To identify potential North Korean IT workers disguised as other nationalities and avoid legal issues associated with hiring them, interviewers can ask about their experience with specific, culturally relevant South Korean pop culture phenomena, like popular TV dramas or K-pop groups. Genuine South Koreans (or those with actual South Korean cultural immersion) would likely have some familiarity with these topics, while imposters, even with fabricated backgrounds, are less likely to possess the nuanced knowledge necessary to convincingly discuss them. This cultural touchstone approach offers a more reliable screening method than relying solely on resumes or claimed nationalities.
The Register article, "The one interview question that will protect you from North Korean fake workers," postulates a method for identifying individuals falsely claiming to be South Korean while actually being citizens of North Korea seeking illicit employment opportunities, often within the IT sector. The article highlights the increasing concern surrounding North Korean operatives utilizing forged identities to secure remote work positions, primarily in software development and cryptocurrency-related fields, thereby circumventing international sanctions and generating revenue for the North Korean regime.
This illicit activity, as described in the article, exploits the demand for skilled tech workers and the relative anonymity afforded by remote work arrangements. The proposed solution, framed as a single interview question, centers on exploiting a purported cultural difference between the two Koreas: the consumption of Choco Pies. The article suggests that genuine South Koreans possess a widespread familiarity with and fondness for this particular snack cake, a sentiment supposedly absent among North Koreans due to its limited availability within the isolated nation. Therefore, posing a seemingly innocuous question about one's preference for or experience with Choco Pies is presented as a litmus test to discern a true South Korean from an imposter.
The article elaborates on the rationale behind this strategy, explaining that a genuine South Korean would likely have a ready answer or anecdote related to Choco Pies, whereas a North Korean operative, unfamiliar with the cultural significance of this treat, might hesitate, exhibit confusion, or fabricate an unconvincing response. The article acknowledges that this method is not foolproof and could potentially lead to false positives or negatives. Nevertheless, it is presented as a simple, quick, and readily deployable screening tool to raise a red flag and potentially initiate further investigation into an applicant's background. The overall tone of the article is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, presenting the Choco Pie question as a somewhat unconventional yet potentially effective addition to the arsenal of techniques used to combat this particular form of cyber-espionage and sanctions evasion.
Summary of Comments ( 115 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43853382
Hacker News users discuss the practicality and ethics of using the proposed interview question ("What's your favorite brand of instant noodles?") to identify North Korean IT workers posing as South Koreans. Several commenters express skepticism, pointing out that cultural osmosis between the two countries makes this an unreliable filter, with North Koreans likely aware of popular South Korean brands. Others raise concerns about the ethical implications, suggesting it perpetuates stereotypes and potentially discriminates against legitimate workers. Some suggest alternative, more technical questions focusing on specific software or development practices would be more effective, while others dismiss the entire premise as fear-mongering and unlikely to be a widespread issue. A few commenters offer humorous takes, suggesting absurd follow-up questions or pointing out the potential for candidates to easily research the "correct" answer. Overall, the consensus leans towards the question being ineffective and potentially harmful.
The Hacker News post discussing "The one interview question that will protect you from North Korean fake workers" has generated several comments, exploring different facets of the issue.
Some commenters express skepticism about the effectiveness of the proposed interview question ("Tell me about the time you used
sedto replace multiple patterns in a file"). They argue that rote learning is common, especially in environments with limited resources, and a determined individual could easily memorize the answer to such a question. One commenter highlights the potential for individuals to learn and practice specific technical skills for the sole purpose of passing these checks, effectively rendering the strategy useless. Furthermore, it's pointed out that relying on such a narrow technical question overlooks the broader issue of identity verification and the sophistication of potential forgeries.Other comments delve into the ethical implications of using such a filtering method. Concerns are raised about the potential for false positives, where genuine, skilled individuals from North Korea or similar backgrounds might be unfairly excluded due to their inability to answer a highly specific technical question. The discussion touches on the importance of considering broader skill sets and the potential for bias in such screening processes.
Several commenters discuss the realities of outsourced IT work and the difficulties in verifying identities and skill sets. They acknowledge the challenges companies face in ensuring the authenticity and qualifications of remote workers, particularly in a globalized market. The conversation also explores the economic motivations behind using outsourced labor and the complexities of navigating international regulations and ethical considerations.
A few commenters share personal anecdotes about interviewing and working with individuals from diverse backgrounds, highlighting the importance of assessing skills beyond rote memorization. They emphasize the value of evaluating problem-solving abilities, critical thinking, and adaptability as more reliable indicators of competence than single, specific technical questions.
Finally, some comments delve into the broader geopolitical context, discussing the situation in North Korea and the challenges faced by individuals seeking opportunities outside the country. These comments provide a nuanced perspective on the human element of the issue, reminding readers of the complexities involved.