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

141–150 of 187 posts

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

#141

Post by sumedh »

privacypoller wrote: post #53
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…

If you look at the indictment it details that they found encrypted files on his computer, then used a password obtained from his cell phone to decrypt the files. If this is a setup, it's beautifully orchestrated.

Maybe he had encrypted files with a password on his cell phone, the CIA just added the CP files later and ofcourse changed the created/modified dates of those files.

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

#142

Post by ruskerdax »

Cacti wrote: post #128
ruskerdax wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing about the use of a VM that is "hard to explain away." You know what a VM is, right? You know anyone could plant things on a VM just like any other computer, right? You know there are many ways someone like the CIA could obtain a password used to encrypt a VM, right? Perhaps it was not always encrypted? Perhaps his host machine was infected with a key logger? Perhaps they used an exploit in the softwa…

My other comment is below. Have you read the complaint? The government is claiming that there is essentially 8 years of evidence on that VM, that in addition to the actual CP, there is a long trail of metadata and inode data that would be fairly difficult to fake. I mean, think about it: if you were the defendant, all you'd have to do is have someone examine it and find inode activity when you had a clear alibi that…

You didn't answer my question. There is nothing about the existence of a VM that makes it "difficult to explain away" and you did not establish why the fact that there is a VM being used is relevant.

What you are now saying is that it's implausible that the CIA would be able to fake logs (and that's what we're talking about with inode data) on a VM for some reason. It would absolutely not be as simple as "have someone examine it and find inode activity when you had a clear alibi" because it is very likely the guy was actually using a VM legitimately. All the CIA has to do is establish that he was in possession of child pornography. Hell, they don't even need to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt if A) the jury, defense, prosecution and / or judge is not tech savvy to understand some of these concepts, and B) if their goal is to trash this guy's life and have it be a warning to other leakers. You don't even need a conviction for that.

It does not strain credulity at all to think that the CIA would go to the effort to fake a small set of data on a VM. The "elaborate detail" is not any more elaborate than in any other instance -- it would be trivially easy to forge. If they wanted to ruin his life, this is a perfect, practical way for them to do it.

The fact that they would forge this data on a VM makes it seem even more plausible to people who don't even understand what VMs are, or how one might fabricate logs like that. It's apparently working on you right now, and you're savvy enough to know about the existence of inode data. You're apparently ready to condemn this guy despite the ludicrous amount of circumstantial evidence that maybe this guy is being set up by an organization literally dedicated to covert operations of this nature, who have even go so far as to detail exactly how they would undertake this exact kind of operation.

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

#143

Post by valuearb »

Cacti wrote: post #95
zeth___ wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Yes your honour, we totally found this." "No your honour, we lost the evidence since then."

Do you actually have an argument as to how they would fake the VM in a manner that would withstand the analysis of the defendants experts?

Can't the CIA hide trojans on unused sectors of storage that can't be detected by any known anti virus program?

You don't think they can't fake a VM?

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

#144

Post by forapurpose »

superflyguy wrote: post #118
22837y wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, those charges are very real. They've continually been upheld in courts in both the UK and Sweden.

Yes, the charges aren't going away. And because the girl was talked into the rape accusation and then tried to back out of it makes it a set up.

Claims in an Internet forum aren't evidence. Also, rape victims back out of accusations all the time because of the trauma involved. Is there evidence?

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

#145

Post by jonnybgood »

squarefoot wrote: post #121
anonymous5133 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Completely agree. The narrative being presented is simply not logical to believe. Based on the narrative, this guy works for the cia, highly likely he knows cp is illegal, obtains cp, knows how to use encryption but then uses a weak password. Not using a weak password is like security 101 first 5 minutes of the first class type of knowledge. Im sure im not the only one buying this story.

I also wonder: if I was going to work for the CIA, wouldn't they triple check everything about what I do before hiring me? Whether the child porn evidence was real or planted, the agency doesn't seem to gain much credibility here.

During a security clearance investigation your computer and other personal effects aren't searched.

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

#146

Post by zeth___ »

chiefalchemist wrote: post #89
wpdev_63 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you really think the guy who leaked highly classified CIA documents that reveals their means of mass surveillance happened to also be a pedophile then you are one naive person. Do yourself a favor and never watch 24-hour news programs.

Believing he was is believable. But it's only a symptom. Believing the intelligence community never bends the rules is the problem. That belief is the root disease.

Which do you think is more likely:

1). A person willing to risk their life for what they believe is right is a pedophile.

2). The CIA plants evidence.

After having a look at the things we know the CIA did during my life time, Iran-Contra, I'd say 2 is vastly more likely than 1.

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

#147

Post by zeth___ »

rosser wrote: post #127
woah wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weird definition of a "journalistic entity" I don't think that any news source satisfies your requirement that it be complete non-partisan, even such a thing was even logically possible.

I don't expect journalism to be non-partisan. I expect it to be affirmatively transparent about its partisanship. You're right, though, that nothing actually meets that bar. It's a human institution; it's necessarily flawed. That's why you source across biases and ideologies, and correct accordingly. The thing I'm talking about is instead the deliberate pretense of not being partisan. Fox News calling itself "fair an…

>You're right, though, that nothing actually meets that bar.

Then your post is content free. If you find nothing to meet your personal standard of being journalism than you finding wikileaks to not be journalists merely means they are the same as the New York Times.

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

#148

Post by jumper_F00BA2 »

DINKDINK wrote: post #132
bb88 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the question I have is did the guy have a password manager on his phone?

The question we need to answer is: Was the incriminating data planted or not. Having a password manager on his phone is tangental to answer that question. After the computer and phone left his custody, either device could have had data modified. Unless he's got his data pinned into the Bitcoin blockchain, it's a pretty hard to show that it was planted. If it wasn't planted then it's really just about how the key was…

I think the level of security provided by passwords or password managers is probably of little import, when confronted by a nation-state actor, and indeed a top tier nation-state actor, with nigh unlimited resources, and an axe to grind over a serious grudge.

We have wi-fi routers being used to passively see through walls, with enough fidelity to read lips and record finger movement.

Put someone under a microscope long enough, and every single password they use will reveal itself. Whether locked behind a manager app (sooner or later you'll snag the master password for it) or directly entered.

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

#149

Post by jumper_F00BA2 »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #69
influx wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the IRC logs, and I'm skeptical that anyone not deeply versed in the lingo, tone, and character of that scene could fake them. It's not impossible, but it was pretty convincing to me.

The IRC logs in the papers linked in this thread make the suspect out to be an imbecile -- discussing highly illegal activity in plain text using the most obvious keywords ...?

Not to mention... searching... Google?

Really.

Does that sound like something anyone would ever expect to return fruitful results enabling criminal activity? Does anyone imagine this being the sort of thing a person operating an encrypted server would do either deliberately or inadvertently? And what would it even mean, to have that in Google search logs?

Here on HN, to most of us, figure it means less than nothing. On some level, it might actually harm the authenticity of the prosecution's technical credibility.

I'd imagine the goal of the prosecutors though, is to select the most technically inept grandmas, to pack the jury with.

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

#150

Post by boomboomsubban »

alpha_squared wrote: post #52
colordrops wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

You can tell the truth and still be deceitful. Claiming to have had evidence on Russian corruption and publicly declaring an intent to release followed by silence and unwillingness to do so indicate two things, to me anyway. 1. The original claim is a lie. There is no evidence of Russian corruption and the claim was made for attention or some other purpose. Remind me, again, how many lies it takes to make someone unt…

>My personal opinion is that Assange is virtually inseparable from Wikileaks and appears to have a god complex, using the platform as his mouthpiece on his view of the state of things while enjoying the comforts of avoiding consequence

Except around eight years of imprisonment now. It being a relatively nice imprisonment doesn't change what it is.

Post reply on HN