Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Coveney claims to have previously been hacked.

Options
1234579

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,874 ✭✭✭skimpydoo


    Coveney had already said they were contacted via Telegram and he doesn't use Telegram. So we have to ask how was his phone compromised, if it was compromised ? If he doesn't use Telegram the messages could not have come from his phone. Simon is protesting too much.



  • Registered Users Posts: 67,428 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Can somebody PLEASE tell me why Simon is still using the same phone and number a year later and WHY deleting text messages is a precaution.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,861 ✭✭✭Cluedo Monopoly


    Sometimes Simon never reads his texts before deleting them. He ignored Regina and the Whistleblowers back in 2017.

    Texts suggest Simon Coveney knew of Air Corps whistleblowers (irishexaminer.com)

    Significant inconsistencies have emerged in the Government’s account of how it managed the warnings it received relating to concerns for Air Corps technicians’ health.

    The Irish Examiner has learned that, in January 2016, Ms Doherty forwarded a text message onto one of the whistleblowers that she said came from then-Defence Minister Coveney. The message claimed Mr Coveney would call this whistleblower the next day.

    Despite their efforts, none of the three whistleblowers have been contacted directly by Mr Coveney or his Department.

    What are they doing in the Hyacinth House?



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,874 ✭✭✭skimpydoo


    The Simon Community on here think he can do no wrong. It's like a parent saying oh no my Johnny would never do that.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,619 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    Its like that time Fianna Fails Michael McGrath didnt know how to use Twitter and he was trying to perform a search for ILoveMilfs .com but he clicked into the wrong box and he tweeted ILoveMilfs .com out to a few thousand of his followers instead. Milfy McGrath was there like 'I was hacked, I was hacked'. Eh no Michael you were searching for Milf porn at 2 in the morning without a clue how to use Twitter and literally got caught with your pants down.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 28,656 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Why would you assume that he's using the same phone and number?



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,778 ✭✭✭✭expectationlost




  • Registered Users Posts: 13,484 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    It is a non story because no one believes it or even wants to pretend to believe it.


    If it was true, it would be newsworthy.


    In Coveneys defence he isn't even pushing it, he must have some humility.


    It's such a cringe story that even the opposition do not want to put their mitts on it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,874 ✭✭✭skimpydoo


    If it's a non story, why has it not gone away?



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,484 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    It's not going anywhere either. Everyone knows it is bs but there will be no smoking gun.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,874 ✭✭✭skimpydoo


    Everyone knows it's BS? I don't think so and neither do others on here.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    Why would he delete texts from a phone and different number that wasn't "hacked"?

    Completely different electronic device, completely different number.

    Would you wipe data and texts from your phone, because your cousin in Cambodia had his "hacked"?



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,420 ✭✭✭✭sligojoek


    " If it was true, it would be newsworthy."

    Coveney's name in the headlines of all Irish papers Friday.

    Broadsheet have only one paper up for today so far.

    The Examiner. Coveney's name is in a headline.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,054 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    As predicted you never answered the question.

    Which scenario I presented was more prudent from a security point of view.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,054 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Not surprisingly this bit of information has been ignored, not once, or twice, but 3 times by the usual crew. Instead, they want to talk about Nigerian princes and 'simple' Simon. All for the banter and craic, like! They give themselves away.

    Post edited by markodaly on


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,054 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    It is good security advice to not let potentially sensitive data on a device in the view that it could be compromised at any future date. By all we know, it was the Cyber Security experts in the Gardai that told him to delete stuff on a regular basis.

    Just because you get a new phone, doesn't mean you cannot be hacked again!


    From my own experience, I consulted for a few organisations that implemented such policies for emails stored on a handset. Anything older than 3 monhs was automatically expounged from the device unless otherwise flagged.

    Going one further I also consulted for an organisation that won't let ANY bit of data that has a certain security label or category attached to it be stored on any personal (obviously) or work devices at rest, even though these work laptops have the usual security precautions taken, like encryption at rest, BIOS passwords, TPM chip passwords, external ports being disabled and so on. For this type of data, one had to use your laptop like a thinclient and go from there. It was a pain but dem the rules. This organisation had a certain ISO standard to adhere to because a sizable arm of their corporate business was in the Defence and Aerospace sector, even though I was not in that division.

    So in summary, yes deleting data from devices on a regular basis or not even allowing certain data on devices at all, is actually protocol in many places.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,426 ✭✭✭maestroamado


    You are correct the politicians think we are eejits quite simply because we are. He has to come next week with a different spin on what he is saying if he wants this to go away. For me its already almost gone as no mention on RTE news last evening and if he was in any real trouble it be headline there...

    He is going no-where and to be fair we all get what we deserve... no-one is asking him to resign... just spin a story that's makes it look a bit better''' Leo, MM are stuck in the middle of this and these are our leaders...



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    I'm going to take a guess here, the data YOU deleted wasn't subject to FOI.

    I'm also going to guess Simon won't be able to give any details of cyber security expert's from within AGS or Government IT departments that have advised him to wipe data (bearing in mind the aforementioned FOI, and his obligations with same) from his presumably new device that wasn't hacked, and also not to back this data up to the cloud or elsewhere before deleting(FOI related data)

    Let me get in front of you now, and state I'm not expecting Simon to publicly make available all his cyber security guidelines surrounding his texts etc, all he needs is some confirmation from the cyber security expert's responsible for telling him it was ok to delete data, subject to FOI from an (as far as anyone is concerned) uncompromised device.

    You're digging a hole on Simon's behalf mark..



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,054 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Where does he say that he is still using the same phone and phone number?



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    Simon needs a change of story before Tuesday. Time is running out.


    Under data protection law, companies and public bodies are obliged to notify the Data Protection Commissioner of breaches that can compromise the personal data of others. Data Protection Commissioner’s office said it has searched its records back to May 2018, with no record of any breach or hack recorded relating to Mr Coveney’s phone.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 14,054 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Ah, so now the goalposts have shifted from


    a) Deleting data is not preduent security advice

    to

    b) Simon wasn't hacked at all (as per the article in the Irish Times, it appeared he was, a fact ignored by you for the past 24 hours)

    to

    c) The data was subject to FOI, when this is pure speculation by you.


    Not all data is subject to FOI, again people seem to be taking an inch to run a mile with some facts here.

    But sure, post up some more memes about Nigerian princes to cover up the fact you seem to be changing your angle of attack numerous times.



  • Posts: 6,192 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Was under impression,by resident expert in every area affecting FFG,that security breaches and hacks arent disclosed routinely or acknowledeged🤣🤣🤣🤣


    Something something jeff bezos....snigger



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,054 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Again, you are forgetting some pertinent bits.


    After he was asked by the Irish Independent why his department did not report the breach to the Data Protection Commissioner his spokesperson said: “The Department judged this incident to be in the realm of a cyber-attack and took all appropriate steps to notify the relevant national security authorities.”

    “Arising from these, an Garda Síochána and the National Cyber Security Centre investigated,” he added.

    The spokesperson would not say what type of cyber attack targeted Mr Coveney’s phone or outline whether they should have contacted the Data Protection Commissioner or not.


    The amount of effort to try and get some 'gotcha' moment is both hilarious and deliciously ironic.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    What goalposts have shifted Mark? The reason Simon is in hot water, is because he deleted data, that was subject to FOI, and he shouldn't have deleted it. There's no "shifting of goalposts" there me old china.... And thankfully it's not I that will have to square that circle Tuesday/or the latter PAC hearing.

    YOU deleting data "for a client's" completely irrelevant and uninteresting here, unless, as already stated that data was subject to FOI rules and regulations, as Simon's undoubtedly was.

    Didn't read anything beyond "goalposts shifting" accusation. If you can't get over the fact, that's the major problem in Simon's sorry tale, I didn't see the point in reading on.


    Sorry about that.

    Post edited by McMurphy on


  • Registered Users Posts: 772 ✭✭✭SchrodingersCat


    Because it limits the amount of information that the hacker can retrieve when/if they access your device.

    To give an example, the Israeli hacking tool “Pegasus” was potentially used to hack into a large number of European ministers and leaders phone in 2019

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/18/revealed-leak-uncovers-global-abuse-of-cyber-surveillance-weapon-nso-group-pegasus

    The suspected countries that used this tool are India, Morocco, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Mexico and Hungary.

    The tool allowed the user to remotely pull any data from the phone such as messages and emails, activate the microphone, get the owners GPS, etc.

    If these countries are using this tool, you can be sure as **** that countries with more sophisticated espionage technologies like the UK or Russia are using tools on countries in their political interest, like Ireland.


    If I were an Irish minister I would be wiping my phone every couple of weeks at the very least.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    If you weren't backing up government related business, you'd, as a govt minister, not be adhering to FOI.



  • Registered Users Posts: 67,428 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady




  • Registered Users Posts: 772 ✭✭✭SchrodingersCat


    The requirements for FOI I am not familiar with: are government ministers required to backup all their communications?

    I can see a plausible situation where a goverment minister, in particularly one involved in foreign affairs, wipes their phone every couple of weeks for security reasons. It is one of the recommended ways to remove the Pegasus Android/Apple hacking tool from your phone, for example. If they received a FOI before wiping their phone, then that should be an offence. If they received the FOI after they wiped their phone, then whoever made the request, unfortunately that information is gone.

    Now, if what you say is true, that government ministers are required to keep backups of all their communications, then that is an offence.



  • Registered Users Posts: 772 ✭✭✭SchrodingersCat


    Do you mean wiping his phone every couple of weeks? If so, I have no idea. I could speculate a couple of ideas:

    1). Didnt get around to it/didnt care as much about security. Politicians can be lazy when it comes to security. Trump used a 6 year old Galaxy S3 while he was president. That phone was so old that it could no longer run the latest, and most secure, versions of Android, and there were known unfixed vulnerabilities in the operating system that could be used to take complete control of the device. It was nuts that he was allowed to keep going with it.

    2) Leo isnt the minister of Foreign Affairs, so he he wouldnt be as big a target to get hacked by foreign countries as Simon Coveney. Covney was much more involved in Brexit, for example. I can see why the UK, Russia or even the USA would target him more.

    3) He did wipe his phone, but kept a backup offline. Apple and Android often do this automatically now, if you wipe it from a computer.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    From what I'm reading, yeah he possibly has committed an offence.


    “He’s been a minister for ten years – has he been deleting text messages which are official government records during that time?"


    Shortall said the minister has an obligation to retain these records and said there is an “important questions about when he deleted those messages”.


    If it was after the FOI request came in seeking that information, well then that would amount to an offence but whenever it was, it is not good practice and ministers are required to retain text messages that relate to government business.”


    we know from the texts Leo released between himself and Simon, they were discussing govt business.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement