Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by opqpo 2143 days ago
Do you have any evidence that FireEye’s report is accurate and not misleading? they are the ones that claimed it in the first place.

Also what do you think is more plausible for a western cybersecurity company's bottomline? make Russia innocent or make it guilty? especially when you got the backing of all western governments and media.
2 comments
posixplz 2143 days ago
FireEye has provided their own evidence[1]. BBC has strong editorial guidelines for dealing with evidence from third-parties[2]. You, however, have provided nothing but conjecture and redirection.

Can you substantiate your claim? If not, it’s fair to classify your comments as obvious attempts to gaslight HN’s readers.

1: https://www.fireeye.com/content/dam/fireeye-www/blog/pdfs/Gh... 2: https://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines/accurac...

link
opqpo 2143 days ago
Literally there is ZERO evidence in the report. It's all pathetic nonsense "ghostwriting" about a few accounts upvoting each other on some blogs. The company and others have every incentive to blame these pathetic "ghostwriting" nonsense on Russia to make profit and be relevant. They have no reason whatsover to not do that. Even mentioning that they have no clear evidence against Russia means bad for their business.
link
raverbashing 2143 days ago
They need to update their response book, at this point it becomes too predictable
link