Re:Linksys CherryBlossom Advisory
by kentt on Thursday June 22, 2017 @09:15PM
(#14616528)
Perhaps I'm missing something, but are you saying you trusted that the malware documentation is correct?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Didn't really have any other choice. We had tons of users calling in last week panicking over what to do about cherryblossom.
Without a sample of the implant or confirmation from the CIA that the documents are legitimate & unaltered, this advisory is pretty much all we can do for those users.
Didn't you have an infected target to test against?
Understood. Thank you. It makes sense that you would move on this urgently and confirm it's success only after.
Re:Linksys CherryBlossom Advisory
by joefkelley on Thursday June 22, 2017 @09:20PM
(#14616555)
Yeah this is a bit worrying. But since it was leaked, this actually doesn't seem so bad. What incentive would the CIA have to lie internally?
Re:Linksys CherryBlossom Advisory
by TheSpiceIsLife on Friday June 23, 2017 @05:16AM
(#14617905)
One good reason I can think of is to have something for leakers to leak that isn't based in reality.
Or: the CIA leaked it intentionally as smoke-screen.
I don't know. Are there organisational silos within intelligence agencies? Layers of access? It's hard to know for sure, but I'm yet to see a human organisation that doesn't have political in-fighting.