurt him amongst Liberals.
Similarly, had Bernie been the candidate, attacks on him,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
There is lots of blame to go around. Or are you seriously trying to claim that Russia had nothing to do with this election?
That's right, Russia had nothing to do with the election. Russia is the enemy of the US multinational corporations, that want control of the European energy market. Providing asylum to Snowden angered the entire military industrial complex and the intelligence community that had been fighting proxy wars with Russia for years. Most of the hot fights in the middle east are really about control of territory for pipelines. Russia wants that European market, and the US has been fighting to prevent them from get
Re:Let's be clear on what we mean by election hack (Score:5, Interesting)
Russians flooding the internet with fake news in order to delegitimize every single news organization is not hacking?
The Russians don't have to. The MSM is doing just a fine job all on their own, that's the reason under 15% of Americans trust them.
Re: (Score:3)
I guess the Russians flooding the internet with fake news in order to delegitimize every single news organization is not hacking? I'm not convinced there was voting machine hacking, but the Russians definitely engaged in social hacking in a concerted effort to boost Trump.
Lemme guess, you hate Woodward and Bernstein too right? They influenced presidential politics the same way you think those 'commie bastards' influenced the election.
Stop repeating the meme (Score:4, Informative)
The "election" was never hacked. A political party was, and its dirty laundry was aired.
Re: (Score:3)
It's accurate to say that the election was interfered with by hacking. Releasing DNC dirty laundry, while not doing the same to the Republicans, undoubtedly had an effect on the outcome of the vote. Don't even bother trying to claim that the Republicans don't have any dirty laundry.
The release of more HRC emails to close to the vote, and the ridiculous decision of the FBI to start an investigation right then certainly had an effect too. The fact that HRC was vindicated didn't undo the damage. The intent was
Re: (Score:2)
and the ridiculous decision of the FBI to start an investigation right then certainly had an effect too.
They said a Nation State tried to influence our election.
The FBI works for a Nation State, and was headed by a Republican.
The IRS and DOJ have both also gotten fingered trying to influence our elections, both headed by Democrats.
Intentionally selective outrage makes you a pretender.
Re: (Score:3)
But at no point does anyone renounce the content of the emails...
Everyone seems to want to blame the people that leaked the emails, not the people that wrote them.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And districts that let illegals vote favored Clinton. Fancy that.
Massive vote fraud, some of it proven, ie caught on tape by Project Veritas. The so-called "hacking" is fake news. The real news is the bussing, multi-voting, and illegal votes. I think you know it.
Re:Stop repeating the meme (Score:4, Interesting)
The Democrats now only control...
The Democrats have less than 1 out of 4 State legislatures now, and less than 1 out of 3 Governorships.
The Democrats got wiped out nation-wide at every level.
Thats the real news. Your welcome.
Re: (Score:3)
Good. Seems like a morally justifiable thing to do when you're in a state where ~466,000 people == 1 electoral vote and there is a state next door where ~257,000 people == 1 electoral vote.
Until that is resolved it's basically these are basically sham elections.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't believe there has been an election where Democrats have won based off of these unbalanced electoral votes while losing the popular vote? Unless you want to count John Quincy Adams in 1824? Certainly nothing in my lifetime or the modern post Civil Rights Act Democratic party.
But yes, I'll cry foul exactly the same way if a Democrat manages to get elected based on electoral votes, and can't sew up a popular vote victory.
Re: (Score:2)
Stop pretending that you dont know this. Your fakeness is getting old.
Re: (Score:2)
You think a non-networked device can't be hacked? Happens periodically with ATMs. In days pre- most people on the internet, viruses were still a problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In other words, we all knew immediately that the Russians didnt hack out elections. Some people are choosing to ignore their own knowledge on purpose. Choosing to be fake. Pretending.
Re: (Score:2)
You think a non-networked device can't be hacked? Happens periodically with ATMs
By definition an ATM machine is networked. How else could it be connected to the bank?
I was going to vote Clinton... (Score:3, Funny)
...but because of the Russian hackers I ended up voting Trump. I've no doubt that many other people were influenced in the same way, and I'm certain Clinton would have won if it weren't for the Russian hackers.
I'm also convinced the Russian hackers caused BREXIT and are secretly supporting the Dutch Party of Freedom, the 5 Star movement and other European populist parties.
Okay, just to be clear, I'm writing this ironically. What's truly hilarious is that the mainstream media writes this stuff seriously. They've really gone off the deep end and into the territory of lunatic conspiracy theorists. I look forward to CNN reporting that Russians are using mind rays to control how people vote.
Eurussia (Score:2)
Right now, the media meme is that Russia is supporting nationalist parties in Europe like Marine Le Pen, hoping to have pliant European leaders just like they 'succeeded' in the US
Except that none of these parties would be anywhere even close to power had people like Merkel, Hollande, et al not thrown their borders open to millions of Syrian refugees, thereby creating a law & order nightmare in their countries
Re: (Score:2)
The real news:
The Democrats now only control...
The Democrats have less than 1 out of 4 State legislatures now, and less than 1 out of 3 Governorships.
The Democrats got wiped out nation-wide at every level.
Thats the real news. Your welcome.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, you've just uncovered an amazing top secret that the "mainstream media" have so carefully kept from us!
Thank God we have Breitbart News, Alex Jones, and Russia Today to give us the real news about the lizard people...
Re: (Score:2)
Mackeeper is utter shit (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
What's funny is seeing it in the AV Comparatives report [av-comparatives.org]. I don't know if they included it seriously or as a joke, but page 29 is pretty funny.
Re: (Score:2)
And despite using Avira's engine as part of its backend, it fails to detect some malware that Avira itself can detect.
Putin making big trouble for moose and squirrel! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Putin making big trouble for moose and squirre (Score:2)
Something that has to happen: (Score:3)
On Linux, something I find very annoying with apt-get is that everything goes into a single /usr hierarchy, rather than having multiple ones and overlaying. Right now, it is a hack at best to do stuff like this. But serious thought, on all OSs, needs to be given to the following:
The point is to make the core of the OS read-only at runtime, preferably read-only at a hardware level (that is, install the OS on a small SSD which even the kernel cannot write to during normal running, and which delegates what configuration settings can be overridden from the writable portion of the files).
Essentially the 'principle of least privilege' is something that OS designers need to give far more serious thought to, and also what privileges are actually needed during normal runtime. Updating the core OS should be done from a 'secondary OS' whose only purpose is updating the core OS, and is restricted in its nature so as to only be able to do this. (The ideal place for this is in PC firmware, where one should use the firmware to install the base OS, and once booted, the base OS is effectively immutable.)
(Yes, this is basically a coarse capability-based security system, partially enforced in hardware, in a way which leaves users in control.)
Re: (Score:3)
The later revs of macOS try to do this with SIP (system integrity protection). Does it work? I've not read anything showing that it has been compromised, but it is a software solution like SELinux, so there is probably a way to bypass it.
What I would like to see is taking that a step further and having all operating systems run on thin hypervisors (think Hyper-V, ESXi, KVM, or whatnot.) That way, a web browser can be in its own separate VM with a separate filesystem, banking data can be in another VM, an
Re: (Score:2)
The reckless assigning of blame (Score:3, Insightful)
This reckless blaming of Russian hackers only serves to recruit more Russian hackers.
Fake News (Score:2)