Hackers Broke Into Real News Sites To Plant Fake Stories (wired.com) 67
A disinfo operation broke into the content management systems of Eastern European media outlets in a campaign to spread misinformation about NATO. Wired reports: On Wednesday, security firm FireEye released a report on a disinformation-focused group it's calling Ghostwriter. The propagandists have created and disseminated disinformation since at least March 2017, with a focus on undermining NATO and the US troops in Poland and the Baltics; they've posted fake content on everything from social media to pro-Russian news websites. In some cases, FireEye says, Ghostwriter has deployed a bolder tactic: hacking the content management systems of news websites to post their own stories. They then disseminate their literal fake news with spoofed emails, social media, and even op-eds the propagandists write on other sites that accept user-generated content. That hacking campaign, targeting media sites from Poland to Lithuania, has spread false stories about US military aggression, NATO soldiers spreading coronavirus, NATO planning a full-on invasion of Belarus, and more.
"They're spreading these stories that NATO is a danger, that they resent the locals, that they're infected, that they're car thieves," says John Hultquist, director of intelligence at FireEye. "And they're pushing these stories out with a variety of means, the most interesting of which is hacking local media websites and planting them. These fictional stories are suddenly bona fide by the sites that they're on, and then they go in and spread the link to the story."
FireEye itself did not conduct incident response analyses on these incidents and concedes that it doesn't know exactly how the hackers are stealing credentials that give them access to the content management systems that allow posting and altering news stories. Nor does it know who is behind the string of website compromises, or for that matter the larger disinformation campaign that the fake stories are a part of. But the company's analysts have found that the news site compromises and the online accounts used to spread links to those fabricated stories, as well as the more traditional creation of fake news on social media, blogs, and websites with an anti-US and anti-NATO bent, all tie back to a distinct set of personas, indicating one unified disinformation effort. FireEye's Hultquist points out that the campaign doesn't seem financially motivated, indicating a political or state backer, and notes that the focus on driving a wedge between NATO and citizens of Eastern Europe hints at possible Russian involvement.
"They're spreading these stories that NATO is a danger, that they resent the locals, that they're infected, that they're car thieves," says John Hultquist, director of intelligence at FireEye. "And they're pushing these stories out with a variety of means, the most interesting of which is hacking local media websites and planting them. These fictional stories are suddenly bona fide by the sites that they're on, and then they go in and spread the link to the story."
FireEye itself did not conduct incident response analyses on these incidents and concedes that it doesn't know exactly how the hackers are stealing credentials that give them access to the content management systems that allow posting and altering news stories. Nor does it know who is behind the string of website compromises, or for that matter the larger disinformation campaign that the fake stories are a part of. But the company's analysts have found that the news site compromises and the online accounts used to spread links to those fabricated stories, as well as the more traditional creation of fake news on social media, blogs, and websites with an anti-US and anti-NATO bent, all tie back to a distinct set of personas, indicating one unified disinformation effort. FireEye's Hultquist points out that the campaign doesn't seem financially motivated, indicating a political or state backer, and notes that the focus on driving a wedge between NATO and citizens of Eastern Europe hints at possible Russian involvement.
lol... (Score:2)
You don't have to break into a news site to create fake news... just use certain narratives and people will just believe it out of hand.
Heck, just over reporting on a single subject as though these are the ONLY crimes happening by only 1 ethnic group is enough to "generate fake news".
Re: lol... (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
How is the fact that NATO is an outdated cold war dinosaur, made up of interest groups with widely diverging goals and without common purpose, which has on many occasions failed the peoples of its member countries especially in Eastern Europe "fake news"?
NATO has always been one thing only - a US shield against the "Soviet threat" made from European territory and European people in the age when the threat was portrayed as a Soviet tank wave from the borders of Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Eastern Germany spe
Re: (Score:2)
and NATO hired Kurds
Whoops, sorry, bad editing. The US hired the Kurds and Iraqis, NATO did nothing but "support" them with strong words from Brussels. Good choice of location, though, nice beer, nice chocolates, nice strawberry milk.
You clearly don't know what NATO is (Score:2)
The North Atlantic Treaty doesn't have a damn thing to do with the Middle East. It's about defending the North Atlantic. Maybe that would have been more clear to you if they had put North Atlantic right in the name. Oh wait ...
NATO is a mutual defense pact, for the NATO members to defend themselves and each other. NATO members promise to:
"by means of continuous and effective self-help and mutual aid, will maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack." (Article 3)
"
Re: (Score:2)
The North Atlantic Treaty doesn't have a damn thing to do with the Middle East.
So what are they doing in Afghanistan, bless your dirty mouth?
Re: (Score:2)
One can certainly argue whether or not that should have been a NATO operation. The UN turned it over to NATO. Still, it's entirely consistent with what I explained - the treaty is a mutual defense treaty. It's not a "hey let's be the world police" treaty. (The UN is more of the latter). An attack on a NATO country, is an attack on all, that's what NATO is all about.
By 1999 the UN officially acknowledged that al Qaeda and the Taliban worked together to engage in terrorist attacks.
In 2001 al Queda, with t
Re: (Score:1)
What a gorgeous and surprisingly highly valued opus to how NATO is dead. Even when it is most assuring mean of protection for Eastern Europe (and U.S. in the long run), restlessly eyed-on by imperial Russia. While latter is attacked-on by shamelessly slurping Crimea, Eastern Ukraine, Transnistria, Abkhazia, puppet Chechnya, just days ago caught with the next batch of military "volunteers" in Byelorussia, right before there held elections.
NATO is needed very much, indeed, and therefore is going to get ever s
Re:lol... (Score:5, Informative)
How is the fact that NATO is an outdated cold war dinosaur, made up of interest groups with widely diverging goals and without common purpose, which has on many occasions failed the peoples of its member countries especially in Eastern Europe "fake news"?
You see what happened in Crimea and in eastern Ukraine? Or in Georgia? Both countries that are bullied by Russia and weren't NATO members.
Some east European countries like Poland, Latvia, etc. have very real concerns that Russia wants to bully them back into Soviet Empire one way or another. NATO is a very real deterrent against that. This is why there are US troops stationed across European allied countries. Russia attacking or operating in those countries would mean direct conflict with US troops, which is another deterrent.
Only somebody who is totally clueless on recent history and vastly underestimates Russia's pride and ambitions would say NATO serves no common purpose.
The Putin regime and its gradual descent into an open dictatorship is a direct consequence of NATO expanding and encircling Russia against the commitments NATO countries made to Russian leadership in the early 90s, which are now vehemently denied. This expansion caused enough fear and alarm to convince most Russians that Yeltsin's democratic reforms are not making the old enemy a "partner", with disastrous results for Russia and for the world security.
Blaming NATO for Putin's takeover of Russia is ridiculous. There was never a commitment of NATO towards Russia not to expand. This is in fact just Russian propaganda. Google it:
https://www.google.com/search?... [google.com]
Putin's was in the right place at the right time, when the Soviet system collapsed. His regime is basically what a country looks like when the mafia takes over. There's an excellent article on the Atlantic:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ma... [theatlantic.com]
NATO members supported the US-lead Iraq 2003 campaign, an aggression against a country under a false pretext - a crime against humanity by all legal and moral definitions.
This was US warmongering of the Bush administration. As a matter of fact, several NATO members OPPOSED and didn't join the war, including the two largest European countries, Germany and France. The "anti terrorist coalition" had nothing to do with NATO and included also non-NATO members. I have no idea why you're trying to spin that useless war as a failure of NATO.
NATO failed to take decisive action against the creation of Islamic State in Norther Iraq and its expansion into Syria until such time as the military operation of Assad and Putin began to break it down in late 2015
You're again trying to pin this on NATO for some reason. A civil war in a Middle Eastern country is not part of NATO's mission statement. NATO is a defensive pact.
Unbelievably, NATO failed to contain Erdogan's Turkey from military forays against the same Kurdish people
Again pinning random stuff on NATO. Internal affairs of Turkey are of no business to NATO, no matter how little we like them. NATO is not the police of its members. Again, it's a defensive pact.
Re:lol... (Score:4, Informative)
You see what happened in Crimea and in eastern Ukraine?
Yes, Ukraine threatened to revoke the contracts for the military bases there and Putin invaded. Did the NATO countries who had commitment to protect Ukraine do anything? Nope. What's the value of their "guarantees" then?
Ukraine never was a member of NATO. Therefore it could not expect any kind of "guaranties" from NATO. It is not NATO's job to defend countries which were attacked and which are not NATO members.
NATO should not function as some kind of world policeman. It is and it should be strictly a defensive pact. It should take an action only if a NATO member is attacked. Otherwise it should not participate in any way.
Re: (Score:2)
Therefore it could not expect any kind of "guaranties" from NATO.
Who said NATO guaranteed anything?
Read my comment again - several NATO countries gave assurances to Ukraine when it gave up its nuclear arsenal in 91 or 92. Their "commitment" turned out to not be worth the ink they signed it with. The question is, if the countries that make up NATO don't honor their individual commitments, what can NATO offer as a committe to its members? The answer has been made obvious long ago by the Greek-Turkey skirmishes - nothing.
Eastern European member countries have asked many tim
Re: lol... (Score:2)
I dont like NATO for a lot of different reasons than you listed. But I would not call it a pointless failure, as evident by the extremes people will go to in order to discredit it. I dont like how all of europe has the budget for a better healthcare system because they do not pony up the cash for their own national defense. Nearly 1/3 of our income taxes are distributed into defense spending. Its been a while since people have looked at the paper version of their 1040, but they used to show a piechart on th
Re: (Score:2)
OK, point taken.
You, did not claim NATO had commitment to protect Ukraine. You claimed some countries (USA, UK, Russia - some of them happen to be NATO members, but why mention it there at all because it is unrelated to NATO) had a commitment to protect Ukraine. The only problem is that the document (1994 Budapest Memorandum of Security Assurances) did not commit USA / UK / Russia to protect Ukraine with their milliary. It only gave assurances that the USA / UK / Russia would pay attention and respect Ukrai
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, Ukraine threatened to revoke the contracts for the military bases there and Putin invaded. Did the NATO countries who had commitment to protect Ukraine do anything? Nope. What's the value of their "guarantees" then?
Can you please cite any sources where NATO commits to protect Ukraine? That doesn't make a lot of sense. NATO protects NATO members, not third parties.
The Georgia that started a war with Russia and got burned? That Georgia? What about it?
https://www.reuters.com/articl [reuters.com]...
Yes, that Georgia. Now why would such a small, poor country pick a fight with Russia, an opponent that is literally a thousand times stronger? Probably only out of sheer helplessness and desperation due to underhand Russian activity. Probably only Mikheil Saakashvili and Putin know the reasons. Anyhow, as you pointed out, Georgia was a total pushover for migh
Re: (Score:2)
Can you please cite any sources where NATO commits to protect Ukraine?
Why should I do anything about your strawmen? Address my point or GTFO.
as you pointed out, Georgia was a total pushover for mighty Russia. And Russia loves to take advantage of those situations. Therefore, NATO.
What a mess you are. You brought up Georgia yourself. When I patiently explained that you have it all wrong, and that Georgia is not the victim, but the attacker, you do a turnaround and blame me about what you yourself came up with. You okay in the head?
I feel confident in saying that the vast number of sources on the Internet
Given the strawmen and the non-sequiturs so far, I don't see any reason to comment on the things you think you've seen on the Internet.
But you're equating US foreign policy to NATO policy, just because
this is how things are at the moment. Maybe they wi
Re: (Score:1)
Did the NATO countries who had commitment to protect Ukraine do anything? Nope. What's the value of their "guarantees" then?
May you recall who was sneaking-in (and, most likely, still does in the Eastern Ukraine) in unlabeled military pajamas to stand in the war against?
These were invaders, who would not even disclose their identities, as world was caught in awe by shameless fashion, in which "superpower" would be sneaking into the neighboring other. Blame NATO to not protect, when there is clear offender? What's that?!!
Nope. Some Eastern European countries with bad economic and social problems are always looking for "foreign enamiez" to blame, because it is so easy.
Cheap lier. Our economies do fine, and, since we work, we have met many evaluations of the economic well-being
Re: (Score:2)
There you are, I usually disagree with DNS-and-BIND about mostly everything, but here's a testimony from someone old enough to have seen and to remember the events of the past 30 years and straight enough to not lie about them.
Re: (Score:1)
When Putin entered, he was basically nobody, to be able of guessing whom he is going to turn into. Yeltsin had to have replacement, who would promise to not terrorize The Family. Keep the order somewhat. He did not care much more for then. And couldn't. Putin became who he is after shuffling constitutionally permitable terms for his services. Still does. Laughs into the face of his country. Yeltsin has nothing to do with this behavior. These are personal decisions, first of all.
As to promises to not expand
Re: (Score:2)
How is the fact that NATO is an outdated cold war dinosaur, made up of interest groups with widely diverging goals and without common purpose, which has on many occasions failed the peoples of its member countries especially in Eastern Europe "fake news"?
It's not, but if you had bothered to read the second paragraph of the summary you would have known that the stories were about the troops on the ground being petty criminals and carrying diseases, not about the organization itself.
Re:lol... (Score:4, Insightful)
The Putin regime and its gradual descent into an open dictatorship is a direct consequence of NATO...
You think Putin wouldn't have become a dictator if it weren't for NATO? Doesn't it seem like what he wanted all along?
Re: (Score:2)
Do you seriously think that without the unceremonious dictate over local politics that US exercised in the 90s Russia Putin would have had so much unfaltering support and find it this easy to subvert the democracy in Russia? You don't really know much about what happened, do you?
Re: (Score:2)
You don't really know much about what happened, do you?
The problems within Russia were far worse than the problems imposed from without.
Re: (Score:1)
Hi, this is really entertaining discourse. Putin is nothing more, than protector of the status quo of the Empire. His job was that, and he never dropped it. Personally, he would not have chosen the role, if not the job. He just carries it on. Like he should. Kagebist once, and for all.
Re: lol... (Score:2)
"Macron, on the other hand, sees Trump as a harbinger of American policies to come, hence Europe needs to build up its own defense force."
So... because of Trump... who in no ways totally doesn't never not point to Putin.
Everything you said suggest the best way to fix NATO is to vote out Trump and Erdogan, double down on our commitments to Europe and to hell with what Putin thinks about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you for sharing the official CCP propaganda with us. Your input is always... informative.
Uttarakhand latest news read now (Score:1)
Wait!! (Score:3)
It's been going on for three years? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I sort of wonder about the narrative of the issue. Most of the media in the countries affected is owned by German companies. I'm purely speculating here, but this troop removal is something which Germany isn'thappy about, however, a component to it is how Germany is dealing with Russia in the nordstream project, something which the USA is not happy about.
So I while I'm not jumping to any conclusions at this point, I do question the who is really benefitting from this. Many of these ex-communist countries ar
Re: (Score:1)
You are purely speculating, as you do not possess knowledge of what news outlets are in the area. Why bother to comment, then? To offload crap and dilute possibilities of information exchange. Surprisingly, this is exactly the kagebist dream in the world of enabled communication.
Re: (Score:2)
This is a disucssion forum, I'm just saying up front, that it's speculation purely because I'm not posing as any authority on the matter, however people will be able to ascertain whether what I say seems reasonable or not. As for what I know, maybe I live in one of the countries involved... Maybe I do have some knowledge in the area.
For one, I don't doubt that the prussian mitteleuropa plan has been forgotten in Germany, after all, the EU has been serving those interests in a radically different approach th
Re: (Score:1)
So, I live in a country, affected, without any need for maybe, and know well enough, that no distant smell of German ownership is present in the local media. So, I do know, and can state grounded, that you are purely speculating. Then, due to peculiarities of my raising, I also have native knowledge of Russian mentality, and what particular place in the landscape is dedicated for the current Tzar Vsiya Rusi of kagebist origin and resulting behavioral patterns. In this picture, there is no place for your mus
Re: (Score:2)
So, I live in a country, affected, without any need for maybe, and know well enough, that no distant smell of German ownership is present in the local media. So, I do know, and can state grounded, that you are purely speculating. Then, due to peculiarities of my raising, I also have native knowledge of Russian mentality, and what particular place in the landscape is dedicated for the current Tzar Vsiya Rusi of kagebist origin and resulting behavioral patterns. In this picture, there is no place for your musings, sorry. Greetings from the land of former Prussia, which itself had found very sad dead-end, unfortunately, as to make any plan for it becoming inapplicable.
But how could it be going on for three years with them knowing it is happening? Their security is that bad and there is nothing they can do? It doesn't make sense.
Re: (Score:1)
How can there be Chinese espionage restlessly taking place, to obtain knowledge from talented and advanced U.S. resources? The very same way, it is restless pressure and search for the tiniest gaps to sneak trough and reap benefits. Russia didn't gave up disturbing western world and a way of living, as it is existentially important for its own survival as is, and who it would be, if it did? Obviously, under such pressure all the means of contemporary infrastructure - from Slashdot to Facebook, to technical
Re: (Score:2)
So, I live in a country, affected, without any need for maybe, and know well enough, that no distant smell of German ownership is present in the local media.
Well, I guess it depends on which country you are referring to. In the case of Poland, approximately 75-80% of its press media is german owned. It is significantly less so for other mediums such as television and radio.
Re: (Score:1)
Depends. Now you can grasp where do I live, and what in particular, in regards of ownership, is not at all applicable here, while pattern of intrusion stays the same.
Have got your concerns, but they are rather local, and do not cover our case. Germany is not at all that cornered animal in despair, my friend.
Real news site? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Nope. CNN posts fake bullshit all the time. It's so bad that I'm not sure any of us could tell if a headline is from CNN or the Onion.
Round up the usual suspects (Score:1)
Been wondering when that would happen (Score:2)
Only a matter of time before the same thing happens in the U.S. with some major media outlet, only here it would be very likely targeting financial markets.
The effect of this would be made worse by the modern news practice of spreading a story far and wide before even the most basic fact checking is done, so something even slightly believable would have massive legs.
Are fake stories fake if they turn out to be true? (Score:2)
Now that is a retorical question!
undermine NATO? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Since Trump started attacking NATO. His supporters have to make sure he is right about stuff by planting fake stories that make him look insightful.
Some of them tagged this story "bizxpsyop" (Bizx is the owner of Slashdot, a psyop is when psychology is used to manipulate people). They literally believe that Bizx is using Slashdot to try to sow doubt in our minds and make us question these pro-Trump stories.
People laugh at QAnon but every day we see people acting on that nonsense.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't trust Fireeye (Score:1)
Just sayin..
It's a big moneymaker these days to come up with things to feed the propagandamill.
No actual propagandafactory hacks sites to plant their material and really influence opinion. When a news site promotes claims which are later shown to be fake the site will ignore that or retract it low profile. When the site is hacked the site will make a bigger news item of the hack than the original news item could have made it.
Most claims about Russian disinfo are plainly disinfo. I checked StopFake about it
Re: (Score:2)
Any statement that begins or ends with "just saying" is 95% guaranteed to be bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
Basically I will like interject any low brow colloquialism when it amuses me, know what I mean? And you will still have no excuse for your lapse of judgement, just sayin.
Re: (Score:1)
You forgot to end with Just sayin'
LOL
Also most people that come up with statistics pulled them out of their ass.
*Just sayin' .
LOL
Heard they used a regex overflow... (Score:2)
Negative, Ghostwriter, the pattern is full.
Explains the dupes! (Score:3)
So *that's* why /. has so many dupe stories. It all becomes clear now :-)
Propaganda (Score:1)
However, the mainstream media are by far the largest purveyors of propaganda and misinformation.
True investigative journalism is essentially dead in the mainstream media. It has been replaced with 'presstitution'.
There are three sides to every story: his story, her story and the truth - which is somewhere in between. When we only get one version of a story (his-story), chances are th
Re:Propaganda (Score:4)
How do we know that this group is really spreading propaganda? Perhaps it is.
If you have counter-evidence, share it. Otherwise, you're just engaging in FUD.
People need to hear all sides of the story and make up their own mind about what is real and what is B.S.
People need to listen to experts, because most people know jack about shit. They're only barely employable and can be replaced with a very small shell script.
FireEye (Score:1)
FireEye disinformation-focused report (Score:1)
“That hacking campaign, targeting media sites from Poland to Lithuania, has spread s/false/true/g stories about US military aggression”
Well, the're not wrong.