Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Selectric bug (cryptomuseum.com)
142 points by mmastrac on Dec 22, 2015 | hide | past | favorite | 17 comments




So the Russians invented and built the first working RFID in 1945! No wonder they made such a big deal about being a nation of builders in their opening show for the Sochi Olympics. What happened to the USA that they began to underestimate these folks?

Now it becomes clear where all that weaponry and defense systems used in Syria comes from. And they keep hinting that they are only using a fraction of their capability, mostly old stuff.

If you think the USA defence establishment is equal or better, then I have to point out that they have nothing like SpaceX, Tesla or Google's self drive cars. The secret sauce is that the private sector knows how to innovate and iterate and deliver working products.

Is it possible that the Russians have their own secret private sector building stuff? If so, they would need an entire secret economy that is impervious to sanctions, etc.


What happened to the USA that they began to underestimate these folks?

The USA's extreme anticommunism led people to believe in its own supremacy and manifest destiny. Now, it is true that communism is a terrible system of economic organisation and capable of the casual deaths of millions, but that does not reflect on the intellectual capabilities of individual Russians. Or small teams that managed to achieve enough political protection to deliver great work.

It's something of an accident of history that HN celebrates Musk rather than Korolev, Tesla rather than Theremin.

Now it becomes clear where all that weaponry and defense systems used in Syria comes from

This isn't really a surprise; Russia has been arming Syria since its independence just after WW2. Much of the weaponry is the ubiquitous AK-47 / RPG-7 and clones; their air force uses MiG and Sukhoi aircraft.

Is it possible that the Russians have their own secret private sector building stuff?

No. They do have rather a lot of freebooter ""cyberwarfare"" people, though, usually engaged in credit card fraud and the like.


That's one very clever bug. Pity there is no schematic or a more high resolution photograph. You'd think that since the existence is now public there would be no harm in that.


Apart from anything else, they probably don't want to give people hints on how to hide bugs from non-linear junction detectors. I think those are still a critical tool for bug detection at least in the private sector. No idea what the government's using these days.


It's fun to imagine keeping the typewriters around in the embassy just to troll the eavesdroppers. But I suspect that at the time, nobody knew for sure what their capabilities were, so the safer choice was just to remove them.


So how did the bug get into the typewriters?

And surprised that the NSA could not get IBM to provide 220v selectrics.

Or just use a step down transformer to convert 220v to 110v


> So how did the bug get into the typewriters?

It's explained in the article:

<quote>

Planting the bug

The bugs were probably planted inside the IBM Selectric typewriters when the machines were in transit (perhaps in Poland or Moscow itself) awaiting customs inspection prior to their delivery to the US embassy in Moscow.

</quote>


That's only probably the infection route this begs the question why didn't they go in the diplomatic bag. I hope some one in the CIA got fired over this fiasco - the KGB have had people put in front of a firing squad for less.


If you've never seen a selectric (or lifted one) you would be excused for wondering why they didn't go 'in the diplomatic bag'.

The article lists about 11 tons of equipment, that would be one hell of a bag.


If you've never seen a diplomatic bag you would be excused for wondering how a Selectric would fit in it ;)

"Bag" (also called "pouch") is a bit of a misnomer. It's not limited in shape, size or weight by the Vienna Convention so it can really be anything that can be transported, including ISO containers.

For example, one of the toilet pumps of the ISS was sent in a diplomatic bag to the US, which is around the same weight as one Selectric https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14017

I remember reading about one incident in the 1980s were a Russian truck of 9 tons was turned down at first at the Swiss border but could pass through later.


It's important to note that the "bags" are only exempt from legal search and seizure at e.g. customs or by police. If they're not equipped with effective tamper-evident seals and/or escorted by a trustworthy courier at all times then they can (and probably will) be intercepted. It's tough to gain access to the small ones, but a shipping container is much harder to keep under watch at all times. It only matters if you get caught with your hands in the cookie jar after all.

I'd guess the typewriters weren't shipped in tamper-proof containers and were simply altered en route. I once read a story that I can't find again about the CIA intercepting a shipment of (what I think were fighter planes?) and disassembling them overnight, then putting them back together to be on the train again the next morning. It was a great story, I wish I could find it again.



Yes that's it! Thanks, I had a feeling it was something aerospace, but I was thinking fighter.


Learn a new thing every day. Maybe the term 'bag' should be retired for this purpose.

I think you've just figured out how to get Julian Assange out of the embassy. Place him in the diplomatic bag. Now we have to find a way to classify him as an 'article for official use'.


I don't think there's anything in the definition of 'bag' that restricts them to being a certain size.


In transit, they were not packaged in tamper proof packaging (see article).




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: