On 01/09/2017 01:51 PM, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > Always Learning wrote: >> On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 12:54 -0500, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: >>> James B. Byrne wrote: >>>> On Thu, January 5, 2017 17:23, Always Learning wrote: >>>>> Cyber attacks are gradually replacing armed conflicts. >>>> Better fight with bits than blood. >>> Yes, but... attacks on the friggin' IoT could result in lots of blood. > Or, less so, what do you mean all the rail lines have been knocked out > of commission for a week, and we can't get food to the eastern half of > the country? Or power? > <snip> >> Query: How did the Reds get into the Democrats computer systems ? Hope > it wasn't a Redhat/Centos system but an 'open Windoze' set-up. > > In at least one of the several, it was a phishing attack. .... Though not being a professional cyber spy, still I don't see how it's possible at all to determine the source of the hack. Once someone's machine succumbs to a phish, the attacker could install something like tor which would conceal all hacker traffic with the hacked machine. Indeed, a professional could, further, set up a chain or web of such compromised machines, each connected to the other via tor to further hide the hacker's home... if that would even be necessary (?). Moreover, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2jD4SF9gFE and others also provide enlightening expert details about the software allegedly used in the hack, maintaining it was a couple years old, not even the latest versions available "off the shelf" on the dark web, hardly software which would be used by a state agent.