Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Government Social Networks The Military

Russian Government Sites Facing 'Unprecedented' Cyberattacks from Thousands in Pro-Ukranian 'IT Army' (msn.com) 116

Posted by EditorDavid from the just-say-nyet dept.
Though the Russian government has tried geofencing access to crucial web sites, the Jerusalem Post reports that two Russian government web site still went offline Saturday — the Kremlin and the Ministry of Defense. "Gosuslugi, Russia's web portal of state services, went offline on Saturday night as well, with the Russian Ministry of Digital Development, Communications and Mass Media telling TASS that the site is facing cyberattacks on an 'unprecedented scale.'"

Meanwhile, the Washington Post interviews 22-year-old Alex Horlan, a Ukrainian cybersecurity expert in Spain "helping take down some of Russia's most powerful websites — including state media and even the official page of the Kremlin." The attacks he and others are helping to carry out on Russian websites are part of a wide information war in the background of the much larger conflict here, as Ukrainians target Russian websites to rewrite the narrative Moscow is presenting to Russians back home. "We are creating an IT army," Ukrainian Vice Prime Minister Mykhailo Fedorov tweeted on Saturday. Horlan is a cybersecurity expert who recently launched an app called disBalancer that helps take down scam websites by overwhelming them with online traffic. He has redirected his team's efforts in recent days to instead target Russian websites he says are spreading dangerous disinformation about the Russian invasion of Ukraine....

Thousands of people are joining Horlan and others' efforts to target the Russian sites, with around 2,000 logging into his app at any given time, he said. The main challenge is that many are losing WiFi when air raid sirens force them to retreat to underground bunkers....

Volunteers are gathering information on attacks and casualties to fact check and challenge Russia's version of events, posting messages on Telegram and other Russian social media platforms [according to Liuba Tsbulska, a Ukrainian analyst and activist who has tracked Russian disinformation for eight year]. Others work to educate international audiences or produce patriotic content. Some also target Russian military and intelligence officers, flooding their emails and other platforms with messages. Volunteers are reaching out to the mothers of Russian soldiers to convince them to call for Russian President Vladimir Putin to bring their boys back home.

In Kharkiv, after reports that Russian troops and armored vehicles entered Ukraine's second largest city early Sunday, one local Telegram channel with more than 400,000 subscribers urged people to continue to document the adversary's movements as a way to aid Ukraine's forces in the area. In one message, the Truha Kharkiv channel asked citizens to "carefully film and send information about the movement of Russian troops to our channel. This is vital to the defense of our city."

Another message instructed citizens on how to make molotov cocktails.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Russian Government Sites Facing 'Unprecedented' Cyberattacks from Thousands in Pro-Ukranian 'IT Army' More

Russian Government Sites Facing 'Unprecedented' Cyberattacks from Thousands in Pro-Ukranian 'IT Army'

Comments Filter:
  • I'm certainly willing to do my part...

  • Somehow they missed the biggest one ... (Score:5, Funny)

    by cpurdy ( 4838085 ) on Monday February 28, 2022 @08:13AM (#62311197)
    Fox News is still online.

  • In Kharkiv, after reports that Russian troops and armored vehicles entered Ukraine's second largest city early Sunday, one local Telegram channel with more than 400,000 subscribers urged people to continue to document the adversary's movements as a way to aid Ukraine's forces in the area. In one message, the Truha Kharkiv channel asked citizens to "carefully film and send information about the movement of Russian troops to our channel. This is vital to the defense of our city."

    This would never be possible w

    • This would never be possible with the US. There is a standard modus operandi to shut down all the communication lines first. Russia doesn't use it. Think about it. It is a 'friendly invasion' strategy. It will carry a cost though.

      But y'all Russians and Russian sympathizers keep trying to turn this into a USA thing.

      • Let's not mix up things, I am not a Russia sympathizer but a rabid contrarian. Put me in the middle of Russia sympathizers and you've got trouble.

      • I am a Russian sympathizer. But I oppose this invasion of Ukraine. Russia should let Ukrainians decide for themselves.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mspohr ( 589790 )

      Remember, the Internet routes around damage. It was designed by the military to be resilient to even severe damage. It's almost impossible to completely shut down the Internet. Even Musk and his Starlink terminals are coming to add backup to the Internet.
      Friedman in the NYT had an interesting opinion piece. This will be the first "World War Wired"

      "Our world is not going to be the same again because this war has no historical parallel. It is a raw, 18th-century-style land grab by a superpower — but in

      • Remember, the internet was created to have the ability to work around damage. That does not mean 'you install internet and suddenly it cannot be broken anymore'.
        Civilian networks can very well be interrupted and they commonly are in the case of insurrection/revolt.

  • Anonymous is boasting about outright cyberterrorism against Russian civilian targets. This isn't defacing websites anymore [hstoday.us]...

    As members of the collective posted information about their operations on Twitter, one account said that hackers breached a Russian Linux terminal and gas control system in Nogir, North Ossetia. “We changed the dates and almost make its gas pressure become so high to turn into fireworks! Luckily we didn’t because of a fast-acting human controller,” the post said, add

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by skam240 ( 789197 )

      Well to be fair Ukrainian infrastructure is getting blown up left and right and Russian hackers have been targeting the US for over a decade now. I'm not a big fan of war either but here it is, we have war in Ukraine.

      Furthermore, this stuff could actually help end the war. Russia's economy is already getting it pretty rough, if a major portion of their oil exports all of a sudden stops they're straight up fucked.

    • This was attempted terrorism, not a protest. Folks in the West cheering on blatant assaults on the Russian civilian infrastructure are going to be left with Shocked Pikachu expressions when the FSB finally cracks its knuckles and says "payback, assholes."

      So you're saying when Russian hackers hit U.S. hosptials with cyber attacks, or electricity producers, or water plants, or corporsations, all of which are civilian infrastructure, that is perfectly fine. The U.S. should completely ignore all those attempts

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by DarkOx ( 621550 )

        What part of his comment led you conclude that? Just because we chose something other than responding in kind or escalating to a shooting war does not mean we are ignoring it or that we should ignore it.

        I would agree over the past decade of incidents we probably should have made more of this as a specific diplomatic issue and offered up a more muscular response though in general.

        That said even if we do/should/have respond[ed] in kind it does not automatically follow the best way is to let some rando with a

      • So you're saying when Russian hackers hit U.S. hosptials...

        The US--correctly--hit back with targeted, lawful means and has generally done well at making Russian cybercriminals suffer.

        I'd also point out that there is a world of difference between taking machines offline and trying to destroy them.

        Ransomeware was disabling hospital Windows machines; it wasn't making things like MRIs, X Ray systems and blood processing equipment permanently inoperable.

        I also don't recall Russian hackers trying to break into th

        • Ransomeware was disabling hospital Windows machines; it wasn't making things like MRIs, X Ray systems and blood processing equipment permanently inoperable.

          Actually, a lot of devices that you mention run on a Windows software substrate. Many of them have older versions of the underlying OS for which Microsoft and their manufacturers have not made updates. The selection of Windows was done to make data interchange with Windows EMR systems easier. Ransomware did not differentiate between embedded and online

          • Actually, a lot of devices that you mention run on a Windows software substrate. Many of them have older versions of the underlying OS for which Microsoft and their manufacturers have not made updates. The selection of Windows was done to make data interchange with Windows EMR systems easier..

            That particular reason is not valid. There is a long-established series of protocols that are platform agnostic that make interchange possible: HL7. [wikipedia.org] I have witnessed some asinine decisions made by 'tech managers' that support claim, though. Include one decades ago where a decision was made to upgrade an existing EMR app from "VB to VB.NET, since it's almost the same thing."

            If there are systems out there which require Windows in order to interoperate with other medical records technologies, they are not

      • There is a significant chunk of the US who feels we should be an island. This is mostly because of our history of usually only having 2 neighbors. And we tried to build a wall on the one border, and for the other border we treat it like an unofficial 51st state. Which means that a lot of the US population really doesn't worry about the outside world that much except when it becomes a bit too apparent. The recent CPAC in Florida almost completely ignored mention of Ukraine, at least by any actual politic

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by DarkOx ( 621550 )

      This!

      These idiots are perhaps unlikely to but really could start a war! All it takes is a serious industrial accident because of some badly secured Russian infrastructure. Maybe they think they are hitting front office target but there is some poorly consider dependency on a DNS, time, certificate, etc services in the ICS network.

      Next Russian attribution is sloppy and rushed, maybe they happen on some actual NSA or CIA finger prints, that happen to be there from a long running itnel operation. Next they con

    • "outright cyberterrorism against Russian civilian targets."
      The Russian gas transport infrastructure is a strategic target.
      They use it as a weapon against European Union (not to mention against Ukraine, Moldova, ...).
      And the gas transport is a (at least partially) state-owned company, so it isn't really "civilian".

    • A new generation of post-Cold War v1.0 Westerners needs to get pimpslapped so they understand the Russian threat to civilization.

      Russia has never supported secular democracy and went from Tsars to dictators. The few protesters don't matter because they are exceptions which prove the rule. Weak people who fail to understand this must be taught by events.

      Attacks also coerce security in ways PHPs can understand. After decades ignoring security action is overdue.

    • I don't know enough about the gas facility target to judge its validity as a target. If it is a piece of energy or fuel infrastructure supporting the invasion though (Nogir is within a day's drive of Rostov-on-Don or Sebastopol), sabotaging it is more guerilla warfare or spec ops than it is terrorism. Anonymous engaging in sabotage like this rather than goofing around harassing Klansman or Scientologists is astonishing though. "For great justice!" takes on new meaning when they're slowing down Belorussian r

  • ... but face the harsh reality, there's no way they can win this.

    Russia is an overwhelming force, and while assistance from other nations could certainly turn that tide, if any countries send troops into Ukraine, it will precedent ww3, and such a war will not end well, for anyone. Ukraine might be doing better than expected so far, but it cannot last.

    My heart is entirely at odds with what my sense of what is realistic is telling me is inevitable, and I deeply grieve for what is going to eventually ha

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by nagora ( 177841 )

      ... but face the harsh reality, there's no way they can win this.

      Russia is an overwhelming force, and while assistance from other nations could certainly turn that tide, if any countries send troops into Ukraine, it will precedent ww3, and such a war will not end well, for anyone. Ukraine might be doing better than expected so far, but it cannot last.

      My heart is entirely at odds with what my sense of what is realistic is telling me is inevitable, and I deeply grieve for what is going to eventually happen here. Russia is wrong, but that's not going to matter.

      One word: Vietnam.

      Wars can be lost politically, regardless of the balance of force son the ground, if they drag on too long. Russia simply can't hold Ukraine. They, as a country, haven't got the power and they haven't got the men and they haven't got the will. They need to try to make a deal for the territory east of the Dnieper. That, they can probably hold.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mark-t ( 151149 )

        I don't recall anyone waving around they would use nukes to deter other countries from getting involved during the Vietnam war. Putin did.

        Putin is clearly afraid he will lose if other nations, particularly the US, send any military troops to help Ukraine. Apparently even more afraid than he is of MAD.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by nagora ( 177841 )

          I don't recall anyone waving around they would use nukes to deter other countries from getting involved during the Vietnam war. Putin did.

          No one had to as no one else was going to get involved aside from China and they were no more directly involved in Vietname than the support Ukraine is getting and will continue to get from outside.

          Putin can't press the button on his own and I don't believe for a moment that if he pressed it anything would happen in the current situation. Russia has felt much, much more threatened by NATO in the past and not pressed the button. If Putin went off the rails and tried to start firing nukes for no better reason

          • Agree, and maybe it's misplaced optimism but I do have a feeling that if Putin gave the order to launch there would disobedience somewhere down the line. It takes dozens if not hundreds of people to go from an order to actually targeting and launching a nuclear strike. Even if for pure self preservation I have to believe that the Russian cabinet and advisors would not let such an action take place. While the oligarch class is feeling some financial pain now it does not compare to being dead or having a

      • They can't even hold that much. Some of that territory has some people who'd like to be in Russia, but not the majority of residents east of Dnieper. When the insurgency fighting began there most fled west and south, and when fighting started most fled west again. Very few want to flee war towards Russia. Putin's mistake may be in believing that anyone who's ethnically Russian wants to be governed by Russia or one of it's puppet leaders.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by nagora ( 177841 )

          They can't even hold that much. Some of that territory has some people who'd like to be in Russia, but not the majority of residents east of Dnieper. When the insurgency fighting began there most fled west and south, and when fighting started most fled west again. Very few want to flee war towards Russia. Putin's mistake may be in believing that anyone who's ethnically Russian wants to be governed by Russia or one of it's puppet leaders.

          I would counter that basically no normal people wanted to live under the terror that was Stalin's despotic mass-murdering slave-based hell regime, but the ones that did had the army. So the question is more about critical mass, not simple majorities.

          And I don't think Putin believes that anyone who's ethnically Russian wants to be governed by Russia any more than Hitler thought that all German-speaking Czechs wanted to be governed by Germany, he just wanted the industry and Putin just wants his warm-water po

          • Putin has his ports, such as near Rostov, or he can build/expand more.He doens't need Crimea for that, but ships would have to sail past Crimea through a tiny strait and wave to non Russians as they go by.

    • Russia is an overwhelming force, and while assistance from other nations could certainly turn that tide, if any countries send troops into Ukraine, it will precedent ww3

      Other nations are sending materiel into Ukraine to be used by Ukraine, and so far that seems to be effective.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Putin fell victim to one of the classic blunders, right up there with starting a land war in Asia. He believed his own propaganda. Russian propaganda has kept up a steady drumbeat of how the Ukrainian people hate the government that has supposedly been imposed on them by the West and will welcome the Russian armies as liberators and offer no real resistance. Apparently Putin himself believed this would be the case.

        • And probably because Putin was only listening to those in the separatists or from Crimea. Those separatists were helped at the start by Russia anyway and is full of loyalists. Crimea on the other hand had a huge population shipped in after Stalin removed all the Tatars.

          It's the same as believing all those WMDs were in Iraq, because the US administration at the time wanted to believe it and was talking to expats with a bias. One hears what one wants to believe.

    • I think we all know that Russia can defeat Ukraine militarily. The point is that the cost is going to bankrupt the country and the toll of human lives on both sides will be unthinkably tragic. The Russian people don't deserve this and the Ukrainians certainly do not either.

    • ... but face the harsh reality, there's no way they can win this.

      Russia is an overwhelming force, and while assistance from other nations could certainly turn that tide, if any countries send troops into Ukraine, it will precedent ww3, and such a war will not end well, for anyone. Ukraine might be doing better than expected so far, but it cannot last.

      My heart is entirely at odds with what my sense of what is realistic is telling me is inevitable, and I deeply grieve for what is going to eventually happen here. Russia is wrong, but that's not going to matter.

      It depends what winning is.

      If winning includes not having a lot of civilians killed then no, they can't win.

      If winning includes bleeding the Russian army through a drawn out guerrilla war then they can win, but the cost will suck.

      The other question is can Russia win? I don't think they can win either.

      The sanctions will last as long as the war, which could be a while.

      Installing a pro-Russian leader requires a permanent occupation army, which again is going to suck for Russia.

      The consensus seems to be that Pu

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Tom ( 822 )

        For all that Putin loves using the Iraq war as a justification he made the same mistake as Bush did in starting a war without a realistic exit plan.

        Unlike Iraq, almost half of the Ukrainian people are Russian by ethnicity and language. That's a huge difference between those two scenarios.

        • For all that Putin loves using the Iraq war as a justification he made the same mistake as Bush did in starting a war without a realistic exit plan.

          Unlike Iraq, almost half of the Ukrainian people are Russian by ethnicity and language. That's a huge difference between those two scenarios.

          Sure, but ethnicity isn't destiny. The vast majority of those ethnic Russian Ukrainians consider themselves to be Ukrainian, not Russian, and that's before Russia started carving away parts of the country.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Tom ( 822 )

            For a few decades, those who wanted to could leave Ukraine and move to Russia, yes. I agree with you.

            Main point was that you can't compare the russian invasion of Ukraine with the american invasion of Iraq 1:1 - there's plenty of differences.

            • For a few decades, those who wanted to could leave Ukraine and move to Russia, yes. I agree with you.

              Main point was that you can't compare the russian invasion of Ukraine with the american invasion of Iraq 1:1 - there's plenty of differences.

              Huge differences yes.

              But one important similarity, they were both done by Presidents who wrongly assumed the invaded population would be docile and them as liberators. And neither had a plan for a serious resistance.

              The invasion and occupation of Ukraine is a multi-decade obligation for Russia. I don't think Putin was planning to spend his remaining years constantly fighting a Ukrainian resistance movement.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by Tom ( 822 )

                The invasion and occupation of Ukraine is a multi-decade obligation for Russia. I don't think Putin was planning to spend his remaining years constantly fighting a Ukrainian resistance movement.

                We don't know what he's thinking or planning, so that's all speculation.

                I'm careful with judging the situation. We are also being bombared by propaganda. Some is obvious, some less so.

        • But that almost-half is not pro-Putin, or even pro-Russia. And even those who lean towards Russia are not necessarily going to be loyal in the face of doing something that's obviously immoral. Especially when they've had some experience with how things can run without a dictator in charge.

          We had this lesson in the US during WWII. Those Japanese ancestry were interred in camps because leadership assumed that they'd be loyal to Japan, even those who were born in the US. But many of those Japanese served with

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Tom ( 822 )

            But that almost-half is not pro-Putin, or even pro-Russia.

            The exact distribution is unclear and not the point. There are Russians living in Ukraine, by nationality, history, ethnicity, language and/or political preference, and not a few expats. Ukraine also borders Russia, and they used to be part of the same country (USSR).

            The Ukraine/Russia situation is nowhere near comparable with the Iraq/USA situation. Whatever your position on either may be, they are two very different situations.

            Especially when they've had some experience with how things can run without a dictator in charge.

            Ukraine was a troubled country even before this. One of the highest corruption

    • It's not clear Russia can win. This is doubly true because the Russian military doesn't seem to want to win.


  • I heard that IT professionals were trying to save people from genocide and they are merely defending themselves.

    Comrades. You know cyber security is non-negotiable!

    Calling these peaceful actions "cyberattacks" is dangerous and destabilising.

  • And losing their minds. They are cheering for a communist dictator to invade and occupy a fledgling democratic country just to hurt the president and watching all those troops and material get ground up in the meat grinder. Even worse, all that money they liked to spend on the Pentagon so it could have the latest and greatest toys is now being shipped to Ukraine to kill the Russian invaders.

    They like to claim Russia is so Christian while completely ignoring Ukrainians are also Christians. But then, Christi

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Um, I think you might have gotten that a bit wrong. Republicans don't support Russia, in fact, for years they have been warning of the danger of Russian aggression. Meanwhile, the current president is compromised by Russia in a way that the previous one was only ever accused of being, which kind of explains why he didn't put any troops in Ukraine to support them two weeks ago when he was asked.

      • Meanwhile, the current president is compromised by Russia in a way that the previous one was only ever accused of being, which kind of explains why he didn't put any troops in Ukraine to support them two weeks ago when he was asked.

        Citation please. Or are you talking about the Biden-Ukraine [wikipedia.org] controversy? Because in none of the conspiracy theories is Biden alleged to have Russian support or links. Biden, if anything, should be beholden to the Ukrainians, and therefore should be more than eager to supply arms and whatnot to help his supposed "friends" in need, especially now that there's a good "cover" for doing so.

        • In an exchange about al-Qaida during the debate, Obama attacked Romney for calling Russia “without question, our No. 1 geopolitical foe” earlier this year.

          "Gov. Romney, I'm glad you recognize al-Qaida is a threat, because a few months ago when you were asked what is the biggest geopolitical group facing America, you said Russia, not al-Qaida," Obama said. "You said Russia. And the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back. Because the Cold War has been over for 20 years. But Gov

          • In an exchange about al-Qaida during the debate, Obama attacked Romney for calling Russia “without question, our No. 1 geopolitical foe” earlier this year.

            "Gov. Romney, I'm glad you recognize al-Qaida is a threat, because a few months ago when you were asked what is the biggest geopolitical group facing America, you said Russia, not al-Qaida," Obama said. "You said Russia. And the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back. Because the Cold War has been over for 20 years. But Governor, when it comes to our foreign policy, you seem to want to import the foreign policies of the 1980s, just like the social policy of the 1950s, and the economic policies of the 1920s."

            https://www.salon.com/2012/10/ [salon.com]... [salon.com]

            Correct link please.

            The link you included 404's: "Whoops! The page you're looking for does not exist." Now even if you just truncated it by mistake, the virtual subdirectory part of the link (2012/10/) and the context (the Obama vs. Romney election debate) makes your comment obsolete at best.

            In 2012, Dmitry Medvedev had just finished his term as Russian president. So, while Putin re-assumed the presidency, there was still that leftover diplomatic "thaw" from the Medvedev presidency, and Putin had still not

            • I messed up on the quotes when coping my old post. Earlier this year was from the article.

              https://www.salon.com/2012/10/... [salon.com]

              • Thanks. That explains a lot. I think even then that Obama was wrong in hinting that a poorly funded fringe group could ever be America's No. 1 threat. However, singling out Russia is also wrong. The danger now is more like a zombie or cloud attack of threats. The danger isn't from Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, Al-Kaeda or some unintended man-made or natural catastrophe, but from an unfortunate combination of different threats.

      • Yes, Republicans traditionally have been anti Russia, post USSR. But with Trump things changed a bit, Trump was buddies with Putin and other dictators while insulting our allies and trying to get us out of NATO. This is why it's hard to really say "Republican" these days and know what their political stance really is. Prominent Republicans are steering clear of the issue really, Rubio talked the most about it, followed by Trump who was mostly blathering about how it's not his fault and he'd do a better j

  • I am okay with people causing mayhem for Putin for invades its neighbors and killing people for no good reason.

Slashdot Top Deals

The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility. And vice versa.

Close