Slashdot Mirror


Feds Pay Millions For Bogus Spy Software

gosuperninja writes "The US Government paid tens of millions of dollars to Dennis Montgomery because he said he had created software that could decode secret Al-Qaeda messages embedded in Al-Jazeera broadcasts. Even though the CIA figured out that his software was fraud in 2003, other defense agencies continued to believe in it. To date, the government has not prosecuted Montgomery, most likely to save itself the embarrassment."

16 of 221 comments (clear)

  1. Likely more prevalent an issue than we realize.. by intellitech · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Mr. Montgomery is about to go on trial in Las Vegas on unrelated charges of trying to pass $1.8 million in bad checks at casinos.

    I'd say he has more than a "penchant" for gambling, it sounds like this guy genuinely has a problem.

    Gambling issue aside, the sad thing regarding his behavior is that it's probably more commonplace than we're aware of. After 9/11, government officials were and still are under serious pressure to produce results, and often all too eager to sign a few papers here and there if it would magically solve their problems. The government trying to save face is merely a symptom, and should be treated as such. The only things I can think of that would discourage this behavior is active prevention through transparency and follow-up enforcement when that fails. One way or another, these charades must not be allowed to continue. I'm sure there's a lot more where that came from which fell into the well along the way, and it's going to add up. After all, it is the taxpayer that will shoulder the weight of these transactions.

    --
    vos nescitis quicquam, nec cogitatis quia expedit nobis ut unus moriatur homo pro populo et non tota gens pereat.
  2. They should have been suspicious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    When the message decoded to "There's a sucker born every minute."

  3. Re:Likely more prevalent an issue than we realize. by causality · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The government trying to save face is merely a symptom, and should be treated as such.

    It certainly does make them look stupid when they're supposed to be protecting us from a big, determined, ruthless threat like Al-Qaeda and it ends up that they can't even protect themselves from simple fraud. It makes them look unnecessary, too, and that's the part they can't stand. It's the sort of thing that can make the political pressures no longer operate in their favor. Until this event they had the whole "be afraid!" thing working well for them.

     

    The only things I can think of that would discourage this behavior is active prevention through transparency and follow-up enforcement when that fails.

    In any kind of merit-based organization that would mean firing and replacing every decision-maker who chose to invest in this software. That's how they could regain credibility, by showing that they won't tolerate such gross incompetence within their ranks. Otherwise the question remains valid: how do they propose to protect the entire country from shadowy underground terrorist organizations bent on our destruction if they cannot even protect themselves from a common con-man?

    --
    It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  4. Embarrassment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This kind of hoaxes happens all the time. Check out Quadro Tracker and friends...

  5. Re:Likely more prevalent an issue than we realize. by Takichi · · Score: 4, Informative
    This all happened way back in the early GW Bush administration. It's unclear how many of these guys are still around. The article is definitely worth a read. There was talk of shooting down passenger aircraft over some of the "intelligence" gathered by his software (ok, so it wasn't really considered, but the fact it was suggested at all is alarming). In regards to firing the people responsible, FTA:

    The C.I.A. never did an assessment to determine how a ruse had turned into a full-blown international incident, officials said, nor was anyone held accountable. In fact, agency officials who oversaw the technology directorate — including Donald Kerr, who helped persuade George J. Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, that the software was credible — were promoted, former officials said.

  6. I saw something very similar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I worked at one of the 'Agenices' and during my time there (in the last 3 years) I worked with a similar fellow. He was introduced to me as this utter genius. An independant subcontractor who, with his never seen friend, had come up with a software solution that could allow their laptop to snoop on any Internet traffic, anywhere in the world at any time...instantly. "It sees everything, you just look at the part that interests you", he explained to me. Sort of like a machine running Wireshark with the NIC in PROM mode, but for the entire Internet. No one in the Gov questioned him. No a single soul. He was a contractor (like myself) and was being paid so much that he was given two billets to cover the cost. So I sat through his presentation and immediately threw a BS flag. He flipped out, stormed out and no one knew what to do. I did my best to explain the facts that made his claims impossible. I asked the room if they'd ever tested his system in a real world environment. "Call your wife, have her get online and tell her what's going on. Then have Peter look at her traffic". After about a half-hour, they started to realize what had happened, you could see it on their faces. Thing is, this guy had been paid millions in funding a salary. I don't think his business partner ever existed. What did they do about it? Nothing. You see, in order to go after him, they'd look foolish. Not going to happen. Not in the Intel community.

    1. Re:I saw something very similar. by roman_mir · · Score: 5, Informative

      Ha ha ha ha! You have just made my day.

      ade 651 and the company's website - they sell them to gov'ts and military at around 60,000USD/pop.

      GT200 - these are cheaper I think, about half the price of ADE. They are sold to governments.

      Quadro Tracker

      Sniffex

      hedd1

      h3tec

      etc. all of these are sold to and bought by various government institutions. From schools to military to airports to subway systems, etc.etc.

      Makes you so much securer. Or does it? Reliance on these devices KILLS people, who 'use' them and then believe the place is safe.

  7. AJ by Ender_Wiggin · · Score: 5, Informative

    What's pretty disturbing is that the government is so gullible over such a lie that's ridiculous on its face. Really, secret messages from Al Qaeda in Al Jazeera? Why not hidden messages from Al Qaeda on MTV or CNN? That would be just as plausible.

    I'm still mystified by how much neocons despise the channel. No wonder Bush planned to bomb Al Jazeera, he was so quick to jump onto the false notion. Never mind that Al Qaeda hates Al Jazeera and has done so for years (AQ supporters call it "Al-Khinzeera," which means The Pig)

    1. Re:AJ by Nidi62 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I've actually found Al Jazeera reporting to be much better than most American news sources. The Al Jazeera articles are usually well written, don't have sensationalist headlines, and you don't have to sift through all the latest celebrity crap. And the bias is nowhere near as blatant and pervasive as CNN, Fox News, and the like. I can't comment too much on the Arabic version however, as my Arabic is nowhere near good enough for that yet.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    2. Re:AJ by Nemyst · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's the thing, don't you see? That their agenda is not incredibly obvious, that they're not spouting hate and misinformation every 10 microseconds. The US govt can't help but think they're hiding something. Any self-respecting news outlet should be biased and trollish on the edges!

  8. Re:Likely more prevalent an issue than we realize. by bcmm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is another tech story which doesn't really involve tech: humans can get paid a lot to tell people what they want to hear too. Feds would really like to believe that Al-Jazeera is somehow connected to terrorism, even though it's a preposterous idea, and they're happy to pay someone for that information so they don't look like frauds themselves.

    --
    # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
    Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
  9. Sure, we've got the money for that... by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This month, our government has proposed a budget in which we confess that we're so fucking poor that we cannot afford to subsidize nutritional supplements for babies born with low birth weight. And yet there seems to be a whole parallel word of government, where insane shit like this must still look insane, but fuck it, we'll fund it anyway, because we're rich and we don't give a fuck. I mean seriously, who could possibly make the decision "Yeah, that's worth paying for" when they hear a sales pitch like this? Only an organization that's so flush with money that they're experimenting with using it for toilet paper. It's a little shocking, given the nature of all the sacrifices the government is forcing on normal people.

    1. Re:Sure, we've got the money for that... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Given the assorted delightful cognitive deficiencies associated with malnutrition in infancy and childhood, there is a strong argument to be made that such a policy is simply pragmatic(even if one has no ethical qualms with letting children suffer for their parents' positions).

      Nutritional adequacy is cheap, a cognitively dysfunctional underclass is not...

  10. Re:Yet Another duplicate article by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I realize this is winter..but must we go on with the repeats?"

    It's a bit more interesting than that. This guy had been outed two years ago. The Federal government, instead of just admitting it got screwed, decided to toss the whole incident under the rug and declare it a secret. This is even more outrageous than the initial fraud and incompetence. Using secrecy as an excuse for incompetence is nothing new, however it is such a serious issue that it needs to be brought up every time it's discovered.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  11. Reminds me of bogus bomb detector by danceswithtrees · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yet another way to waste money in the fight against terror.

    This one sunk $85M on a bogus bomb detector used widely in Iraq until its export was banned-- ie demand for it was still present and they wanted to continue importing into Iraq! http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/8471187.stm

    Airport body imagers, duct tape and plastic wrap... Is there no end?

  12. Re:File suit against the government by osgeek · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Blaming a woman for the way she dresses in a rape trial would be attacking her freedom of expression.

    Blaming the government for spending millions of our tax dollars on a blatant scam would be attacking the government officials for being abjectly stupid.

    The former is not okay. The latter is responsible and should be expected.