N Korea made millions from remote work scheme, US says
www.bbc.com
Fourteen North Koreans have been charged with fraud in the US over an alleged long-running conspiracy.

A federal court in St Louis has indicted 14 North Koreans for allegedly being part of a long-running conspiracy aimed at extorting funds from US companies and funneling money to Pyongyang’s weapons programmes.

The wider scheme allegedly involves thousands of North Korean IT workers who use false, stolen, and borrowed identities from people in the US and other countries to get hired and work remotely for US firms.

The indictement says the defendants and others working with them generated at least $88m (£51.5m) for the North Korean regime over a six-year period.

[…]

The prosecutors say the suspects worked for two North Korean-controlled companies - China-based Yanbian Silverstar and Russia-based Volasys Silverstar.

[…]

    • rtc@beehaw.org
      0·
      6 days ago

      Aside from using stolen identities to avoid detection, prosecutors said they paid people residing in the US to receive, set up, and host laptops provided by the US employers. They would then instruct those US residents to install remote access software allowing them to appear to be working from the US when they were actually overseas.

      It is directly in the article. It is impossible for civilians to do this. In an absolute sense.

      Lastly, the aggressive countering nature of this comment was unnecessary if you were merely seeking clarification.

      • LukeZaz@beehaw.orgEnglish
        0·
        6 days ago

        It is impossible for civilians to do this. In an absolute sense.

        I know of nothing whatsoever that proves this. The article certainly doesn’t clarify anything to that effect.

        Lastly, the aggressive countering nature of this comment was unnecessary if you were merely seeking clarification.

        It was four words, without any emphasis. I deliberately wrote my comment to be simple and calm. Any aggression you’ve interpreted is on you, not me, and I suspect you only read it that way due a to a pre-existing negative opinion of me.