It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dispelling the NK BS: Bureau 121 - NK Does Have An Elite Hacking Capacity

page: 3
27
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

I absolutely agree. How does the saying go? Perpetual war for perpetual peace? I for one haven't seen the peace yet. I certainly didn't mean to imply that the U.S. should have been militarily involved in any of those places to begin with rather that the politicians rarely allow the generals to win, there wouldn't be enough money in that! When they do allow them to win you know that some puppet isn't following the tune of his puppet master anymore, WWII in Europe certainly comes to mind! Regional instability is definitely part of the U.S./Western/Multinational Banker playbook just as long as it isn't too close to home. While the reasons are different the ME and Korean peninsula (actually the whole Asian Pacific) bother seem to be in the same boat. For the U.S. I think its fair to say as long as countries remain poor, unstable and deprived of their own resources they can't rise to the level of being able to threaten regional U.S. hegemony....




posted on Dec, 26 2014 @ 07:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Bilk22

You gauge success or failure based upon the number of pages? Interesting. I personally don't care if the thread gets a single reply, only hope that it gets read.

As for "fools" and "buying" - I've presented well documented and sourced evidence. You've offered nothing to counter it but opinion and topic dilution.

Again, I eagerly and geniunely invite you to post evidince that contradicts the OP - something more tangible than your opinion.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: Bilk22

You gauge success or failure based upon the number of pages? Interesting. I personally don't care if the thread gets a single reply, only hope that it gets read.

As for "fools" and "buying" - I've presented well documented and sourced evidence. You've offered nothing to counter it but opinion and topic dilution.

Again, I eagerly and geniunely invite you to post evidince that contradicts the OP - something more tangible than your opinion.

It's pretty clear from all available information that's come to light in the past weeks and more recently, that NK had nothing what so ever to do with this attack. The sources you provided did not supply any intel that proved anything. It was conjecture based on their idea that NK has a system sophisticated enough to perpetrate this event. No evidence of such. Just statements. However, I don't think even you at this point, can still make the claim that NK was involved. There's plenty out there you can search for yourself that pretty much supports that position.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 01:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Bilk22

Directly quoted from the OP of this thread:


As a preface I do want to state that I am not at all convinced that the attacks upon the US came from North Korea, neither am I yet convinced that North Korea was not a pawn nor player in the event. What I do wish to do is to set the record straight regarding the computing skills of NK.


The entire premise of the OP is simply to dispell the myth that North Korea is behind the curve regarding Cyberwarfare - and did not at all link their ability to any event whatsoever.

This leaves me assuming you have been posting either to this threads title alone or upon a misconception of what was stated.


edit on 12/27/14 by Hefficide because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 01:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Bilk22

But hold on, the OP specifically made it clear he wasn't claiming it was NK. All he did was provide clear evidence that all these so called "experts" were wrong when they claim NK wasn't capable of it.

From what I can see, your the only one claiming you know for a fact who the culprits were, so why not actually provide some evidence of your claims. Instead of just trying to bait people into a debate of petty insults.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 08:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: Bilk22

But hold on, the OP specifically made it clear he wasn't claiming it was NK. All he did was provide clear evidence that all these so called "experts" were wrong when they claim NK wasn't capable of it.

From what I can see, your the only one claiming you know for a fact who the culprits were, so why not actually provide some evidence of your claims. Instead of just trying to bait people into a debate of petty insults.
There were no petty insults. The OP said the sources he provided would dispel the idea that NK was behind the curve in cyber warfare. Those link do no such thing. They are merely statements of such with no verifiable proof. Sort of what we get a lot around here and what is very much criticized. Are we to accept these statements as fact or something else?

And what was the point of the tread in actuality? To confuse and obfuscate? There's no direct proof of anything in this matter. It's all conjecture. However a reasonable person looking at the known information in totality can make a conclusion that NK had no hand in this. There's more pointing to that idea than there is to NK being the perpetrator in this event. I'll say it's JMO. Does that make you both happier?



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: jlafleur02
All that from 1 source? Who's to say he isn't a double agent that is just saying those things to make NK look capable? They do it with everything else.
Cutting edge programing ,like Microsoft isn't learned in school. They are seasoned professionals. The hackers in NK have no exposure to network infrastructure that you find in the USA or Europe. Never heard that NK has an advanced computer network. Probably cause they don't have the expertise. If they did then it would have been built already. You would need that real world experience to perform major hacks like the Sony hack.


My router is made in China as well as everything else pretty much. Who did the US ask to assist with negotiations? Oh yeah China because they have pull with them. Ignorance to think they don't know how to operate a network lol. Most hosted servers and the dark net are outside of the us anyways lmfao



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Bilk22


South Korea views the regime's cyber capabilities as a terroristic threat, and has prepared for a multifaceted attack in the future -- although it is important to note no such attack has yet occurred. According to a report written by Captain Duk-Ki Kim, a Republic of Korea Navy officer, "the North Korean regime will first conduct a simultaneous and multifarious cyber offensive on the Republic of Korea's society and basic infrastructure, government agencies, and major military command centers while at the same time suppressing the ROK government and its domestic allies and supporters with nuclear weapons." South Korea also claims that North Korea's "premier" hacking unit, Unit 121, is behind the US and Russia as the "world's third largest cyber unit."

North Korea's Reconnaissance General Bureau (RGB) is in charge of both traditional and cyber operations, and is known for sending agents abroad for training in cyber warfare. The RGB reportedly oversees six bureaus that specialize in operations, reconnaissance, technology and cyber matters -- and two of which have been identified as the No. 91 Office and Unit 121. The two bureaus in question comprise of intelligence operations and are based in China.


Much more here.

Link to very detailed private industry assessment of NK by Hewlett Packard

ABC News agrees

CNN is about a week behind not only in reporting this but also in the connections I've made regarding private Industry involvement

There... documented and sourced evidence. Now, it's your turn to guffaw it with off-handed empty dismissals.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 09:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: Bilk22


South Korea views the regime's cyber capabilities as a terroristic threat, and has prepared for a multifaceted attack in the future -- although it is important to note no such attack has yet occurred. According to a report written by Captain Duk-Ki Kim, a Republic of Korea Navy officer, "the North Korean regime will first conduct a simultaneous and multifarious cyber offensive on the Republic of Korea's society and basic infrastructure, government agencies, and major military command centers while at the same time suppressing the ROK government and its domestic allies and supporters with nuclear weapons." South Korea also claims that North Korea's "premier" hacking unit, Unit 121, is behind the US and Russia as the "world's third largest cyber unit."

North Korea's Reconnaissance General Bureau (RGB) is in charge of both traditional and cyber operations, and is known for sending agents abroad for training in cyber warfare. The RGB reportedly oversees six bureaus that specialize in operations, reconnaissance, technology and cyber matters -- and two of which have been identified as the No. 91 Office and Unit 121. The two bureaus in question comprise of intelligence operations and are based in China.


Much more here.

Link to very detailed private industry assessment of NK by Hewlett Packard

ABC News agrees

CNN is about a week behind not only in reporting this but also in the connections I've made regarding private Industry involvement

There... documented and sourced evidence. Now, it's your turn to guffaw it with off-handed empty dismissals.



So what is your reasoning for the attack if NK did indeed do this? Seems a rather silly notion they did it on a whim because the little man didn't like the ending of a movie. And why a thread about this if it's pretty clear NK didn't do it? You admit the thread is really only to bolster the idea NK is capable. So what?

I watched the attacks on that live feed you linked to. Quite a lot of attacks originated out of Sweden of all places. Is Sweden attacking the US internet infrastructure? Not likely I'm sure.

I'll also ask, do those locations showing the origination of the attack necessarily mean it's a hostile player in that country or can those attacks be redirected to look as if they're coming from there? All one needs to perpetrate these attacks is a computer and a linkup. So the entity doing it could be from anywhere and represent any interest.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Bilk22

Again, my position has consistently been that North Korea did not perpetrate the attack. Through several threads, two written before the news was even covering this story, my narrative has been that I believe Corporations and possibly Government agencies are carrying out the attacks as a means of creating a public outcry for the Internet to be controlled.

During those debates the red-herring that North Korea could never accomplish a Cyberattack kept coming up and accepted as fact by many. THIS thread was, then, in response, created to show that North Korea indeed does have the capacity and that the myth that they've got ancient computers is, just that, a myth.

Having said all of that, it is entirely possible that NK is complicit in whatever it is that is happening. It's hard to get all of the players in line because this is all happening on a scale exponentially higher than anything seen before in terms of Cyberwar.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 09:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Bilk22

Regarding the idea of attacks from Sweden...

If you understand slaved computers and botnets - then Sweden makes perfect sense as that is the country with the most "free" Internet and, thus, the most proxies and VPN's.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 10:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: Bilk22

Again, my position has consistently been that North Korea did not perpetrate the attack. Through several threads, two written before the news was even covering this story, my narrative has been that I believe Corporations and possibly Government agencies are carrying out the attacks as a means of creating a public outcry for the Internet to be controlled.

During those debates the red-herring that North Korea could never accomplish a Cyberattack kept coming up and accepted as fact by many. THIS thread was, then, in response, created to show that North Korea indeed does have the capacity and that the myth that they've got ancient computers is, just that, a myth.

Having said all of that, it is entirely possible that NK is complicit in whatever it is that is happening. It's hard to get all of the players in line because this is all happening on a scale exponentially higher than anything seen before in terms of Cyberwar.
Well one of my first posts (not to this thread) on the subject was just what you stated here- it's being used to further some agenda. www.abovetopsecret.com... A lot of stuff is certainly going on here. Very bizzaro world .



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 10:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: Bilk22

Regarding the idea of attacks from Sweden...

If you understand slaved computers and botnets - then Sweden makes perfect sense as that is the country with the most "free" Internet and, thus, the most proxies and VPN's.

Yeah I assumed as much. That's why it's difficult to say who is doing what.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 10:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hefficide
Actually ( spoiler alert ) I've been doing a LOT of research and I am of a mind that the entire Cyberwar that played out rather silently ( No MSM mentions of a global cyberwar, and yet one happened for several days and is still sporadically going on ) is domestic in nature and far, far more complex than anyone can imagine.


Just curious,

You state that the cyberwar (cyberskirmish)? was domestic in nature. Is it your belief that this is some sort of government sponsored false flag, a corporate-to-corporate attack or the work of another unknown third party?



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 10:56 PM
link   
a reply to: clay2 baraka

My best guess at this point is the most frightening answer, the option you didn't offer:

D) All of the above.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 11:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: clay2 baraka

My best guess at this point is the most frightening answer, the option you didn't offer:

D) All of the above.



So one party provokes an attack and all parties let fly the virtual missiles much like many believe would happen in a nuclear exchange?..



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 11:03 PM
link   
a reply to: clay2 baraka

Somewhat - but in Cyberspace there is no mutually assured self-destruction. There is opportunity to offer the population "security" - security which means less content, more control of what we can access, corporate control of the whole shebang as it were.

Internet V.2 Where everything is sanitized for your protection- including content. Oh and that is going to cost extra. A lot extra for websites and consumers.

We are witnessing the war for the last true global platform for freedom of speech and expression.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 11:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide

Iv'e heard the theory that the cyberwar was deliberately engineered by corporations and government to serve as an excuse for tightening controls over the free internet..You have indirectly named the US government in league with corporate interests with the unwitting participation of North Korea.. Who do you suspect the other players to be?



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 11:17 PM
link   
So where is the outcry from people who are being denied their twitter and facebook? Where are the banks demanding government action for the loss of millions of account details and untold billions stolen? Where is the economy coming to a grind if we don't just pass this bill now?

These attacks have been in the public's awareness for weeks now, so if they are trying to piss people off to pass a bill, they are doing a piss poor job of it. Go after people's source of entertainment, or their wallets. I'm just not seeing it with this.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 11:29 PM
link   
a reply to: pl3bscheese

Maybe that Trans Pacific Partnership is involved?

Lots at stake.



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join