New evidence Sony hack was ‘inside’ job, not North Korea

Cyber Theft - Photo by d70focus

US cybersecurity experts say they have solid evidence that a former employee helped hack Sony Pictures Entertainment’s computer system — and that it was not masterminded by North Korean cyberterrorists.

One leading cybersecurity firm, Norse Corp., said Monday it has narrowed its list of suspects to a group of six people — including at least one Sony veteran with the necessary technical background to carry out the attack, according to reports.

The investigation of the Sony hacking by the private companies stands in stark contrast to the finding of the FBI, which said Dec. 19 its probe traced the hacking — which ended up foiling the planned wide release of the Hollywood studio’s “The Interview” — to North Korea.

(Read the rest of the story here…)

1 thought on “New evidence Sony hack was ‘inside’ job, not North Korea”

  1. I think a lot of people are wondering what actually happened at Sony.
    The most likely is that hackers used a random program that generates passwords until the computer broke into the system.
    People in charge of security at Sony obviously did not have the proper security to stop it. For instance, if more than 3 passes occur, the system should have . . . well shut them out. But should have, could have, would have are all phrases from people that are 100% 20/20 in their hindsight. Hindsight is normally pretty good after the fact.
    It is possible that disgruntled former employees were involved. More likely than the hack would be.
    But surely the passwords are deleted or changed when someone leaves the company.
    The reason why most of us are a little nervous is that it can happen again to any company with sloppy security procedures.
    An entire enormous part of the computer world is computers with XP on them. This is no longer supported by Microsoft. So it is open season on those computers right now.
    XP is still out there on old computers every where. After many corrections, 3 service packs later, Most of the errors have been corrected in this antique system that refuses to just go away. This is to the embarrassment of the company that produced it.
    The new XP will most likely be Windows 7 Pro 64. It is actually a fairly decent operating system.
    Is it hackable? Not so much as XP is.
    The problem all software manufacturers have is logistics. Microsoft probably has less than 200 programmers working to correct systems.
    At last count, Linux users number over 10,000 programmers volunteering their time. And that is probably world wide. This is just a comparison between the two.
    Why would anyone keep XP? Simply because it costs money to upgrade to a newer hardware/operating system. What is remiss is each system is only capable of working with more advanced hardware. For instance, I think the minimum hardware requirements will be something that old machines are not capable of. For instance, dual processors are almost a necessity now. Probably 4 gigs of ram is minimum to keep a system running.
    With that in mind, probably a huge number of XP systems will simply have to be trashed and new equipment bought and new networks established to just stay on top of all this.
    I have seen numbers on a medium sized average business. They are looking at up to 40,000 dollars in upgrades to just stay where they are with new operating systems and hardware.
    Microsoft software is part of the problem. It is the main operating system of the world, and just about everyone uses it. I mention this because most of the foreign hackers are trained in hacking Microsoft systems. Few are trained in either MACs or Linux. That is rapidly chan
    I think that Microsoft should have provided an alternative operating system to keep old equipment running until the businesses could afford to trash their old equipment. There is a virtual depression going on in the real world right now. That would have been worth it in the long run. It would made Microsoft more of a hero than the villain taking down their ways of doing business.
    A lot of small businesses are switching to Linux as an alternative now that XP is not supported. The backside of that is Linux needs people that actually know how to program in Linux.
    The software does not support an office system that needs border to border control like labels. XP does support labels.
    Upgrading a system to Linux requires a dual boot at startup or the entire system changed over. XP does have things that Linux does not. So a dual boot makes sense.
    Microsoft software is written mostly in C Plus Plus.
    Linux software is written in a form of Unix.
    The main reason that Linux is competitive with Windows is that it is small potatoes and few businesses actually use it.
    So not a whole lot of hackers try to break into it or put viruses on it.
    That is rapidly changing now that XP is not a factor.

Comments are closed.