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

Wikileaks releases CIA's Marble: Malware obfuscation tools

wikileaks.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 284 posts

Re: Wikileaks releases CIA's Marble: Malware obfuscation tools

#71

Post by phkahler »

elif wrote: post #55
ajross wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If your perspective is that more secrets are being kept by more egregious actors than the US, the truth welcomes your contribution... If your perspective is that the US is truly the most secretive and "egregious" actor on the modern stage, then you are shockingly naive. Or, more likely, misled by the skewed "truth" you are reading.

please provide something to educate me. Who has more spy bases around the world? Who has disseminated their spy tools so widely that they have become available to 3rd parties? Who else is tapping undersea fiber? Who else is behind the SSL layer at google? I like primary documents obviously, but publications are fine too.

>> Who has more spy bases around the world? Who has disseminated their spy tools so widely that they have become available to 3rd parties? Who else is tapping undersea fiber?

Those are all evidence that other parties have secrets.

Re: Wikileaks releases CIA's Marble: Malware obfuscation tools

#72

Post by externalities88 »

elif wrote: post #31
azinman2 wrote: post #21

I've really turned on Wikileaks. Itd be one thing if all the major powers had equivalent leaks publishing, but focusing on the US basically serves Chinese and Russian interests far more than it does the citizens of the US. String obfuscation isn't stemming from some corrupt deal that needs sunlight... this is just doing a disservice to their original mission.

The truth isn't responsible for serving anyone's interests, and especially not the interests of the biggest secret keeper. The truth is not political, except that it is the natural enemy of politics which rely upon secrecy. If your perspective is that more secrets are being kept by more egregious actors than the US, the truth welcomes your contribution...

Wikileaks is controlled by humans who have a pretty dubious track record of seeking truth, when immediate personal benefit is also an option.

Assange is essentially a prisoner of the US. Withholding data regarding other players (does anyone really believe Russia and China are any less hackable?) in order to undermine US is very much in his interests.

Not to say the US isn't deserving some pushback. Just saying there are very specific human interests in play as well.

Re: Wikileaks releases CIA's Marble: Malware obfuscation tools

#73

Post by 112-123 »

elif wrote: post #65
eli wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wikileaks creates misleading summaries and narratives of the documents they release and then uses various techniques to encourage the media to follow that narrative. For example, they dump an unreadably large cache at the same time as a sexed-up summary and then tell news orgs that if they cover the story quickly and favorably, they'll be rewarded with early access to future leaks. The "CIA uses your smart TV to spy…

I'm not sure i follow your reasoning. I follow all of their leaks, but i'm not aware of these "summaries" you are referring to. It sounds like perhaps your interaction with wikileaks is mediated by the media, and your problem is with the media. For instance, this link we are commenting on is directly to a primary document, with no summary provided. The only "summaries" i am aware of, would be their tweets, which are…

https://wikileaks.org/vault7/#Marble Framework

> The source code shows that Marble has test examples not just in English but also in Chinese, Russian, Korean, Arabic and Farsi. This would permit a forensic attribution double game, for example by pretending that the spoken language of the malware creator was not American English, but Chinese, but then showing attempts to conceal the use of Chinese, drawing forensic investigators even more strongly to the wrong conclusion

There's no evidence the CIA has ever done this. This is pure conjecture based on the fact that there's demo code showing that the library supports Unicode.

They're pretty obviously trying to push the idea that attribution of hacks (such as the DNC hack) can be really easily spoofed, and you shouldn't trust them. And it's working:

https://www.rt.com/news/382940-wikileaks-vault7-marble-frame...

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/-wikileaks-vault-7-m...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4367746/WikiLeaks-sa...

Re: Wikileaks releases CIA's Marble: Malware obfuscation tools

#74

Post by externalities88 »

elif wrote: post #39
azinman2 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why shouldn't there be secrets?

There should be secrets. there should not be secret attacks on every computer on the planet.

So you're being uptight about getting sources from others.

Care to back up the assertion that "secret attacks on every computer on the planet" are literally taking place?

Re: Wikileaks releases CIA's Marble: Malware obfuscation tools

#76

Post by xienze »

112-123 wrote: post #73
elif wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure i follow your reasoning. I follow all of their leaks, but i'm not aware of these "summaries" you are referring to. It sounds like perhaps your interaction with wikileaks is mediated by the media, and your problem is with the media. For instance, this link we are commenting on is directly to a primary document, with no summary provided. The only "summaries" i am aware of, would be their tweets, which are…

https://wikileaks.org/vault7/#Marble Framework > The source code shows that Marble has test examples not just in English but also in Chinese, Russian, Korean, Arabic and Farsi. This would permit a forensic attribution double game, for example by pretending that the spoken language of the malware creator was not American English, but Chinese, but then showing attempts to conceal the use of Chinese, drawing forensic in…

> They're pretty obviously trying to push the idea that attribution of hacks (such as the DNC hack) can be really easily spoofed, and you shouldn't trust them.

OK, and? Is it incorrect that they can spoofed? If not, doesn't that necessarily mean that you can't take "the Russians did this" at face value?

Re: Wikileaks releases CIA's Marble: Malware obfuscation tools

#77

Post by SXX »

npunt wrote: post #52
Jerry2 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's much harder to leak Russian stuff because a lot of it is in paper form. After Snowden revelations, Russians returned to typewriters for all their top secret stuff [0]: > A source at Russia's Federal Guard Service (FSO), which is in charge of safeguarding Kremlin communications and protecting President Vladimir Putin, claimed that the return to typewriters has been prompted by the publication of secret documents…

Interesting. > Russians returned to typewriters for all their top secret stuff That's what they're telling people, I wonder how much truth there is to it. At the very least it provides a plausible cover story for when people ask why there aren't big leaks.

I guess you don't wonder that much why there is no leaks from large criminal syndicates and criminal structures in general. So the special agencies in Russia not just derived from USSR, but also built on corruption like any other government structure.

So like in usual organised crime most of people in charge are relatives or close friends and different spheres of influence are controlled by different groups of them. Most work there to make money on corporate raid or government contracts.

There is always wars for power between different groups inside those agencies which make people working there more careful about everything they doing since others always watching. So just like most of criminals they tend to not leave tons of documents in their email.

PS: And one more reason is obviously fact that no one want to end up drinking polonium tea or just get few bullets in back. Criminals don't have problem with killing traitors or those who failed to keep secrets.

Re: Wikileaks releases CIA's Marble: Malware obfuscation tools

#78

Post by freeflight »

ajross wrote: post #66
elif wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

please provide something to educate me. Who has more spy bases around the world? Who has disseminated their spy tools so widely that they have become available to 3rd parties? Who else is tapping undersea fiber? Who else is behind the SSL layer at google? I like primary documents obviously, but publications are fine too.

So "egregious" behavior extends only to digital surveillance? OK, fine. Surely the US is the worst at that, I think that's a fair assessment. I thought you were talking about seemingly-Wikileak relevant things like secret police stuff, control over national media, poisoning of political enemies, assassinations... Y'know. Boring stuff. Not "egregious" I guess.

>like secret police stuff, control over national media, poisoning of political enemies, assassinations

How about "secret police stuff" like the illegal abductions of people to put them into torture "black sites" all over the world? [0]

Massive control over global media trough lobbying and propaganda instruments? [1]

A long history of successful, and not so successful assassination attempts aimed at the "ideological opposition" all over the world? [2]

The point here not being that the "US is the worst", the point being that the US hardly has the "moral high ground" on these issues just because they use these methods mostly against external "enemies" and not their own population. Questionable methods are questionable because of their methodology, not because of their targets.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition

[1]https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-op...

[2]https://wikispooks.com/wiki/US/Foreign_Assassinations_since_...

Re: Wikileaks releases CIA's Marble: Malware obfuscation tools

#79

Post by rdtsc »

shuntress wrote: post #62
rdtsc wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a huge advantage to do that. False flag attacks are one of the tried and true methods of intelligence agencies since ancient times. For example the official pretext for WWII was started as a false flag: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleiwitz_incident US did it at the start of Vietnam War: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_incident We gain a lot from this. We can for example manufacture "Russian hy…

>"Look we found a Russian rootkit on a DNC server" Implying a 'Russian rootkit' was planted in a false flag operation? So the CIA pretended to be Russia helping to get Trump elected -- why?

Did they pretend to be Russia? I didn't see any evidence. They seemed to have heavily invested in this capability though. Why waste time and money if they don't plan on using it?

Why do you think they might want to pretend to be someone else?

Post reply on HN