Scary..
I heard that the hacker installed through the backdoor a malware called Windows 10.

*badumm tssh*

Thats a typical blackhat, but the linked article is with high probability - fake.

"The hacker responsible, who goes by the name "Peace," told me in an encrypted chat"

My bro hacked LinuxMint, he told me that in encrypted chat.
He said, he wanted to build a botnet from corrupted images which were distributed for (just) 1 (one day), with 99,99% probability to be discovered and purged by users.
He has some problems with logic, you know.

^^^^ thats more reputable journalism than zdnet.

Good, you're more awake than me ;)
I didn't analyze it, and just skimmed through it before linking.

Some more brain trash:

(One)
How big is the chance that cracker uses logic more than impulses to pick his actions? Pretty big.

Why would a blackhat create a botnet for a day? Makes no sense to me. He was running risks doing that, risk with low profit?

Fact that he installed generic kaiten, rather than custom malware, means he used existing tool - kaiten can remotely deploy payload. In short term, the most profitable would (probably) be - grepping for passwords (keylogger with basic shell) on live machines, for 1 day at high typical download rate -- that is better payoff than random short-lived botnet.

Also, botnet - on wide spectrum of machines actively used by users, who are experienced with tinkering? Makes zero sense..

(Two)
How high is the chance someone to expose himself after successful crack to media? Very thin (see profit chance above).

What is more probable to happen:
1) cracker to expose himself for fame (and penalty), or
2) ZDnet chief to like money from page views?

I assume - 2.

Imagine this scenario:
ZDnet chief: "Hey, there is some major event going on! Now, we MUST monetize on this! Ain't we "news"? If there is no sensation - lets make one! Lets assume we were contacted by the cracker, how much will this click-bait give us (sends inquiry to statistic manager)? Ah, then - have someone write it up! I want it TODAY, so we are exclusive! "

Random guy:"But what if anyone will be asking for facts?"

ZDnet chief: "I don't care! We will just drop words like "encryption", "hacker", "highly secure", "anonymity" and this will suffice".

How probable do you think this to have happened in a typical media-company?

The article lacks any serious proof and depicted cracker actions lack any logic..

Just to note, the site appears to be live again.