In a first, U.S. blames Russia for cyber attacks on energy grid

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-russia-sanctions-energygrid/in-a-first-u-s-blames-russia-for-cyber-attacks-on-energy-grid-idUSKCN1GR2G3

by HiroProtagonist • 8 years ago

103 94 8 years ago

reuters.com

mc324• 8 years ago

That Russia is acting like a spoiled country is not much in doubt. What I hope doesn't happen is a needless tit-for-tat escalation. I think much of this goes back to the ill-conceived and ill fated "Reset" with Clinton (at the behest of Obama). For whatever reason Putin and Obama didn't get along.

I'm hopeful that cold-war warriors don't dominate the policies to come. If we (they and us) take that tack, we're in for a bad stretch. I'm hoping the current administration is capable of bucking the Russophobia the Dems are so attached to and committed to, mostly for internal political reasons.

Let's get real, deal with Russia as the adversary it is, but in a level-headed manner. Let's face it, they do not care about sanctions. One Bit. They will survive with or without the rest of the world but we get to deal with their blow back.

Obama granted N Korea's Kim more respect than he did Putin. I think that was a grave mistake on his part and we're now paying for this slight with these passive-aggressive moves.

ComradeTaco4• 8 years ago

Russian-American relations have worsened not because of russophobia, but rather because of several high profile and geopolitically relevant events. The first of these was the invasion of Crimea and the funneling of arms to Ukrainian Separatists engaging in a civil war. These actions are a direct violation of the Budapest Memorandum signed by Russia and the US. Essentially, Ukraine agreed to destroy the nuclear weapons leftover from the USSR in exchange for total respect in regards to territorial integrity.[1] Furthermore, a Russian BUK system, staffed by these separatists downed the civilian airliner Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, killing 298 innocent people.[2]. Furthermore, Russian hackers hacked the emails of both major political parties, and has, literally, a 3 story office complex staffed with internet trolls intent on misleading the American public via social media for the last several years[4]. Finally, you have the most recent incident where Russia attempted to murder not only a former spy in the U.K., but also his daughter, and about twenty other bar patrons, neighbors and first responders. The poisoned used was a nerve gas developed in Russia and exclusively available in Russia.[5]

Clearly, these are meaningful events in the context of American-Russia relations as well as NATO-Russia relations, you can't just handwave them away by saying it's one parties political problem.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_17 [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Securit... [3]https://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/comey-republicans-ha... [4]https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2018/03/15/594062887/... [5]https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/14/europe/theresa-may-reprisals-...

mc324• 8 years ago

People need to understand Russia needs a deep water port in the black sea. There is no way around that. That's what Crimea is about. They couldn't give two shits about it otherwise.

But Obama wanted to thumb his nose at Russia and ignored that to Russia (as well as the USSR) a deep water port on the black sea is a must.

The separatists are often labeled as Russian military in the MSM, but I gather they were essentially militias who overran Ukraine depots and then later got some Russian leadership help. The MSMs though, present them as Russian regulars.

The Russian troll factory for most of its existence was to troll Ukrainians not The West.

It'd be like expecting us (the US) to give up San Diego as a strategic harbor and let it silt up. It is not gonna happen.

stelonix• 8 years ago

It did not start with the Ukrainian coup, but rather with the Georgia conflict back in 2008. Can't really blame the Russians, what do you think it'd happen if a pro-Moscow government were elected in Mexico? What would be the US' reaction?

StanislavPetrov3• 8 years ago

Anyone interested in seeing the, "proof" that Russia was responsible can see it here:

https://www.us-cert.gov/ncas/alerts/TA18-074A

As with virtually every other accusation of "Russian hacking", there is actually nothing presented suggesting that it was Russians that performed these hacks, let alone conclusively proving that. The line of "reasoning" used to accuse Russia of being responsible is, yet again, the same bit of tired tripe. It boils down to, "this attack uses methods that we suspect Russians have used in the past, and we assert that Russians would have liked to do this hack, therefore we have proof that it was Russians".

Malicious email campaigns dating back to late 2015 were used to gain entry into organizations in the United States, Turkey and Switzerland, and likely other countries, Symantec said at the time, though it did not name Russia as the culprit.

In other words, these were generic fishing attacks that could have been performed by anyone. Since anyone and everyone uses these fishing attacks, we had no idea who it was in 2015. However, now that everyone is blaming everything on Russia, we can safely do so without even casual scrutiny of our claims.

arthurcolle• 8 years ago

you're repeating yourself

exabrial4• 8 years ago

While HN has a liberal bias, it is worth reading and understanding the opposite side's motivation for their opinion. Instead of voting him down, it would be more academic to understand and engage in civil discussions.

ComradeTaco4• 8 years ago

It's infinitely harder to have a reasonable discussion when there's a troll factory pumping out bad faith arguments in great volume. [1]https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2018/03/15/594062887/...

orbital-decay• 8 years ago

In a civil discussion, the whole notion of the opposite side whose points necessarily contradict yours and should be refuted can make the conversation counterproductive. Most of these political threads are useless for exactly this reason - they usually descend to participants getting locked inside their bubbles or even passively implying other participants are either bots or trolls, without any downvoting.

StanislavPetrov3• 8 years ago

All due respect, I'm not "the other side". Not much of a fan of political labels, but much closer to what's considered a classical liberal than anything else. The world isn't a binary place, nor is the political spectrum. I'm on the side of skepticism, critical thinking and logical consistency, while being the mortal enemy of hypocrisy. Were the Russians responsible for this hack? Its possible - but the baseless claims of our credibility-free government are worthless as far as proof goes - and it has nothing to do with partisanship. If there is proof, let them show us the proof and evaluate for ourselves. Its disturbing that this position is viewed by anyone as "Pro-Russian".

mike_hearn3• 8 years ago

This is not a first. The USA made a nearly identical claim in this retracted story in 2016:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russi...

A code associated with the Russian hacking operation dubbed Grizzly Steppe by the Obama administration has been detected within the system of a Vermont utility, according to U.S. officials.

... but ...

Editor’s Note: An earlier version of this story incorrectly said that Russian hackers had penetrated the U.S. electric grid. Authorities say there is no indication of that so far. The computer at Burlington Electric that was hacked was not attached to the grid.

Generally speaking, anonymously sourced stories in western news outlets about Russian hacking have a very high propensity to collapse or get quietly retracted days later. The DHS is particularly notorious for this: they also claimed Russia hacked various election related systems in multiple states, but the states themselves investigated and said the DHS was wrong.

I cite some more examples in this blog post:

https://blog.plan99.net/%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B4%D0%B0...

Glenn Greenwald also wrote extensively about this problem.

So now we have an "unprecedented" story sourced to anonymous officials in the DHS, making the entirely false claim that this is the first time US officials have accused Russia of hacking the electrical grid. The cited evidence is a Symantec report that didn't name anyone in particular.

Is it possible Russia is doing this? Of course. I would be, if I were Putin. But I'd also be doing it if I were the leader of Iran or North Korea or China. Perhaps all of them are doing it.

Regardless of the truth, this sort of story should have no credibility with anyone by now. There have been far too many false stories about Russian hacking published for them to carry weight.

comex2• 8 years ago

No, this is a first. It's the first time the US has publicly blamed Russia through official channels, as opposed to leaks to the press. The original alert was published by US-CERT:

https://www.us-cert.gov/ncas/alerts/TA18-074A

and has more interesting technical details.

It's true that both this and previously reports technically involved "anonymous officials in the DHS", in the sense that alert doesn't name any specific officials, but the phrase "anonymous officials" is usually associated with leaks, not official announcements...

toomuchtodo• 8 years ago

Was eye opening to see that gas turbine SCADA system access had been obtained.

I’ve seen unsecured electrical substation and industrial controls, but not actively compromised.

mike_hearn3• 8 years ago

The story I linked to has statements from multiple elected representatives stating point blank that Russia had hacked the electricity grid. Official statements by representatives is the same thing as "The US Says" as far as the world is concerned.

onetimemanytime4• 8 years ago

>"The computer at Burlington Electric that was hacked was not attached to the grid.

Not exactly what you said, they hacked a utility computer but not one connected to the grid.

> story sourced to anonymous officials in the DHS

This is Reuters so odds are that someone @DHS made that claim. Even if Reuters screwed up, DHS would probably call AP and deny the claim.

What should be said is that USA almost certainly does the same, and it makes sense to be able to shut down your adversary once "war" starts.

spitfire• 8 years ago

They've been watching this in Ukraine for a few years now. Russia has been using the Ukraine as a cyberwar testing ground attacking utility systems on a seasonal basis.

US utilities and US officials have been in Ukraine for a while working with these utilities on the assumption that what happens in Ukraine will eventually happen on their home turf.

This is actually a thing and it's an important move that officials are calling people out now.

https://www.wired.com/2016/03/inside-cunning-unprecedented-h...

https://www.wired.com/2016/01/everything-we-know-about-ukrai...

montyf• 8 years ago

There have been far too many false stories about Russian hacking published for them to carry weight.

They never carried weight for me. The "evil Russians" angle has always been about disinforming and misdirecting the public.

joering2• 8 years ago

but who is doing all this "jumping on a tree's branch" ?? We are worse now than in Cold War times! These unspecified retracted stories' authors are traitors! I won't blame Putin for WW3, I will blame them!

dragonwriter5• 8 years ago

This is not a first. The USA made a nearly identical claim in this retracted story in 2016

Er, no. The story was retracted because what the original version said that authorities claimed was not what authorities actually claimed. It was a journalistic backtrack (WaPo retracted their original reporting), not a government backtrack.

An erroneous media report of the government making an accusation is not an example of the government making the accusation that would, then, invalidate a description of the government later actually making a similar accusation as being unprecedented.

mike_hearn3• 8 years ago

Did you read the story? The claims made to the WaPo were very clear.

Here's an example paragraph:

Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) said the attack shows how rampant Russian hacking is. “It’s systemic, relentless, predatory,” Welch said . “They will hack everywhere, even Vermont, in pursuit of opportunities to disrupt our country. We must remain vigilant, which is why I support President Obama’s sanctions against Russia and its attacks on our country and what it stands for.”

and another

Officials said that it is unclear when the code entered the Vermont utility’s computer, and that an investigation will attempt to determine the timing and nature of the intrusion.

What US officials are claiming here is very straightforward - the journalists simply quoted them directly in many cases, even the anonymous ones. And the story makes clear this story came from many different sources.

So no, it wasn't a simply journalistic error. The government made precise, clear claims multiple times from multiple officials - and then the story was retracted. But only after many people had seen it.

exabrial4• 8 years ago

I feel like we're playing a dangerous game, escalating towards war. We've interfered with each other's elections dating back to the cold war. I'm not saying it's moral, but we should maybe reexamine our own actions and what we're willing to sacrifice before asking for things [extraditions] for things we're also guilty of.

onetimemanytime4• 8 years ago

Russia cannot afford a war. It simply doesn't have the money or military to go against USA and Europe. And, no, China is not going to help them out

mc324• 8 years ago

Europe is not in good shape to fight a war by themselves against Russia. So Russia could get away with lots of things like they did in Eastern Ukraine or meddle some more in the middle east. It does not hurt them, but it will hurt the EU as well as the US.

chokolad6• 8 years ago

Russia can't afford starting conventional war against NATO, but if such a war will somehow flare up, Russia can afford to finish the nuclear war that will follow.

exabrial4• 8 years ago

A conventional one, very true and a good point to keep in mind. Do you think, however, this would push them towards the nuclear button?

vadimberman• 8 years ago

Nobody needs a conventional war anymore, unless the takeover of the enemy territory and resources is an objective. Blockades and sanctions are far less efficient than in the past when it was possible to completely cut off a vital supply of resources for an entire nation.

It is much cost-effective and efficient to engage in low-intensity sabotage while making an innocent face, scaring the population, and balancing in the gray zone.

rdiddly2• 8 years ago

Russia is absolutely prepared to win a land war in their own territory. It kind of appears to be all they're interested in. Which would tend to make one draw some crazy wacky conclusions like maybe it's a defensive force held by a nation of peace-loving people who just want to cooperate and be respected, or at least left alone?

Probably sounds ridiculous to anybody steeped in the current wave of anti-Russian hysteria in the American media (or the earlier wave in the 80s). Why somebody might be producing warmongering propaganda against Russia I don't know, but clearly I'm supposed to take it as an unquestioned first principle that of course Russia is out to get us (as if we weren't busy "getting" ourselves) and of course Putin is the bogeyman -- Putin, a guy who has something like an 80% approval rating among his people and whose every public speech seems to be about conciliation, cooperation and peacemaking. Something isn't quite right. (Probably both sides are full of shit.)

Anyway no one has ever invaded Russia and won, including Napoleon and Hitler. Russians are proud of that. Their navy is about 2/3 as big as the US, but if what you're defending is most of Asia (an ocean of dirt) maybe that's not the biggest concern. Anyway if China does join in, their navy is comparable to the US's, and together with Russia's, it'd be bigger.

The Russian air force is tiny (same for China) but given that all our aircraft carriers are basically sitting ducks for all the various Russian carrier-busting missiles they have nowadays, our air superiority might not matter as much as we'd like to think. Also they tend to stretch money further. Their jets are fairly cheap, indestructible metal cans with loose tolerances... kind of like flying AK-47s... while ours are exquisite and expensive (because they're made out of porkbarrel) and you have to walk the airfield and pick up every little bitty piece of debris before you take off, otherwise it might suck something in and choke... so the equivalent of a flying AR-15 that always jams.

OrganicMSG• 8 years ago

This is somewhat simplistic, but I cannot help but feel that at least a part of this current drama is about giving a Boris Yeltsin variant back to the west.

forapurpose5• 8 years ago

First, can you back up the claims in this comment? Also, Russia has had very few actual elections, especially when you include the Cold War era. Finally, there is no moral equivalency between totalitarian dictatorships which murder tens of millions and oppress nations from Germany to the Pacific (and elsewhere), and free democracies, with all their flaws.

The false equivalencies appear on every issue that casts the Chinese or Russian governments in a bad light. Speaking of the Cold War, IIRC my history, the KGB liked to use them in their propaganda.

rflrob• 8 years ago

How about the coups in Guatemala or Iran? In one sense, those are different because we viewed both of those countries as lesser powers and within our sphere of influence, but I would argue that the underlying philosophy of democracy is that all men and women, everywhere, are created equal, which means us secretly meddling in the elections of tiny Gadjookistan has comparable moral weight to Evil Empire meddling in ours. We don’t always live up to that ideal; pluralistic democracy certainly does better than a totalitarian system, but we aren’t blameless. I believe we can be a stronger advocate for democracy abroad by owning up to our past mistakes, making some kind of amends, and making plans for what to do in similar situations in the future that avoid making those mistakes. Containing communism was viewed as a critical threat, but how much did we hurt the long-term cause for democracy by taking short-term steps to suppress what may well have been early democratic socialist leaders? I can’t tell you for sure that Arbenz wouldn’t have been an early Hugo Chavez (at whose feet I lay most of the blame for Venezuela’s current troubles), but I think we ought to have at least let the Guatemalans make their own mistakes.

[1]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1954_Guatemalan_coup_d%27éta...

[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27état

eddiebilly• 8 years ago

The false equivalencies appear on every issue that casts the Chinese or Russian governments in a bad light.

Yeah and it even has its own yankee response meme called "whataboutism". If we want to go peak "whataboutism" here, the founding of the US was based on the ethnic slaughter and enslavement of millions of aboriginal and african peoples. American culture and corporations have a hand in nearly every corner of the world. If you want to get into the head of Russian paranoia towards the US and the anglosphere in general, look at the US for what its ruling elites have historically demonstrated itself to do, to dominate everything that exists by any means necessary which includes wiping out inconvenient peoples both culturally and literally.

boomboomsubban3• 8 years ago

The US loaned the Yeltsin government 10 billion dollars shortly before the 96 election, at the same time they were involved with the First Chechen War. A Republican consultant team also ran Yeltsin's campaign.

The US looks great when compared to Stalin era USSR. When compared to modern day Russia, it's hard to argue we have the unquestionable moral high ground.

aninteger• 8 years ago

If I leave my door unlocked can I really blame <bad person> for opening my door and robbing me? Why dont I invest in door locks? The US should really look into a more security focused infrastructure. This year the bad guy is Russia, but last year it was China and next year maybe it will be Iranian hackers. I understand that security is constant game of cat and mouse but when I see and hear of companies running Wimdows XP in 2018... it's like we're not even trying. Might as well leave the doors unlocked.

duck• 8 years ago

If I leave my door unlocked can I really blame <bad person> for opening my door and robbing me?

Yes, you can and should.

akhilcacharya2• 8 years ago

I'm in full agreement, and I'm shocked that this argument is used so much. Even when faced with a vulnerability, it is absolutely the thief's responsibility if they take advantage of the vulnerability for their own gain.

kurthr4• 8 years ago

Yes, burglary is not only wrong, it's against the law.

I agree that companies should do more about securing or disconnecting their networks, but I don't get to shoot someone just because they're so silly as not to be wearing a bullet proof vest.

notatoad• 8 years ago

Yes, you can and you should blame them. Crime isn't morally okay just because the victim hasn't protected themselves well enough. It doesn't matter whether it's hacking a poorly secured network, robbing a poorly secured house, or raping a provocatively dressed woman.

Smoosh• 8 years ago

So, you're saying that America deserved to get raped because they went out dressed in a revealing outfit?

rdtsc2• 8 years ago

can I really blame

Sure you can blame them and blame yourself. It doesn't have to be either or.

Depending if you think internet is a safe small town neighborhood or a hostile place full of bad actors constantly trying to gain entry into your systems. In the first case, nobody would say you're irresponsible because well it is unprecedented for burglary to happen there, in the second case the perpetrator would be guilty, but you'd be laughed at and ridiculed for being irresponsible as well.

If you happen to hold someone else info (cough Equifax cough) you might even be sued, though ... you probably also have friends in the government and tons of lawyers to not really be bothered by it.

dguaraglia• 8 years ago

If I leave my door unlocked can I really blame <bad person> for opening my door and robbing me?

Sure you can! Robbing is not something that happens by accident, and neither is hacking. I agree that the US should invest heavily in improving security, but taking the view that "pfff, who cares who did it!" is a terrible idea.

djrogers• 8 years ago

If I leave my door unlocked can I really blame <bad person> for opening my door and robbing me?

Yes.

To think otherwise removes the social construct that theft is wrong.

TomMckenny2• 8 years ago

Rather than discussion about technical aspects, we get a spew of how innocent Russia is and how America deserves it.

If the west now can't even defend its technical discussion forums from totalitarian disruption, heaven help it.

jwtadvice2• 8 years ago

It's a knee-jerk reaction to totalitarian domestic propaganda.

Has a tendency to breed confused, alarmist, emotional and untechnical conversation.

Here's the truth: Russia isn't evil. Neither is the United States. But they are enemies. The people are getting caught in a propaganda war, which has shifted conversation from the venue of technical to ideological. (Propaganda, in practice, breeds ideological self-affirming thinking.)

The breakdown of conversation isn't the fault of the "traitors who support the evil Russians" or the fault of the "domestic saboteurs who support the US mass propaganda apparatus" but the fact that the two countries can't get their shit straight and work toward a post-Cold War without throwing acid at each other.

(I'm rewriting the last sentence of this over and over because I realize its going to attract ever-yet more comments of the form "but Russia's evil and they started it and you can't really compare the US and Russia - can you?". Screw it.)

fbarred• 8 years ago

I'm surprised how often people are starting to carelessly refer to Russia as "enemy". I think "adversary" is a more accurate term, on the same level as China.

The governments of both sides say they want cooperation but are are annoyed at each other's behavior and actions. However I don't think the people of either country treat the other as "enemy", like they did during the cold war. Back then each side was afraid that the other one may attack them preemptively out of ideological reasons.

leke• 8 years ago

I've just finished watching the Stuxnet documentary. State funded attacks on critical infrastructure are going to be a world-wide norm. No matter how good your security, you will be vulnerable eventually. We'll have to go back to analogue style systems to be protected.

In a first, U.S. blames Russia for cyber attacks on energy grid

Related Stories