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

111–120 of 284 posts

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

#111

Post by finid »

bluGill wrote: post #89
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.

That is one of those "known unknowns". That is something you know you do not know that answer to and can never know. If I pick a random poor third world country and tell you they are you can never be sure I'm wrong - "all those villagers going to the river for dirty drinking have a phd equivalent in spying: they only go to the river when people are looking, the rest of the time they use the running water in the basem…

If I pick a random poor third world country and tell you they are you can never be sure I'm wrong

Off course, we will be sure you're wrong, but please, go ahead. Name a "random poor third world country" that has a military base in one of its neighboring countries. And while you're at it, which one has a base in Kuwait, Turkey, Iraq, Bulgaria, Romania, Djibouti, etc, etc, etc.

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

#112

Post by reddytowns »

mhermher wrote: post #99
gkoberger wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The truth may not be political, however the curation is. Take the US election, for example. Wikileaks has released information about Clinton and the DNC, and claims they have stuff they never released about Trump and the GOP [1, 2]. Other sources have said the GOP was hacked in the same attack that got Podesta [3]. The only person less likely to criticize Russia than Trump is Assange. Wikileaks lost any proximity to…

Do you hold WaPo, NYT, CNN to those same standards? Because that is mainly what American "MSM" does, selectively publish information which bebefits the agenda of American foreign policy interests. It's fair if you align yourself with American foreign policy interests, I do too, but to single out other publications that don't follow that agenda is just a case of having self interested double standards. All of the crit…

By complaining about WaPo, et al, you are guilty of "whataboutism" yourself.

Is the standard so low that we can't even mention that a non profit(?) organization devoted to releasing leaks of wrongdoing shouldn't be blatantly partisan?

Edit: I misread the last part of your comment about "whataboutism". Yet my question still applies, isn't it?

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

#113

Post by elemenopy »

mhermher wrote: post #99
gkoberger wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The truth may not be political, however the curation is. Take the US election, for example. Wikileaks has released information about Clinton and the DNC, and claims they have stuff they never released about Trump and the GOP [1, 2]. Other sources have said the GOP was hacked in the same attack that got Podesta [3]. The only person less likely to criticize Russia than Trump is Assange. Wikileaks lost any proximity to…

Do you hold WaPo, NYT, CNN to those same standards? Because that is mainly what American "MSM" does, selectively publish information which bebefits the agenda of American foreign policy interests. It's fair if you align yourself with American foreign policy interests, I do too, but to single out other publications that don't follow that agenda is just a case of having self interested double standards. All of the crit…

I disagree: I think there is a reasonable case to hold WikiLeaks and the NYT to different standards. I think WikiLeaks holds itself out as a much more anarchic news organisation than traditional outlets like the NYT. WikiLeaks isn't connected or have allegiance to any particular country, and will publish, let the facts speak for themselves and damn the establishment and any particular national interests that are harmed. On the other hand, organisations like the NYT are pretty open about how while they often publish against the wishes of USG they do ask for comment and may defer publication if they are satisfied there are very good reasons to do so. [1]

Therefore, for WikiLeaks to become highly partisan is a radical departure from their original mission; moreover, it has happened without WikiLeaks acknowledging that this is the case. I think you can't same the same for the NYT.

1. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/10/public-editor/sullivan-les...

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

#115

Post by mihular »

math0ne wrote: post #50
mihular wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Send them documents and they will publish them if legit.

There is simply no evidence of that.

You are saying that Wikileaks has a ton of other documents but won't publish them? Based on what exactly?

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

#117

Post by learc83 »

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…

Stop being obtuse. Human communication is more nuanced that formal programming language. The context in which you say something is just as important as the content.

It is very easy imply something and push a specific agenda without technically lying.

What if I take out an add that says:

"elif regularly participates on hacker news--a forum for computer programmers and 'hackers', and he is a programmer who can create malicious programs. The libraries he uses support multiple languages, like Chinese and Russian, giving him the capability to make it look like these programs were created by foreigners."

I'm just describing your capabilities. But the way I said it implies to non-experts that your actually writing malicious code, because they lack the context to understand what they're reading.

They don't understand that all programmers have the capability to create malicious programs. And most importantly, just like the readers of Wikileaks commentary, they don't realize that supporting Unicode is very common, and it's necessary if you want to parse text written in it. It's not a specialized capability that you'd only want if you intended to write in Russian or Chinese.

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

#118

Post by Laforet »

bingomad123 wrote: post #106
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…

>Telling Chinese people that their government is systematically harvesting organs of Tibetian people has no new information or benefit.

This is hilarious. Whatever you have been smoking, it needs to stop.

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

#119

Post by cavanasm »

bingomad123 wrote: post #106
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…

I'm a young person with other young people friends. One such friend grew up in Shanghai. He had never heard of the Tiananmen Square student protests (and the resulting military intervention) until he came to the US for college and someone asked him about it. Anecdotally, it seems China does a very, very, good job of controlling information through their extensive government controls. Telling Chinese people about something like that would probably surprise them greatly.

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

#120

Post by [deleted] »

bingomad123 wrote: post #106
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…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN