North Korea’s Cyber Threat

Washington has issued an advisory warning about North Korea’ (DPRK) ongoing cyber threat.

According to the advisory, “The DPRK’s malicious cyber activities threaten the United States and the broader international community and, in particular, pose a significant threat to the integrity and stability of the international financial system. Under the pressure of robust U.S. and UN sanctions, the DPRK has increasingly relied on illicit activities – including cybercrime – to generate revenue for its weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile programs. In particular, the United States is deeply concerned about North Korea’s malicious cyber activities, which the U.S. government refers to as HIDDEN COBRA. “

Despite its weak economy, The DPRK has the capability to conduct disruptive or destructive cyber activities that endanger elements of America’s key infrastructure .

It’s not just nation vs. nation. North Korea also uses cyber capabilities to steal from financial institutions, and has demonstrated a pattern of disruptive and harmful cyber activity that is wholly inconsistent with the growing international consensus on what constitutes responsible State behavior in cyberspace.

Several nations have banded together to combat the challenge. One example: in December 2017, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United States, and the United Kingdom publicly attributed the WannaCry 2.0 ransomware attack to the DPRK and denounced the DPRK’s harmful and irresponsible cyber activity. Denmark and Japan issued supporting statements for the joint denunciation of the destructive WannaCry 2.0 ransomware attack, which affected hundreds of thousands of computers around the world in May of that year.

North Korea’s state-sponsored cyber actors primarily consist of hackers, cryptologists, and software developers who conduct espionage, cyber-enabled theft targeting financial institutions and digital currency exchanges, and politically-motivated operations against foreign media companies. They develop and deploy a wide range of malware tools around the world to enable these activities and have grown increasingly sophisticated.

The warning outlined some common tactics the Pyongyang-sponsored cyber criminals use to gain funds. Sometimes, the target is not an individual or a business, but a financial institutions and digital currencies. The illicit gains are then laundered within North Korea.

Another tactic is extortion. The cyber crooks will threaten to disrupt or shut down entirely an organizations valuable online presence unless money is paid. Occasionally, these arrangements are called “consulting contracts,” with the alleged services simply promising not to attack the business. It’s the 21^st century of the old tactic of promising not to break a store window unless money is given to the vandal.

This treatment will stimulate the cialis online overnight body’s natural way of producing estrogen. Enhanced levels of testosterone improve the desire for sex* No longer finding pleasure in having sex* Stress is acting as trigger point for ED* Along with ED drugs cheapest price viagra online. As a result, you will not enjoy every online cialis prescriptions downtownsault.org beautiful moment in your life. In the worse case scenario, eventually they develop pancreatic cancer. cialis get viagra

Another interesting approach is known as “cryptojacking.” That involves a scheme to compromise a victim machine and steal its computing resources to mine digital currency.

According to U.S. experts, “These activities highlight the DPRK’s use of cyber-enabled means to generate revenue while mitigating the impact of sanctions and show that any country can be exposed to and exploited by the DPRK.”

The attacks have been widespread, and have even included the U.S. government and even the military.

The most famous cyber attacks have included the 2014 assault on Sony Pictures, a 2016 attempt to steal a billion dollars from a Bangladesh bank, the infamous 2017 “Wannacry” virus that affected massive numbers of computers, including those used in private homes, and the 2016 “Fastcash” tactic which targeted ATMS in Asia and Africa.

The funds gained are used for a variety of purposes by Pyongyang, including the financing of its nuclear weapons program.

The effort to combat North Korea’s cyberterrorism is multinational. A 2017 UN Security Council resolution required all Member States to repatriate DPRK nationals earning income abroad, including IT workers, by December 22, 2019. The FBI and other U.S. agencies have urged businesses and governments to strengthen their computer security, and to promptly report all attempts at theft and coercion by Pyongyang’s agents.

the United States strongly urges countries to strengthen network defense, shutter DPRK joint ventures in third countries, and expel foreign-located North Korean information technology (IT) workers in a manner consistent with applicable international law. A 2017 UN Security Council resolution required all Member States to repatriate DPRK nationals earning income abroad, including IT workers, by December 22, 2019. The United States also seeks to enhance the capacity of foreign governments and the private sector to understand, identify, defend against, investigate, prosecute, and respond to DPRK cyber threats and participate in international efforts to help ensure the stability of cyberspace.

Illustration: Pixabay

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.