Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Comments
How Guccifer 2.0 Got 'Punk'd' by a Security Researcher
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
SchemaCzar
50%
50%
SchemaCzar,
User Rank: Strategist
3/8/2018 | 10:18:09 AM
Why would anyone still believe Guccifer was driven by Russians?
Everything in this article makes me doubt that Guccifer 2.0 was driven by Russian state actors.  To fall for a trick like this is not what happens with Russian state-level hackers.  If the Russians were paying him/her, the only purpose was to muddy the waters.  It's hard to think of a nation-state, or a trans-national movement, that would be unable to set up a cutout like this to "look Russian."
Gorilla Hunter
40%
60%
Gorilla Hunter,
User Rank: Strategist
3/8/2018 | 11:02:48 AM
Re: Why would anyone still believe Guccifer was driven by Russians?
Because "RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA". There is nothing here that shows that Guccifer was "punked" or that he is even connected to the Russians, but we have to hear once again "RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA!!!1!"
Dong_Johnson
50%
50%
Dong_Johnson,
User Rank: Apprentice
3/8/2018 | 1:38:07 PM
Re: Why would anyone still believe YOU KNOW WHAT YOU TALK ABOUT?
You're not understanding the article I guess.  It's pretty clear Gucci was punked because he's no longer responding.  

 

Russia has various means of accomplishing what they want to, and using low-level useful idiots isn't below their means either.  I agree with the premise presented in the article that it's clear Russia wasn't going "all-in" using state resources (which would be attributable directly, of issue) to publish the stolen emails, and instead decided to disseminate them using troll networks rather than official ones.  The fact is you have no compelling or offered reason to doubt anything in this story.  If you did you wouldn't be doing the typical spambot/chatbot song and dance of crying about people focusing on "russia russia russia' for what Russia did did did provably provably provably.  Get your politics out of here, this is a discussion about facts.   The fact is Russia was involved.

Once again, if you want to discredit any aspect of this, you're going to need something to point to.  Whining won't help your case.
Gorilla Hunter
67%
33%
Gorilla Hunter,
User Rank: Strategist
3/9/2018 | 10:21:49 AM
Re: Why would anyone still believe YOU KNOW WHAT YOU TALK ABOUT?
So because he stopped talking to a reporter, he was punked? You demand facts, yet you are unable to back up your claim with any of your own. Julian Assange, the publisher of the hacked emails and knows who the source is, has came out time and time again saying the Russians had nothing to do with it.

http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/346904-assange-meets-us-congressman-vows-to-prove-russia-did-not-leak-him

https://www.democracynow.org/2017/4/12/full_interview_julian_assange_on_trump 

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donna-brazile-owes-an-apology-to-julian-assange-and_us_59fe1c3ae4b076eaaae2701d

I doubt the story because I looked at the authors twitter feed, saw her politics, and then read her parroting the same agenda, and  once again hear the clams of "Russia did hax", when everyone who is involved with the DNC email dump says otherwise.  Also included three sources from both left and right. But hey, a dude stopped talking to a reporter, ao case closed, right?

 
ellascottgm123
50%
50%
ellascottgm123,
User Rank: Apprentice
3/11/2018 | 10:07:03 PM
Re: Why would anyone still believe Guccifer was driven by Russians?
Such a very useful article. Very interesting to read this article.I would like to thank you for the efforts you had made for writing this awesome article.
antivirussupport12
50%
50%
antivirussupport12,
User Rank: Strategist
3/12/2018 | 11:46:13 AM
Re: Why would anyone still believe YOU KNOW WHAT YOU TALK ABOUT?
I totally agree with you.This the way we can tackle this situation.if you know the situation and all other prospects you can handle it in a better way. visit https://antivirussupport.org for more.


COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 5/27/2020
10 iOS Security Tips to Lock Down Your iPhone
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  5/22/2020
How an Industry Consortium Can Reinvent Security Solution Testing
Henry Harrison, Co-founder & Chief Technology Officer, Garrison,  5/21/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
How Cybersecurity Incident Response Programs Work (and Why Some Don't)
This Tech Digest takes a look at the vital role cybersecurity incident response (IR) plays in managing cyber-risk within organizations. Download the Tech Digest today to find out how well-planned IR programs can detect intrusions, contain breaches, and help an organization restore normal operations.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-13632
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-27
ext/fts3/fts3_snippet.c in SQLite before 3.32.0 has a NULL pointer dereference via a crafted matchinfo() query.
CVE-2020-13253
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-27
sd_wp_addr in hw/sd/sd.c in QEMU 4.2.0 uses an unvalidated address, which leads to an out-of-bounds read during sdhci_write() operations. A guest OS user can crash the QEMU process.
CVE-2020-13630
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-27
ext/fts3/fts3.c in SQLite before 3.32.0 has a use-after-free in fts3EvalNextRow, related to the snippet feature.
CVE-2020-13631
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-27
SQLite before 3.32.0 allows a virtual table to be renamed to the name of one of its shadow tables, related to alter.c and build.c.
CVE-2020-4226
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-27
IBM MobileFirst Platform Foundation 8.0.0.0 stores highly sensitive information in URL parameters. This may lead to information disclosure if unauthorized parties have access to the URLs via server logs, referrer header or browser history. IBM X-Force ID: 175207.