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

New Charges in Huge C.I.A. Breach Known as Vault 7

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 187 posts

Re: New Charges in Huge C.I.A. Breach Known as Vault 7

#31

Post by simion314 »

staunch wrote: post #9

> Mr. Schulte had been charged last year in New York with possession of child pornography. The fact that they found child porn on his computer is the scariest part. Almost any technical person could frame almost anyone else with CP possession. It's just a matter of putting some files on a computer and/or faking some logs, browser history, etc. It would be incredibly trivial for the CIA to put CP on his computer and t…

Exactly, some bad iframe could load CP files and not display them, later if someone checks the network logs they can "prove" you visited and watched those urls.

Combine this with the very specific ad targeting that is possible to pull of(like the guy that managed to make FB to show his ad to his roommate) and you get an easy and remote way to frame people

Re: New Charges in Huge C.I.A. Breach Known as Vault 7

#32

Post by colordrops »

wyldfire wrote: post #8
jscipione wrote: post #7

"Government investigators suspect that he provided WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy organization, with a stolen archive of documents detailing the C.I.A.’s hacking operations, but they had not initially charged him in that crime." Wikileaks is a news organization, not an anti-secrecy organization who's First Amendment Right to Freedom of the Press has been illegally infringed upon by the US Government.

Or option C: a propaganda arm of the Russian Government. EDIT: downvoters aren't offering a response, so I'll just hope or assume that they want evidence: [1] https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-l... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/07/putin-dismisses... [3] http://www.haaretz.com/us-news/1.771716 [4] http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/25/politics/cambridge-analyti... [5] https://sunli…

Calling wikileaks a propaganda arm of the Russian Government is just US propaganda. 1984 double-speak here. Can you point to ANYTHING that wikileaks has reported or released that is untrue?

Re: New Charges in Huge C.I.A. Breach Known as Vault 7

#33

Post by rosser »

DINKDINK wrote: post #28
wyldfire wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or option C: a propaganda arm of the Russian Government. EDIT: downvoters aren't offering a response, so I'll just hope or assume that they want evidence: [1] https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-l... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/07/putin-dismisses... [3] http://www.haaretz.com/us-news/1.771716 [4] http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/25/politics/cambridge-analyti... [5] https://sunli…

Do you mind enlightening us how Wikileaks was a propaganda arm of the Russian government when they released video of US war crimes (murder of journalists in the Collateral Murder video)? If another news organization received the DNC leaks and chose to not publish them, do you think that would have been ethical? Is your position that, one cannot be a US citizen and oppose the US government and if you do you're a Russi…

The selectivity of Wikileaks' leaks put the lie to their claim of being a journalistic entity.

Julian Assange has an agenda against certain people/parties, and has demonstrably leaked things that support that, and not leaked things that refute it.

I say that as a detractor of many of the same people and institutions Assange dislikes, so check your assumptions of bias before you throw them, please.

Re: New Charges in Huge C.I.A. Breach Known as Vault 7

#34

Post by LMYahooTFY »

wyldfire wrote: post #8
jscipione wrote: post #7

"Government investigators suspect that he provided WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy organization, with a stolen archive of documents detailing the C.I.A.’s hacking operations, but they had not initially charged him in that crime." Wikileaks is a news organization, not an anti-secrecy organization who's First Amendment Right to Freedom of the Press has been illegally infringed upon by the US Government.

Or option C: a propaganda arm of the Russian Government. EDIT: downvoters aren't offering a response, so I'll just hope or assume that they want evidence: [1] https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-l... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/07/putin-dismisses... [3] http://www.haaretz.com/us-news/1.771716 [4] http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/25/politics/cambridge-analyti... [5] https://sunli…

What evidence?

None of your links contain any "evidence".

Evidence shouldn't be difficult to explain. Loosely connected assumptions, however, are often difficult to articulate.

The argument you propose is that practically anyone who exposes corruption in western organizations could be Russian government propagandists.

Re: New Charges in Huge C.I.A. Breach Known as Vault 7

#35

Post by [deleted] »

dexterdog wrote: post #21
salimmadjd wrote: post #5

Mr. Schulte had been charged last year in New York with possession of child pornography Very interesting! It almost seems like the pornography charges against him was a way to punish him but without prosecuting him for the actual leakage. Perhaps the government wanted to still point the fingers at someone else or avoid embarrassment?

And you can color me skeptical of any evidence that the government provided in that case.

[deleted]

Re: New Charges in Huge C.I.A. Breach Known as Vault 7

#36

Post by admiralEyebrows »

wyldfire wrote: post #8
jscipione wrote: post #7

"Government investigators suspect that he provided WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy organization, with a stolen archive of documents detailing the C.I.A.’s hacking operations, but they had not initially charged him in that crime." Wikileaks is a news organization, not an anti-secrecy organization who's First Amendment Right to Freedom of the Press has been illegally infringed upon by the US Government.

Or option C: a propaganda arm of the Russian Government. EDIT: downvoters aren't offering a response, so I'll just hope or assume that they want evidence: [1] https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-l... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/07/putin-dismisses... [3] http://www.haaretz.com/us-news/1.771716 [4] http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/25/politics/cambridge-analyti... [5] https://sunli…

Before scrambling to gather a handful of news articles (though no proof) which confirm 'option C' to avoid down votes, are you certain that you are not regurgitating the propaganda of a different government or corporation?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_cross-ownership_in_the_U...

Re: New Charges in Huge C.I.A. Breach Known as Vault 7

#37

Post by vkou »

wyldfire wrote: post #8
jscipione wrote: post #7

"Government investigators suspect that he provided WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy organization, with a stolen archive of documents detailing the C.I.A.’s hacking operations, but they had not initially charged him in that crime." Wikileaks is a news organization, not an anti-secrecy organization who's First Amendment Right to Freedom of the Press has been illegally infringed upon by the US Government.

Or option C: a propaganda arm of the Russian Government. EDIT: downvoters aren't offering a response, so I'll just hope or assume that they want evidence: [1] https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-l... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/07/putin-dismisses... [3] http://www.haaretz.com/us-news/1.771716 [4] http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/25/politics/cambridge-analyti... [5] https://sunli…

Good God. I don't like Wikileaks, but even if they are a 'propaganda arm of the Russian government', they still have First Amendment rights, and they are still a news organization.

Re: New Charges in Huge C.I.A. Breach Known as Vault 7

#38

Post by rubbingalcohol »

StanislavPetrov wrote: post #11

Crickets from all of the "news" outlets that pointed to this incident as more "proof" of a Russia-Wikileaks partership. Very much like the Sony hack, which was widely attributed to North Korea (again, without a shred of evidence), you can be sure that there will be very few, if any, mea-culpas issued by those media organizations that uncritically swallowed DC/CIA misinformation and reported that misinformation as fac…

I researched your claim. For the Sony hack, no actual evidence was ever provided implicating North Korea - just unsupported allegations. [Independent researchers](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/dec/30/sony-hack-resea...) found it was much more likely to have been disgruntled employees.

However, for the Vault 7 leak, almost no major news organizations cited Russia as a likely culprit for this.

I agree with your sentiment that basically any official information that comes out of the IC is suspect, but in this case, unless you can cite specific examples, I'm pretty sure the IC never publicly blamed Russia.

Re: New Charges in Huge C.I.A. Breach Known as Vault 7

#39

Post by vkou »

rosser wrote: post #33
DINKDINK wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you mind enlightening us how Wikileaks was a propaganda arm of the Russian government when they released video of US war crimes (murder of journalists in the Collateral Murder video)? If another news organization received the DNC leaks and chose to not publish them, do you think that would have been ethical? Is your position that, one cannot be a US citizen and oppose the US government and if you do you're a Russi…

The selectivity of Wikileaks' leaks put the lie to their claim of being a journalistic entity. Julian Assange has an agenda against certain people/parties, and has demonstrably leaked things that support that, and not leaked things that refute it. I say that as a detractor of many of the same people and institutions Assange dislikes, so check your assumptions of bias before you throw them, please.

> The selectivity of Wikileaks' leaks put the lie to their claim of being a journalistic entity.

It really doesn't, though. You don't have to be unbiased to be a journalist, a journalistic entity, or whatever you want to call it.

Fox News, biased as it is, is still news.

Re: New Charges in Huge C.I.A. Breach Known as Vault 7

#40

Post by rspeer »

DINKDINK wrote: post #28
wyldfire wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or option C: a propaganda arm of the Russian Government. EDIT: downvoters aren't offering a response, so I'll just hope or assume that they want evidence: [1] https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-l... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/07/putin-dismisses... [3] http://www.haaretz.com/us-news/1.771716 [4] http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/25/politics/cambridge-analyti... [5] https://sunli…

Do you mind enlightening us how Wikileaks was a propaganda arm of the Russian government when they released video of US war crimes (murder of journalists in the Collateral Murder video)? If another news organization received the DNC leaks and chose to not publish them, do you think that would have been ethical? Is your position that, one cannot be a US citizen and oppose the US government and if you do you're a Russi…

The WikiLeaks that released the "Collateral Murder" video was a very different thing from the Russian organization that exists today.

That WikiLeaks even had a wiki.

Post reply on HN