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

911–920 of 1001 posts

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#911

Post by yAnonymous »

shard972 wrote: post #763
abandonliberty wrote: post #485

It's interesting to note that Julian Assange didn't demonstrate control of the wikileaks private key during his Reddit AMA 1 month ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/5n58sm/i_am_julian_as... Considering the political situation unfolding in the US and who this leak weakens, there is some evidence that wikileaks is not in the hands of a neutral party. There is clear motive right now for undermining the CIA. Th…

> This comment was immediately down voted on Reddit. Someone is seeking to control the narrative. Reddit has been beyond terrible the last year and it didn't recover post election. There always used to be a bias but you could usually drill down into some good back and forths in the comments, now you will only find that if it even exists in heavily downvoted posts along with troll posts.

>the last year

The Reddit front page has always been terrible. Maybe it was once terrible in your favor, but that doesn't really matter.

Ever since it became popular, it has been the best place to influence millions of people and forge opinions.

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#912

Post by frubar »

mhneu wrote: post #865
jerkstate wrote: post #733

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hillary was under investigation throughout the primaries, and we know from the leaks that some democratic political operatives thought it was a bad idea for her to run due to the amount of dirt out there about her.

You are being misleading. Hillary has been investigated nonstop for twenty years, and their are entire nonprofits (Judiciary Watch) funded by the right to dig up dirt on her and her family. So instead I think the opposite is true- the fact she hasn't had major (true) scandals (Benghazi and emails we know are trumped up) means she is fairly clean. Yes, she has some flaws. It is unbelievable to me that Mike Pence was u…

Wow, the left are the new loony, tin foil hat conspiracy theorists.

Sure, it was definitely a "vast right wing conspiracy" (Hillary's exact words) that threw up flags when she opened her first ever trading account with $1k, turned it into $1 million in less than a year with no experience, or understanding of the markets (she supposedly started trading futures on a tip from a friend) and then never did it again because it was stressful. I guess that same conspiracy group were trying to go after this irrelevant governor in Arkansas for the other scandals going on during his governorship.

Then when Bill became president the scandals continued. People like you and Hillary want to claim this is some vast conspiracy by the republicans but the question any critical thinker has to ask themselves is why? Clinton was the most conservative president since Reagan [1]. Why on earth would the Republicans be out to get someone who's more conservative than most of their own presidential candidates? Like most conspiracy theories, it requires a great deal of faith in absence of evidence, motive or even logic.

[1] https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/was-clinton-mor...

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#914

Post by thewhitetulip »

flukus wrote: post #739
jerkstate wrote: post #727

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Let's say hypothetically that the Russian government has a Cyber Defense arm that has nearly the scope and capability as the US (the DNC/Hillary stuff seems to indicate this). Let's say this is true for many world powers (US, UK, China, and Russia for starters). Do we think that, though? We've heard a LOT about Russia's cyber capability lately and the consensus seems to be that they employ groups of criminal kids w…

> We also know that the US's military spending (known budget) is something like 6x Russia's military spending, and we can imagine that intelligence spending is a similar multiple higher. This is often misleading. Russia and China might spend less but their dollar goes further.

Not to mention the hackers for hire who don't exist like The Hacking Team.

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#915

Post by mmjaa »

Cookingboy wrote: post #767
incompatible wrote: post #674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of us are not USians. I'd say if your goal is to make people elsewhere in the world love the US, then CIA dirty tricks isn't the way to do it. Dirty tricks by other governments wouldn't do much if the US was a genuinely beneficial influence in the world. At the moment it's not so clear that the US is beneficial, with it doing some things that are useful, but which Trump seems to want to eliminate as soon as poss…

Nope, the goal is not to make the rest of the world love the US. It is to further our own national interest while fucking over our enemies. Just like any other countries that ever existed in the history of human civilization.

>Just like any other countries that ever existed in the history of human civilization.

Self-Godwin'ed. Nice!

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#916

Post by thewhitetulip »

CodeTheInternet wrote: post #732
fastball wrote: post #689

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's say hypothetically that the Russian government has a Cyber Defense arm that has nearly the scope and capability as the US (the DNC/Hillary stuff seems to indicate this). Let's say this is true for many world powers (US, UK, China, and Russia for starters). However, it seems like Wikileaks, while claiming to be a neutral source that "just wants to make powerful people accountable", they only seem to be releasing…

Maybe the only sources they have are within American units. It stands to reason if sources in other countries leaked, Wikileaks would report as such. That said, there definitely is a disproportionate amount of info on America v ROW.

That might have something to do with US citizens having freedom than Russian citizens. I mean, a guy like Snowden walked out with scores of documents and went out of US, I don't think anyone can do that in Kremlin

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#917

Post by benedikt »

Ntrails wrote: post #904
hollander wrote: post #900

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an excellent example of telling the facts while distracting from the truth. He's afraid that he will be extradited to the US after being extradited to Sweden. The rape accusations are thought to be just a trick to get him to Sweden. If he had the guarantee that he would not be extradited he would go to Sweden immediately.

> If he had the guarantee that he would not be extradited he would go to Sweden immediately. He can claim this, allowing him to imply that he is of course innocent, safe in the knowledge that it's impossible for the Swedish prosecutor to make such a guarantee.

Also Sweden does not extradite anyone that has a chance of facing the death penalty.

And Assange said he would allow himself to be extradited to if Manning was commuted. She was, Assange is still in the Ecuadorian embassy.

The UK has much favourable extradition treaties with the US than Sweden has.

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#918

Post by golergka »

huffmsa wrote: post #591
vanattab wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be careful also if you think you might need to get a clearance in the future. I was in college during the initial Wikileaks Manning dump and I remember getting a email from the DoD forwarded through the Physics department that viewing or sharing classified wikileaks info could prevent us from getting a clearance in the future even of we did not have a clearance at the time.

And that's when you laugh and cite https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793 subsection (e) wherein you have never transmitted nor believed the documents in question to be harmful to the defense of the United States. Especially in this case as these are all offensive tools.

Are you implying that offensive tools cannot be useful for defense? Really?

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#919

Post by chiaro »

mpg33 wrote: post #639
badloginagain wrote: post #562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Im stating the possibility that the Executive Branch made available the means to doxx the CIA. The timing, the target, and the vector of attack all line up very nicely.

So Trump is simultaneously a complete incompetent blowhard and pulling off these mastermind plans??

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot

The plans aren't his.

Re: CIA malware and hacking tools

#920

Post by mind_bakery »

abandonliberty wrote: post #485

It's interesting to note that Julian Assange didn't demonstrate control of the wikileaks private key during his Reddit AMA 1 month ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/5n58sm/i_am_julian_as... Considering the political situation unfolding in the US and who this leak weakens, there is some evidence that wikileaks is not in the hands of a neutral party. There is clear motive right now for undermining the CIA. Th…

As has been demonstrated, the narrative is very easy to manipulate when people are lazy about how they acquire and treat data. Interestingly, this new development could also be a good thing for the CIA. A way to clean the slate as well as a rallying call for new talent with fresh minds, with far less baggage. The proliferation of this tech was inevitable. We need to set standards for responsible use. My perspective constitutionally is that it falls between the 2nd and 4th amendments, depending on intended and actual use. As a data collection tool, it should be treated with the same care as medical data.
Post reply on HN