News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
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?
Re:Linksys CherryBlossom Advisory by bsamuels on Thursday June 22, 2017 @09:21PM (#14616559)
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.

Re:Linksys CherryBlossom Advisory by pbhjpbhj on Friday June 23, 2017 @03:27AM (#14617520)
Didn't you have an infected target to test against?
Re:Linksys CherryBlossom Advisory by kentt on Thursday June 22, 2017 @09:26PM (#14616571)
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.