Reading the article, it seems the conclusion was inferred from the fact that Cyprus, Greece, Albania and Turkish Masons were targets. That those targets are not a good way to steal but are all disliked by the current regime. That several western analysts concluded they were government sponsored and that the attacks were quite complex.

What are the chances the hackers disliked one of those targets and only attacked all of them to throw the investigators off?

That is a commonly used technique actually and one to throw off the scent of false attribution. Although no evidence is cited in the article and all the nebulous case is built on anonymous sources.

The last disastrous piece on the alleged hack of firmware at AWS and Apple by the Chinese was built on anonymous sources as well and the cyberhacking article was not retracted or apologized by Bloomberg.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-10-04/the-big-h...

Time will not be forgiving to the authors of this article.

Maybe Reuters has article quotas on cyberattacks per month and it’s close to the end of the month and they need to fill it somehow. It’s the journalistic equivalent of being pulled over by cops for no reason towards the end of the month so they can issue a ticket and fulfill their quota.

And my favorite part is Turkish interests. Is that a couple of script kiddies who speak Turkish sitting in a basement in their pjs taking a break from Fortnite or PUBG?

This article makes Judith Miller look like a real journalist like Walter Cronkite. Judith Miller of NY Times wrote stories based on multiple western anonymous and credible sources covering WMD in Iraq.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller

Could be the whole thing is faked by an other country. Could be all the logs were misread. Could be the west trying to make Erdogan look bad, or a plot by Gulen or maybe UFOS.

But more likely is a regime spewing conspiracy theories so the people can no longer tell truth from fiction.

The evidence isn't just that the hackers were in Turkey, the evidence to quote the article:

>According to two British officials and one U.S. official, the activity bears the hallmarks of a state-backed cyber espionage operation conducted to advance Turkish interests.

So the evidence is that it's a state sponsored attack done to pursue Turkish interests. You can choose not to believe it, but that's what western experts are saying.