CIA malware and hacking tools

Post by dmix » Tue, Mar 07, 2017, 4:48 PM UTC

pvg wrote: post #243

dmix wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There also still hasn't been any public evidence that Wikileaks got their Podesta email data from Russians yet. So far we only know the DNC leaks were very likely Russian. That means until today only about ~50% of the 'election hacks' have been attributed to Russia with public evidence. Now this leak calls into question some of the evidence about the DNC hack [1]. This evidence being the malware was Russian. But ther…

The circumstantial evidence in the Podesta phishing is pretty decent, not really 'up in the air'. https://www.secureworks.com/research/threat-group-4127-targe... https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/status/81662155364329472... (the second link is a lengthy thread)

Post by snissn » Tue, Mar 07, 2017, 4:48 PM UTC

dmix wrote: post #204

imron wrote: post #66

The CIA's Remote Devices Branch's UMBRAGE group collects and maintains a substantial library of attack techniques 'stolen' from malware produced in other states including the Russian Federation. With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of attack types but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the "fingerprints" of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen from. Th…

There also still hasn't been any public evidence that Wikileaks got their Podesta email data from Russians yet. So far we only know the DNC leaks were very likely Russian. That means until today only about ~50% of the 'election hacks' have been attributed to Russia with public evidence. Now this leak calls into question some of the evidence about the DNC hack [1]. This evidence being the malware was Russian. But ther…

Post by throwawayish » Tue, Mar 07, 2017, 4:49 PM UTC

compuguy wrote: post #210

sandworm101 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol like anyone in this field cares about copyrights. It is like suggesting that North Korea cannot build nuclear bombs because doing so would infringe US patents. Some things are above IP rules.

Think about it. Having the code copyrighted, would leave a paper trail.

Post by knowaveragejoe » Tue, Mar 07, 2017, 4:51 PM UTC

struct wrote: post #53

u_wot_m8 wrote: post #48

>"As of October 2014 the CIA was also looking at infecting the vehicle control systems used by modern cars and trucks. The purpose of such control is not specified, but it would permit the CIA to engage in nearly undetectable assassinations." Reminds me of the reporter who was supposedly working on a massive investigation and then died in a flaming car crash while skipping town. Forgot his name

Michael Hastings? [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hastings_(journalist)

Post by asdfGUYasdfn » Tue, Mar 07, 2017, 4:53 PM UTC

pimlottc wrote: post #221

pjc50 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Command & Control and Listening Post software were classified, then CIA officers could be prosecuted or dismissed for violating rules that prohibit placing classified information onto the Internet. Consequently the CIA has secretly made most of its cyber spying/war code unclassified. This is almost hilarious. Not that being classified would make any difference: cyber-"weapons" have something in common with biologic…

Obviously there's a difference between cyber and conventional weapons, but imagine if the same rationale were extended to physical munitions: "We can't drop this bomb on the enemy, it contains classified technology"