this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2025
216 points (95.4% liked)
Technology
73792 readers
3756 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There are also reports by companies and american judiciary system. Now, those are biased voices too, they lack clear proof of what happened, and they probably make it bigger than it is, but i find it unlikely that this is 100% bs and staging : if i had that much resources to pour into staging something, i think it would be more convincing.
I'm not doubting the N Korean scheme to infiltrate IT jobs. There's even that woman who was prosecuted (I think she lived in Arizona?) because she is one person who acted as a facilitator for this scheme. My point is the BBC ran a story with an "anonymous" source then admits in the middle that they couldn't substantiate any of the claims. That's the problem here.
Okay, my mistake, i misinterpreted it. To be fair with BBC, they point out in the title and article that this is just some transcript of someone anonymous, and they try to tie each allegation with reports from other sources to back up their likeliness. I guess it's the best you can do with someone anonymous ? Revealing the company, dates, or town might compromise the anonymity. I have this low-key uncomfortable feeling of "well, there's nothing that proves it" with most anonymous reports i read or hear, even when it's for events that are common otherwise.
In cases like these the journalists can and often do say something to the effect of they were able to corroborate the claims. But you're super right about being careful, because they also can mishandle the data they receive to the point where they dox the anonymous source, too. That's what happened with Reality Winner and The Intercept. They botched it, and she was arrested.