What is Reddit's opinion of Sandworm: A New Era of Cyberwar and the Hunt for the Kremlin's Most Dangerous Hackers?

From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

Because they are aggressive, good at what they do and often times very reckless. Andy Greenberg wrote a very good account of the activity of a single Russian military intelligence unit in the fanatic book Sandworm

It’s laughable to read a lot of you don’t think they’re linked to the Kremlin. You can turn a corner and run into evidence. There are literal books written on this very subject.

https://www.amazon.com/Sandworm-Cyberwar-Kremlins-Dangerous-Hackers/dp/0385544405

Don’t be naive

I'd recommend everyone to read the book "Sandworm: A New Era of Cyberwar and the Hunt for the Kremlin's Most Dangerous Hackers" ( https://www.amazon.com/Sandworm-Cyberwar-Kremlins-Dangerous-Hackers/dp/0385544405 ) - although it focuses mainly on Russian hackers, a significant portion talks about the capacity of other players as well.

The book says that there are three major players - the US, Russia and China (after them Iran, Israel and North Korea)

But each uses cyber weapons differently and with different purposes.

The US uses specific surgical attacks on specific targets and most covertly.

China uses them on a large scale, hitting all sorts of targets en masse, but their primary target is industrial espionage, patents, know-how, just about anything that can be acquired.

Russia uses attacks as part of an ideological method, they make little secret of the fact that they are perpetrating them and combine them with political and psychological influence (as with other types of attacks) - basically saying - Look what we can do, be afraid, leave us alone. That's also why the most publicly known info is about Russian hackers.

Those interested in the subject might want to check this out: https://www.amazon.com/Sandworm-Cyberwar-Kremlins-Dangerous-Hackers/dp/0385544405/ref=nodl_

I just finished it and while it’s not exactly conspiracy focused it seems very relevant to the now and future. These guys could bend a whole country over a barrel (and have) with a handful of lines of code.

You should read Sandworm by Andy Greenberg. Or this free article. It explains all about the largest cyberattack in history, who did it, how, and why. I'll bet you never knew that in 2017, 80% of the world's shipping was suddenly paralyzed for weeks.

Check out this book about earlier cyber warfare from Russia against the Ukraine

https://www.amazon.com/Sandworm-Cyberwar-Kremlins-Dangerous-Hackers/dp/0385544405

I'm reading Sandworm at the moment, it's pretty fucked at what they get away with

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_cyberattacks_on_Estonia

IIRC, there isn't a full episode on the attack. Might be too small of an incident to dedicate a whole episode to.

There's a chapter dedicated to the attack in the book Sandworm, which I believe was one of the books used to source the episode on the Ukrainian cyber attacks.

> Infrastructure and financial systems are pretty resilient. The energy infrastructure is fragile and outdated, yes, but as someone who works in this industry, you can have some pretty complex problems and there is usually a guy on staff who will know exactly where the problem lies. This is partially why from a security standpoint, a distributed network with a variety of energy sources has its advantages.

While it's more pop than hard tech, Andy Greenbergs recent-ish book on Russian government hacking comes to a different conclusion. the book is basically the history of Sandworm, the alleged GRU-hacking organization and is a pretty good (and light) read.

They've taken out large parts of Ukraines power grid twice and not much reason to think this couldn't be done in the US - in fact in the book, he thinks the impact may be worse since Ukrainian operators are still used to doing a lot of their work by hand in the field, vs an overreliance on tech we see in the US (this is all his speculation) which he concludes to mean the US would struggle more to get systems back online.

Here is an article he wrote for WIRED demonstrating what an attach could to an electrical generator:

> if Assante had done his job properly, they were going to destroy it. And the assembled researchers planned to kill that very expensive and resilient piece of machinery not with any physical tool or weapon but with about 140 kilobytes of data, a file smaller than the average cat GIF shared today on Twitter.

...

> The machine did not make it. After a third hit, it released a larger cloud of gray smoke. “That prime mover is toast,” an engineer standing next to Assante said. After a fourth blow, a plume of black smoke rose from the machine 30 feet into the air in a final death rattle.

Targeting civilian infrastructure openly is asking for war so I very much doubt it. It's constant probing and testing the waters for now. We've seen a fraction of each nations cyber capabilities. Great book on the subject of cyber attacks https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sandworm-Cyberwar-Kremlins-Dangerous-Hackers/dp/0385544405/

Based upon what I know as an IT generalist, I'd agree with Stuxnet and NotPetya...both were devastating attacks in their own ways and for their own reasons...and each attack could've been mitigated, if not for the too often weak link - humans and unpatched systems. Best wishes with your studies.

This book is about the NotPetya attack: https://www.amazon.com/Sandworm-Cyberwar-Kremlins-Dangerous-Hackers/dp/0385544405

and several books also cover Stuxnet.

https://www.amazon.com/Sandworm-Cyberwar-Kremlins-Dangerous-Hackers/dp/0385544405
its maybe this one, the apt group was called FancyBear iirc.
try this too
https://www.amazon.com/Perfect-Weapon-Sabotage-Fear-Cyber/dp/0451497902/ref=pd_sbs_9?pd_rd_w=fg1uF&pf_rd_p=98101395-b70f-4a52-af63-8fac2c513e02&pf_rd_r=0HJZEZFMW16JY3AB7YCT&pd_rd_r=44f24466-bed7-4059-9626-f986850ae582&pd_rd_wg=ypo3p&pd_rd_i=0451497902&psc=1

and if you are still dumb enough to not believe this, then there are sources for every claim in the book.. if thats not enough, then read it again