The three million toothbrush botnet story isn’t true.
Here’s the original source of the story: https://archive.is/2024.01.30-203406/https://www.luzernerzeitung.ch/wirtschaft/kriminalitaet-die-zahnbuersten-greifen-an-das-sind-die-aktuellen-cybergefahren-und-so-koennen-sie-sich-schuetzen-ld.2569480
It’s simply a made up example. It doesn’t exist. It starts talking about NoName Ddosia, too, which also isn’t toothbrushes.
They say the story isn’t true, but the source they cite in the very next sentence says:
Das Beispiel, das wie ein Hollywood-Szenario daherkommt, hat sich wirklich so zugetragen. Es zeigt, wie vielseitig digitale Angriffe geworden sind.
(This example, which sounds like a Hollywood plot, really happened. It shows how multidimensional (my mind blanks on a better translation right now) EDIT: diverse cyber attacks have become)
Edit: I hate microblogging sites. Apparently the thread continues on and the company who made the statement in the cited article has backtracked and admitted that this was a hypothetical. It did not happen.
The only one I’d trust without having to do more research on their reporting quality is netzpolitik.org. Not sure how much of a newspaper they are though. I’d consider them digital activists - with sound positions based on facts, but activists nonetheless.
They say the story isn’t true, but the source they cite in the very next sentence says:
(This example, which sounds like a Hollywood plot, really happened. It shows how
multidimensional (my mind blanks on a better translation right now)EDIT: diverse cyber attacks have become)Edit: I hate microblogging sites. Apparently the thread continues on and the company who made the statement in the cited article has backtracked and admitted that this was a hypothetical. It did not happen.
Are you a regular reader of the Luzerner Zeitung? What do you think of their other tech reporting?
No.
The only one I’d trust without having to do more research on their reporting quality is netzpolitik.org. Not sure how much of a newspaper they are though. I’d consider them digital activists - with sound positions based on facts, but activists nonetheless.