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

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#391

Post by clubm8 »

bluejekyll wrote: post #102
imron wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this is exactly what I expect a spy agency would be doing From Wikileaks' overview: "In the wake of Edward Snowden's leaks about the NSA, the U.S. technology industry secured a commitment from the Obama administration that the executive would disclose on an ongoing basis — rather than hoard — serious vulnerabilities, exploits, bugs or "zero days" to Apple, Google, Microsoft, and other US-based manufacturers. ... "Y…

Not to nitpick, I absolutely agree that the NSA should be responsible for disclosing this type of information to help secure the USA and its infrastructure. The CIA on the other hand has clear (though not always followed) directive to only act outside the US and to act against foreign nationals. It's less clear to me that they should be required to disclose these. Another post makes the claim that the CIA may have lo…

The problem is that there are very few IT systems that are purely foreign.

For example, if the CIA finds an exploit in a wireless router made in China and sold all over the world, that hole can also be found by others and used against targets in the United States.

Is being able to hack others worth letting ourselves get hacked?

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#392

Post by JohnStrange »

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…

Well, you've nailed it in your parenthetical comment. Lack of a credible motive is one of the telltale signs of conspiracy theories, but has never kept conspiracy nuts from presuming all kinds of nefarious motives if they fit into their preconceived world-view.

Of course the CIA could have constructed a complicated false flag operation to get Trump elected, but they lack a reasonable motive. Similar things can be said about many conspiracy theories, only few of them attribute credible motives to the state actors and/or individuals involved.

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#393

Post by ickler9 »

snissn wrote: post #366
jowiar wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

File metadata wasn't my concern. Spreading baseless rumors without concern for grieving family and friends makes Sparkling (and his buddies) grade-A fuckwads in my book.

Which is the baseless rumor and which is the truth?

I would say that's kind of the point, the manner in which that opinions is expressed aside. There isn't evidence in either direction that's been released to the public. So why respond to a comment with more conjecture?

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#394

Post by dhdbhshshhah »

DashRattlesnake wrote: post #346
cloakandswagger wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just like they committed to revealing exploits to the tech industry instead of hoarding them?

> Just like they committed to revealing exploits to the tech industry instead of hoarding them? I think you're letting your cynicism get in the way of truth and understanding. The US has signed and ratified a treaty committing to destroy all chemical weapons and never produce them again [1], and it has built the infrastructure to do so [2] [3]. It's conspiracy-nut territory to think the US is simultaneously stockpili…

If you believe the US government you are a complete fool.

The US government has dedicated itself to lying.

Clapper lied to Congress.

We have secret courts, we have secret kill lists. We have a secret mass surveillance program.

But do go on about how we can trust the government.

God HN commenters are just shills or idiots.

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#395

Post by acdha »

thraway2016 wrote: post #368

Any guesses on why CNN and MSNBC are completely avoiding reporting this news?

Because the story broke this morning and it takes time for someone to read the dump, write a story, get comments from technical experts, etc? There's not really a big dramatic revelation here – “Intelligence agency spies on people - film at 11!” – so they probably aren't pulling people off of bigger stories to cover it.

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#396

Post by elif »

alxdistill wrote: post #386

Maybe this is a stupid question but how does one go about verifying the information wikileaks releases is accurate? I assume the people who submit info are verified in some way, does wikileaks then pass on that verification info to the public or are we supposed to just trust that they are providing truthful information in an unbiased way?

for many of the emails, including a lot of the important ones, we have DKIM signing proving that the body and most headers were unaltered and came from the sending domain's actual server.

For the rest, there is no absolute mathematical proof so indeed we must rely upon the lack of counter-claims of legitimacy and the validity of the presented facts themselves. Knowing how grey that area can be, WL takes great care to release only when they have high confidence their reputation can't be harmed by claims. It is certainly a higher bar than is set by the anonymous-quote-happy US press.

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#398

Post by nyolfen »

snissn wrote: post #253
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…

Can you point to information to research about connections to the DNC hack and Russia?

this is the best public evidence afaik (and it's pretty good): https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/status/81662291586096332...

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#399

Post by snissn »

ickler9 wrote: post #393
snissn wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is the baseless rumor and which is the truth?

I would say that's kind of the point, the manner in which that opinions is expressed aside. There isn't evidence in either direction that's been released to the public. So why respond to a comment with more conjecture?

Sure - my point was that the parent seemed to have their mind made up when I couldn't tell from their comments in which direction it was made!
Post reply on HN