The reference biography of Kim Il Sung is "Kim Il Sung: The North Korean Leader" by Dae Sook Suh. A relatively fair treatment of the man given that the author is notable for his anticommunist bias: https://www.amazon.com.au/Kim-Sung-North-Korean-Leader/dp/02...
I can also recommend Kim Il Sung's own autobiography, With The Century: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/With_the_Century (wiki page has many links to the full book). Because it was written by Kim himself, it's a lot less hagiographic than what you might expect (he didn't have to worry about censorship). Plenty of embellishments sure, but also shows a very human picture of the man.
To give a bit more historical background on the conspiracy theory: Kim's anti-Japanese actions in the 1930s-40s had received some coverage in the Korean press - despite Japanese censorship. He went into hiding in the USSR in the early 40s and was sent back to Pyongyang by the Soviets a couple months after the August 1945 liberation of the peninsula. Dissatisfied with their first choice for a North Korean leader (a man named Cho Man-Sik), the Soviets intended to replace him with Kim (a convinced Stalinist) after some PR efforts to bolster his public image.
At Kim Il Sung's first public appearance at a rally in Pyongyang in late 1945, people were shocked by his young age (there are several testimonies from people present at the event attesting to this). This was exploited by the anti-communist South to discredit him, claiming that someone that young could never have done the resistance deeds that people had heard about during the colonial period. As Suh's book shows, however, there is a good amount of evidence to support the fact that he was indeed a leader in the resistance against Japanese colonization (albeit not the only one) with several feat of arms (albeit not nearly as many as later claimed).
The post you're commenting on is a PDF file hosted on cia.gov, how is that any better? Or are you assuming that all readers of HN 1) are American citizens, and 2) that American citizens shouldn't care about possible threats from the CIA?
hacking provides a significant portion of the North Korean economy. the same cannot be said for the USA.
besides, the CIA has a lot more to lose. if you get a virus downloading a PDF from North Korean servers, that's The Scorpion and the Frog. you're not gonna get much sympathy. if you get a virus downloading a PDF from CIA servers, that's near enough an international incident
I think analogies can be taken too far, but "both North Korea and the US are probably interested in compromising the computers of their adversaries, and may intentionally or unintentionally infect others in the process" doesn't seem too far-fetched to me. It's not the same as saying "North Korea and the US are functionally and ideologically the same."
A zero day bug in the pdf parser or javascript engine of your browser. Such bugs are common enough that the North Korean military is believed to use them to gather intelligence and for theft, but also are rare enough that they're going to use them on just anyone.
I thought North Koreans don't know how to use computers? Remember the Kim Jong Un memes around that?
I'm frankly getting tired of all the hysteria. If that is indeed the attack vector just use a sandbox and a pdf viewer with low featureset. Is all we do nowadays mindless hysteria?
EDIT: comical. the response to the advice to use a PDF viewer with low featureset is to list Acrobat exploits. Seems like in the hysteria about how terrible "our enemies" are, all sarcasm and absurdity is lost
I can see why calling out the hypocrisies of the hysteria of people like you would seem obnoxious to you.
EDIT: Comical indeed that MichaelCollins feels the need to come to muruculas rescue. The thread didn't start with murucula, it started with people saying they should not open NK PDF's because they're dangerous. The mindless hysteria could only have been trumped by people accusing one of China and Russia stoogedom in the comments below.
I was merely referring to the memes that were so popular in HN circles just a few years ago about how Kim Jong Un was too stupid to use a computer[1].
I have no skin in the game, but if the HN crowd is not able to read a PDF with basic Opsec to protect itself from malicious Acrobat exploits, we don't really deserve to be called hackers.
Anyway, muricula didn't say North Koreans don't know how to use computers, so there was no hypocrisy in his suggestion that North Koreans might have competent computer hackers. You're raging at numerous strawmen at once.
So many strawmans, so little time. Viewing the history of rjzzleep is fascinating. He loves china and russia but can't say a nice thing about a western country. He constantly points to a collapsing west.
Im not convinced. The Chinese communist party celebrates itself for its resistance against the japanese all the time, when one reads the history though, it gets obvious that the brute of the fighting was done by the nationalists and the communists then only performed a cleanup operation, engaging in no major battles.
These rewritten heroic-historys are largely worthless.
USSR was so pivotal in defeating Germany - forgetting that the Second World War broke up because Soviets signed Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, essentially giving Germans free reign.
Korea hardly had any nationalist armed resistance by the 1930s. The nationalists camp had either turned to peaceful resistance a la Ghandi (Cho Man-sik), exile (Syngam Rhee) or collaboration (Lee Kwang-su, Ch'oe Nam-Seon and so many others).
Kim Il Sung participated in two attacks on the Japanese in the Korean Peninsula confirmed by modern historians (at Hyesan and Pochonbo, the latter of which may have been led by someone else) and other attacks in collaboration with the Chinese communists (see book above for details).
For those wondering why Korean nationalists would have become collaborators: they thought colonozation by an Asian race was less likely to erase Korean culture than colonization from a white race (as the nationalists believed a Japanese defeat in the pacific war would lead to Western colonization of East Asia)
The Communists didn't fight major battles against the Japanese, they didn't have the resources for that after the Nationalist purges and civil war. But neither did the French resistance against Nazi Germany, does that mean they didn't resist at all?
The Communists used guerilla tactics, to much success in some cases. Who did more to stifle the Japanese war effort is an impossible question to answer, but both sides of the Chinese Civil war contributed in the fight, each to their own strengths.
Are there any reliable modern historians that have written about this? Especially the bit that says he was a serial killer in his early years.