Slashdot Mirror


Googling for CIA Agents

yali writes "As the heat turns up on the investigation into how an undercover CIA officer's identity was leaked to the press a technology columnist at the SF Chronicle, David Lazarus, shows how easy it is to identify individuals via the Internet. Even with little information, using widely available tools like Google and LexisNexis, it is possible to turn up startlingly relevant details." From the article: "I then went back to Google and got a map of Plame's neighborhood and directions to her home. Google also allowed me to study a high-resolution satellite photo of Plame's house. I could see that the property appears to be in a quiet residential community and looks approachable from all sides. It also offers ready access by car to major thoroughfares."

30 of 494 comments (clear)

  1. And? by BWJones · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So the reporter was able to identify her by name and her maiden name. He was also able to dig up information as to where she lives and details regarding their home. What he was unable to do with this search is define what it is Ms. Plame actually did for a living. This information could be dug up via a search of tax records documenting her employer, but even this will not describe responsibilities within that employer. For instance, any W-2s I might have had would say that the listed person was an employee of the State Department or the Central Intelligence Agency but they would not say anything about what job was actually performed.

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:And? by BWJones · · Score: 5, Informative

      Don't know how you got modded as insightful since you obviously didn't read the article. Note the comment in the article where it states:

      You don't know much about the Agency do you? Do you have any idea how many analysts work there? Do you realize that all analysts are not "agents" working in secret as supposed employees of the State Department? Do you realize that agents working under-cover are often analysts? Determining who is actually a "spook" can be difficult and that is the problem with this case. If Ms. Plame was actually an under-cover operative, then an egregious violation of protocol and law has occurred.

      As an aside: You should also know that there are a significant number of employees working for the agency that are doing nothing in the way of classified work.

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    2. Re:And? by DavidTC · · Score: 5, Insightful
      She was a NOC, someone with 'non-offical cover'. Some people know what that means, but many apparently don't.

      For those who don't, anything listing her job would have had her working at that CIA front, 'Brewster Jennings & Associates'. Completely unrelated to the government.

      Which also means she was DISAVOWED if she got caught, not sent home with a stern note and public complaints like those with diplomatic immunity pretending to work for the state department.

      Many times spouses of NOCs don't even know who they really work for. Although presumably hers did, considering who he worked for.

      OTOH, you can have great fun outing CIA agents by googling "Brewster Jennings" and seeing who claims to work for them.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    3. Re:And? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > you can have great fun outing CIA agents by googling "Brewster Jennings" and seeing who claims to work for them.

      And numerous eastern european spook agencies where Plame worked for all those years have already done this. I'm sure they've also looked through their past records to find who met with who from that company a few years back.

      I remember back shortly after this Plame story first broke way back when, a friend of a friend said the rumors going over on the Hill (take with whatever salt you feel necessary) said as many as 70 of our sources had vanished. If that's true, most of them probably went into hiding, the remainder would have gotten quietly "picked up." Either way, they're not talking to our people anymore.
      It's dangerous being an informant for a foreign government, especially when that government's spy agencies can be jerked around like this by some half-ass political hack like Karl Rove, the Mayberry Machiavelli.

    4. Re:And? by sneakers563 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not only that. Think about all the people in foreign countries that had contact with her, maybe even worked with her. Now suppose those people live in countries with not-so-friendly, not-so-concerned-with-human-rights governments. What about them? Make no mistake: outing an agent doesn't just consign them to a desk job for the rest of their lives. In some ways, they're the ones least affected by it. It endangers the lives of countless others in very real ways.

    5. Re:And? by EvilMagnus · · Score: 4, Informative

      CIA wouldn't have refered the matter to DoJ, and DoJ wouldn't have formed a Grand Jury unless they thought someone broke some laws, Mr Rustmann's analysis notwithstanding.

      And the official position of CIA (not just 'someone who supervised her') is that she was a NOC. You can spin that however you like, but I doubt the Special Counsel will listen to you.

      --
      -EvilMagnus
    6. Re:And? by Mark_in_Brazil · · Score: 5, Insightful
      OTOH, you can have great fun outing CIA agents by googling "Brewster Jennings" and seeing who claims to work for them.
      Actually, that's the real problem with the "outing" of Valerie Plame. Brewster, Jennings was a great CIA asset, with close ties to ARAMCO and other major oil companies and ministries. Now it is useless as a front for US intelligence.
      What's the problem with this? Well, there's been a lot of talk of oil production having reached its peak and begun its decline. Financial Times recently reported that the Saudis had admitted that OPEC oil production won't be able to meet world demand within 20 years.
      I don't know whether petroleum production has yet reached its peak and started to decline, and I don't know when OPEC will not be able to meet world demand. Wouldn't it be nice if at this time of uncertainty, the USA had some kind of asset capable of investigating these things from up close?
      Too bad a political vendetta destroyed major intelligence assets that could have helped with just that.
      --
      "It is nice to know that the computer understands the problem. But I would like to understand it too." --Eugene Wigner
  2. You're Not Field Officers by cynic10508 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nerds playing at being intelligence operatives. Cute.

  3. Her Biggest Mistake by ndansmith · · Score: 5, Funny

    She probably shouldn't have joined that "CIA Spooks Only" group at Google groups.

  4. Next Stop: Mandatroy Information Pollution by Phoenixhunter · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The wonderful thing about the World Wide Web, the Information Super Highway, the Net, etc, is its ability to provide an enormous amount of information (duh). Compliments of those companies, groups, and otherwise who have developed means to mining this information, it is becoming far easier to find information you're looking for, cross-reference it, and filter out the garbage/noise/conspiracy theorists.

    Information Pollution, one of Arthur C. Clarke's insights pointed out some years back, that a time would come when the amount of noise within that enormous repository of information would become detrimental. In this case, the government might seek to inject as much contradictory information as it can.

  5. But if they had access to by WebHostingGuy · · Score: 4, Funny

    their wallet and jewelry box they could look for the "I am a certified spy" card and secret decoder ring.

    --
    Quality Hosting e3 Servers
  6. Did they...? by AtariAmarok · · Score: 5, Funny

    Did Google present some nice associated ad-links for James Bond cameras, trenchcoats, and Le Carre books while you were doing these searches?

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
  7. Next week's column by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    What's his scare tactic for next week? How about "Did you know that your name and address are recorded in a privately-produced book that's located in every house and street corner in your town? For a city like New York, that's over 10 million copies of your private information."

  8. It's worse than that... by gbulmash · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Long, long ago (in the '90s), when pondering an activist anti-spam site, I was able to get the name and phone number of Spamford Wallace's mom through doing a variety of online searches, and was seriously considering posting it with a suggestion that people call her and tell her what a terrible mother she must be for raising such a scumbag of a son.

    The reason I didn't... such a sword cuts both ways. If I put his mom in play, all moms became fair game.

    But this was 8 or 9 years ago, and the only thing that reporter cited that I wasn't able to do then was examine satellite photos of Spamford's mom's house.

    - G

  9. Can someone please... by spun · · Score: 4, Funny

    post David Lazarus address, phone number and google map coords? I'm interested in, uh, how accessible his house is by large van...

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  10. Wow! by pete-classic · · Score: 5, Funny
    I could see that the property appears to be in a quiet residential community and looks approachable from all sides. It also offers ready access by car to major thoroughfares.


    A house in a residential area? With easy access by car? And no moats or dragons near by? This must be some sort of top secret CIA house of the future!

    Sensationalism at its finest.

    -Peter
  11. Technology is a sword .... by Gopal.V · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I've heard this a LOT ...
    Technology is like a sword or a gun

    It's used and misused by both sides
    Or in other words, you can do Evil with Google maps. But that doesn't make Google maps evil (maybe CIA might not see it that well).

    Essentially it lets me peek at a street address in NYC sitting here in Bangalore. I can plan and co-ordinate my ops to snuff out someone - especially if the operatives are expendable. Recon became a lot easier , especially of the aerial map kind.

    <sarcasm> How long before we hear that a terrorist attack was planned using Google Maps ? </sarcasm>
  12. $GOOGLE_RM_FUNCTION ( "Sarah Conner" ) by digital+photo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Imagine if the Terminator had access to the net, as it is now. "Taking Out" all Sarah Conners within a given mile radius is a simple matter of mapping software, addressbooks, and a name+area to target.

    Now, you could locate and plan "events" around individuals throughout the US/world.

    No need for super computers... with a few PCs and access to the various API's on the net, you too can have your own war-room and tactical planning system.

  13. Re:On Nomenclature: by pcidevel · · Score: 4, Funny

    Likewise, I'd go to jail just the same if i was threatening the life of George Bush or the President of the United states.

    Or, Laura Bush's husband.

    --

    I thought someone said there was going to be free beer!

  14. easy to blow the entire CIA front firm too by theodicey · · Score: 4, Interesting
    When Robert Novak disclosed of Valerie Plame Wilson's identity as a CIA operative, the firm (Brewster-Jennings) which was the cover for her counterproliferation work, and presumably many others', was also totally compromised.

    Of course it's not that hard to find out where someone is working (in this case, the existence of Brewster-Jennings wasn't a secret, but the fact that it was a CIA front was).

    But the CIA would have had more time to make sure its agents and assets were secure if the company hadn't been listed on her election contribution records. You can see them at Open Secrets

    I'm not saying that campaign contribution disclosure is a bad thing. It's essential to the media and bloggers investigating governmental corruption.

    But this is more pathetic evidence that Karl Rove, and everyone else involved at the White House, just didn't care. They were far more interested in retaliation and their own political gain than in the lives that were endangered, and the millions of dollars that were wasted.

  15. You're Right: And... Nothing by cmholm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Jesus, could this "story's" headline be any less thought out? When Adm. Poindexter was leading the Total Information Awareness project, this sort of digital dumpster diving was news three years ago. If someone wants to report on something fresh, they'll need to exploit search engines to find agents when you don't know who they are.

    --
    Luke, help me take this mask off ... Just for once, let me butterfly kiss you with my own eyes.
    1. Re:You're Right: And... Nothing by ArsonSmith · · Score: 4, Funny

      I jsut googled for "CIA Agents" and got over 1.6 Million hits. That's a lot of agents.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
  16. Google Me This, Batman by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So Google lets you look at satellite photos of addresses. Which photos have already been available, even on the Internet, for a few bucks to anyone. So what? Foreign spy agencies have the bucks for satellite photos. And if they can't find the home address of an Ambassador's wife, they're not very good spies - they're not going to pull off ther rest of their spy operation on her house.

    The entire point here is that someone *cough*Karl Rove*cough* released the secret association between Valerie Plame's identity, and her job as CIA operative. That is the point in the dataflow that is sensitive. It has nothing to do with Google. Hell, I'd like to see you Google someone's house based on their Slashdot userID, let alone a CIA secret identity, without someone leaking that less than "top secret" association.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Google Me This, Batman by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's a crock. If Rove is protecting the US national security, his job, he responds to questions from reporters asking about a CIA WMD operative with "I don't know", not "she's CIA/WMD". Regardless of his political gain, Rove cannot, as a White House employee, even confirm that someone is CIA, especially during the run up to a war over WMD. That violates national security, that is treason. Rove might have been smart enough not to pick an enemy protected by the laws so far discussed, but he cannot do what he clearly did. And he cannot then lie to the public, claiming "I had nothing to do with it", when he clearly did.

      So you go ahead apologizing for Rove's selfserving attack on a CIA agent. You go ahead patronizing a guy attacking our WMD intelligence system as cover for lies about Iraqi uranium purchases that never existed. You go ahead running cover for the people we have protecting us, who instead lie to invade countries they prefer, instead of finishing the legitimate invasions they're piggybacking on. Go ahead, because you're a traitor too.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  17. Philip Agee and Identifying CIA agents by billstewart · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Philip Agee (interview about Plame/Wilson affair) worked for the CIA from 1957-1968, and left because he disagreed with what the CIA was doing - assassinations, overthrowing governments that weren't politically convenient for the US, supporting Latin American , that sort of thing. In 1975, he wrote a book "Inside the Company: CIA Diary" about his experiences there, which the CIA tried to prevent from being published, and sometime around that time he wrote about how to identify CIA agents from publicly available information - things like the kinds of jobs at US embassies or US military bases that were usually CIA agents. (Imagine if Google had been available back then!) Barbara Bush accused Agee of being a traitor, and George H.W. Bush got Congress to pass a law making it illegal to out CIA agents, and the US and its allies revoked his passport, making it harder for him to travel. I heard Agee speak at Berkeley in ?1979? - very interesting character.

    The Don't-Out-CIA-Agents law that was passed to bust future Agees is now being used to possibly bust G.W.Bush's henchmen, probably his handler Karl Rove. The law makes it more illegal if you have access to classified information (which Rove does, but may or may not have used) and use that to reveal the identity of covert agents, but also makes it illegal to out them using publicly available information.

    The White House has been weasel-wording about "Rove didn't tell Cooper Plame's name, just that she was Wilson's wife", but not only does the law talk about identifying people, not just specifically naming them, but somehow Novak, Cooper, and probably Judith Miller all found out she was an agent, so it wasn't just a "casual remark" intended to "correct mistaken impressions" - it was a well-organized campaign, and Novak apparently talked to two different Administration sources. Not only is Rove guilty, but he's trying to cover it up.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  18. Better example: The sad story of David Kelly by Florian+Weimer · · Score: 4, Interesting
    According to this story from The Guardian, David Kelly was actually exposed by correlating data using Google.
    Norton-Taylor said, "I went to the internet and searched through Google and I pressed a couple of words in. I typed in the search engine something like 'Britain' plus 'Unscom' plus maybe one other word. About the first or second item on that list that came up on Google was a lecture David Kelly had given, I think in America, and it said that he was a former British Unscom inspector."
    After that, Norton-Taylor still needed confirmation, but the UK government had promised to act as an oracle.

    The second part is the more important one. Finding information is easy, most of the time. Deciding what's relevant is the key issue.
  19. Re:On Nomenclature: by jafac · · Score: 4, Insightful


    Actually, the reason Rove hasn't done anything illegal is because Plame was not a clandestine agent when her name was revealed. In fact she hadn't been a covert agent for several years before her name was revealed. Also, Plame was never a deep cover NOC.

    Not true. The Washington Times article is wrong. Wilson said that she was no longer covert the day Novak wrote the article - or rather, Novak's article caused her to lose her cover.

    This was made plain by Larry Johnson (who's making the press-rounds this week) who is a former CIA employee who knew Val P, and knew her to be a NOC, and confirms that Novak compromised her identity.

    The misinformation that she was not NOC is just a dust-up to provide cover for Rove. Not only did Rove break the law, but he compromised National Security - and clearly broke the rules that EVERY cleared person signs when they get a clearance.

    --

    These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  20. Re:Stating the obvious by sg3000 · · Score: 4, Informative

    > 'Brewster Jennings & Associates' was a CIA front, or at the very
    > least it had been infiltrated by CIA.

    Yeah, or for the slower witted spies, you could just wait for Novak to publish his second article where he identified Brewer Jennings & Associates as a CIA front company:

    > In making her April 22, 1999 [to Gore], contribution, Valerie E.
    > Wilson identified herself as an "analyst" with "Brewster-
    > Jennings & Associates." No such firm is listed anywhere, but
    > the late Brewster Jennings was president of Socony-Vacuum
    > oil company a half-century ago. Any CIA employee working
    > under "non-official cover" always is listed with a real firm, but
    > never an imaginary one.

    This was at the beginning of Novak attempting to dismiss Wilson's conclusions about his trip because he was "partisan" (even ignoring the fact that Wilson gave money to Bush and Gore, and he served under both parties' presidents). It's considered to be a logical fallacy, but it hasn't stopped Republicans from trying it in the past two years of this WMD debacle. The fact that they exposed information about the CIA for political gain is unconscionable.

    --
    Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
  21. Re:Real smart, David Lazarus. by tenchiken · · Score: 4, Informative

    Nevermind the fact that Patriot isn't even in use here, and has nothing to do with this subject. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of your trolls. I am sure some /.er will moderate you up for it.

  22. Re:Stating the obvious by Thanatopsis · · Score: 5, Informative

    He never said Cheney sent him. That's simply a lie. What he said was that the office of the vice president requested the CIA look into this Niger matter. The CIA chose Joe Wilson as he already done this sort of work before (Valerie did not send him to Niger on here own. That's just silly.) He was an ambassador to Niger and Gabon and knew all the players in the area and had completed covert work for the CIA before.
    Here's the quote
    "In February 2002, I was informed by officials at the Central Intelligence Agency that Vice President Dick Cheney's office had questions about a particular intelligence report. While I never saw the report, I was told that it referred to a memorandum of agreement that documented the sale of uranium yellowcake -- a form of lightly processed ore -- by Niger to Iraq in the late 1990's. The agency officials asked if I would travel to Niger to check out the story so they could provide a response to the vice president's office."
    Media repeated false GOP talking point on authorization for Wilson trip to Niger