An attack which targeted users of the Telegram app on Wednesday might be linked to protests in Hong Kong that turned violent.
Read more in my article on the Tripwire State of Security blog.
Facebook announced it would stop Huawei from pre-installing social networking apps on its smartphones to comply with US sanctions.
Facebook announced it will no longer allow pre-installation of its social networking apps on Huawei smartphones to comply with the US ban on the Chinese tech giant.
“We are reviewing the Commerce Department’s final rule and the more recently issued temporary general license and taking steps to ensure compliance,” a Facebook spokesperson told AFP.
The decision will not impact on customers who already have Huawei phones, but new devices will not have Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram apps
Everyone will buy a Huawei device will have no access to updates to Google Android and will have no access to Google services, including the Google Play Store and Gmail and YouTube apps.
Google confirmed that Huawei will only be able to use the public version of Android (Android Open Source Project (AOSP)), but the users of the Chinese giant will not be able to get access to proprietary apps and services from Google.
(SecurityAffairs – Huawei, Facebook)
The post Facebook is going to stop Huawei pre-installing apps on mobile devices appeared first on Security Affairs.
Citing security concerns, the Chinese military wants to replace Windows with its own custom operating system:
Thanks to the Snowden, Shadow Brokers, and Vault7 leaks, Beijing officials are well aware of the US' hefty arsenal of hacking tools, available for anything from smart TVs to Linux servers, and from routers to common desktop operating systems, such as Windows and Mac.
Since these leaks have revealed that the US can hack into almost anything, the Chinese government's plan is to adopt a "security by obscurity" approach and run a custom operating system that will make it harder for foreign threat actors -- mainly the US -- to spy on Chinese military operations.
It's unclear exactly how custom this new OS will be. It could be a Linux variant, like North Korea's Red Star OS. Or it could be something completely new. Normally, I would be highly skeptical of a country being able to write and field its own custom operating system, but China is one of the few that is large enough to actually be able to do it. So I'm just moderately skeptical.
EDITED TO ADD (6/12): Russia also wants to develop its own flavor of Linux.
Vice-chancellor says hack involved personal and payroll details going back 19 years
The Australian National University is in damage control after discovering a major data breach a fortnight ago in which a “significant” amount of staff and student information was accessed by a “sophisticated operator”.
In a message to staff and students, vice-chancellor Brian Schmidt said someone illegally accessed the university’s systems in late 2018.Continue reading...
Innovative Connecting is actually a Chinese company that secretly owns 10 VPN products with a total of 86 million installs under its belt.
Recent research by the cybersecurity experts at VPNpro shows that the popular mobile VPN developer Innovative Connecting is actually a Chinese company that secretly owns 10 VPN products with a total of 86 million installs under its belt.
The study also revealed that two of those VPN products are under its other developer name, Lemon Clove, and another two by Autumn Breeze 2018.
Interestingly, most of the popular mobile-only VPNs that VPNpro analyzed are actually Chinese (run by Chinese nationals or actually located in China). Any data that is held in mainland China is wide open to access by Chinese authorities, confirming US Senators’ recent fears of American data falling into Chinese or Russian hands.
Innovative Connecting VPNs products
Innovative Connecting owns the following 10 VPN products:
- VPN Master – Free Proxy
- VPN Proxy Master (Pro)
- VPN Proxy Master (Lite)
- Turbo VPN
- Unlimited Free VPN
- HOT VPN
- Snap VPN
- VPN Robot
- VPN Sofast
What is the relationship between Innovative Connecting, Lemon Clove and ALL Connected?
VPNpro’s research reveals that there is a clear relationship between these three companies. Innovative Connecting has more than a strong business relationship with Lemon Clove, which creates the popular Snap VPN and VPN Robot apps.
Lemon Clove and Innovative Connecting share the same secretary, Loo Ping Yoo, and key addresses. Both Lemon Clove’s website and Innovative Connecting’s website are the same, with only small changes in text.
If you search VPN Proxy Master on Apple’s App Store, you can see the developer name appears as ALL Connected, while Innovative Connecting listed as the developer on Google Play.
ALL Connected’s Turbo and Master VPN are on similar Cloudfront domains that link to Innovative Connecting. The App Store policy for VPN Master (developed by Innovative Connecting) is hosted on ALL Connected’s domain. All the policies for these VPN apps have the exact same broken English and typos.
Innovative Connecting’s Director seems to be Danny Chen, the well-known Chinese entrepreneur and CEO behind Linksure. Beyond that, the researchers discovered that the email address used to register turbovpn.co (developed by Innovative Connecting) also registered lemonclove.net, vpnsnap.com, and many others.
Why does it matter if a company owns multiple VPN products?
There is nothing wrong with owning multiple VPN brands – but there must be transparency between the company and its users. Trust is the most important factor for most users of VPN services. Other than this, there are two further crucial issues
In a recent US survey, 95% of internet users said they were either somewhat concerned or very concerned about their privacy. However, if VPNs are actually located in a 5/9/14 Eyes country, which are normally high-surveillance countries, or in a repressive country like China or Russia, users’ data is most likely already in those governments’ hands.
If a VPN’s parent company is untrustworthy, including having weak security or actively engaged in malicious activities, it can be a big problem. This can lead to users’ data being stolen and sold on the black market, or even having their computers hacked into.
There are thousands of VPN companies out there, and unfortunately many of them have weak security and privacy features, or are outright malicious in wanting to steal or sell user data.
To help you find a trustworthy VPN, you should follow these steps below:
- read in-depth reviews of a VPN company on different platforms
- ask for a recommendations on different communities and see their views
- check if the company is GDPR compliant
- read their privacy features
- check if they have had any scandals or breaches
With the right homework, you can find a trustworthy VPN that actually helps safeguard your online activity.
About The Author: Susan Alexandra is is a cybersecurity and privacy enthusiast. She is a small business owner, traveler and investor of cryptocurrencies. Susan’s inbox is open for new ideas and stories, you can share the story ideas to susanalexandra67(at)gmail(dot)com
The post VPNpro research: this Chinese-linked company secretly owns 10 VPNs with 86 million installs appeared first on Security Affairs.
Don’t hire a hacker, they might scam you! What works and what doesn’t when it comes to protecting your email account? And China’s controversial social credit system comes under the microscope.
All this and much more is discussed in the latest edition of the award-winning “Smashing Security” podcast by computer security veterans Graham Cluley and Carole Theriault, joined this week by Maria Varmazis.
Yesterday, I visited the NSA. It was Cyber Command's birthday, but that's not why I was there. I visited as part of the Berklett Cybersecurity Project, run out of the Berkman Klein Center and funded by the Hewlett Foundation. (BERKman hewLETT -- get it? We have a web page, but it's badly out of date.)
It was a full day of meetings, all unclassified but under the Chatham House Rule. Gen. Nakasone welcomed us and took questions at the start. Various senior officials spoke with us on a variety of topics, but mostly focused on three areas:
- Russian influence operations, both what the NSA and US Cyber Command did during the 2018 election and what they can do in the future;
- China and the threats to critical infrastructure from untrusted computer hardware, both the 5G network and more broadly;
- Machine learning, both how to ensure a ML system is compliant with all laws, and how ML can help with other compliance tasks.
It was all interesting. Those first two topics are ones that I am thinking and writing about, and it was good to hear their perspective. I find that I am much more closely aligned with the NSA about cybersecurity than I am about privacy, which made the meeting much less fraught than it would have been if we were discussing Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act, Section 215 the USA Freedom Act (up for renewal next year), or any 4th Amendment violations. I don't think we're past those issues by any means, but they make up less of what I am working on.
US Commerce Department will delay 90 days before to apply the announced Huawei ban to avoid huge disruption of the operations.
During the weekend, the Reuters agency revealed in exclusive that Alphabet Inc’s Google has suspended some business with Huawei after Trump’s ban on the
On Thursday, President Trump added Huawei Technologies to a trade blacklist, but on Friday, the U.S.
Now a Commerce Department filing confirmed that
The Temporary General License aims at preventing disruption to the operations of the company that could have a dramatic impact on mobile users and broadband network operators.
“The Temporary General License grants operators time to make other arrangements and (gives) the Department space to determine the appropriate long term measures for Americans and foreign telecommunications providers that currently rely on Huawei equipment for critical services,” said Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross.
“In short, this license will allow operations to continue for existing Huawei mobile phone users and rural broadband networks.”
While the tech giant is in the middle of a heated debate, FiveEyes intelligence agencies believe the Huawei equipment for 5G infrastructure poses a “significant network security risk,” for this reason, they asked mobile companies to avoid using the equipment of the Chinese company.
The Chinese company has been founded by a former People’s Liberation Army official in 1987. The US was the first country that warned of the security risks associated with the usage of the products manufactured by the Chinese telecommunications giant.
US intelligence believes Huawei equipment is taitend with backdoors that could allow Chinese intelligence to spy on communications networks of rival countries.
In November, The Wall Street Journal reported that the US Government is urging its allies to exclude Huawei from critical infrastructure and 5G architectures.
The United States highlighted the risks for national security in case of adoption of Huawei equipment and is inviting internet providers and telco operators in allied countries to ban Huawei.
Chinese equipment is broadly adopted in many allied countries, including Germany, Italy an, Japan. Many countries are going to build 5G infrastructure, but the approach of their governments is completely different.
Now the US Commerce Department delayed the bad for 90 days. Experts believe that Huawei is only one of the Chinese companies that will face similar measures because could threaten the economic and technological leadership of the United States.
(SecurityAffairs – Huawei ban, China)
The post US Commerce Department delays Huawei ban for 90 Days appeared first on Security Affairs.
In 2016, a hacker group calling itself the Shadow Brokers released a trove of 2013 NSA hacking tools and related documents. Most people believe it is a front for the Russian government. Since, then the vulnerabilities and tools have been used by both government and criminals, and put the NSA's ability to secure its own cyberweapons seriously into question.
Does this mean that both the Chinese and the Russians stole the same set of NSA tools? Did the Russians steal them from the Chinese, who stole them from us? Did it work the other way? I don't think anyone has any idea. But this certainly illustrates how dangerous it is for the NSA -- or US Cyber Command -- to hoard zero-day vulnerabilities.
EDITED TO ADD (5/16): Symantec report.
While I am delighted that Gavin Williamson (May tells defence secretary: ‘You leaked, you are fired’, 2 May) has been removed from the government – remember he said that all British jihadists should be hunted down and killed in the Middle East rather than returned for trial here – I am sorry that as a result Rory Stewart no longer has responsibility for prisons. His is a deserved promotion, but as prisons minister he was the first member of the government to make any attempt to get to grips with the problems of our criminal justice system and offered to resign if things did not improve. How sad that there are not more of that ilk in public life these days.
• Is the Gavin Williamson who has just been sacked as defence secretary for allegedly leaking plans discussed in the National Security Council to allow Huawei to be involved in building the UK’s 5G network the same Gavin Williamson who told us last year that it’s Jeremy Corbyn that “cannot be trusted”?
While many of us were focused on the European Union’s GDPR and California’s Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), the giant on the other side of the world implemented China’s Cybersecurity Law (CSL) in June 2017. While CSL laid out broad data protection principles, there were noticeable gaps related to implementation and overall scope. To operationalize and further clarify CSL scope, the Chinese government instituted six systems: the Internet Information Content Management System; the Cybersecurity Multi-Level Protection System (MLPS); the Critical Information Infrastructure Security Protection System; the Network Products and Services Management System; the Cybersecurity Incident Management System; and the Personal Information … Continue reading The Giant Awakens – China’s Cybersecurity Law (CSL) and Data Protection Obligations
The post The Giant Awakens – China’s Cybersecurity Law (CSL) and Data Protection Obligations appeared first on TrustArc Blog.
Tan's former employer and the FBI allege that Tan "downloaded restricted files to a personal thumb drive." I could not tell from the complaint if Tan downloaded the files at work or at home, but the thumb drive ended up at Tan's home. His employer asked Tan to bring it to their office, which Tan did. However, he had deleted all the files from the drive. Tan's employer recovered the files using commercially available forensic software.
This incident, by definition, involves an "insider threat." Tan was an employee who appears to have copied information that was outside the scope of his work responsibilities, resigned from his employer, and was planning to return to China to work for a competitor, having delivered his former employer's intellectual property.
When I started GE-CIRT in 2008 (officially "initial operating capability" on 1 January 2009), one of the strategies we pursued involved insider threats. I've written about insiders on this blog before but I couldn't find a description of the strategy we implemented via GE-CIRT.
We sought to make digital intrusions more expensive than physical intrusions.
In other words, we wanted to make it easier for the adversary to accomplish his mission using insiders. We wanted to make it more difficult for the adversary to accomplish his mission using our network.
In a cynical sense, this makes security someone else's problem. Suddenly the physical security team is dealing with the worst of the worst!
This is a win for everyone, however. Consider the many advantages the physical security team has over the digital security team.
The physical security team can work with human resources during the hiring process. HR can run background checks and identify suspicious job applicants prior to granting employment and access.
Employees are far more exposed than remote intruders. Employees, even under cover, expose their appearance, likely residence, and personalities to the company and its workers.
Employees can be subject to far more intensive monitoring than remote intruders. Employee endpoints can be instrumented. Employee workspaces are instrumented via access cards, cameras at entry and exit points, and other measures.
Employers can cooperate with law enforcement to investigate and prosecute employees. They can control and deter theft and other activities.
In brief, insider theft, like all "close access" activities, is incredibly risky for the adversary. It is a win for everyone when the adversary must resort to using insiders to accomplish their mission. Digital and physical security must cooperate to leverage these advantages, while collaborating with human resources, legal, information technology, and business lines to wring the maximum results from this advantage.
There has been recent focus on alleged Iran cyber activity the past few weeks, spurned on by the publication of a vendor report on Iranian operations. Per the vendor’s findings, not only was Iran likely behind the activity that was targeting government and private sector in the Middle East, it was implementing National Security Agency exploits that were stolen and dumped into the public domain by the Shadow Brokers group in April 2017. As recently as late August 2018, Iran is suspected of trying to launch influence operations ahead of the midterm elections. The conclusion is that Iran is increasingly using asymmetric attacks, particularly via cyberspace, as part of its tool box to conduct retaliatory attacks.
The new reporting comes at a time when Russia’s cyber malfeasance has largely dominated the press, due to its influence operations efforts and election shenanigans, not just in the United States but in other countries as well. Prior to the Russia focus, North Korea was the focal point with its suspected cyber activities targeting cryptocurrency, and the SWIFT banking transactions before that. Iran was propelled onto the scene with Operation Ababil
DDoS attacks against U.S. banks, as well as its suspected involvement in the wiper malware incident against Saudi Aramco. Some consider Iran a powerful cyber nation on par or close to it to China and Russia. Others, maintain that Iranian actors are much less sophisticated, preferring to implement “tried-and true tactics while targeting many individuals.” China initially led the state-led cyber espionage activity, which largely was curbed against the United States once the “no hack” pact was agreed to in 2015.
There seems to be a perpetual “revolving door” of news-cycle focus on suspected state activity, with new reports reporting on hostile espionage and exploitation occurring against global targets. The purpose of these appears to track the latest and greatest escapades of these governments using – in most cases – publicly available tools and exploits that are publicly accessible (see Shadow Brokers above) and using vectors that for the most part are routine for any hostile cyber actor (certainly, if a state actor is “sophisticated”, the intimation is that the activity hasn’t been detected as of yet, or the sophisticated tools/exploits haven’t been implemented yet).
Between the ongoing stories of adversarial state activity as aforementioned above and news of smaller nations looking to acquire offensive cyber capabilities, all indications are that media and vendor reporting will continue to push the “hostile state actor as monolith” narrative into the public eye. Yet, like the saying goes, “if everything is important, nothing is important,” which rings with authenticity with regards to state cyber activity. Actual activity or incidents that threaten to disrupt, destroy, degrade, deny, or manipulate data systems or the data resident on them deserve to be pushed to the forefront as they potentially impact everyone at all levels.
But theft of intellectual property and state secrets affect a minority, and rarely if ever will impact everyday citizens. Such vigorous scrutiny and analysis of suspected state activity should apply to the cyber crime ecosystem whose nefarious endeavors directly impact the global population. And while there are isolated incidents of law enforcement efforts arresting groups and individuals or taking down marketplaces, this has failed to put a dent into a global industry that was cited as the second most reported economic crime, according to a 2017 report by the same vendor.
This needs to change and it would be welcome to see such vendors with a wide and deep visibility into the cyber threat space to uncover some of the more “sophisticated” state actors, to apply that precision against a threat intent on exploiting everyone on the planet. Some of the more notable breaches have exposed a high volume of individual data:
2013/14 Yahoo 3 Billion Accounts
2016 Adult Friend Finder 412 Million Accounts
2014 eBay 145 Million Users
2017 Equifax 143 Million User
2008 Heartland Payment Systems 134 Million credit cards
One thing is clear – cyber criminals have proven to be as sophisticated and resourceful as state actors, often times using the same tools and techniques. The fact that this category of cyber actor is not as robustly tracked, and information shared directly to the appropriate authorities is disappointing.
This is a guest post by Emilio Iasiello
The post State Actor Cyber Reports Overshadow the Extensive Threat of Cyber Crime appeared first on CyberDB.
Dear President Trump,
Hello. As President of Paramount Defenses, I pen this letter most respectfully to you, the President of our United States.
Sir, almost all reasonable people would agree that a bellicose and now nuclear North Korea likely poses a threat not just to the United States but to the whole world, and that this threat must be dealt with. While there are several options, including military options, that you may be considering, I just wanted to say that you may want to give a peaceful resolution to this situation a reasonable chance (because wars are gruesomely destructive), and perhaps there may be still something that could be done.
Of course, North Korea must make no mistake about one fact - it must unequivocally understand that if it attacks the U.S. or its territories or allies, the U.S. will have no choice but to act to defend itself, and if it does, it will likely be the end of North Korea.
Speaking of Nuclear Weapons and North Korea
I likely speak on behalf of not just millions of American citizens, but billions of people worldwide when I say that this dangerous "sabre rattling" needs to please stop; we just cannot have a(ny) country threatening the world with the use of Nuclear Weapons.
We should also make NO mistake about this - This must please stop, and yet we must try and do all we can do to resolve this PEACEFULLY, because wars are gruesomely destructive. It is estimated that should this situation result in a war on the Korean peninsula, millions of people in numerous countries may lose their lives and/or be severely impacted.
If I might add, in today's civilized world, no one person in the world, whether it be the leader of any country (whether it be North Korea, Iran, China, Russia, USA, etc.) or entity should be able to endanger the lives of all 7,000,000,000+ people on Earth.
Speaking of peaceful efforts, allow me to voice one unsolicited suggestion, which involves a country that may likely have, over the years, whether unintentionally or otherwise, played^ a (not so small) role in helping North Korea get where it is today, and they now ought to do everything they can to help resolve this situation peacefully, and that one country is China.
[ ^ Watch this 6 min video - "China is North Korea's largest trading partner and has pushed hard for the livelihood exemptions" , "Sanctions will only be as effective as Beijing wants them to be" , "Regime survival is exactly what China actually wants to see"]
Where Does China Stand on This?
Sir, as of Aug 11, 17, you've certainly tried to have China resolve this problem. However, it does not seem to (yet) have worked.
As of this morning, according to the Global Times newspaper, which although is not an official mouthpiece of the Communist Party, does according to experts most likely reflect government policy, China is likely okay with an armed conflict in the region.
I quote from here -
"Beijing is not able to persuade Washington or Pyongyang to back down at this time. It needs to make clear its stance to all sides and make them understand that when their actions jeopardize China's interests, China will respond with a firm hand."
"China should also make clear that if North Korea launches missiles that threaten U.S. soil first and the U.S. retaliates, China will stay neutral. If the U.S. and South Korea carry out strikes and try to overthrow the North Korean regime and change the political pattern of the Korean peninsula, China will prevent them from doing so."
In other words, by not being against it, China is apparently tacitly okay with an armed conflict in the region. That's concerning.
Today, no country in the world should be okay with any such conflict, especially one involving countries with Nuclear Weapons.
China needs to realize that now is the time to respond to North Korea with a firm hand (; lest it might be too late & cost a 100x.)
China may need to unequivocally understand that this isn't just about a regional conflict or stability in one specific region of the world, but that this could result in the use of Nuclear Weapons and that could potentially dangerously impact the entire world.
The Suggestion - Having China Do More
In reality, as its largest trading partner, China does likely have a substantial amount of influence on North Korea, which is also why most sanctions imposed on North Korea by the U.N. thus far may have only been as effective as China wanted them to be.
Thus, perhaps, all countries in the world that desire peace, led by the U.S., should earnestly communicate to China that unless China does more to help, the world may have no choice left but to begin to look into potentially unfair Chinese trade practices and consider* (even if temporarily) substantially reducing their imports from China (i.e. the import of goods Made in China).
Perhaps, as a consequence, if China realizes that the world may seriously no longer be interested in importing its inexpensive goods, and that it may stand to lose up to a Trillion $ in trade each year, unless it "reins in" North Korea, perhaps it will do more.
(As such, China should be quite concerned about the possibility of any armed conflict in its region as it could impact its people. If concern for the safety of its billion+ people doesn't motivate China, perhaps the potential of a Trillion $ a year of loss, may.)
China may very well understand this today, so they need to flex some serious muscle to help resolve this dangerous situation.
[ A small digression...
An Unintended Impact
Incidentally, this could help kick-start your Made in USA initiative, and perhaps help reduce the trade imbalance with China, and although products for the U.S. consumer may no longer be dirt cheap, it could start bringing back American manufacturing jobs, thus helping your #MAGA slogan.
Speaking of #MAGA, while America is already a great country, its greatness may likely indeed have diminished a bit in light of globalization, and speaking of jobs, perhaps it may help to let the American people know that it is our own companies, i.e. the major companies whose products the American populace consumes, that whether driven by fierce competition and/or a desire to "maximize shareholder value", may have over the years substantially outsourced manufacturing, so and it may be up to the people to consider having (and if they decide, could have) these companies put country/security ahead of maximizing profits.
(It is difficult to walk into a Walmart or a Home Depot anywhere in the U.S. and find any products that are not "Made in China." Obviously, since you Sir, are (supposedly) a Billionaire, I do not expect you to have personally walked into a Walmart or a Home Depot, but in all likelihood a majority all hard-working people living in the U.S. may likely know what I'm talking about.)
Lastly, perhaps we, the American people may also need to realize that it may not likely be possible to simultaneously have both, "dirt-cheap (i.e. super inexpensive) products" and "American manufacturing jobs." Perhaps, if there is a strong desire to bring back manufacturing jobs to the U.S., it may require, even if for a bit, some adjustments as consumers - perhaps consume a little less, but buy quality products that are Made in USA as well as made in all such countries that adhere to fair trade practices.
Here, I should mention that it is also certainly possibly for (a more responsible and fairly competing) China to continue to be a major exporter of goods to the U.S., just as long as the Chinese too engage in manufacturing under fair trade practices, fair employment, regard for the environment, and for human rights, thus making the manufacturing playing-field level for all nations.
Alternatively, in lieu of having thousands of companies bring back manufacturing jobs to America, perhaps we could make solid results-driven investments towards helping our workforce acquire skills in those fields and industries that play a substantial role in contributing to America's exports, in effect helping millions of our people find suitable, respectable and gainful employment, as well as contributing to an increase in American exports, which too will have the effect of improving uneven trade deficits.
Speaking of Made in USA, perhaps the best way for you Sir, to demonstrate your commitment and seriousness of purpose to #MAGA, may likely be to lead by example and have all products made by the Trump Organization be made here in USA.
... end of digression.]
The World should stand united on one front - regarding threats involving use of Nuclear Weapons, there must be zero tolerance.
As for North Korea, it must make no mistake about one fact - it must unequivocally understand that if it attacks the U.S. or its territories or allies, the U.S. will have no choice but to act to defend itself, and if it does, it will likely be the end of North Korea.
The Chinese too must understand that any military conflict in their region, especially one potentially involving the use of even a single nuclear weapon, and its fallout, could endanger not just all the countries in the Korean Peninsula, but also likely threaten and perhaps possibly jeopardize the very existence of Earth, and the last I checked, a billion Chinese people too, live on Earth.
If a millennia of history haven't taught us about the horrors and savagery that military conflicts and wars entail, and if a millennia of progress hasn't made us all realize that we all need to peacefully co-exist, then while we may have made material progress, what have we truly learnt?
Instead of predominantly pursuing profits, world-domination and egos, we should (all) instead be first pursuing peace, love and harmony, improving life for everyone, and cherishing and saving our precious planet (because in the Universe, its all we have.)
PS: I write neither as a Republican nor a Democrat, merely as a caring citizen, and not just as a U.S. citizen, but as a peace-loving global citizen, i.e. just one of 7,000,000,000+ people that live in 150+ countries worldwide who believe in living in Peace.
You ought to ask yourselves if you're really doing everything you can to diffuse this incredibly reckless and dangerous situation; should this result in an armed conflict in your region, your great country and its people may very likely be substantially impacted.
This is not the time for any party to play "Chess." This is the time for all countries to help prevent a potentially nuclear conflict.