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

101–110 of 284 posts

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

#101

Post by matthewbauer »

salesguy222 wrote: post #61
eli wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think the CIA did it instead? Other than it maybe being technically possible, what evidence or motivation would they have for doing that?

Before I answer, I'd like to state that I am an American citizen living abroad and I have no particular allignment to or against any country :) I don't know if the CIA did or would want to do this specific attack. But, I could grasp at straws to fit the Sony attack in line with the narrative of what I would call "1950s American Imperialism". In my view, the Americans took covert or overt actions for many decades now…

> The most blatant endgame here for the US is "NK hacked us. They have nukes! It's time to invade!". And then NK becomes a new market for the West to take over for cheap as they did in Communist Yugoslavia and so on

But "They have nukes!" would be reasonable enough reason to invade. Why not work with that narrative as opposed to "They're hacking us!"?

Some might say the US has a moral obligation to pursue regime change in N Korea, but US foreign policy has focused on isolating as opposed to invasion

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

#102

Post by funnuf »

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?

Guaranteed Victory? If Hillary won, they win. If she loses, they get Trump impeached, and they win.

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

#103

Post by sigmar »

oliv__ wrote: post #59

The WARBLE languages are pretty telling of which actors this software is intended to target: * Arabic * Chinese * Russian * Korean * Farsi Interesting...

You realize that is a list of most non-latin character sets? Seems it is just to test the framework with unicode.

http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/news/450416071/WikiLeak...

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

#105

Post by JabavuAdams »

antocv wrote: post #23
JabavuAdams wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More like Assange knows that the FSB will just straight up poison him with Polonium instead of slapping him around a bit and shipping him to GITMO.

Polonium in tea, or "slaps" while in Guantanamo or solitary confinement like Manning?

Empirically, one is more deadly than the other.

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

#106

Post by bingomad123 »

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.

I totally support Wikileaks. Both China and Russia are oppressive regimes. They don't pretend to be "land of free" while oppressing their people. USA does!

Secondly there is element of "outcome". Exposing US government has clear benefit of keeping people informed and hence help them make better voting decisions. Telling Chinese people that their government is systematically harvesting organs of Tibetian people has no new information or benefit.

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

#109

Post by goldmouth »

ajross wrote: post #46
elif wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

> 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 read Ghost Wars by Steve Coll or read up on the various Latin American dictators the CIA supported.

The US may not be the 'worst' but we certainly have our hands bloodier than most nations.

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

#110

Post by sigmar »

elif wrote: post #81
112-123 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>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. Where is the conjecture? the exact quote is "this would permit" not "this has happened" > 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. They are ~revea…

>They are ~revealing~ the capability and intent of attribution obfuscation.

This framework is used to obfuscate. The document itself seems to suggest they built this framework to be very generic and prevent attribution.

Where in this document do you see Wikileaks is misdirecting attribution? It is possible the CIA does miss-attribution, but none of these documents suggest that (which is not in line with how Wikileaks is framing it)

Post reply on HN