They can't be that good if you happen to know this and be writing about it on the internet.

From what I've read, things started going wrong when an (ex?) official of the US released information the Dutch shared with their American allies[1]. Details on when or why access to the Russian networks was lost aren't readily available (secret service and all that) but I do remember reading about the intelligence agencies being not particularly pleased with the way the information was publicly released by their allies. It makes sense that someone gloating about how there's an ally of theirs in your network will make you take a second look at the traffic flowing through your network if you're waging cyber warfare.

[1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/new-d...

In general, in the spyworld you do not talk about your tricks. But if you've already been found out, and your tricks no longer work, there is still political advantage to be had (damage your adversary, obtain credit from partners, obtain funding, easier recrutement).

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/01/dutch...

Or if you just want to claim it to damage your adversary, whether they have the unit you supposedly hacked and it does what you say it does, or not...

Covert access for over two years to every part of the GRU's election meddling apparatus is very impressive, actually. Once you're caught, too, there's sometimes value in sort of showing it off and embarrassing your adversary.

Or this is the least of their exploits, and releasing this info is a psyops thing.

As a Dutch citizen, I am very suspicious about this story. Sounds too good to be true? Probably is not true.

The timing was also amazingly convenient.

As another Dutch citizen, it's a true story! Read about it here: https://amp.nos.nl/artikel/2213762-hackteam-aivd-gaf-fbi-cru...

I advice to read this book then: https://www.bol.com/nl/p/het-is-oorlog-maar-niemand-die-het-...

It was in there. Pretty interesting read as well. Lots of stuff on FoxIT and the guy behind it.

It doesn’t seem an English translation of the book has been released yet. I don’t speak Dutch so apologies if this is a silly question but when you mention FoxIT are you referring to the PDF application?

It's this FoxIT I imagine: https://www.fox-it.com/en/

Ah, that makes much more sense! Thanks!

I know it has been reported in the news. Does not make it true.

They were pretty public with the evidence when it came out (including releasing security camera footage and names of Russian agents). Which parts do you think are false?

And those names can't be faked (or belong to true people but not relevant to what they supposedly did) because?

I'd be sceptical of any "revelation" from such agencies...

There's evidence that it's substantially true (ex. security camera footage and confirmation by most worldwide press outlets).

Curious if you have evidence that it's fabricated? Other than your distrust of intelligence agencies in general.

>Curious if you have evidence that it's fabricated?

What happened to the burden of proof?

Especially from professional liars like intelligence agencies...

So, no?

No, they don't have any proof just a claim we should take at face value.

Are you being intentionally obtuse?

Agree with you. Sounds too good to be True. IMO, Probably somebody had a mole inside GRU who was instrumental in getting the info. but in order to provide cover for its source, they invented a success story of the AIVD.

There isn't much literature on it (Dutch spying activities), but the little there is might convince you.

A fun exercise is applying with the AIVD or NFI (involved in spying on home soil). You may meet someone who can tell you some good war stories. Of course, you'll be bound not to speak of it outside company walls ;)

I'm skeptical of that story. I know a Russian on Facebook who disputed it. He said that the Red Square building described in the report doesn't exist, and provided a Google Maps view of Moscow to support his claim. It's also curious to me why the Dutch even would allow APT29 to get away with their activities at the time, if they truly had access as deep as they claimed.

Or they advertise that they have.

Including making up claims for specific foreign countries people have no way of substantiating...

"According to the Mueller Report, WikiLeaks had received an email containing an encrypted file named "wk dnc link I .txt.gpg" from the Guccifer 2.0 GRU persona on July 14, which was four days after Seth Rich died.[80][81][82] In April 2018, Twitter direct messages revealed that even as Assange was suggesting publicly that WikiLeaks had obtained emails from Seth Rich, Assange was trying to obtain more emails from Guccifer 2.0, who was at the time already suspected of being linked to Russian intelligence.[83] BuzzFeed described the messages as "the starkest proof yet that Assange knew a likely Russian government hacker had the Democrat leaks he wanted. And they reveal the deliberate bad faith with which Assange fed the groundless claims that Rich was his source, even as he knew the documents' origin."[83]"

So, there's no evidence, other than people with at best a vested interest against the Clintons or obviously compromised by Russian intelligence - if you work with them once, they've got you.

So you're trying to tell us that Russian APT teams could not have hacked into DNC servers because there might have been an internal leak instead?

Why not both? Why would Dutch intelligence care about supporting a random political faction in the United States?

Not at all, but judging from the amount of effort put into starting a war with Russia around the same time I find it more likely that the whole thing was made up.

US intelligence, Dutch intelligence, UK intelligence, German intelligence, who cares? They're all in the same boat, and it's sinking fast.

doesn't that put Russian intelligence in the same boat too, if those mentioned could be involved in disinformation then so could russia

Reality check: The Russian economy completely depends on gas and middle class salary is 200 euro (said Putin). So who is sinking here?

At the same time they colonized Crimea, fought a war with Georgia. Who is starting wars here?

You might not like intelligence work, but that's another story.

>At the same time they colonized Crimea, fought a war with Georgia. Who is starting wars here?

Well, one could say those who befriended and armed their neighbourhood states like Georgia to use them against them, or helped install Nazi sympathisers toppling the legitimate government in Ukraine?

> What never ceases to amaze me is how otherwise seemingly intelligent people blindly believe

Why does it amaze you? If you sustain your attention in one direction, you will lack it in another.

Germans have a beautiful expression: "fachidiot", that perfectly captures the underlying issue.

I know it's probably unintentional considering the false news reports at the time, but the 2016 DNC hack was actually never conclusively pinned on Russia.

In fact, according to a recent release the entire basis for the US intelligence appartus' opinion was totally unproven.

CrowdStrike never conclusively proved Russia was behind the hack, and in fact didn't even conclusively prove a hack even occurred.

https://www.itwire.com/security/crowdstrike-chief-admits-no-...