Das trojanische Pferd (the Trojan Horse)

Government Caught in the Act

Hackers discovered the Trojan Horse plan of a country at the heart of Europe.

Trojan horse or simply Trojan, is a malicious software that can track users through their computers. Until now we have encountered many usage of these software, for data theft, computer hijacking, keystroke logging and installation of third party software. But governmental usage of this software raises the question. Is every way allowable to catch a criminal?

A group of hackers in Germany discovered an ugly truth when they were tracking the activities of a Trojan horse. Government of Germany was riding inside.

The name of the Trojan Horse is Bundestrojaner, literally Federal Trojan Horse, it is by the Government of Germany to track Skype conversations of the residents. This is only the visible part, when investigated deeper, hacker group found that the Troajan also installed “0zapftis” (a German cry for the start of the October fest) and “R2D2” (we all know what it is). When these software dispatched, it installed updates, tracked user entries and activities and also allowed remote connection to certain users. Needless to say these are not legal activities according to German constitution.

The discovery was made by the group Chaos Computer Club (CCC), they had contributors from another club “Sophos”. They announced that they are tracking the activities of this Trojan and although it started with legal consent, following steps came illegally and unauthorized. It is also vulnerable to bad intentions since it has been used for other purposes than it’s primary objective. The issue has already been addressed in political arena and government officials were called for an action.


One thought on “Das trojanische Pferd (the Trojan Horse)

  1. It’s interesting to note that to hide the command and control servers they routed it all through servers located in the United States. The CCC stated:

    “The instrument could therefore violate the fundamental principle of national sovereignty. Considering the incompetent encryption and the missing digital signatures on the command channel, this poses an unacceptable and incalculable risk. It also poses the question how a citizen is supposed to get their right of legal redress in the case the wiretapping data get lost outside Germany, or the command channel is misused.”

    Raises some interesting questions about why governments aren’t hesitant to attempt to dodge the same laws that they are supposed to enforce.


Comments are closed.