GRU
India
GRU
India

Time filter

Source Type

News Article | May 19, 2017
Site: news.yahoo.com

Donald Trump still seems to dispute Russia’s meddling with last year’s US presidential elections, even if all the great intel he’s been getting says otherwise. Furthermore, he keeps insisting there are no hidden ties between him and Russia, and that the entire Russia investigation is a major witch hunt. But a scathing new report reveals that Russia’s hacks that came to light during the election might be just the tip of the iceberg. Russia’s cyber attacks under Trump have apparently continued after the election showing an impressive degree of sophistication. What’s more disturbing is that the report is based on information coming from sources familiar with spying operations. And that means Trump may have known all along about Russia’s intensified spying efforts well before inviting Russia officials at the White House. The fascinating report into Russia’s sophisticated hacking operations against the US comes from Time magazine. The publication reveals that on March 2nd, a “disturbing report” hit the desks of US counterintelligence officials in Washington — Time makes no reference to Trump seeing the report, but if all these allegations are true, it’s likely the most powerful TV show producer in the country was also informed about the matter since then. “It described how Russia had already moved on from the rudimentary email hacks against politicians it had used in 2016,” Time writes. “Now the Russians were running a more sophisticated hack on Twitter. The report said the Russians had sent expertly tailored messages carrying malware to more than 10,000 Twitter users in the Defense Department. Depending on the interests of the targets, the messages offered links to stories on recent sporting events or the Oscars, which had taken place the previous weekend. When clicked, the links took users to a Russian-controlled server that downloaded a program allowing Moscow’s hackers to take control of the victim’s phone or computer–and Twitter account.” What the Russians are looking to do with these operations is to influence in real-time American people who are hooked on social media. “What chaos could Moscow unleash with thousands of Twitter handles that spoke in real time with the authority of the armed forces of the United States?,” spies investigating the newly discovered Russian attacks wondered. “At any given moment, perhaps during a natural disaster or a terrorist attack, Pentagon Twitter accounts might send out false information. As each tweet corroborated another, and covert Russian agents amplified the messages even further afield, the result could be panic and confusion.” Time also explains that the first time US officials got wind of Russia’s plans to interfere with the election was all the way back in May 2016. At the time, however, they did not know what to do with that information. “[A] Russian military intelligence officer bragged to a colleague that his organization, known as the GRU, was getting ready to pay Clinton back for what President Vladimir Putin believed was an influence operation she had run against him five years earlier as Secretary of State,” Time explains. “The GRU, he said, was going to cause chaos in the upcoming US election.” The report says the attack on the US election has been five years in the making, and that Russia’s current social manipulation powers may be unmatched. “We are on the verge of having something in the information arena which will allow us to talk to the Americans as equals,” Putin adviser Andrey Krutskikh said in February 2016. He said Russia’s cyber weapons are comparable to the Soviet Union obtaining a nuclear weapon in the 1940s. “The Russians are 10 years ahead of us in being willing to make use of” social media to influence public opinion, former NSA deputy Chris Inglis said. Ironically, Russia is using American services like Facebook, Twitter, and Google to influence opinions, while one of the engineers who’s working on these social algorithms has been trained in the US. Time’s full report is available at this link and it’s worth a read. It will also appear in the May 29th issue of Time. Exclusive: The world’s first look at Apple’s final iPhone 8 design in real life Get Amazon Prime free for 6 months, then 50% off forever if your .edu email still works See the original version of this article on BGR.com


News Article | May 15, 2017
Site: www.accesswire.com

Total Revenues Increased 59% for the Quarter; Organic Revenues Increased 11% for the Quarter ROCK HILL, SC / ACCESSWIRE / May 15, 2017 / GlyEco, Inc. ("GlyEco" or the "Company") (OTC PINK: GLYE), a leading specialty chemical company, announced today the following financial results for the quarter ended March 31, 2017: "With our first quarter 2017 results, we have already begun to see the benefits of the acquisitions we completed in December 2016 and our revamped sales efforts that we launched in late 2016, as revenues increased 59% compared to the first quarter of last year. Additionally, our operating expense ratio decreased approximately 19 percentage points as we increased the scale of our operations. However, our gross profit margin was negatively impacted by approximately $200,000 of production costs that were not fully absorbed into inventory, but rather expensed while the newly acquired Glycol Recycling Unit (the "GRU") facility in Institute, West Virginia was off-line during the first 2 months of the quarter for infrastructure related capital improvements," said Ian Rhodes, GlyEco's President and Chief Executive Officer. "Additionally, organic revenues increased 11%, a solid increase, but even more meaningful when considered against the backdrop of a mild winter in 2017 compared to 2016." Effective January 1, 2017, the Company has two segments, Consumer and Industrial. Presented below are the financial results for each segment as well as reconciling items to the consolidated results. First Quarter of 2017 Financial Review The Company's sales for the quarter ended March 31, 2017 were $2.3 million, compared to $1.4 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2016, representing an increase of $847 thousand, or approximately 59%. The increase in Net Sales was due to organic revenue growth of $156 thousand, or approximately 11%, and $692 thousand of sales related to the businesses and assets acquired in December 2016. The Company realized a gross profit of $140 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, compared to a gross profit of $137 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. The gross profit margin was negatively impacted by approximately $200 thousand of production costs that were not fully absorbed into inventory, but rather expensed as incurred while the newly acquired GRU facility in Institute, West Virginia was off-line during the first 2 months of the quarter for infrastructure related capital improvements. The Company reported an operating loss of $912 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, compared to an $801 thousand operating loss for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. The Company reported a net loss of $1.1 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, compared to a net loss of $806 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. The Company reported adjusted EBITDA of negative $529 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, compared to negative $443 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. As our West Virginia facility was off-line for half of the first quarter, we did not see the full benefit this quarter of the combined businesses. However, we were pleased with the revenue growth and reduction in our operating expense ratio, which both speak well for the positive direction of our company. We are focused on profitable revenue growth and continue to seek out and add sales and other personnel, as well as business partners that will have a meaningful positive impact on both our top and bottom line results. We expect period over period sales growth for the remainder of 2017 to exceed the sales growth we experienced in the first quarter of 2017. We are also focused on expanding our gross margin through a combination of increased sales and improvements in our production and distribution operations. We expect production savings through a combination of further production increases and decreases in key costs. We continue to invest in new equipment and make enhancements to existing equipment to improve operations and drive down costs. We have added and will continue to add personnel to further strengthen our growing operations team. We expect our gross margin for the remainder of 2017 to be better than our gross margin in the first quarter of 2017. Subsequent to the end of the quarter, the Company entered into a sale-leaseback transaction for $1.7 million and used the proceeds to repay $1.0 million in notes and deploy the balance into working capital. Also subsequent to the end of the quarter, the Company's monthly sales for April exceeded $1 million and set a new monthly sales record for the Company. GlyEco is a leading specialty chemical company, leveraging technology and innovation to focus on vertically integrated, eco-friendly manufacturing, customer service and distribution solutions. Our eight facilities, including the recently acquired 14-20 million gallons per year, ASTM E1177 EG-1, glycol re-distillation plant in West Virginia, deliver superior quality glycol products that meet or exceed ASTM quality standards, including a wide spectrum of ready to use antifreezes and additive packages for antifreeze/coolant, gas patch coolants and heat transfer fluid industries, throughout North America. Our team's extensive experience in the chemical field, including direct experience with reclamation of all types of glycols, gives us the ability to process a wide range of feedstock streams, formulate and produce unique products and has earned us an outstanding reputation in our markets. For further information, please visit: http://www.glyeco.com This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Safe Harbor Provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements are often identified by the words "believe," "anticipate," "expect," "intend," "estimate," and similar expressions. All statements in this document regarding the future outlook related to GlyEco, Inc. are forward-looking statements. Such statements are based on the current expectations, beliefs, estimates and projections of management and are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements including the risk that the future data will not be as favorable as the initial results. Additional uncertainties and risks are described in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K. For a more detailed discussion of factors that affect GlyEco's operations, please refer our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"). Copies of these filings are available through the SEC website at http://www.sec.gov. All forward-looking statements are based upon information available to us on the date hereof, and GlyEco undertakes no obligation to update this forward-looking information. GLYECO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016 GLYECO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations For the three months ended March 31, 2017 and 2016 Adjusted Earnings before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization (non-GAAP) For the three months ended March 31, 2017 and 2016 Presented above is the non-GAAP financial measure representing earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and stock compensation (which we refer to as "Adjusted EBITDA") and the reconciliations of Adjusted EBITDA to net loss. Adjusted EBITDA should be viewed as supplemental to, and not as an alternative for, net income (loss) and cash flows from operations calculated in accordance with GAAP. Adjusted EBITDA is used by our management as an additional measure of our Company's performance for purposes of business decision-making, including developing budgets, managing expenditures, and evaluating potential acquisitions or divestitures. Period-to-period comparisons of Adjusted EBITDA help our management identify additional trends in our Company's financial results that may not be shown solely by period-to-period comparisons of net income (loss) and cash flows from operations. In addition, we may use Adjusted EBITDA in the incentive compensation programs applicable to many of our employees in order to evaluate our Company's performance. Further, we believe that the presentation of Adjusted EBITDA is useful to investors in their analysis of our results and helps investors make comparisons between our company and other companies that may have different capital structures, different effective income tax rates and tax attributes, different capitalized asset values and/or different forms of employee compensation. Our management recognizes that Adjusted EBITDA has inherent limitations because of the excluded items, particularly those items that are recurring in nature. In order to compensate for those limitations, management also reviews the specific items that are excluded from Adjusted EBITDA, but included in net income (loss), as well as trends in those items.


News Article | May 15, 2017
Site: marketersmedia.com

Total Revenues Increased 59% for the Quarter; Organic Revenues Increased 11% for the Quarter ROCK HILL, SC / ACCESSWIRE / May 15, 2017 / GlyEco, Inc. ("GlyEco" or the "Company") (OTC PINK: GLYE), a leading specialty chemical company, announced today the following financial results for the quarter ended March 31, 2017: "With our first quarter 2017 results, we have already begun to see the benefits of the acquisitions we completed in December 2016 and our revamped sales efforts that we launched in late 2016, as revenues increased 59% compared to the first quarter of last year. Additionally, our operating expense ratio decreased approximately 19 percentage points as we increased the scale of our operations. However, our gross profit margin was negatively impacted by approximately $200,000 of production costs that were not fully absorbed into inventory, but rather expensed while the newly acquired Glycol Recycling Unit (the "GRU") facility in Institute, West Virginia was off-line during the first 2 months of the quarter for infrastructure related capital improvements," said Ian Rhodes, GlyEco's President and Chief Executive Officer. "Additionally, organic revenues increased 11%, a solid increase, but even more meaningful when considered against the backdrop of a mild winter in 2017 compared to 2016." Effective January 1, 2017, the Company has two segments, Consumer and Industrial. Presented below are the financial results for each segment as well as reconciling items to the consolidated results. Sales increased 59% or $847 thousand to $2.3 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, as compared to $1.4 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. Organic sales increased 11% or $156 thousand from $1.4 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2016 to $1.6 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2017. Operating loss of $912 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, compared to $801 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. Adjusted EBITDA of negative $529 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, compared to negative $443 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. Average monthly distillation production for our Consumer segment was 80,000 gallons for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, the highest quarterly average for the past five quarters and a significant increase from an average monthly distillation production of 44,000 gallons for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. First Quarter of 2017 Financial Review The Company's sales for the quarter ended March 31, 2017 were $2.3 million, compared to $1.4 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2016, representing an increase of $847 thousand, or approximately 59%. The increase in Net Sales was due to organic revenue growth of $156 thousand, or approximately 11%, and $692 thousand of sales related to the businesses and assets acquired in December 2016. The Company realized a gross profit of $140 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, compared to a gross profit of $137 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. The gross profit margin was negatively impacted by approximately $200 thousand of production costs that were not fully absorbed into inventory, but rather expensed as incurred while the newly acquired GRU facility in Institute, West Virginia was off-line during the first 2 months of the quarter for infrastructure related capital improvements. The Company reported an operating loss of $912 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, compared to an $801 thousand operating loss for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. The Company reported a net loss of $1.1 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, compared to a net loss of $806 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. The Company reported adjusted EBITDA of negative $529 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, compared to negative $443 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. As our West Virginia facility was off-line for half of the first quarter, we did not see the full benefit this quarter of the combined businesses. However, we were pleased with the revenue growth and reduction in our operating expense ratio, which both speak well for the positive direction of our company. We are focused on profitable revenue growth and continue to seek out and add sales and other personnel, as well as business partners that will have a meaningful positive impact on both our top and bottom line results. We expect period over period sales growth for the remainder of 2017 to exceed the sales growth we experienced in the first quarter of 2017. We are also focused on expanding our gross margin through a combination of increased sales and improvements in our production and distribution operations. We expect production savings through a combination of further production increases and decreases in key costs. We continue to invest in new equipment and make enhancements to existing equipment to improve operations and drive down costs. We have added and will continue to add personnel to further strengthen our growing operations team. We expect our gross margin for the remainder of 2017 to be better than our gross margin in the first quarter of 2017. Subsequent to the end of the quarter, the Company entered into a sale-leaseback transaction for $1.7 million and used the proceeds to repay $1.0 million in notes and deploy the balance into working capital. Also subsequent to the end of the quarter, the Company's monthly sales for April exceeded $1 million and set a new monthly sales record for the Company. GlyEco is a leading specialty chemical company, leveraging technology and innovation to focus on vertically integrated, eco-friendly manufacturing, customer service and distribution solutions. Our eight facilities, including the recently acquired 14-20 million gallons per year, ASTM E1177 EG-1, glycol re-distillation plant in West Virginia, deliver superior quality glycol products that meet or exceed ASTM quality standards, including a wide spectrum of ready to use antifreezes and additive packages for antifreeze/coolant, gas patch coolants and heat transfer fluid industries, throughout North America. Our team's extensive experience in the chemical field, including direct experience with reclamation of all types of glycols, gives us the ability to process a wide range of feedstock streams, formulate and produce unique products and has earned us an outstanding reputation in our markets. For further information, please visit: http://www.glyeco.com This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Safe Harbor Provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements are often identified by the words "believe," "anticipate," "expect," "intend," "estimate," and similar expressions. All statements in this document regarding the future outlook related to GlyEco, Inc. are forward-looking statements. Such statements are based on the current expectations, beliefs, estimates and projections of management and are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements including the risk that the future data will not be as favorable as the initial results. Additional uncertainties and risks are described in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K. For a more detailed discussion of factors that affect GlyEco's operations, please refer our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"). Copies of these filings are available through the SEC website at http://www.sec.gov. All forward-looking statements are based upon information available to us on the date hereof, and GlyEco undertakes no obligation to update this forward-looking information. GLYECO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016 Preferred stock; 40,000,000 shares authorized; $0.0001 par value; no shares issued and outstanding as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively Common stock, 300,000,000 shares authorized; $0.0001 par value; 126,944,190 and 126,156,189 shares issued and outstanding as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively GLYECO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations For the three months ended March 31, 2017 and 2016 Adjusted Earnings before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization (non-GAAP) For the three months ended March 31, 2017 and 2016 Presented above is the non-GAAP financial measure representing earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and stock compensation (which we refer to as "Adjusted EBITDA") and the reconciliations of Adjusted EBITDA to net loss. Adjusted EBITDA should be viewed as supplemental to, and not as an alternative for, net income (loss) and cash flows from operations calculated in accordance with GAAP. Adjusted EBITDA is used by our management as an additional measure of our Company's performance for purposes of business decision-making, including developing budgets, managing expenditures, and evaluating potential acquisitions or divestitures. Period-to-period comparisons of Adjusted EBITDA help our management identify additional trends in our Company's financial results that may not be shown solely by period-to-period comparisons of net income (loss) and cash flows from operations. In addition, we may use Adjusted EBITDA in the incentive compensation programs applicable to many of our employees in order to evaluate our Company's performance. Further, we believe that the presentation of Adjusted EBITDA is useful to investors in their analysis of our results and helps investors make comparisons between our company and other companies that may have different capital structures, different effective income tax rates and tax attributes, different capitalized asset values and/or different forms of employee compensation. Our management recognizes that Adjusted EBITDA has inherent limitations because of the excluded items, particularly those items that are recurring in nature. In order to compensate for those limitations, management also reviews the specific items that are excluded from Adjusted EBITDA, but included in net income (loss), as well as trends in those items. Total Revenues Increased 59% for the Quarter; Organic Revenues Increased 11% for the Quarter ROCK HILL, SC / ACCESSWIRE / May 15, 2017 / GlyEco, Inc. ("GlyEco" or the "Company") (OTC PINK: GLYE), a leading specialty chemical company, announced today the following financial results for the quarter ended March 31, 2017: "With our first quarter 2017 results, we have already begun to see the benefits of the acquisitions we completed in December 2016 and our revamped sales efforts that we launched in late 2016, as revenues increased 59% compared to the first quarter of last year. Additionally, our operating expense ratio decreased approximately 19 percentage points as we increased the scale of our operations. However, our gross profit margin was negatively impacted by approximately $200,000 of production costs that were not fully absorbed into inventory, but rather expensed while the newly acquired Glycol Recycling Unit (the "GRU") facility in Institute, West Virginia was off-line during the first 2 months of the quarter for infrastructure related capital improvements," said Ian Rhodes, GlyEco's President and Chief Executive Officer. "Additionally, organic revenues increased 11%, a solid increase, but even more meaningful when considered against the backdrop of a mild winter in 2017 compared to 2016." Effective January 1, 2017, the Company has two segments, Consumer and Industrial. Presented below are the financial results for each segment as well as reconciling items to the consolidated results. Sales increased 59% or $847 thousand to $2.3 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, as compared to $1.4 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. Organic sales increased 11% or $156 thousand from $1.4 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2016 to $1.6 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2017. Operating loss of $912 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, compared to $801 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. Adjusted EBITDA of negative $529 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, compared to negative $443 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. Average monthly distillation production for our Consumer segment was 80,000 gallons for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, the highest quarterly average for the past five quarters and a significant increase from an average monthly distillation production of 44,000 gallons for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. First Quarter of 2017 Financial Review The Company's sales for the quarter ended March 31, 2017 were $2.3 million, compared to $1.4 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2016, representing an increase of $847 thousand, or approximately 59%. The increase in Net Sales was due to organic revenue growth of $156 thousand, or approximately 11%, and $692 thousand of sales related to the businesses and assets acquired in December 2016. The Company realized a gross profit of $140 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, compared to a gross profit of $137 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. The gross profit margin was negatively impacted by approximately $200 thousand of production costs that were not fully absorbed into inventory, but rather expensed as incurred while the newly acquired GRU facility in Institute, West Virginia was off-line during the first 2 months of the quarter for infrastructure related capital improvements. The Company reported an operating loss of $912 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, compared to an $801 thousand operating loss for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. The Company reported a net loss of $1.1 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, compared to a net loss of $806 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. The Company reported adjusted EBITDA of negative $529 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, compared to negative $443 thousand for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. As our West Virginia facility was off-line for half of the first quarter, we did not see the full benefit this quarter of the combined businesses. However, we were pleased with the revenue growth and reduction in our operating expense ratio, which both speak well for the positive direction of our company. We are focused on profitable revenue growth and continue to seek out and add sales and other personnel, as well as business partners that will have a meaningful positive impact on both our top and bottom line results. We expect period over period sales growth for the remainder of 2017 to exceed the sales growth we experienced in the first quarter of 2017. We are also focused on expanding our gross margin through a combination of increased sales and improvements in our production and distribution operations. We expect production savings through a combination of further production increases and decreases in key costs. We continue to invest in new equipment and make enhancements to existing equipment to improve operations and drive down costs. We have added and will continue to add personnel to further strengthen our growing operations team. We expect our gross margin for the remainder of 2017 to be better than our gross margin in the first quarter of 2017. Subsequent to the end of the quarter, the Company entered into a sale-leaseback transaction for $1.7 million and used the proceeds to repay $1.0 million in notes and deploy the balance into working capital. Also subsequent to the end of the quarter, the Company's monthly sales for April exceeded $1 million and set a new monthly sales record for the Company. GlyEco is a leading specialty chemical company, leveraging technology and innovation to focus on vertically integrated, eco-friendly manufacturing, customer service and distribution solutions. Our eight facilities, including the recently acquired 14-20 million gallons per year, ASTM E1177 EG-1, glycol re-distillation plant in West Virginia, deliver superior quality glycol products that meet or exceed ASTM quality standards, including a wide spectrum of ready to use antifreezes and additive packages for antifreeze/coolant, gas patch coolants and heat transfer fluid industries, throughout North America. Our team's extensive experience in the chemical field, including direct experience with reclamation of all types of glycols, gives us the ability to process a wide range of feedstock streams, formulate and produce unique products and has earned us an outstanding reputation in our markets. For further information, please visit: http://www.glyeco.com This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Safe Harbor Provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements are often identified by the words "believe," "anticipate," "expect," "intend," "estimate," and similar expressions. All statements in this document regarding the future outlook related to GlyEco, Inc. are forward-looking statements. Such statements are based on the current expectations, beliefs, estimates and projections of management and are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements including the risk that the future data will not be as favorable as the initial results. Additional uncertainties and risks are described in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K. For a more detailed discussion of factors that affect GlyEco's operations, please refer our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"). Copies of these filings are available through the SEC website at http://www.sec.gov. All forward-looking statements are based upon information available to us on the date hereof, and GlyEco undertakes no obligation to update this forward-looking information. GLYECO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016 Preferred stock; 40,000,000 shares authorized; $0.0001 par value; no shares issued and outstanding as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively Common stock, 300,000,000 shares authorized; $0.0001 par value; 126,944,190 and 126,156,189 shares issued and outstanding as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively GLYECO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations For the three months ended March 31, 2017 and 2016 Adjusted Earnings before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization (non-GAAP) For the three months ended March 31, 2017 and 2016 Presented above is the non-GAAP financial measure representing earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and stock compensation (which we refer to as "Adjusted EBITDA") and the reconciliations of Adjusted EBITDA to net loss. Adjusted EBITDA should be viewed as supplemental to, and not as an alternative for, net income (loss) and cash flows from operations calculated in accordance with GAAP. Adjusted EBITDA is used by our management as an additional measure of our Company's performance for purposes of business decision-making, including developing budgets, managing expenditures, and evaluating potential acquisitions or divestitures. Period-to-period comparisons of Adjusted EBITDA help our management identify additional trends in our Company's financial results that may not be shown solely by period-to-period comparisons of net income (loss) and cash flows from operations. In addition, we may use Adjusted EBITDA in the incentive compensation programs applicable to many of our employees in order to evaluate our Company's performance. Further, we believe that the presentation of Adjusted EBITDA is useful to investors in their analysis of our results and helps investors make comparisons between our company and other companies that may have different capital structures, different effective income tax rates and tax attributes, different capitalized asset values and/or different forms of employee compensation. Our management recognizes that Adjusted EBITDA has inherent limitations because of the excluded items, particularly those items that are recurring in nature. In order to compensate for those limitations, management also reviews the specific items that are excluded from Adjusted EBITDA, but included in net income (loss), as well as trends in those items.


News Article | May 26, 2017
Site: motherboard.vice.com

Russian government hackers seem to have figured out that sometimes the best way to hack into people's Gmail accounts is be to abuse Google's own services. On Thursday, researchers exposed a massive Russian espionage and disinformation campaign using emails designed to trick users into giving up their passwords, a technique that's known as phishing. The hackers targeted more than 200 victims, including, among others, journalists and activists critical of the Russian government, as well as people affiliated with the Ukrainian military, and high-ranking officials in energy companies around the world, according to a new report. Read more: Would You Click on These Fake Gmail Alerts? Researchers at the Citizen Lab, a digital rights research group at the University of Toronto's Munk School of Global Affairs, were able to identify all these victims following clues left in two phishing emails sent to David Satter, an American journalist and academic who's written Soviet and modern Russia, and who has been banned from the country in 2014. On October 7, Satter received a phishing email designed to look like it was coming from Google, claiming someone had stolen his password and that he should change it right away. As with seen with other phishing attacks targeting people affiliated with the Hillary Clinton campaign that led to the DNC leaks of last year, the email, however, didn't come from Google. It was actually from a group of hackers known as Fancy Bear, or APT28, whom many believe work for Russia's military intelligence, the GRU. The "Change Password" button linked to a short URL from the Tiny.cc link shortener service, a Bitly competitor. But the hackers cleverly disguised it as a legitimate link by using Google's Accelerated Mobile Pages, or AMP. This is a service hosted by the internet giant that was originally designed to speed up web pages on mobile, especially for publishers. In practice, it works by creating a copy of a website's page on Google's servers, but it also acts as an open redirect. According to Citizen Lab researchers, the hackers used Google AMP to trick the targets into thinking the email really came from Google. "It's a percentage game, you may not get every person you phish but you'll get a percentage," John Scott-Railton, a senior researcher at Citizen Lab, told Motherboard. So if the victim had quickly hovered over the button to inspect the link, they would have seen a URL that starts with google.com/amp, which seems safe, and it's followed by a Tiny.cc URL, which the user might not have noticed. (For example: https://www.google[.]com/amp/tiny.cc/63q6iy) Using Google's own redirect service was also perhaps also a way to get the phishing email past Gmail's automated filters against spam and malicious messages. "It's a percentage game, you may not get every person you phish but you'll get a percentage." According to Citizen Lab, who doesn't directly point the finger at Fancy Bear, the email was actually sent by annaablony[@]mail.com. That address was used in 2015 by Fancy Bear to register a domain, according to security firm ThreatConnect. And another domain used in the October attacks exposed by Citizen Lab was also previously linked to Fancy Bear, according to SecureWorks, which tracked the phishing campaign against the DNC and the Clinton campaign. Curiously, the email targeting Satter came just a few days before Google warned some Russian journalists and activists that "government-backed attackers" were trying to hack them using malicious Tiny.cc links. Now we know that in October of 2016, when the hackers targeted Satter and at least 200 other people, the trick of using Google AMP was working, and Google hadn't blocked it. Google has previously dismissed concerns about open redirectors, arguing that "a small number of properly monitored redirectors offers fairly clear benefits and poses very little practical risk." On Thursday, a company spokesperson said that this is a known issue and last year some Google AMP URLs started showing a warning if the company's systems are uncertain whether the link is safe to visit, such as this. But for some security researchers, they are dangerous. "The AMP service's behavior as an open redirect for desktop browsers was clearly abused in this situation and is also just trivial to abuse in general," Nicholas Weaver, a senior researcher at the International Computer Science Institute at UC Berkeley, told Motherboard in an email. "There is undoubtedly some engineering tradeoff I'm not seeing that causes them to maintain it." Google's redirectors might not be the only part of Google's infrastructure that Fancy Bear hackers have been taking advantage of. Citizen Lab researchers found a Tiny.cc URL that targeted an email address—myprimaryreger[@]gmail.com—that other security researchers suspect was used by Fancy Bear to test their own attacks. That address had a Google Plus page filled with images that appear in real, legitimate Gmail security alerts. It's unclear what the hackers used these for, or if they used them at all. But the researchers said that perhaps the hackers were embedding them in phishing emails, and the fact that they were hosted on Google Plus perhaps helped thwart Gmail's security controls. The Fancy Bear hackers are known to use popular services like URL shorteners in their high-profile hacking operations. And, sometimes, those URL shorteners betray them and end up revealing who they targeted. Between March 2015 and May 2016, as part of their operation to hack Clinton's campaign chairman John Podesta, and former National Security Advisor Colin Powell, the hackers targeted more than 6,000 people with more than 19,000 phishing links. Some of those used Bitly URLs that, as it turned out, could be decoded to figure out who they were intended to. Similarly, in this case Citizen Lab researchers were able to identify the victims by figuring out that there was a pattern behind how Tiny.cc creates short URLs. That pattern, as research fellow Adam Hulcoop explained to me, "was chronological." So, starting from the links sent to Satter, the researchers were able to guess other links created around the same time. It's impossible to know why the hackers keep relying on services like Bitly or Tiny.cc, which end up exposing some of their operations—although months later. One explanation could be that their phishing campaigns are highly automated, given that they target thousands of people. So, as Hulcoop put it, they need a modular phishing infrastructure where every element can be modified if needed, as "an insurance policy of sorts" and they use third party services "to try and balance the need for OpSec [operational security, or the practice of keeping operations secret] with the ability to operate at scale." "The construction of the Tiny.cc shortcodes pointing to TinyURL shortcodes, which ultimately point to phishing sites on different servers. This modularity is likely by design so that the operator can change up the individual components, servers, redirectors, etc., and only abandon the pieces that are burned," he said in an online chat. "The more layers you have, the more flexible you can be." Subscribe to Science Solved It, Motherboard's new show about the greatest mysteries that were solved by science.


News Article | May 4, 2017
Site: news.yahoo.com

The Russian intervention in Syria has been, by most accounts, a success. And Russian President Vladimir Putin is going to do everything he can to keep it that way. Beginning with an air campaign on behalf of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in September 2015, Russian forces have not only stopped regime losses but also helped Damascus retake Aleppo city in December 2016. Now with the opposition stronghold under government control and Assad’s hold on power no longer in question, Moscow has said it plans to reduce its presence in the country. But while some Russian forces did initially depart in early January, Moscow is actually expanding its role in Syria. Russian officials announced major expansions to Russian military bases in the country while the number of private contractors fighting on the Kremlin’s behalf also swelled. Most interestingly, however, Putin deployed an unprecedented Russian weapon to Syria: several units of Chechen and Ingush commandos hailing from Russia’s restive North Caucasus region. Until recently, regular Russian forces in Syria were largely limited to being a support crew for aircraft conducting strikes across the country. Apart from a few notable exceptions — artillery and special forces deployments in Hama province and military advisors alongside Syrian troops in Latakia — Moscow’s ground game in Syria has been minimal. But the ongoing deployment of the Chechen and Ingush brigades marks a strategic shift for the Kremlin: Russia now has its own elite ground personnel, drawn from its Sunni Muslim population, placed across Syria. This growing presence allows the Kremlin to have a greater role in shaping events on the ground as it digs in for the long term. Such forces could prove vital in curtailing any action taken by the Assad regime that would undermine Moscow’s wider interests in the Middle East while offering a highly effective method for the Kremlin to project power at a reduced political cost. The exact role and size of the Kremlin’s new brigades are still uncertain. Initial open-source reports on the ground placed the number of Chechens deployed in December at around 500, while some estimates suggested a total of 300-400. The number of Ingush is reportedly slightly smaller, at roughly 300. Despite their designation as “military police,” the units are reportedly drawn from elite Spetnaz formations within the Chechen armed forces and are being employed in a role far beyond the simple rear-area guard duty that’s typical of such units: manning checkpoints, distributing aid, guarding bases, and even coordinating the defense of pro-government strongholds with regime forces. “I think this represents Moscow’s grudging recognition that it’s stuck in a quagmire,” says Mark Galeotti, a senior researcher at the Institute of International Relations in Prague. In their hybrid civil-military role, capable of a wide range of operations, these brigades have become a go-to deployment for the Kremlin as it seeks to assert itself in various theaters abroad. Chechen fighters have appeared alongside pro-separatist Russian “volunteers” in eastern Ukraine, and several battalions of Chechen servicemen also entered Georgia during its brief war with Russia in August 2008, occupying the town of Gori. At least some of the Chechen troops deployed in Syria have combat experience in eastern Ukraine, with the Russian newspaper Novaya Gazeta reporting that one of the Chechen commanders is Apti Bolotkhanov, who spent substantial time fighting alongside pro-Russian forces in the Donbass. But beyond their skill on the battlefield, the brigades are valuable to Moscow for other reasons. Russian society and leadership have proved extremely sensitive to casualties in Syria; the Kremlin has gone to extreme lengths to hide its losses. Casualties are often only publicly confirmed after observers find the tombstones of deceased soldiers in their hometown cemeteries. Moscow’s official figures only account for 30 dead in Syria — with the true figure likely much higher. Using nonethnic Russian special personnel might protect the Kremlin from a public backlash sparked by rising battlefield casualties. Losses incurred by the new, North Caucasian contingent are unlikely to trigger such a response. Russian society carries a deep-seated resentment toward natives of the region, in particular Chechens, after two wars in the 1990s and multiple terrorist attacks since. Gregory Shvedov, the editor of the Caucasian Knot website and an expert on the North Caucasus, says popular disdain toward the region is a major factor for the deployment of these personnel. “Cynically speaking [it would be much easier for Putin] if the Chechens or other [troops] from the Caucasus would be killed in Syria … than those from other regions of Russia,” Shvedov notes. Employing these fighters offers Moscow another major advantage. The natives of the North Caucasus are almost entirely Sunni Muslims, a faith they share with the majority of Syria’s population. Since the first units arrived in December 2016, Moscow has sought to use their shared religion and appearance to its advantage. North Caucasian units have been documented using handbooks that include helpful suggestions for dealing with locals, such as the liberal use of the word “mukhabarat” (Syrian secret police) — implying detention and other nasty repercussions — should a request be met with resistance. On a more cordial level, Chechen military police have been told to use shared Islamic words to build friendlier relations with the public, relying on various religious epithets to greet locals when on a patrol. The conversion of an ethnic Russian soldier to Sunni Islam, conducted by Chechnya’s grand mufti in front of Syrian onlookers in Aleppo, was another public relations maneuver utilizing the shared faith between Syrians and the servicemen. While the deployment of the Caucasian brigades represents a new phase of Russia’s intervention in Syria, Moscow’s use of its Muslim-majority regions to reach out to the Middle East is not new. Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov has often acted as an interlocutor between Moscow and Sunni Arab states, making state visits on behalf of Putin and attracting Gulf investors to the Chechen capital. Kadyrov has attempted to cast the Chechen capital, Grozny, as a center of international Sunni discussion on the state level, hosting numerous international forums where Chechen figures were the sole representatives of Russia’s 20 million Muslims. The aim of such conferences is generally to discredit Salafi Islam, the hard-line strain followed by most jihadis. Syrian officials themselves have begun to engage closely with North Caucasian authorities. A delegation from Damascus including Syria’s minister of religious affairs visited the Dagestani capital of Makhachkala in March, discussing counterradicalization with Dagestani authorities and students. In present circumstances, where it is rare for Syrian officials to make any foreign trip, let alone to a far-flung region of another country, the Makhachkala trip is significant in demonstrating the depth of Moscow’s use of its Sunni Muslim region as an outreach tool. Most recently, the head of Damascus University announced in mid-April that his institution is opening a campus in Chechnya. Given these religious and cultural links, Moscow is banking on its new Muslim-majority brigades to prove more amenable to the Syrian populace than its ethnic Russian soldiers. As Moscow’s footprint deepens, North Caucasian special forces have taken on increasingly important tasks across Syria, from guarding Syrian Kurdish units against Turkish incursions in Manbij to ensuring the success of negotiated rebel evacuations on the outskirts of Damascus. The growing role of the brigades demonstrates a desire on Russia’s part to wield greater influence over areas of Syria it deems crucial, particularly in the face of occasional tension with its Syrian and Iranian allies. Although outward appearances suggest solidarity, Moscow has occasionally clashed with both Damascus and Tehran. Perhaps the most publicized example of this uneasy alliance came during the late stages of the Aleppo campaign. Iranian officials were reportedly incensed with the terms of a cease-fire brokered for the city by Russia and Turkey in December 2016 that were imposed without their input. Iran later intentionally scuttled the deal, using its Iraqi and Syrian proxy forces to resume fighting in Aleppo. Not coincidentally, Moscow’s first Chechen soldiers arrived in Syria within weeks of that event. The importance for Moscow in being able to control unexpected events on the ground was highlighted in late January when rumors began to spread that Assad had suffered a stroke. Adding fuel to the fire, some opposition figures claimed that the Syrian president had flown to Beirut for treatment; Damascus uncharacteristically denied the claims instead of ignoring them, fueling the speculation. Amid the uncertainty, reports emerged that with Assad’s health failing, Iranian forces were posturing to install his brother Maher, who is rumored to not be among the Kremlin’s preferred list of successors. Within several days, Assad returned to Damascus and held a series of publicized meetings, calming the situation. But the incident highlighted the value for Moscow in having its own ground forces in the Syrian capital. As part of its strategy to further control events on the ground in Syria, the Kremlin has also elected far more secretive means to expand its footprint. To bolster its regular forces, Moscow has employed a sizable private military contractor (PMC) that now has nearly four years of experience in the country. First known as the Slavonic Corps, the group’s first mission in 2013 in Syria proved a major debacle, but after rebranding itself and gaining stronger Kremlin backing, the group redeployed to Syria as part of Moscow’s official intervention in 2015. Now called Wagner, the group is headed by Dmitry Utkin, a former intelligence officer in the GRU, Russia’s foreign military intelligence agency, who first deployed the PMC in operations in Crimea and eastern Ukraine. Obtaining precise statistics on the group is difficult, but the most accurate estimate by the Russian daily RBC, whose experts have broken numerous stories on the group, puts their number at 2,500. Russia’s regular forces in Syria total around 5,000, so when combined with its brigades from the North Caucasus and its PMCs, Moscow’s true ground strength in the country has swelled significantly. The first stage of Moscow’s Caucasian adventure in Syria ended on March 27, as the deployed Chechen military police returned home after their first tour. The soldiers were greeted by Kadyrov himself in Grozny and received several awards for their service. But the Chechens’ initial success appears to have earned them another tour. Less than a month after the return of the first military police battalion, Kadyrov announced on April 19 that a new unit of Chechens had just been deployed to Syria. The Ingush battalion, meanwhile, continues to function in Damascus, having been spotted in the center of the capital throughout April. There are signs that the Ingush battalion is becoming more involved in front-line action with rebel forces in the Syrian capital. In Damascus’s Jobar district, the scene of heavy fighting in March, rebels reportedly intercepted communications indicating that some Ingush officers, as well as some remaining Chechens, were coordinating much of the pro-government defense of the area. The Ingush battalion will reportedly return home from its tour in May. Another tour is yet to be announced for the Ingush battalion, but given the units’ early successes, expect to see Russia’s North Caucasian specialists appear in locations across Syria as the war grinds on. So far, the deployment of Chechen and Ingush forces has been very surgical, appearing only in areas and events Moscow considers critical to its aims in Syria. And while their role is unlikely to expand greatly anytime soon, the North Caucasian battalions will continue to serve as the tip of the spear in Moscow’s wider strategy to expand its influence in Syria. Christian Borys, an independent Canadian journalist focused on Eastern Europe and based in Ukraine, contributed to this report. Follow him on Twitter at: @itsborys.


News Article | May 6, 2017
Site: news.yahoo.com

Emmanuel Macron, head of the political movement En Marche !, or Onwards !, and candidate for the 2017 presidential election, speaks with supporters during a campaign visit in Rodez, France, May 5, 2017. REUTERS/Regis Duvignau FRANKFURT/PARIS (Reuters) - Leading French presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron's campaign said on Friday it had been the target of a "massive" computer hack that dumped its campaign emails online 1-1/2 days before voters choose between the centrist and his far-right rival, Marine Le Pen. Macron, who is seen as the frontrunner in an election billed as the most important in France in decades, extended his lead over Le Pen in polls on Friday. As much as 9 gigabytes of data were posted on a profile called EMLEAKS to Pastebin, a site that allows anonymous document sharing. It was not immediately clear who was responsible for posting the data or if any of it was genuine. In a statement, Macron's political movement En Marche! (Onwards!) confirmed that it had been hacked. "The En Marche! Movement has been the victim of a massive and co-ordinated hack this evening which has given rise to the diffusion on social media of various internal information," the statement said. An interior ministry official declined to comment, citing French rules that forbid any commentary liable to influence an election, which took effect at midnight on Friday (2200 GMT). The presidential election commission said in statement that it would hold a meeting later on Saturday after Macron's campaign informed it about the hack and publishing of the data. It urged the media to be cautious about publishing details of the emails given that campaigning had ended, and publication could lead to criminal charges. Comments about the email dump began to appear on Friday evening just hours before the official ban on campaigning began. The ban is due to stay in place until the last polling stations close Sunday at 8 p.m. (1800 GMT). Opinion polls show independent centrist Macron is set to beat National Front candidate Le Pen in Sunday's second round of voting, in what is seen to be France's most important election in decades. The latest surveys show him winning with about 62 percent of the vote. Former economy minister Macron's campaign has previously complained about attempts to hack its emails, blaming Russian interests in part for the cyber attacks. On April 26, the team said it had been the target of a attempts to steal email credentials dating back to January, but that the perpetrators had failed to compromise any campaign data. The Kremlin has denied it was behind any such attacks, even though Macron's camp renewed complaints against Russian media and a hackers' group operating in Ukraine. Vitali Kremez, director of research with New York-based cyber intelligence firm Flashpoint, told Reuters his review indicates that APT 28, a group tied to the GRU, the Russian military intelligence directorate, was behind the leak. He cited similarities with U.S. election hacks that have been previously attributed to that group. APT28 last month registered decoy internet addresses to mimic the name of En Marche, which it likely used send tainted emails to hack into the campaign’s computers, Kremez said. Those domains include onedrive-en-marche.fr and mail-en-marche.fr. "If indeed driven by Moscow, this leak appears to be a significant escalation over the previous Russian operations aimed at the U.S. presidential election, expanding the approach and scope of effort from simple espionage efforts towards more direct attempts to sway the outcome," Kremez said. France is the latest nation to see a major election overshadowed by accusations of manipulation through cyber hacking. U.S. intelligence agencies said in January that Russian President Vladimir Putin had ordered hacking of parties tied to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to influence the election on behalf of Republican rival Donald Trump. On Friday night as the #Macronleaks hashtag buzzed around social media, Florian Philippot, deputy leader of the National Front, tweeted "Will Macronleaks teach us something that investigative journalism has deliberately killed?" En Marche! said the documents only showed the normal functioning of a presidential campaign, but that authentic documents had been mixed on social media with fake ones to sow "doubt and misinformation".


News Article | May 6, 2017
Site: news.yahoo.com

Emmanuel Macron, head of the political movement En Marche !, or Onwards !, and candidate for the 2017 presidential election, is pictured through a window of his hotel during a campaign visit in Rodez, France, May 5, 2017. REUTERS/Regis Duvignau TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY FRANKFURT/PARIS (Reuters) - Leading French presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron's campaign said on Friday it had been the target of a "massive" computer hack that dumped its campaign emails online 1-1/2 days before voters choose between the centrist and his far-right rival, Marine Le Pen. Macron, who is seen as the frontrunner in an election billed as the most important in France in decades, extended his lead over Le Pen in polls on Friday. As much as 9 gigabytes of data were posted on a profile called EMLEAKS to Pastebin, a site that allows anonymous document sharing. It was not immediately clear who was responsible for posting the data or if any of it was genuine. In a statement, Macron's political movement En Marche! (Onwards!) confirmed that it had been hacked. "The En Marche! Movement has been the victim of a massive and co-ordinated hack this evening which has given rise to the diffusion on social media of various internal information," the statement said. An interior ministry official declined to comment, citing French rules that forbid any commentary liable to influence an election, which took effect at midnight on Friday (2200 GMT). The presidential election commission said in statement that it would hold a meeting later on Saturday after Macron's campaign informed it about the hack and publishing of the data. It urged the media to be cautious about publishing details of the emails given that campaigning had ended, and publication could lead to criminal charges. Comments about the email dump began to appear on Friday evening just hours before the official ban on campaigning began. The ban is due to stay in place until the last polling stations close Sunday at 8 p.m. (1800 GMT). Opinion polls show independent centrist Macron is set to beat National Front candidate Le Pen in Sunday's second round of voting, in what is seen to be France's most important election in decades. The latest surveys show him winning with about 62 percent of the vote. Former economy minister Macron's campaign has previously complained about attempts to hack its emails, blaming Russian interests in part for the cyber attacks. On April 26, the team said it had been the target of a attempts to steal email credentials dating back to January, but that the perpetrators had failed to compromise any campaign data. The Kremlin has denied it was behind any such attacks, even though Macron's camp renewed complaints against Russian media and a hackers' group operating in Ukraine. Vitali Kremez, director of research with New York-based cyber intelligence firm Flashpoint, told Reuters his review indicates that APT 28, a group tied to the GRU, the Russian military intelligence directorate, was behind the leak. He cited similarities with U.S. election hacks that have been previously attributed to that group. APT28 last month registered decoy internet addresses to mimic the name of En Marche, which it likely used send tainted emails to hack into the campaign’s computers, Kremez said. Those domains include onedrive-en-marche.fr and mail-en-marche.fr. "If indeed driven by Moscow, this leak appears to be a significant escalation over the previous Russian operations aimed at the U.S. presidential election, expanding the approach and scope of effort from simple espionage efforts towards more direct attempts to sway the outcome," Kremez said. France is the latest nation to see a major election overshadowed by accusations of manipulation through cyber hacking. U.S. intelligence agencies said in January that Russian President Vladimir Putin had ordered hacking of parties tied to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to influence the election on behalf of Republican rival Donald Trump. On Friday night as the #Macronleaks hashtag buzzed around social media, Florian Philippot, deputy leader of the National Front, tweeted "Will Macronleaks teach us something that investigative journalism has deliberately killed?" En Marche! said the documents only showed the normal functioning of a presidential campaign, but that authentic documents had been mixed on social media with fake ones to sow "doubt and misinformation".


News Article | May 8, 2017
Site: www.theguardian.com

The hackers behind a “massive and coordinated” attack on the campaign of France’s president-elect, Emmanuel Macron, have been linked by a number of cybersecurity research firms to the Russian-affiliated group blamed for attacking the Democratic party shortly before the US election. Tens of thousands of internal emails and other documents were released online overnight on Friday as the midnight deadline to halt campaigning in the French election passed. According to the head of Macron’s digital team, Mounir Mahjoubi, “five entire mailboxes” were “stolen”, with many of the accounts being personal Gmail mailboxes. New York’s Flashpoint and Tokyo-based Trend Micro have shared intelligence that suggests that the hacking group known variously as Advanced Persistent Threat 28, Fancy Bear and Pawn Storm was responsible. The group has been linked with the GRU, the Russian military intelligence directorate. Macron, an independent centrist, won Sunday’s runoff election against the far-right Marine Le Pen by a 66% to 34% margin. A congratulatory statement from the Kremlin, which had been widely seen as backing Le Pen, urged Macron to work with Russia to “overcome mutual mistrust and unite to ensure international stability and security”. In an interview on Monday with Radio France, Mahjoubi sought to play down the impact of the data release, saying there were “no secrets” in the emails. “You will find jokes, you will find tens of thousands of invoices from suppliers … And you will find hundreds of exchanges on the manifesto, on organising events. In fact, all that makes a campaign.” He said, however, that some among the thousands of published documents were fake. “There are files that have been added to these archives … fake emails that have been added.” Despite the strong technical abilities believed to be possessed by APT 28, its primary route of attack is a simple yet effective method known as spear phishing: creating fake login pages targeted at individuals in an attempt to encourage them to enter their usernames and passwords, giving the hackers access to confidential information. They can then repeat the process, using the confidential information to craft even more convincing phishing pages, until they have stolen significant amounts of data. Vitali Kremez of Flashpoint said his review indicated APT 28 was behind the leak. As part of the group’s spear phishing technique, it needs to register and control web addresses which could plausibly fool a target into thinking they were logging into a legitimate website. In the US elections, one such address (“myaccount.google.com-changepasswordmyaccount-idx8jxcn4ufdmncudd.gq”) was designed to look like an official Google page. Last month, APT 28 registered decoy internet addresses to mimic the name of Macron’s movement, En Marche!, which it probably used to send emails to hack into the campaign’s computers, Kremez said. Those domains include onedrive-en-marche.fr, designed to appear like an official Microsoft address, and mail-en-marche.fr, which pretended to be a webmail site. “If indeed driven by Moscow, this leak appears to be a significant escalation over the previous Russian operations aimed at the US presidential election, expanding the approach and scope of effort from simple espionage efforts towards more direct attempts to sway the outcome,” Kremez said. Trend Micro also identified links between the hacks, noting that the same organisation registered the fake Google address used in the hacks of the Democratic party’s national committee in April 2016 and the Macron address in March this year. That organisation had also registered domain names with the apparent purpose of stealing details from Germany’s Christian Democratic Union, through the party’s foundation arm Kas, and from MPs in Montenegro, where the government said last year said a coup plot had aimed at derailing the country’s elections. Ryan Kalember of information security firm Proofpoint said there was evidence that En Marche!’s attacker had Russian connections. “Some of the metadata from this breach clearly indicates that certain documents, such as those with Macron’s ‘Bahamian bank accounts’, were edited on computers with Russian language operating systems,” he said. Kalember said that was also a warning that some of the claimed leaked documents may be fake. “It’s absolutely critical that French citizens confirm the legitimacy of the news they are reading as this story develops. Make sure it is a reputable outlet and check multiple sources to confirm accuracy.” A number of factors appear to have lessened the impact of the hacks, from the late date when the stolen data was released – two days before Sunday’s runoff vote – to the rapid response of the French electoral authorities. The presidential electoral authority, the CNCCEP, warned broadcasters and the public to avoid sharing details gleaned from the documents, 9GB of which were posted by a user calling themselves Emleaks to the anonymous data-sharing site Pastebin. Another factor may have been the response of the Macron campaignIt intervened an hour before the legally imposed blackout on public statements from election candidates to report that many of the documents being shared were fake. The Daily Beast claimed that rather than being faked by the hackers or those reposting the data, the bogus information had been planted by the Macron campaign, which had become aware it was the target of a phishing campaign and flooded the hackers with false information. The Macron campaign reportedly turned the spear phishing strategy against the attackers, by flooding “these addresses with multiple passwords and logins, true ones, false ones, so the people behind them use up a lot of time trying to figure them out”, according to Mahjoubi. As well as the fake documents that he alleged had been added by the hackers, “there is also information that we had sent in counter-retaliation for phishing attempts”, he told Radio France.


News Article | February 15, 2017
Site: motherboard.vice.com

In October of 2014 an American security company revealed that a group of hackers affiliated with the Russian government, dubbed APT28, had targeted Georgia and other Eastern European countries in a wide-ranging espionage campaign. Two and a half years later, APT28—also known as "Fancy Bear" or "Sofacy"—is a household name not just in the cybersecurity industry, but in the mainstream too, thanks to its attack on the US Democratic party and the ensuing leaks of documents and emails. Before that report by FireEye, APT28 was a well-kept secret within the cybersecurity industry. At the time, several companies were willing to share information about the hacking group. Even Google investigated the group, and penned a 40-page technical report on the hacking group that has never been published before. Read more:  How Hackers Broke Into John Podesta and Colin Powell's Gmail Accounts This sort of document, which Motherboard obtained from two independent sources, may be a common sight in the threat intelligence industry, but the public rarely gets to see what such a report from Google looks like. The report draws from one of Google's most interesting sources of data when it comes to malware and cybersecurity threats: VirusTotal, a public malware repository that the internet giant acquired in 2012. Sofacy and X-Agent, the report read, referring to the malware used by APT28, "are used by a sophisticated state-sponsored group targeting primarily former Soviet republics, NATO members, and other Western European countries." "It looks like Google researchers were well aware of Sofacy before it was publicly disclosed." While Google security researchers don't dwell into who's really behind these operations, they do hint that they agree with the now widespread belief that APT28 works for the Russian government in a clever, indirect, way—in the very title of the report: "Peering into the Aquarium." While that might seem like an obscure title, for those who follow Russian espionage activities, it's a clear reference to the headquarters of the military intelligence agency known as GRU or Glavnoye Razvedyvatel'noye Upravleniye, which are popularly known as "The Aquarium." "It looks like Google researchers were well aware of Sofacy before it was publicly disclosed," Matt Suiche, a security researcher and the founder of Comae Technologies and the OPCDE  conference, told Motherboard in an online chat after reviewing the report. "And also attributed Sofacy and X-Agent to Russia before it was publicly done by FireEye, ESET or CrowdStrike." In its report Google security researcher note that APT28 attacks a large number of targets with its first-stage malware Sofacy, but only uses the more tailored and sophisticated X-Agent, which was recently used against Ukraine's military units, for "high-priority targets." "Sofacy was three times more common than X-Agent in the wild, with over 600 distinct samples," Google's report stated. Asked for comment, a Google spokesperson said via email that the company's "security teams are constantly monitoring potential threats to internet users, and regularly publish information to better protect them." The report noted that Georgia had the highest ratio of submissions of Sofacy malware, followed by Romania, Russia and Denmark. While this report is now a bit dated, it shows that for all its sophistication, APT28 has been often caught in the act of hacking politically interesting targets, betraying the origin of the hackers behind the dry nickname. It also reveals how much a company like Google, which doesn't have software installed on thousands of customers computers like other antivirus and security vendors, can still learn a lot about government hacking groups thanks to the other data it has access to. Get six of our favorite Motherboard stories every day by signing up for our newsletter .


Harris R.B.S.,GRU
Biochimica et Biophysica Acta - Molecular Basis of Disease | Year: 2013

Parabiosis is a chronic preparation that allows exchange of whole blood between two animals. It has been used extensively to test for involvement of circulating factors in feedback regulation of physiological systems. The total blood volume of each animal exchanges approximately ten times each day, therefore, factors that are rapidly cleared from the circulation do not reach equilibrium across the parabiotic union whereas those with a long half-life achieve a uniform concentration and bioactivity in both members of a pair. Involvement of a circulating factor in the regulation of energy balance was first demonstrated when one member of a pair of parabiosed rats became hyperphagic and obese following bilateral lesioning of the ventromedial hypothalamus. The non-lesioned partner stopped eating, lost a large amount of weight and appeared to be responding to a circulating "satiety" factor released by the obese rat. These results were confirmed using different techniques to induce obesity in one member of a pair. Studies with phenotypically similar ob/ob obese and db/db diabetic mice indicated that the obese mouse lacked a circulating signal that regulated energy balance, whereas the diabetic mouse appeared insensitive to such a signal. Positional cloning studies identified leptin as the circulating factor and subsequent parabiosis studies confirmed leptin's ability to exchange effectively between parabionts. These studies also suggest the presence of additional unidentified factors that influence body composition. © 2013 Elsevier B.V.

Loading GRU collaborators
Loading GRU collaborators