Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CIA malware and hacking tools

wikileaks.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 1001 posts

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#121

Post by Bartweiss »

alphonsegaston wrote: post #78
imron wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would anyone consider that? (Yes I know the accusations, but they don't appear backed by evidence or reason).

The guy went from "cryptoanarchy" to having a TV show on RT(a propaganda network)and saying Russia has "vibrant" criticism of Putin's regime (beyond absurd). Not to mention him somehow being able to facilitate Snowden's entry into Russia. I'm no fan of imperialist American foreign policy, but Russia is just as grotesque. http://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2016/12/23/news/assange_wiki...

> saying Russia has "vibrant" criticism of Putin's regime

No, he didn't. I know The Guardian said he did, but they mislead readers so badly that the interviewer they were quoting specifically called them out for bad journalism. Wikileaks has gone off the rails lately, but the "vibrant" thing is from a hitpiece that's inaccurate in almost every way.

Assange said "In Russia, there are many vibrant publications, online blogs, and Kremlin critics such as [Alexey] Navalny are part of that spectrum." This wasn't part of a statement about Russia not needing dissent like Wikileaks, but about whether Wikileaks was competent to provide it. He continued "in Russia there are competitors to WikiLeaks, and no WikiLeaks staff speak Russian, so for a strong culture which has its own language, you have to be seen as a local player" and made similar comparisons to China and East Timor.

The question was about Wikileaks efficacy compared to Russian activists, not whether Putin suppresses critics. Note that Assange cited Navalny, a man Putin has put in prison. That shows pretty clear awareness of what criticism means in Russia, but The Guardian pulled the quote without the followup or example.

Worse, The Guardian also cited Assange as offering "praise for Trump" in the interview. That's flatly dishonest - no such statement appears, they just claimed it did. When asked, he described Trump as "gathering around him a spectrum of other rich people and several idiosyncratic personalities".

https://theintercept.com/2016/12/29/the-guardians-summary-of...

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#122

Post by rrggrr »

CIA needs to work with the tech community to patch the vulnerabilities, and the US business community for awareness of the vulnerabilities. The cat is out of the bag and CIA's mission is very much consistent with a direct defense effort to ensure foreign powers and organized criminal entities cannot use the CIA's compromised assets against US citizens.

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#123

Post by swalsh »

aeleos wrote: post #12

Wow this is really big. There are tons of documents about the various tools they use, but it seems the majority of the actual source code is still being reviewed and the links just show a link to the file list. I hope they eventually release the source code, as a lot of these tools seem very interesting. I can imagine that many at the CIA are running around on fire, as this seems like a big problem for them.

I'm pretty okay with wikileaks not releasing hundreds of zero day exploits into the wild en mass.

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#124

Post by ending »

akhilcacharya wrote: post #77
wdr1 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But considering that Wikileaks is essentially a Russian intelligence services front at this point Trump is crazy & I'm willing to believe the Russians helped him, but this is an equally baseless accusation. Wikileaks has a history of pissing off both the left & right in the United States. I have a hard time believing the claims they're part of the Republican party.

"Republican Party"? OP said Russian intelligence.

I think that was the joke.

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#125

Post by karpodiem »

bluejekyll wrote: post #113
karpodiem wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"their role in domestic affairs is severely restricted" You're delusional if you still believe this.

It's not delusional to accurately state the law. But there does need to be strong oversight of these organizations to make sure they actually follow the law. Edit: and yes, there is plenty of evidence that especially during the Vietnam war the CIA was actually breaking the law.

there is no oversight because it relies on the character of humans, who are weak and prone to folly.

There is no paper trail for this abuse. This is a system that should not exist.

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#126

Post by RodericDay »

dvcc wrote: post #84
topwer wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What exactly in the admittedly shortened list am I supposed to be upset about? It makes no distinction between US citizens and overseas parties. If these actions are being done domestically against US citizens, with no just cause sure I will get upset, but that has yet to be seen. From the Reppublica article: "Three years ago the news that the Agency had spied on the US Senate intelligence committee's years-long eff…

This is a past revelation that was already investigated, no? Without any direct connection to the current release it muddies the waters.

How does it muddle the waters? People are saying "no big deal I expect my agency to defend me from foreign threats", and it turns out they have been used against domestic do-gooders.

It seems incredibly relevant.

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#130

Post by bluejekyll »

rrggrr wrote: post #122

CIA needs to work with the tech community to patch the vulnerabilities, and the US business community for awareness of the vulnerabilities. The cat is out of the bag and CIA's mission is very much consistent with a direct defense effort to ensure foreign powers and organized criminal entities cannot use the CIA's compromised assets against US citizens.

Actually, it's the CIAs job is to actively collect information on foreign governments and nationals. This information is then supposed to be given to other organizations in the government to be used to guide decisions on foreign policy and potentially active missions to disrupt foreign activity.

I would argue that the group you are talking about is really the NSA. They should be doing everything in their power to make the US more secure, not easier to spy on.

Post reply on HN