Slashdot Mirror


'Motherlode' of Data Seized At Bin Laden Compound

itwbennett writes "The raid that killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan Sunday also turned up an 'intelligence harvest' of computer-based data that was described by an anonymous government source as 'the motherlode of intelligence.' The data is being sifted through at a secret site in Afghanistan. An unnamed official was quoted by Politico as saying: 'Hundreds of people are going through it now. It's going to be great even if only 10 percent of it is actionable. They cleaned it out. Can you imagine what's on Osama bin Laden's hard drive?'"

718 comments

  1. Sounds like a photoshop contest by jfengel · · Score: 1

    Not necessarily a photoshop contest I'd want to see the results of, though.

    1. Re:Sounds like a photoshop contest by gandhi_2 · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I'm pretty sure his hard drive has lots of this:

      http://pw0nd.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/icanhas72virgins-500x423.jpg

      I know mine does!

    2. Re:Sounds like a photoshop contest by obergfellja · · Score: 1

      this would be an awesome new game...

      007: Bin Laden to Rest.

    3. Re:Sounds like a photoshop contest by Sectoid_Dev · · Score: 1

      Hot burqa on burqa action!

    4. Re:Sounds like a photoshop contest by ArcherB · · Score: 1

      I just want to see the blooper reel from some of the videos he released to see if it was anything like the SNL skits I've seen.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    5. Re:Sounds like a photoshop contest by spun · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Wait a minute, wait a minute, what did I say? Did I just say 'Radaman?' What is that? Yeah, maybe Dennis Radaman is going to punish you with his crazy hair."

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    6. Re:Sounds like a photoshop contest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They find out he's actually Moot and no one will ever be permabanned again. Plus in his mansion, he probably had satellite internet and spent him time posting "frosty piss" on everything.

    7. Re:Sounds like a photoshop contest by GeckoAddict · · Score: 2

      There is NO way I'm going to click any link in this thread at work...

    8. Re:Sounds like a photoshop contest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hot burqa on burqa action!

      But the 72 virgins are D&D nerds. So I'm betting it's burquakke!

    9. Re:Sounds like a photoshop contest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just in! The contents of Bin Laden's hard drive have been leaked to the public

    10. Re:Sounds like a photoshop contest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its fairly safe for work.
      Its cute enough to be a desktop wallpaper

    11. Re:Sounds like a photoshop contest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pussy.

    12. Re:Sounds like a photoshop contest by johnsnails · · Score: 1

      We know what he has been doing... http://www.google.com/trends?q=donkey+sex

    13. Re:Sounds like a photoshop contest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, they've finally discovered a decent curry recipe. Kudos!

    14. Re:Sounds like a photoshop contest by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 2

      From page source:

      <title>
              YouTube
                      - Rick Astley - Never Gonna Give You Up
          </title>

      The perl GET command is a wonderful thing.

      Honestly, I was expecting goatse. I never figured Osama was a Rick Astley fan...

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
  2. My bet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Goat porn

    1. Re:My bet by ifiwereasculptor · · Score: 1

      I'll bet on Unity source code.

    2. Re:My bet by rapiddescent · · Score: 1

      "They cleaned it out. Can you imagine what's on Osama bin Laden's hard drive?"

      it turns out that Osama Bin laden is ... Anonymous Coward.
      hard drives are therefore useless and have been sold on ebay. There's the repayments on that helicopter you see.

    3. Re:My bet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Goat porn

      Goatse?

    4. Re:My bet by mangu · · Score: 1

      Goat porn

      You think Goatse is actually OBL? Could be, no one ever saw Goatse's face...

    5. Re:My bet by Coren22 · · Score: 1
      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    6. Re:My bet by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

      Obama's real long form birth certificate, showing that Ben Laden was Obama's real father.

      Ben Laden: *Wheeze* *click* Obama, *wheeze* I am your father *click*
      Obama: *Blam* Ok, so what if I shot first.

      --
      Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
    7. Re:My bet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Goat porn

      Allah smites you.

    8. Re:My bet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Goat porn

      With real goats, see?

    9. Re:My bet by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      "Ben" Laden? I thought Obama's dad was Kenyan. Is Ben a common name there?

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    10. Re:My bet by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      They wouldn't send 40 Navy SEALs after "goat porn".

      Baby goat porn, ie kidd porn. Now that is actionable.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    11. Re:My bet by darkshadow88 · · Score: 1

      Not that Unity, I assume, but rather the new Unity user interface in Ubuntu.

    12. Re:My bet by Rick+Genter · · Score: 1

      His real name was Obi Wan Laden.

      --
      Don't underestimate the power of The Source
    13. Re:My bet by Drugmath · · Score: 1

      Presumably he's referring to the Unity GUI in the latest Ubuntu release. I mean really, only a truly evil mastermind would create an interface like that.

    14. Re:My bet by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Oh, you must mean old crazy Ben Laden Kenobi.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    15. Re:My bet by tgrigsby · · Score: 1

      DANG IT! You beat me to it...

      --
      *** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
    16. Re:My bet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w57JLmY5dmw&feature=player_detailpage#t=152s

    17. Re:My bet by SpanglerIsAGod · · Score: 1

      And I was thinking Muslim bubble porn. Or maybe the more risque Mormon bubble porn.

      --
      War doesn't show who is right - just who is left.
    18. Re:My bet by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Well, it sure is a big asshole, so...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    19. Re:My bet by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Well, he better has SOME porn, because according to a German judge, if he had NO porn he'd be suspected of having had child porn and just managed to wipe it before the SEALs took him down.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    20. Re:My bet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Women without burqas!

    21. Re:My bet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Goat porn

      I thought the relevant slur involved camels.

    22. Re:My bet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in the "goat sex" thread I would avoid words beginning with "ass"

    23. Re:My bet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Ben" Laden?

      His name is Arabic and can only be accurately rendered in Arabic script. 'Ben' is just as good a transliteration as 'bin,' even though 'ben' is conventionally used to transliterate the Hebrew equivalent. Bear in mind that in both Hebrew and Arabic vowels are usually not notated. So "bin Laden" (son of Laden) or 'Benjamin' (son of my right side), could just as easily be 'ben Ladin' and 'Binjamen.'

    24. Re:My bet by vegiVamp · · Score: 1

      Stop reading my mind, you heathen.

      --
      What a depressingly stupid machine.
    25. Re:My bet by xSander · · Score: 1

      He could also be referring to this.

  3. Porn? by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

    Lot and lots of it

    1. Re:Porn? by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah, lots of pictures sexy...ankles!!

    2. Re:Porn? by countertrolling · · Score: 2

      Then you can bet they won't have any pictures of Hillary's...

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    3. Re:Porn? by elrous0 · · Score: 2

      You joke, but I bet if they did find porn, it would do more to hurt his reputation among the Koran-thumpers than killing scores of innocent civilians.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    4. Re:Porn? by GNious · · Score: 1

      If anyone came out and said they found porn on Osama Bin Laden's computers, you'll have riots for lying about Osama Bin Laden.

    5. Re:Porn? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      They might not believe it, true. But I seriously doubt they could hate us any more. It's sort of like the "Now that we've killed him, they might attack us!" crap. Like they *weren't* going to attack us before?

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    6. Re:Porn? by jimbolauski · · Score: 2

      Then you can bet they won't have any pictures of Hillary's...

      I'm sure they have panoramic cameras that can handle the job.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    7. Re:Porn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I seriously doubt they could hate us any more.

      What a difference a space makes - I first read that as "But I seriously doubt they could hate us anymore" and I was ready to rail against the idea that they would stop hating us. Instead, it's quite the opposite meaning.

  4. They found terrorist porn by countertrolling · · Score: 5, Funny

    Lots of snuff films

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    1. Re:They found terrorist porn by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Mod parent Insightful, not funny.

  5. Heh... by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 1

    I would imagine there is a lot of goat porn.

    --
    I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    1. Re:Heh... by No.2 · · Score: 1

      That was Baaaaa

      --
      "I see. The fact that you . . . can't explain . . . explains everything."
  6. We know what's on Bin Laden's hard drive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Furry porn... all the big gay sex spooge all over furry porn.

  7. Can you imagine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >> Can you imagine what's on Osama bin Laden's hard drive?

    Pictures of naked virgins?

  8. Truecrypt by afidel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I would imagine a big old truecrypt partition, though perhaps he didn't encrypt things for some reason?

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    1. Re:Truecrypt by bjdevil66 · · Score: 2

      If he didn't encrypt his HDD and it burns terrorists everywhere, the smart terrorists in the future won't make the same mistake. This is probably a one-time "motherlode" of intel...

    2. Re:Truecrypt by Nimatek · · Score: 1

      Maybe this is exactly the kind of success the truecrypt honeypot project was made for.

    3. Re:Truecrypt by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Suicide bombers rarely make the same mistakes twice.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Can you imagine the hardware and algorithms that the NSA has? This encryption would stop the average joe from cracking your stuff, but hell, Google or Microsoft could crack this in a week.

    5. Re:Truecrypt by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      You assume that the NSA can not crack a Truecrypt partition. Also you assume that they thought that physical security would fail.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    6. Re:Truecrypt by alta · · Score: 2

      or apple could tap the unused power of all the iDevices connected to the internet and give it to you in real time.

      --
      Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
    7. Re:Truecrypt by tripleevenfall · · Score: 2

      He further assumes that Truecrypt does not provide a backdoor to NSA for this in the first place.

    8. Re:Truecrypt by LateArthurDent · · Score: 1

      He further assumes that Truecrypt does not provide a backdoor to NSA for this in the first place.

      Truecrypt is open source. No, I haven't looked at it myself, but it only takes one person to rat such a thing out. It's not probable that nobody has seen it yet, save the ones in on the conspiracy. Possible yes, but highly unlikely.

    9. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At first I was thinking the same thing but then I realized these guys were probably pretty arrogant, selfish and lazy considering how long they had been on the run and living in a nice well defended palace. The selfish part comes from thinking that if Osama was captured then the whole gig was up anyway so screw everything. They probably had little to no encryption on anything.

      However, from what I have seen these terrorist organizations tend to be loosely run and they have very little useful electronic data in the first place. This is actually my bet if I was going to make a conjecture.

      So who knows.

    10. Re:Truecrypt by tripleevenfall · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hopefully (if it were encrypted and we cracked it), we would continue to put out statements in the media that we couldn't crack it...

      (while we were kicking doors at his safehouses and rounding up the remainder of his minions around the world)

    11. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not. Quite the NSA, but the Dutch police could not decrypt the truecrypt partition of a child porn suspect recently.

      They eventually did manage to make him tell them their password though, but that's a bit of a problem if you shoot someone first :)

    12. Re:Truecrypt by dougmc · · Score: 2

      Truecrypt is open source. No, I haven't looked at it myself, but it only takes one person to rat such a thing out.

      Encryption is hard. Really hard to do right.

      The NSA can hire the best. It's entirely possible that they (or some other comparable agency) hired somebody to inject a weakness into it's algorithms that would only be noticed in a code audit by somebody extremely skilled in the art. I'm not saying there's a backdoor such as "if you == NSA, decrypt everything!" but there may be something that greatly restricts the key combination that must be tested to crack it or something.

      If you're in a situation that the authorities would give anything to get access to your encrypted data, a lot of paranoia is a very healthy thing.

      I do agree that I'd trust open source code more than closed source code in this regard, but it's certainly possible for open source code to have backdoors or weaknesses -- intentional or accidental -- and for nobody to notice it for a long time.

    13. Re:Truecrypt by khallow · · Score: 1

      If he didn't encrypt his HDD and it burns terrorists everywhere

      Why use something which can be defeated with a $5 wrench?

    14. Re:Truecrypt by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      He further assumes that Truecrypt does not provide a backdoor to NSA for this in the first place.

      He also further assumes the NSA don't have a wizard on hand who can utter an incantation to call on the dark powers of the Ancient Ones to reveal the password. That's probably because the evidence so far makes both a tad unlikely.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    15. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's dead. Hitting him with a wrench isn't going to give you the encryption keys.

    16. Re:Truecrypt by GweeDo · · Score: 1

      His technical assistant might have worked for Sony.

    17. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That trick only works if you didn't shoot the guy who knows the password in the head and dump the body in the ocean though.

    18. Re:Truecrypt by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 1

      Depends where you shoot them.

      --
      <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
    19. Re:Truecrypt by Hultis · · Score: 2

      Even if you somehow synchronized all the hardware in the world with no overhead you wouldn't be able to crack 4096 bits RSA within reasonable time. Unless the NSA has some algorithms they haven't told the world about (frankly it wouldn't be all too surprising) it's not going to happen. However, I doubt Bin Laden used such crazy encryption.

    20. Re:Truecrypt by Cytotoxic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Hopefully (if it were encrypted and we cracked it), we would continue to put out statements in the media that we couldn't crack it...

      (while we were kicking doors at his safehouses and rounding up the remainder of his minions around the world)

      Agreed! Didn't we learn anything from the whole "we tracked him by his cell phone" braggadocio fiasco? STFU about your intel sources. Sheesh....

    21. Re:Truecrypt by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would imagine a big old truecrypt partition, though perhaps he didn't encrypt things for some reason?

      The guy was 54 and the latter part of those years was spent in some pretty remote areas. I doubt he had much expertise in computer security. They probably relied much more on physical security, i.e. being to blow all their stuff up if the shit hit the fan (or their stuff going up in same bombing raid as them.)

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    22. Re:Truecrypt by MrLint · · Score: 1

      But it if you hit him hard enough it will play the theme to tetris ;)

    23. Re:Truecrypt by SnarfQuest · · Score: 3, Informative

      You mean, like not handling daylight savings time correctly, thus blowing themselves up an hour early? (Yup, this did happen).

      --
      Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
    24. Re:Truecrypt by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

      Especially since they had the password on a post-it note stuck to the monitor , just like most of you.

      --
      Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
    25. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hahahahahaha, classic.

    26. Re:Truecrypt by GreenTom · · Score: 2

      I think the $0.10 bullet made the $5 wrench unworkable.

    27. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's bit late to beat his password out of him.

    28. Re:Truecrypt by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

      Yes... but unfortunately for them the US took prisoners who will be tortured until they produce the key(s).

    29. Re:Truecrypt by wjousts · · Score: 1

      Perhaps it is all encrypted and inaccessible? Maybe they didn't find anything at all? In that case maybe announcing that you've hit the "motherlode" is perhaps the best of a bad lot. Let the bad guys think they've been compromised and maybe they'll make a mistake as they flee to a new hiding place and we can pick them up. At the very least, maybe they'll scrap plans that where already in the works, forcing them to start over.

      All wild speculation of course.

    30. Re:Truecrypt by wjousts · · Score: 1

      While I think the idea of the NSA putting a backdoor into an open source project is pure tin-foil hat territory, it's probably true that they would have some of the best people available analyzing it for any weaknesses and they wouldn't be likely to tell anybody if they found some fault in the algorithms.

    31. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, but preserving Osama Bin Laden's body will cost $200,000 and then we have to wait until a gunshot wound to the head is no longer a fatal injury to medical science.

      After you restore him from cyro, fix his injuries, and see if he still retains any memories or personality at all .. feel free to beat the crap out of him with a $5 wrench.

      Until then, if the key dies with the holder, the encrypted drive is secure as secure gets.

    32. Re:Truecrypt by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      My guess is that they already know there isn't a lot of useful data there. However, they may figure that by saying there is it will cause of flurry of activity among the places they are watching and the nature of what that activity is will give them an idea of which ones are important and which ones are blind alleys.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    33. Re:Truecrypt by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Informative

      Didn't we learn anything from the whole "we tracked him by his cell phone" braggadocio fiasco?

      That wasn't bragging. That was leaking, meant to do political damage to the Bush administration.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    34. Re:Truecrypt by CFTM · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My guess is there is rhyme and reason to why they're making this announcement so public Say what you will about the bureaucrats who run these bureaus but they understand the relationships you described above and these are not idle statements.

      Most individuals, upon completing a university education should have been exposed to Sun Tzu's "Art of War" and the wisdom on prevailing in conflicts explored in that text has stood 5,000 years of scrutiny. So what I'm saying is, don't underestimate this action. Our politicians are stupid because they pander to groups, thereby inducing the lowest common denominator. They often make the bureaucrats look stupid with their double-talk and ineptitudes, but perception is rarely reality.

      Ideologically you may disagree with these people, but make no mistake about it, this was planned action and not a mere oversight.

    35. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the man with the access was killed by a $1 bullet.

    36. Re:Truecrypt by igb · · Score: 2

      For example, if someone modified the code to completely break the entropy generation in a widely used cryptography library in a major Linux distribution, with the effect that you only had to search 32768 possibilities in order break "4096 bit" cryptography, the benefit of open source is that it would be spotted immediately. No, wait... One interpretation of that disaster is that people who were completely unqualified to work on crypto code made a stupid mistake. Another is that people who were most certainly qualified to work on crypto code made an excellent move for the security services.

    37. Re:Truecrypt by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      No magic. All it would take is a weak password. No encryption is will work if you combine a weak password with a lot of processing power.
      Even if they use a good password but one that is say only ten or twelve characters long you are still at something like a max of 72^12 combinations. So if it fails a dictionary attack then you fall back to brute force attack. That is assuming that their isn't some undocumented weakness that they know and we do not.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    38. Re:Truecrypt by tripleevenfall · · Score: 1

      How about if they are at the bottom of the Indian Ocean?

    39. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except for that it would be the case of beating a dead horse... uhm Bin Laden.

    40. Re:Truecrypt by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      I also seem to remember someone's bomb going off in their house because it was rigged with a cell phone and the bomber's operator sent a text wishing a happy birthday or something.

    41. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Truecrypt uses AES which had a pretty transparent process for choosing the algorithm and is approved for Top Secret document encryption by the NSA. I find it hard to believe the NSA would approve an algorithm that had a gapping security hole that would let them quickly decrypt something. It only takes one person and a 'ahha!' moment to find and widely (or worse, narrowly) distribute such an attack.

    42. Re:Truecrypt by mangu · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Do you know why there are so few competent suicide bombers?

      Because only those who flunk their exams graduate from the training.

    43. Re:Truecrypt by LWATCDR · · Score: 2

      You also assume that they didn't use a weak password. You would be shocked how many really smart people don't know the difference between a week and a strong password.
      Also I would bet that the NSA has at least the computing power of a Cray Jaguar or two or three to throw at this. With that much power anything but a very long and totally random string of characters would probably be too weak.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    44. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hard to use a $5 wrench on someone who is dead.

    45. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody will ever know, since actually, they "threw it in the *COUGH*COVERUP*COUGH* water" and those "hundreds of 'people'" are just as fishy as the the whole story. ;)

    46. Re:Truecrypt by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      putting a backdoor into an open source project is pure tin-foil hat territory

      And how many people download the source, analyze it for backdoors, and then compile it themselves? I suspect that 99.99% of people who download Trucryrpt download the binaries.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    47. Re:Truecrypt by PCM2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While I think the idea of the NSA putting a backdoor into an open source project is pure tin-foil hat territory

      Let me get this straight: You think the idea that one of the nation's most secretive intelligence agencies would be doing something in secret that allows them to gain intelligence is "tin-foil hat territory"? How do you know which contributors to TrueCrypt are working for the NSA? How could you ever know?

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    48. Re:Truecrypt by LateArthurDent · · Score: 1

      Encryption is hard. Really hard to do right.

      The NSA can hire the best. It's entirely possible that they (or some other comparable agency) hired somebody to inject a weakness into it's algorithms that would only be noticed in a code audit by somebody extremely skilled in the art. I'm not saying there's a backdoor such as "if you == NSA, decrypt everything!" but there may be something that greatly restricts the key combination that must be tested to crack it or something.

      Yeah, I agree that's a reasonable concern. That said, TrueCrypt is not only open-source, but also famous enough that heavyweights tend to use it for security research. It's no guarantee, but I think enough knowledgeable people look at it that I'd think it's most likely free of backdoors and known weaknesses.

      I do agree that I'd trust open source code more than closed source code in this regard, but it's certainly possible for open source code to have backdoors or weaknesses -- intentional or accidental -- and for nobody to notice it for a long time.

      Yeah, you're right, and I had no intention whatsoever of making my post sound like, "open source = safe!!!" I think it's unlikely to contain purposeful weaknesses, but yes, it's not impossible.

      Either way, it's irrelevant. Even if bin laden's hard drives were fully encrypted with something with no known weaknesses and no backdoors, I don't doubt that that they still would be able to crack it fairly quickly. The world is full of data encrypted with 256-bit AES protected by a dictionary password. The encryption scheme is rarely the weakest link in the chain.

    49. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If his drive was encrypted, you can bet that an awful lot of computer horsepower at the NSA will be grinding on it day and night for however long it takes to crack it.

    50. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You also assume that he doesn't have the password written on a sticky note next to the keyboard.

    51. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It works fine if you tell everyone you shot him in the head and dumped the body in the ocean. If, on the other hand, he's been spirited off to a black CIA "debriefing" center, the password is just a few Black and Decker drill bits away.

      Seriously, do you know where Dick Cheney is right now (although due to his reliance on electronics to maintain his blood flow, I hear they don't let him play with the really fun tools of the trade that involve electricity anymore)?

    52. Re:Truecrypt by dch24 · · Score: 1

      This. Although the NSA can also brute-force any 128-bit key in a few months, why would they need to? (Almost) nobody uses more than 12 characters for their password.

    53. Re:Truecrypt by lgw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The NSA has told the world to stop using product-of-prime-numbers based asymmetric encryption. However, TrueCrypt uses symmetric encryption, so that's secure against a brute-force attack ... well, except the sort of brute force attack where a Navy SEAL team kicks down your door and shoots you in the face while your computer is running with the TrueCrypt volume mounted - then it's easy. Hooah!

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    54. Re:Truecrypt by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      Modifying the code of an open-source project hardly qualifies as "in secret".

    55. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am shocked at the number of really smart people that don't know the difference between week and weak.

    56. Re:Truecrypt by afidel · · Score: 1

      Why wouldn't he use crazy(?) encryption, it's not like he's running an eCommerce site where the small amount of additional overhead for better encryption has some noticeable impact. Heck since Truecrypt uses AES acceleration if available it can be actually faster than a less secure software only implementation.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    57. Re:Truecrypt by powerlord · · Score: 2

      I would imagine a big old truecrypt partition, though perhaps he didn't encrypt things for some reason?

      The guy was 54 and the latter part of those years was spent in some pretty remote areas. I doubt he had much expertise in computer security. They probably relied much more on physical security, i.e. being to blow all their stuff up if the shit hit the fan (or their stuff going up in same bombing raid as them.)

      Not to mention, he escaped from the Afghan caves and has been successfully hiding from authorities for the better part of 6 years. That might have helped make him more careless in security matters ( such as "They couldn't catch me! Ha!" or "They missed me once, and haven't been able to find the backside of their own hands since my Pakistani colleagues have been feeding them shit for intelligence").

      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
    58. Re:Truecrypt by rwv · · Score: 1

      Don't you know the different between variable costs and fixed costs? It's $0.10 per bullet. The breakeven point is only 50 bullets. Tell me, how many thousands of times can you swing a wretch before it becomes any less effective? Meanwhile, bullets are one trick ponies.

    59. Re:Truecrypt by hierophanta · · Score: 1

      no offense intended, but i dont think you know what you are talking about. i dont know what NSA has, but i have a good idea of what it would take to crack a truecrypt volume. from wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrueCrypt#Operation_Satyagraha

      Operation Satyagraha
      In July 2008, several TrueCrypt-secured hard drives were seized from a Brazilian banker Daniel Dantas, who was suspected of financial crimes. The Brazilian National Institute of Criminology (INC) tried for five months (without success) to obtain access to TrueCrypt-protected disks owned by the banker, after which they enlisted the help of the FBI. The FBI used dictionary attacks against Dantas' disks for over 12 months, but were still unable to decrypt them.

    60. Re:Truecrypt by Americano · · Score: 1

      But the $5 wrench will last for years. The $0.10 bullet is single-use.

    61. Re:Truecrypt by MozeeToby · · Score: 1

      Ha, if the NSA needs the computing power they could go to IBM and say "How would you like the awesome PR opportunity of letting us borrow one of your blue gene clusters for a few months? You can't tell anyone about it now, but we'll let you mention it to the press in not more than 10 years. Deal?" If you were in charge of doling out computer time on one of the top 500 supercomputers and were offered the opportunity to try and decrypt those disks can you honestly say you wouldn't do it?

      Anyone got the numbers on how long a top 10 supercomputer would take to decrypt a strong encryption scheme? I suspect it's still in the realm of 10s of years, but this is the kind of thing that someone just might be willing to say lets try it anyway and maybe we'll get lucky.

    62. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, do you know where Dick Cheney is right now

      He's pretty much retired now, so he just spends his time shooting people in the face.

    63. Re:Truecrypt by Americano · · Score: 1

      Intelligence data doesn't always take the form of form letters like,

      "Dear $terrorist, thank you for confirming your location at grid coordinates XXXX YYYY. We will be sure to keep you on our newsletter distribution list, we're so happy you've decided to renew!"

      Some of it (lots of it) may be operational communications about things that they're in the process of planning, chatter about the capabilities of the people looking for them, suspicion that person X, Y, and Z might be informants or double-agents, plans for recruiting, information and communication about sources of funding...

      It doesn't all take the form of an address book of terrorists and their precise locations. Knowing "what they know about us," "what they're planning," and "what their capabilities are," is all very important info that requires absolutely no specific location data for other people. They can go to ground, but that may already have significantly disrupted ongoing operations, dried up funding sources, and identified new names and places to go look for other leads.

    64. Re:Truecrypt by praxis · · Score: 1

      The NSA has told the world to stop using product-of-prime-numbers based asymmetric encryption.

      You wouldn't perhaps have a source for this, would you?

    65. Re:Truecrypt by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      The $5 wrench only works if you can capture both the encrypted device and the person who knows the key.

      If you value a secret more than your own life you should keep this in mind when deciding how to protect the secret.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    66. Re:Truecrypt by chiBrian · · Score: 1

      I would imagine a big old truecrypt partition, though perhaps he didn't encrypt things for some reason?

      One would think they would, except these guys are just amazingly dumb: [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/22/ba_jihadist_trial_sentencing/
      There seems to be a correlation between belief in the redemptive power of suicide attacks and being really, really stupid.

    67. Re:Truecrypt by hedwards · · Score: 1

      That's the thing it sounded like they were relying upon relatively low tech means for distributing information, it doesn't sound like the materials were being encrypted for transit. He specifically chose couriers because he didn't trust technology to be secure. And it sounds like those DVDs were basically just standard homebrew DVD movies.

    68. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought suicide bombers always made the same mistake, once. :-D

    69. Re:Truecrypt by Grizzley9 · · Score: 1

      There were no phone lines or other communication lines going into the compound. I'm wondering if he was tethering his iPhone. AT&T probably gave him away. In all seriousness though, I'm wondering what kind of data access he had and if he was at all computer savvy or if all his data came from sneaker -net.

    70. Re:Truecrypt by kriston · · Score: 1

      To crack a TrueCrypt volume, you do not need to decrypt the data itself, but only the encryption that protects the key. This encryption is also very strong and can be protected further by keying it with external data, like a USB thumb drive, but the whole key is still there in the volume.

      I had once asked if TrueCrypt could add a feature that would allow us to completely remove the key from the volume but that was not popular with the developers. I think TrueCrypt would be even more secure if the key was physically separated. That way an adversary would need to decrypt the unknown/unpredictable cleartext inside the volume data itself, not just by attacking the little key data in a well-known format.

      --

      Kriston

    71. Re:Truecrypt by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Modifying the code of an open-source project hardly qualifies as "in secret".

      No, but by that same token, do you think spies creep around on tip toe in trenchcoats and hats?

      Doing something ostensibly for one reason while concealing another is nothing new. (Although, I will admit it seems like it would be a very difficult task to build in weaknesses without *someone* spotting what you were doing).

    72. Re:Truecrypt by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      Of course you can't rule out the NSA math whizzes have some unknown vulnerability they are keeping under wraps even though it is unlikely: the same vulnerability could potentially expose a lot of US organizations (maybe including parts of government) too. Keeping your own side purposefully weak for unknown potential gains seems like a losing proposition to me. Anyway the charge wasn't weak passwords or even vulnerabilities but a backdoor, a completely baseless and wholly made up claim as far as I can see.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    73. Re:Truecrypt by HanClinto · · Score: 2

      I know you're speaking in jest, but it's a bit more chilling to consider how many of them (such as the 9/11 suicide hijackers) had college degrees -- they were no flunkies.

    74. Re:Truecrypt by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      Modifying the code of an open-source project hardly qualifies as "in secret".

      It does if they can sufficiently obfuscate their intentions, as an earlier poster suggested.

      It just strikes me as strange that people who would be paranoid enough to encrypt their [probably completely banal and uninteresting] data, when told that their encryption might not actually prevent the world's top spies from accessing said data, would brush off the idea as simple paranoia. Make up your mind, folks: Are you paranoid or aren't you?

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    75. Re:Truecrypt by Knuckles · · Score: 1

      As someone said above, getting encryption right is terribly hard, and bugs have gone unnoticed for long stretches of time in the past.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    76. Re:Truecrypt by parlancex · · Score: 1

      If he was a truly a thinking terrorist, he'd have left it unencrypted with a database of thousands of Americans. The aftermath inflicted on those people would be just as bad as anything else he could have done to them.

    77. Re:Truecrypt by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      I hear this his password was his dream for the future: TrumpPalin2012.

    78. Re:Truecrypt by Americano · · Score: 1

      And also, let's be honest: he was a mid-50's man who simply may not have known all that much about computers, and how to choose a good password or use encryption properly. I know a whole lot of 50-somethings (working in software) who I wouldn't trust to properly encrypt stuff and choose a good password without significant outside assistance - i.e., someone else to do it all for you, and then just tell you the password when they're done.

    79. Re:Truecrypt by CFTM · · Score: 1

      That's just nonsense, everyone knows that spies dress up like ninjas!

    80. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If only WikiLeaks got to it first. The results would be the same, but at least we could see the source for ourselves.

    81. Re:Truecrypt by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      "smart terrorists"? I'm not so sure you understand one or the other of those terms.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    82. Re:Truecrypt by Shotgun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Either that, or it is a commentary on the value of a college degree.

      Just sayin'.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    83. Re:Truecrypt by uncqual · · Score: 1

      One would hope that if that if the computers were powered on (and connected to a UPS if the power was out), the Seals were prepared to, and did, extract the machines without powering them off. Surely they brought along their own small customized UPS that they could then plug into the helicopter power supply so the Seal Mark XII UPS didn't need to be heavy or large.

      Come on, I'll bet OBL clicked on the 'cache passwords and key files in memory' option two or three years ago because he was sooo tired of typing 'USA_47_tH3_Satan__no_more_V474446s_for_TH3M, w3_get_them_255' every time he stuck in another USB drive.

      --
      Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading /.
    84. Re:Truecrypt by modecx · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile, bullets are one trick ponies.

      Well, you could carefully line up your targets...

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
    85. Re:Truecrypt by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      The way I look at it I am defending against the average hack trying to get my data. If the NSA/CIA/DHS are after my data then I have vastly bigger problems. Defense in depth coupled with a reality check of how deep that defense has to be is plenty good for me.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    86. Re:Truecrypt by jthill · · Score: 1

      The NSA has told the world

      Link, please.

      --
      As always, all IMO. Insert "I think" everywhere grammatically possible.
    87. Re:Truecrypt by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      No I said "You assume that the NSA can not crack a Truecrypt partition."
      I didn't say how. I am betting on a weak password myself. I am sure that Truecrypt is actually secure but even a strong but short password would allow a crack much less a weak one that falls to a dictionary attack.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    88. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Especially considering that the Obama administration has been sitting on his location since at least August.

      Oh, sorry, it's my tee time. I'll make the decision fast and transparently right after.

    89. Re:Truecrypt by compro01 · · Score: 2

      10s of years? You have no sense of scale.

      The combined Rpeak of the top 10 supercomputers is about 19 teraFLOPS, let's assume that equals to about 40 trillion integer operations per second.

      Let's use 128-bit AES, so there's 2^128 possible keys.

      just to increment through all those keys, never mind checking them, would require those systems for 269,000,000,000,000,000 years. While you'd probably find the right key in about half that time, it will still be long after the last stars go cold and dark.

      Each bit you add to the key length doubles the keyspace. 56-bit DES is trivial to crack with specialized hardware, 128-bit is all but impossible. And never mind 256-bit.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    90. Re:Truecrypt by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      You're comparing the covert intelligence capabilities of The Brazilian National Institute of Criminology and the FBI? While I'm sure the people that work there are smarter than the average 5th grader, I don't think you can really compare them to a black-ops organization.

      The old saying from black-ops operatives is "If you know about it, it is obsolete."

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    91. Re:Truecrypt by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 1

      How about if they are at the bottom of the Indian Ocean?

      I doubt very much he is at the bottom of any ocean. Perhaps I am paranoid, but I expect he is sitting in an interrogation room right now.

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    92. Re:Truecrypt by Syncerus · · Score: 1

      And his password on a small Post-it note stuck to the bottom of his keyboard. ;)

      --
      "Man is nothing without the works of man" -- Helvetius
    93. Re:Truecrypt by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      Eh. Encryption is hard. Doing it right takes a decent amount of work, and a ton of discipline. There will be more mistakes.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    94. Re:Truecrypt by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Haven't priced military grade ammunition lately, have you?

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    95. Re:Truecrypt by hey! · · Score: 2

      It just strikes me as strange that people who would be paranoid enough to encrypt their [probably completely banal and uninteresting] data, when told that their encryption might not actually prevent the world's top spies from accessing said data, would brush off the idea as simple paranoia. Make up your mind, folks: Are you paranoid or aren't you?

      I agree. It would be wise to assume that even if the NSA doesn't have the equivalent of a back door, they could well exploit weakness in the software, especially if the user gets just a tiny bit sloppy and lets his paranoia slip just a bit (e.g. leaving plaintext in the hibernate file).

      What is interesting is to take this line of reasoning back to the apparent claim that our analysts are already going to town on the stuff they picked up in the Waziristan Mansion. Either (a) those claims are bogus or (b) Osama didn't use any kind of encryption or (c) our crypto geeks have a way through the encryption software he used, which could either be a backdoor or a known but undisclosed weakness.

      A is not so interesting and C we've beaten into a temporary coma, but B raises some interesting points.

      Osama's survival for so long so champion at the art of discriminating paranoia. So why didn't he use encryption? If we assume he was acting rationally, it must be because he considered the risk of his computer falling into the hands of the enemy negligible compared to the other risks he was running. Either he got cocky, or he didn't give a damn what happened after he was out of the picture.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    96. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Note to self: Invent gun that shoots wrenches, so we can avoid these problems in the future.

    97. Re:Truecrypt by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Unless you don't have much actionable data. Then you jump in the room to yell, "Boo!!", and watch the culprits as they scatter. Hoping to pick up more info that they leave behind, or just hope they scatter so they'll be less effective, or even go home and stay. There is value is being able to say, "I've got my eye on you."

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    98. Re:Truecrypt by wjousts · · Score: 1

      Let me get this straight: You think the idea that one of the nation's most secretive intelligence agencies would be doing something in secret that allows them to gain intelligence is "tin-foil hat territory"?

      Yes

    99. Re:Truecrypt by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      Is Truecrypt susceptable to a Rainbow Tables attack?

      OK, let's say it takes a month to build the tables on 20TB of drive space. So what? The result would be cracking it in a few days after that.

      There may also be other files on the computer that might help with cracking the password, like a paging file. Truecrypt suffers from the problem of holding the key in memory during use of the encrypted volume. So, if you can find it in memory you have the key. The paging file and any full memory dumps are going to be helpful in this mission.

    100. Re:Truecrypt by jimbolauski · · Score: 2

      He received a spam text that blew him up. spam kills

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    101. Re:Truecrypt by hierophanta · · Score: 1

      no comparison intended - i'm just giving an example of how long the FBI and the Brazilian National Institute of Criminology tried to crack a truecrypt volume and failed. to note: the harddrives were never cracked

    102. Re:Truecrypt by jimbolauski · · Score: 1

      He was there for 6 years and never was bothered if he used encryption at first I'm sure he got tired entering his key and decided to go unencripted.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    103. Re:Truecrypt by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      I was replying originally to tripleevenfall, who most definitely did accuse Truecrypt of having a backdoor. That's what I reject, I do not disagree in the slightest with your assertion that it is crackable when using a weak password.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    104. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The guy was 54 and the latter part of those years was spent in some pretty remote areas. I doubt he had much expertise in computer security.

      So what age group do you think have experience in computer security? (Not that Osama would be likely to but seriously, piss off with the ageism).

    105. Re:Truecrypt by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      The "Seal Mark XII UPS" is also known as a Hotplug from a company originally known as WiebeTech. I guess it is still marketed under that name.

      It is a handy little device for moving computers around without losing power. Nothing real fancy here, just your stock computer forensic seizure device.

    106. Re:Truecrypt by Synn · · Score: 1

      I know you joke, but that's why there's things like deniable encryption.

      I really don't understand why criminals wouldn't use something like that.

    107. Re:Truecrypt by blueg3 · · Score: 2

      I guess I mostly object to the use of "secret" as a synonym for "covert". But people seem to have the impression that it's trivially easy for the NSA to get someone to volunteer on TrueCrypt, have them modify the cryptography, and subtlety insert a weakness that goes unnoticed by everyone else. You can't just show up and make a few commits -- what sort of managers of a crypto product would allow that?

      But yes, you could *covertly* make changes to TrueCrypt that result in a security flaw, but you can't really do it *secretly*, since all your changes have to be made public for them to be included in the open-source project.

      These days, thought, that'd be an odd thing for the NSA to do. Strong encryption is easy to come by these days. To have a reasonable shot at accessing encrypted data, you'd need to affect a lot of projects or have put a weakness into AES itself. But adding weaknesses to products that the US Government intends to use (like AES) is dangerous, because the NSA isn't the only crypto game in town any more. It's so much more common for people to make security practice mistakes (like writing down the password and storing it near the encrypted data, or even using an encrypted container inside a non-encrypted system disk) that you're in a much better position if you keep the encryption products strong and attack their non-encryption security practices.

    108. Re:Truecrypt by sabt-pestnu · · Score: 1

      I imagine that in the event that their physical security failed, they would have much more immediate problems to worry about than the contents of their hard disks. Like assault rifles.

    109. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or he figured if the Americans showed up, he'd be dead anyway and didn't give a shit about what happened after that because he was an egomaniac.

    110. Re:Truecrypt by PCM2 · · Score: 2

      Osama's survival for so long so champion at the art of discriminating paranoia. So why didn't he use encryption? If we assume he was acting rationally, it must be because he considered the risk of his computer falling into the hands of the enemy negligible compared to the other risks he was running. Either he got cocky, or he didn't give a damn what happened after he was out of the picture.

      It's possible. One rule of thumb that's been practiced by revolutionary cells for years is: Keep quiet for 24 hours. They will torture you. Endure the torture. Do everything within your power to tell them nothing... for 24 hours. Then talk. After 24 hours, tell them anything they want to hear. Tell them everything. It won't matter, because you're just one guy, and after 24 hours, nothing in your head will be of any real use to them anymore.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    111. Re:Truecrypt by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      Well, those could be different people, you realize.

      Encryption of course makes sense even if you think the NSA has some backdoor or knows its weaknesses. It's a matter of threat reduction. If you don't encrypt, your neighbor, jealous roommate, ex-girlfriend, a random thief, or the police can trivially access your data. If you make your own encryption, it's more likely that your system has a serious weakness than TrueCrypt has a backdoor. If you use a closed-source product, it would be easier for mistakes and backdoors to be present. It's still possible with TrueCrypt, but it's the lowest-risk alternative. Even if the NSA can access your encrypted data, for a wide variety of relatively minor (or even fairly major crimes), they're unlikely to share that capability with local law enforcement so that people don't find out and fix the problem.

      I personally think that the idea of TrueCrypt, or any open-source product, having an NSA-injected flaw is laughably unlikely. I also realize my data is banal enough that minor encryption hurdles are more than sufficient (to foil snoopers and thieves).

    112. Re:Truecrypt by N0Man74 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Either that, or it is a commentary on the value of a college degree.

      Just sayin'.

      People seem to think that suicide bombers are either idiots, complete nutjobs, or hate-filled extremists. I think the truth is more complicated than that.

      I've heard stories about how at least some these guys are recruited. It often involves deceit, manipulation and heavy cohesion. They end up getting mixed up with the wrong people (and it can start seemingly innocently and naively). By the end, they end up being threatened or blackmailed, and put in a position where they feel like if they don't do it, they may bring danger or shame to family and loved ones.

      I know it's no consolation to their victims, and by no means does it justify their actions, but some of these guys are victims too.

    113. Re:Truecrypt by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      I would not rule out a back door or a weakness. I have not fully audited the code for Truecrypt and I am an old programmers so I know that.
      A. I can make mistakes.
      B. That there is always someone smarter than I am or luckier than I am. I will even bet good money that many of the ones working for the NSA are much smarter than the average bear.
      I will go so far as to say it is very unlikely. I would put a weak password, retrieving the password from a swap file, or some really interesting dedicated hardware as all far more likely.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    114. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Screw Truecrypt...try deciphering Arabic like I had to do for 10 years in the military.

    115. Re:Truecrypt by Hultis · · Score: 1

      Granted, the extra overhead will probably not matter much to him, and he definitely has something to hide (and knows the guys he hides it from has a lot of resources). I'd probably put on my tinfoil hat if I knew a country was spending millions and millions of dollars every month looking for me, and then 4096 bits RSA would probably not seem as overkill as it seems now. So I guess he could very well use that level of encryption, in which case (if he hasn't messed up) the NSA won't be able to crack it.

    116. Re:Truecrypt by lennier · · Score: 2

      Meanwhile, bullets are one trick ponies.

      True, but it's a really impressive trick.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    117. Re:Truecrypt by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Paranoia only works when it's convenient for the paranoid.

    118. Re:Truecrypt by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Premature Detonation?

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    119. Re:Truecrypt by uncqual · · Score: 1

      Yep :) But does it plug into a MH-60K power system and is it Mil Spec? That 'Seal Mark XII UPS' designation is going to cost you some serious extra dough. Defense contractors need to make their money somewhere.

      --
      Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading /.
    120. Re:Truecrypt by bware · · Score: 1

      Where do you get these $0.10 bullets? I haven't been able to find anything that low in years.

    121. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's certainly possible for open source code to have backdoors or weaknesses -- intentional or accidental -- and for nobody to notice it for a long time.

      Sure. How long did the "if (uid=0)" thing go unnoticed?

    122. Re:Truecrypt by rsborg · · Score: 1

      If he didn't encrypt his HDD and it burns terrorists everywhere

      Why use something which can be defeated with a $5 wrench?

      Your pithy comment aside (from US sources, he was offered a chance to surrender, but did not comply), if you are someone like bin Laden, you probably can safely assume the $5 wrench trick (aka harsh interrogation) can by sidestepped by suicide.

      This makes encryption a very useful tool, as the password will literally die with you.

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    123. Re:Truecrypt by blair1q · · Score: 1

      As terrorists go, bin Laden was a suit, not a tech.

      I expect lots of the stuff on his disk is duplicated on paper around his office.

    124. Re:Truecrypt by blair1q · · Score: 1

      If we're smart, there won't be any future terrorists, because we'll stop making people feel so disenfranchised and disconnected that killing their fellow man is the only way to get political attention.

      See: Libertarians.

      Nobody wants their bullshit, but they're not bombing us. If we can bottle how it is that we placate them without actually implementing thier ideas, we'll win the war on terror in perpetuity.

    125. Re:Truecrypt by blair1q · · Score: 2

      The competent ones build the bombs and recruit the suicide bombers to act as mere mules.

      It's not cost-effective to train someone to select targets and build and arm bombs, and then blow them up.

    126. Re:Truecrypt by compro01 · · Score: 1

      Although the NSA can also brute-force any 128-bit key in a few months

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

      Go back to math class and retake that part about exponents. 2^128 is a damn big number of keys. If you put the entire TOP500 to the task of brute forcing a 128-bit key, you might have it done in time to watch the last white dwarf in the universe go cold.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    127. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      U.S. security forces ambushed Bin Laden while he was on the toilet, reading the Islamic equivalent of Playboy, "Burka Bitches." Your joke was better :-)

    128. Re:Truecrypt by gadget+junkie · · Score: 1

      I question how much of a "motherlode" it truly is. This seems to fly in the face counter-intelligence.

      The problem is it will take time to disseminate and act on the intell gained. Most of it is going to be out of data precisely because they announced they had it. Even if they didn't announce it a lot of it was going to be out of date if AQ couldn't verify that the US hadn't compromised the data. Basically, we sent out a huge "LOOK AT ME WE HAVE POSSIBLE INFO ON WHO YOU ARE AND WHAT YOU'RE PLANNING ON DOING" which basically has told all the terrorists to go to ground.

      Good job heroes.

      They should have just made the strike. Loot the hardware. Then covered up the scene with a cruise missile strike. Make it hard to tell the US nabbed the data.

      Or, even if there's no effing computer in there, bring one in, and pretend to have found it. Encrypted or not, the whole organization has to act on the premise that data have been cracked. people that were on the verge of moving stay still, dormant people have to be activated just to see if the organization is crumbling or not, lots of SIGINT opportunities.
      This being slashdot, I assume many will have read Henlein's the moon is a harsh mistress; heavy compartmentalization is a must in underground organizations, but in these cases it works against it, precisely because the purpose is to avoid betrayal from below, not above. Or

      --
      "If a boss demands loyalty, give him integrity. But if he demands integrity, give him loyalty." (John Boyd, 1927-1997)
    129. Re:Truecrypt by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      Because the secret's out so if they don't find what they want with the password you give them, they continue beating you until they get the real password.

    130. Re:Truecrypt by Threni · · Score: 0
    131. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > cohesion

      did you mean: coercion?

    132. Re:Truecrypt by Plekto · · Score: 1

      Let's assume, though, a password that's no longer than 30 characters and uses whatever keys he has on his keyboard and.or special symbols (he's not going to have a password in Chinese/Kanji , after all) ie - at worst, it would be a passage from the Koran or something that he could remember. At best, it's his cat's name or something similar. 50+ year old people who didn't grow up as computer geeks don't remember complicated things.

      Stuff that into a supercomputer and it's probably not even months. Maybe days. You don''t have to decrypt anything - you just need the password and enough patience. And that's assuming he even used anything that sophisticated. Or that the servers that he sent the emails through did the same.

      I give them a few weeks, tops, to have it all nice and pretty in a stack on someone's desk in D.C.

    133. Re:Truecrypt by compro01 · · Score: 1

      Assuming you knew the password was exactly 12 characters. There are lots more (about 2*10^22) passwords up to 12 characters long. If you set Jaguar to the task, you should have it done in two or three decades. Or maybe a month if you had the entire TOP500 at your disposal.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    134. Re:Truecrypt by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

      I heard it works great for Frogger games with your highscore too...

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    135. Re:Truecrypt by ozbird · · Score: 1

      "You've got a nice cluster here, IBM. It'd be a shame if anyone were to ... appropriate it."

    136. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damage by who?

    137. Re:Truecrypt by tftp · · Score: 1

      Either he got cocky, or he didn't give a damn what happened after he was out of the picture.

      When I become the Evil Overlord I will make sure that spies with great difficulty can get into my inner sanctum and copy unencrypted plans of my conquests.

      Of course those plans will be a deception. The real plans will not be in a computer to begin with; but if they must be, I will keep them encrypted on an SD card that I will put into the birdcage of my parrot. The spies will not have time to search for it, and even if they find it the filesystem on the card is empty. Good luck trying to rebuild a file out of a million sectors, all filled with random bytes. But it's easy for me to do because the key to that is a certain very long quotation from my Sacred Book that I just remember where it starts.

    138. Re:Truecrypt by mundanetechnomancer · · Score: 1

      the military buys them in slightly higher bulk then you do

    139. Re:Truecrypt by Opportunist · · Score: 0

      You assume that a SEAL can actually use a computer sensibly? It's not really part of their core skill set...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    140. Re:Truecrypt by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      So he finally can do for real what he only could do figuratively during his career. Nice to see a man finally gets to do what he loves.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    141. Re:Truecrypt by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I guess the military gets a quantity discount.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    142. Re:Truecrypt by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      So what? We've been beating the dead horse called terrorism for a decade now.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    143. Re:Truecrypt by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't think terrorists are dumb. I mean, you're dealing with a bunch of people who have a decentralized organization structure, yet manage to work fairly coherent, and they manage to fight a war against a military power with exponentially more means, both manpower and firepower, at their hands for over 10 years by now. WW2 didn't take that long...

      Never underestimate your enemy. It's a surefire way to lose a war.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    144. Re:Truecrypt by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Erh... what gives you the idea that there's anyone (in power) that wants to END that war? How do you plan to justify military spending without an enemy?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    145. Re:Truecrypt by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      You've seen the corpse?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    146. Re:Truecrypt by WorBlux · · Score: 1

      Sheesh, you only need to kill a guy once.

    147. Re:Truecrypt by DocHoncho · · Score: 1

      But remember, time is money! In these situations you have to compare throughput. How many deaths per hour can be achieved with a wrench versus a bullet? Chances are you pay the thug doing the killing far more than it costs for a handful of bullets.

      --
      Celebrity worship is a poor substitute for Deity worship and costs more to boot.
    148. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You assume that someone like, say, Bruce Schneier doesn't take a regular look around the code to check that the open source security isn't being tampered with by "The Man".

    149. Re:Truecrypt by mywhitewolf · · Score: 1

      yes, but the tick is a show stopper :)

    150. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wrong anology. In Al Qaeda "fan-shitting" is actually a common method of celebration. It's often done when there are insufficient bullets to shoot up in the air.

    151. Re:Truecrypt by mywhitewolf · · Score: 1

      If your paranoid enough to use Truecrypt, then I'd guess you'd be paranoid enough to check the source code.

    152. Re:Truecrypt by praxis · · Score: 1

      An interesting read, thanks.

    153. Re:Truecrypt by realperseus · · Score: 1

      You assume that a SEAL can actually use a computer sensibly? It's not really part of their core skill set...

      Err, in general, Navy Seals are a lot smarter than your average squids...

      --
      "Trusting every aspect of our lives to a giant computer was the smartest thing we ever did.." Homer Simpson
    154. Re:Truecrypt by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      "that's secure against a brute-force attack ... well, except the sort of brute force attack where a Navy SEAL team kicks down your door and shoots you in the face while your computer is running with the TrueCrypt volume mounted - then it's easy. Hooah!"

      I see a beautiful quote there to put in a signature. Gotta shave it a little to fit anywhere - care to repeat yourself more concisely?

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    155. Re:Truecrypt by physicsphairy · · Score: 1

      The National Security Agency's job is not to gather indiscriminate information, as you seem to infer, but rather, to promote national security. Part of the actual day-to-day function of the NSA is to try to provide domestic data security, and inserting backdoors in encryption products used by Americans would be working in blatant opposition to that interest.

      America is still at the front of the race--scientifically, technologically, economically, militarily--and consequently is fighting a bit of a one-sided battle regarding espionage--it's really awesome for the Chinese to learn about our secret new stealth fighters and microprocessors. It's not so interesting for us to steal schematics of the 5-10 year old technology they copied from us. Thus, introducing general security holes would be a pretty stupid move on our part.

      But maybe *you* are working for the NSA. Developing powerful encryption software and spreading rumors to make other countries too paranoid to use it seems much more effective than export restrictions.

    156. Re:Truecrypt by daremonai · · Score: 1
      We learned that we fall for urban myths all the time. That "fiasco" never happened.

      In a separate case, Orrin Hatch inadvertently revealed on September 12,2001 that we had been monitoring the communications of bin Laden's associates, though whether that had any effect on anything isn't clear.

    157. Re:Truecrypt by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      If only our military remembers how to decode ROT-13.

    158. Re:Truecrypt by compro01 · · Score: 1

      Correction, that should be petaFLOPS, not teraFLOPS, and 40 quadrillion, not trillion, integer ops.

      Also mistyped my years figure. That should be 269,000,000,000,000 (269 trillion) years, not 269 quadrillion. The stars comment remains accurate.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    159. Re:Truecrypt by Americano · · Score: 1

      But he may not be the ONLY guy you need to kill!

    160. Re:Truecrypt by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Everyone is also assuming it isn't written on a piece of paper under his mousepad or keyboard. Or on a sticky on the monitor.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    161. Re:Truecrypt by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      Except they have no way to know if there even is a hidden partition. What are they going to do? Just continue beating everyone indefinitely? How do they know the suspect hasn't hidden another hidden encrypted partition inside the first one? It's beatings all the way down. I can imagine the Marquis de Sade's erection rising out of the earth like a tumescent volcano at this news.

    162. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TrueCrypt can be broken go buy a nice graphics card and you will find out. The U.S. is the code makers and breakers, or in this case algorithmic breakers

    163. Re:Truecrypt by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      Just as soon as I finish building my personal bathysphere.

    164. Re:Truecrypt by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily. I'm paranoid enough to encrypt my drives, but not enough to check it (though I did compile it from source, gentoo, but of course we know from Trusting Trust that compiling even carefully audited source code is no real protection).

      I encrypt my drives so that my tax/bank records are safe if the laptop gets stolen, and so no one can tamper with personally important data. I'm trying to fend off identity theft (and angry ex-girlfriends), not the NSA. Trusting everything top to bottom isn't necessary for all purposes.

    165. Re:Truecrypt by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      Except that very few people actually use a 128-bit passphrase (either to generate the symmetrical key or to protect the private RSA key). So saying that 128bit or 256bit keys are super secure is misleading. Yes the old 56 bit DES is trivial to crack, it only has 2^56 possibles (and the birthday paradox cuts a bit off of that). So if we assume that you can check 40 trillion keys per second (which is optimistic):

      2^55 = 36,028,797,018,963,968
      / 40,000,000,000,000
      = 900 seconds
      (1800 seconds if you discard the birthday paradox)

      The problem is that a lot of people will just use a dictionary word, which puts it at around 1:10,000 possible keys if you use common words or 1:300,000 if you use an uncommon word. Or they'll chain together two or three words. Which is (300,000 ^ 3) or:

      27000000000000000
      / 40,000,000,000,000
      = 675 sec

      If you're lucky, they use a completely random 8 character password, we'll assume each digit can be 1 of 80 possibles. That works out as:

      80^8 = 1677721600000000
      / 40,000,000,000,000
      = 42 sec

      Ooops. Not so secure if you only use 8 characters or less in your password / passphrase. In fact, it's so weak that you can probably build a machine for under $5k that can crack any 8 character password within a month or so. Or build a larger array, since passwords can easily be checked in a parallel fashion.

      The odds do get better if you use at least a 12-character, completely random password.

      80^12 = 68719476736000000000000
      / 40,000,000,000,000
      = 1717986918 sec

      Then you at least has something large enough to be difficult. Even for a determined attacker who can use all 100 top supercomputers along with a few hundred thousand desktops with NVIDIA CUDA.

      All of this, however, assumes that there is no rate-limiting in place. Most SSH or login systems don't allow constant retries of an account's password at much above 1 try per second (or even 1 per 10 seconds). That has a drastic effect on how long it takes an attacker to guess the password (and 8-character passwords, as long as they are random are okay). Account lockout will usually happen before the attacker guesses the password.

      But if an attacker has the *hashed* version of the password, knows how the hash is calculated, and lots of time on their hands, then anything of 8 characters or less is extremely vulnerable and you have to go up to 10-12 characters now to protect things. An example of this would be someone managing to swipe your /etc/shadow file, or grabbing a hash off the network in a situation where the hashed password is sent to the server (instead of a challenge/response system). Or a physical intrusion where they manage to grab the password hashes.

      (Yes I realized that 40 trillion passwords per second is over the top. But for $1M, you can probably build something right now that checks close to a billion hashes per second.)

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    166. Re:Truecrypt by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Damage by who?

      Damage by people who thought it was inappropriate for the NSA to be tracking satellite phone communications to find these guys.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    167. Re:Truecrypt by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      It just strikes me as strange that people who would be paranoid enough to encrypt their [probably completely banal and uninteresting] data, when told that their encryption might not actually prevent the world's top spies from accessing said data, would brush off the idea as simple paranoia. Make up your mind, folks: Are you paranoid or aren't you?

      As another poster said, it's about threat reduction. I'm not trying to hide my (admittedly banal and uninteresting data) from the NSA. I'm trying to hide it from the guy who steals my laptop (which carries my bank and tax records, among other financial details) off an airport chair when I'm stupidly not looking. I'm trying to hide it from my angry ex-girlfriend and other petty foes who might (and in the past, have) caused mischief for me by getting into my computer. If the NSA comes after my stuff, I don't see much point in worrying about the data (I have no data worth more than life). If I were a Chinese dissident or similar I'd be more concerned about it. As is, basic drive encryption with dm-crypt and luks is good enough for my needs.

    168. Re:Truecrypt by Kjella · · Score: 1

      You haven't a clue. Assuming I add a little noise so your dictionary attack fails (like internaXtionalL33TspeakerZ) then lower + upper + 0-9 = ~6 bits/character. At 30 characters that's 180 bits strength, good luck with that.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    169. Re:Truecrypt by edjs · · Score: 1

      Or perhaps worse, there is no hidden encrypted partition but your lead-pipe cryptoanalyst assumes there is?

    170. Re:Truecrypt by subreality · · Score: 1

      I agree that the possibility exists, but historically, the NSA has been on the side of actually improving crypto: In the development of DES they supplied a new set of S-boxes. It wasn't until 25 years later that their purpose became apparent when differential cryptanalysis became public knowledge.

      Whether that extends from standards to applications, and whether that's still their attitude today is certainly questionable, but I think it'd be very risky move on their part. Even if they obfuscate the weakness well, there'd be a chance they'd get caught. That would permanently destroy their credibility to the point they could no longer make legitimate suggestions for improvements.

    171. Re:Truecrypt by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      It often involves deceit, manipulation and heavy cohesion.

      Sounds like those welding classes came in handy.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    172. Re:Truecrypt by DaleSwanson · · Score: 1

      Anyone got the numbers on how long a top 10 supercomputer would take to decrypt a strong encryption scheme?

      The top publicly known super computer has a peak of almost 5 million GFlops. If we generously assume that each floating point operation = 1 key try, that gives 5x10^15 trys per second. Some spreadsheet work shows that would crack a 64 bit key in under an hour, but a 128 bit key would take 10^15 years. 256 bit would take 10^53 years.

      If we assume that the NSA has even greater power to throw at this, or that power will increase with time it still doesn't make much difference. It takes about 2^50 more power before it becomes feasible, i.e., less than a decade. So that is either 50 years of computing power doubling ever year or the NSA having supercomputers about 10^15 times more powerful. 256 bit remains secure well past 100 years of annual doubling (or 10^30 more power).

      Or course, all this assumes one uses the full keyspace available. An 8 character password isn't 256 bit, even if 256 bit encryption is used. If one used a random mixture of digits upper/lower case letters and special chars, there are 95 possibilities easily made on a normal keyboard. 95^20 ~= 2^128, so one would need about 20 random characters to have 128 bits.

    173. Re:Truecrypt by Plekto · · Score: 1

      Think about the sort of password your mother or father is likely to use. It's going to be a short phrase or two words at most, and maybe 2-3 substitute letter of "noise". Unless the "noise" is unicode garbage, changing an E to a 3 won't make one bit of difference in a brute-force attack. The 30 characters would be an absolute upper limit. I bet it's less than 15 characters like 99% of people tend to use.

    174. Re:Truecrypt by Billlagr · · Score: 1

      Is he working as a SEAL then? Something of a hobby perhaps

    175. Re:Truecrypt by Billlagr · · Score: 1

      I bet if he played Dodgeball, he could dodge a wrench. Or a bag of wrenches.

    176. Re:Truecrypt by Jeremi · · Score: 2

      This makes encryption a very useful tool, as the password will literally die with you.

      On the other hand, if there's anyone who can crack the encryption without the password, it's probably the US government. Perhaps the common encryption methods are mathematically strong enough to withstand money-is-no-object brute-force, and perhaps the implementations don't have any unpublicized weaknesses (or secret back doors) ... but I wouldn't want to bet my evil terrorism network on that.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    177. Re:Truecrypt by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      You assume that a SEAL can actually use a computer sensibly?

      Maybe, or maybe not. But I'm pretty sure he'd be able to deliver the computer to someone who can.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    178. Re:Truecrypt by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      Ha, if the NSA needs the computing power they could go to IBM and say "How would you like the awesome PR opportunity of letting us borrow one of your blue gene clusters for a few months?

      I think it's probably safe to assume that the NSA has all the computing power they feel they need (and probably much more than IBM does).

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    179. Re:Truecrypt by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      I bet it's less than 15 characters like 99% of people tend to use.

      You underestimate Mr. bin Ladin. He actually left laptops with TrueCrypt partitions full of only random binary lying around, just to drive the NSA batty.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    180. Re:Truecrypt by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Actually, that's closer to $0.30 to $0.40, depending on the caliber. Not like it matters... :P

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    181. Re:Truecrypt by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Don't make the mistake of thinking that fanatics cannot be smart. They shut down their intelligence only when it comes to the object of their belief.

    182. Re:Truecrypt by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Yea? and the 0.01% who do that, are probably a hell of a lot smarter than the 99.99% who don't - and those are the ones who matter.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    183. Re:Truecrypt by tbird81 · · Score: 1

      Let me get this straight: You think the idea that one of the nation's most secretive intelligence agencies would be doing something in secret that allows them to gain intelligence is "tin-foil hat territory"? How do you know which contributors to TrueCrypt are working for the NSA? How could you ever know?

      The answer is the same reason that we "know" anything - because the chance of any alternative is so incredibly low as to be negligible. It's the same reason I know that God does not exist.

      How do you know what TrueCrypt contributers work for the NSA? Well, it's incredibly unlikely. And would require all sorts of difficult lies and secrecy - and it's not easy to maintain situations like that.

      But you go on, shredding your bank statements then burning the shreds - because some nerd fantasy you have involves people spending excessive time and resources for little real gain. One of the problems with being a nerd, other than the social handicap, is that predictions of human behaviour can be extremely inaccurate. (e.g. That girl will think I'm really cool if I act all elusive and don't speak to her.)

      So, to summarise, how do you know that NSA doesn't infiltrate open source? Because it makes sense.

    184. Re:Truecrypt by tbird81 · · Score: 1

      I am shocked at the number of really smart people that don't know the difference between week and weak.

      He does. He used it correctly throughout the rest of his comment. The mistake he made was a typo - he typed the wrong thing. People make mistakes.

      But you can just go chuckle about it to yourself, and masturbate over your knowledge of 4th grade homophones.

    185. Re:Truecrypt by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      You would be shocked how many really smart people don't know the difference between a week and a strong password.

      These would be the people I have to reset their mail password for every seven days because they forgot it and then complain because I can't make it the name of their dog, right? :-D

    186. Re:Truecrypt by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      +5 Adamantine Returning Bullet of Greater Terrorist Bane. Problem solved. Jesus, look in the rulebooks every now and then...

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    187. Re:Truecrypt by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      He used a clever encryption scheme he developed on his own. It uses a spreadsheet...

    188. Re:Truecrypt by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Yeah all those doctors in the UK for a start. Didn't any of them think, you know this is a real waste of an education.

    189. Re:Truecrypt by lxs · · Score: 1

      You know you've read too many Tom Clancy novels when...

    190. Re:Truecrypt by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

      The answer is the same reason that we "know" anything - because the chance of any alternative is so incredibly low as to be negligible. It's the same reason I know that God does not exist.

      You 'know' that god doesn't exist, that's a probability calculation I'd like to see, Honestly that statement is as absurd as a lot of the things that religious people believe in.

      Lack of evidence != Low probability != Lack of existence.

      Also 'God' is not a well defined being, or is your definition of god an actual old man with a white beard and robes sitting on a real cloud somewhere.

      Do you think this universe just randomly happened? - how does such a complicated structure come to exist? - to rule out the possibility of an external creator is erroneous because it may not be possible to know.

      NSA infiltration is unlikely you say - but you don't say why it is unlikely.

      NSA infiltration is hard, so they wouldn't try you say - by this logic, spys would have never existed anywhere ever.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    191. Re:Truecrypt by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      I really don't understand why criminals wouldn't use something like that.

      These techniques are known to smart people and we are lucky that there are few smart people in the terrorism trade.

    192. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its not like they can beat him with a $5 wrench anymore to get the passwords out either.

      http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/security.png

    193. Re:Truecrypt by horza · · Score: 1

      Even your most basic password cracker from the 80's has heuristic rules built in to deal with that. If '3' is only ever used as a substitute for 'E' then that does not add anything significant in the way of strength. The point Piekto is making, however, is that a non-computer literate man in his mid-50's is unlikely to use l33t speak hence reducing the time significantly.

      Phillip.

    194. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's unlikely to try to smuggle code into these Free Software projects. It's unlikely because it's not very effective AND because we don't have any evidence that they've tried to do this, let alone ever succeeded.

      Spies do exist, we know because we keep catching them. During WW2 the British literally caught all the German spies. They couldn't know that for sure of course until the war was over, but German intelligence in the UK was actually being run entirely by British counter-intelligence in Whitehall.

      If you said "here are six Free Software projects, which have caught the NSA tampering in their source code" then you would have something. If you said "Here is my personal examination of this critical code block, showing that the changes made by this person are subtly wrong in a way that introduces a hole the NSA could take advantage of" that would be worth at least a second glance. But what you have is just bluster.

      The Israelis could have a mole machine that would tunnel from Jerusalem to Moscow in six hours. China might have a secret miniature death ray built into all its space vehicles so that it can destroy the entire US Eastern Seaboard in a single button push. Wales might be controlled by giant space ants with a powerful psychic aura that prevents anyone from seeing them. But all these possibilities are so unlikely we can ignore them. The same goes for "secret NSA backdoor" bluster.

    195. Re:Truecrypt by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      He further assumes that Truecrypt does not provide a backdoor to NSA for this in the first place.

      Truecrypt is open source. No, I haven't looked at it myself, but it only takes one person to rat such a thing out. It's not probable that nobody has seen it yet, save the ones in on the conspiracy. Possible yes, but highly unlikely.

      If anyone discovered the backdoor, the NSA would either recruit or disappear them. You need to work on your conspiracy theories a bit before messing with people who are proud to wear tinfoil baseball cap liners.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    196. Re:Truecrypt by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      You would be shocked how many really smart people don't know the difference between a week and a strong password.

      A week's seven days, and a strong password has, like, numbers and dollar signs and shit in it. Does that make me really smart?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    197. Re:Truecrypt by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      There were no phone lines or other communication lines going into the compound. I'm wondering if he was tethering his iPhone. AT&T probably gave him away. In all seriousness though, I'm wondering what kind of data access he had and if he was at all computer savvy or if all his data came from sneaker -net.

      Hey, the guy's dead, you don't have to slander him by suggesting he was an Apple fanboy (as well as a dangerous terrorist mastermind.)

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    198. Re:Truecrypt by muckracer · · Score: 1

      > if you are someone like bin Laden, you probably can safely
      > assume the $5 wrench trick (aka harsh interrogation) can by
      > sidestepped by suicide.

      Yeah. That's why he shot himself in the head! Twice!!

    199. Re:Truecrypt by muckracer · · Score: 1

      > > if you are someone like bin Laden, you probably can safely
      > > assume the $5 wrench trick (aka harsh interrogation) can by
      > > sidestepped by suicide.

      > Yeah. That's why he shot himself in the head! Twice!!

      Of course, that's still pretty lame compared to the at least 35 times Peter Gutmann would have used... :-D

    200. Re:Truecrypt by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Criminals and terrorists are generally not the smartest lot. Sure, there are a VERY small handful of exceptional masterminds, but most are morons who can barely read and write--much less analyze source code.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    201. Re:Truecrypt by muckracer · · Score: 1

      > As is, basic drive encryption with dm-crypt and luks is good enough
      > for my needs.

      As is, basic drive encryption with dm-crypt and luks and a matching 128bit+ passphrase is good enough for my needs.

      TFIFY!

    202. Re:Truecrypt by muckracer · · Score: 1

      > You would be shocked how many really smart people don't know
      > the difference between a week and a strong password.

      But there's certainly a correlation: If it takes you a week to enter your passphrase, it's probably pretty good! :-)

    203. Re:Truecrypt by Americano · · Score: 1

      Do you know how much the mats cost for that enchant?!

    204. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't priced them lately, but in my experience back in the '90s, real cartridges cost over a buck apiece retail. I got some crap 7.62 FMJ from China that cost about .50 each once but they were on sale, too. I don't remember where, but I read once that SEALs use the really good stuff, custom grade.

    205. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah it's incredibly difficult to .. verify that the downloadable binaries match the compiled source code .. if only someone could invent a mechanism for that ..

      it could be called .. weed .. or hash .. or something

    206. Re:Truecrypt by Troed · · Score: 1

      Although the NSA can also brute-force any 128-bit key in a few months

      I lol'd

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brute-force_attack#Theoretical_limits

    207. Re:Truecrypt by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      True, but then again, we just took down a boss - perhaps there is one in the loot.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    208. Re:Truecrypt by Cytotoxic · · Score: 1

      The Post link doesn't support it's urban myth contentions. In fact, it pretty much says that all the senior officials from that time agree that it is true. It has a lot of fuddled logic about other publications saying he was using a sat phone - but the real connection is "cruise missiles were dispatched to the location revealed by his sat phone". The entire last 20% of the article is various officials saying that their information confirms the connection. (although it may or may not be a single publication) In fact, the biggest thing the article seems to wish to accomplish is to exonerate the Times for running the story. Ok, Times, you are Exonerated. The conduit for the leak is perfectly irrelevant.

      Money quote:

      "You got me," said Benjamin, who was director for counterterrorism on the National Security Council staff at the time. "That was the understanding in the White House and the intelligence community. The story ran and the lights went out."

      More to the point, if your enemy is revealing sensitive information to you, don't tip your hand and let him know. That's true in poker and in war. And it is true whatever the reason for Bin-Laden's eschewing electronic communications. The only source in the story with any sense was "CIA spokesman Tom Crispell" who "declined to comment, saying the question involves intelligence sources and methods. "

      I think it is really cool that I know that we followed Bin-Laden's most trusted couriers until they led us to him. It is fun to know about things like that. I also think it probably isn't the best thing for our intelligence agencies that this fact is public knowledge. Unless, of course, that is just a disinformation campaign designed to further disrupt their operations..... in which case: well played!

    209. Re:Truecrypt by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      The criminals and terrorists are not the 0.01% I am referring to. I mean the crypto people who would read and understand the code.

      Eg, there would be no reason for me to even bother trying. I couldn't spot a flaw in that type of code if it punched me in the face. That said, a PhD in mathematics and cryptography would actually stand a chance.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    210. Re:Truecrypt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is there any sliver of respect left over to damage?

    211. Re:Truecrypt by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      TFIFY!

      What?

      As is, basic drive encryption with dm-crypt and luks and a matching 128bit+ passphrase is good enough for my needs.

      Eh, I use an encrypted 128bit keyfile, but whatever floats your particular boat.

  9. Was it full of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was it full of pr0n?
    Or do they mean a different type of mother-lode?

    Either that or all the PSN stolen account data! :)

  10. I bet he used a Mac by jongalbreath · · Score: 1

    No reason in particular, I just think it'd be funny to see him hunched over in front of an iMac. Or playing Angry Birds on his iPad.

    1. Re:I bet he used a Mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They wasted years looking for him when they could have traced him through his itunes account.

  11. The American Way by RogueRat · · Score: 0, Insightful

    This is simply another step in the American plan to stop all terrorism, everywhere. Forever. I have a dream that we will someday be able to enjoy our Philly Cheese Steak sandwiches and apple pie without fear of being bombed by suicidal Jihad warriors!

    1. Re:The American Way by Montezumaa · · Score: 1

      Until the TSA decides to fondle your apple pie.

      In all seriousness, the "War on Terror" will be never-ending. The "war" is just too lucrative for intelligence services, and really the government, as a whole. The "War on Terror" will just be like the "War on Drugs"; it actually already is just like the "War on Drugs".

      It all as become a way to perpetuate the existence of the US Government, as well as state government, as they all exist currently. Why would any of our government give up the ability to continually spy on us, the citizenry? Even if the United States Government killed every last foreign "terrorist", it would turn to "home-grown terrorist". I mean, any one of us could potentially be one.

      I own many firearms, as well as other equipment that would allow me to hold my own against a small incursion of military troops.. Perhaps people, like myself, who are law-abiding citizens that also own firearms, will become the reason that the liberal and/or simply pro-government(since even "conservative" government in the US are starting to all be more liberal) ultimate utopia does not exist. "We cling to our guns and refuse to accept that government knows best and only does what is needed to "protect us"". Fuck that. Government does not provide personal security; that is my responsibility.

      The simply fact is that any administration and congress, from the last few decades, on to the foreseeable future, will always look for ways to expand government and strip away our rights. Sure, some government members will look to speed this process along and they will get called out on it. Those are not the people to be the most worried about; it is the people that look to strip away rights incrementally. You know, "for the children" or "for the public good", or even "to maintain the peace, security, and prosperity of the people of the United States".

      Obama is not the first, and he certainly will not be the last. Looking at the possible 2012 contenders, just for the position of US President, the pool is severely lacking. Obama has failed in so many ways, and no one that looks to challenge him appears to be any better. It has almost become the ultimate reality TV show for who might challenge President Obama.

      The TSA will continue to grope those dumb enough or required, as a matter of business, to use the airlines for travel. The airlines will continue to financially rape those that do go through the essentially rape process of the TSA and press onwards to fly. The US Government will continue to monitor our communications, no matter how many times they tell you that only do so after "court approval". Until the US citizenry stops allowing this horseshit and votes in people that will actually do what they promise and stop the current stupidity, nothing will ever change.

      It will only get worse.

    2. Re:The American Way by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      This is simply another step in the American plan to stop all terrorism, everywhere. Forever.

      If that's the goal, then it's one step forward after a long and arduous march back. How many civilians died in Iraq from coalition air strikes and other "collateral damage"? How many of their relatives will hate Americans for that reason alone, even if they didn't have an ax to grind before?

  12. Where's wiki-leaks? by HockeyPuck · · Score: 1

    In all seriousness, how long until this finds it's way onto Wikileaks?

    1. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hopefully a while. War intelligence does not belong in the public domain.

    2. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Yeah, too bad we aren't legally at war with anyone.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    3. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by men0s · · Score: 1

      I was going to give the Hopefully a while answer but for completely different reasons.

      They stated that they have hundreds of people going through it. If one of those hundreds leaked it, I imagine it wouldn't take many resources to figure out who it was. I mean, these guys just killed the Hide and Seek World Champion; surely a mole in their own group would be much easier to locate and neutralize.

      Also, is this information relevant? With Wikileaks, lots of the information and cables were in the vein of what the United States government was doing or saying without letting the US citizens know. The data that is contained on some spinning platters in OBL's compound could be, well, anything. It might not even be pertinent to any country's citizens.

    4. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by Sectoid_Dev · · Score: 1

      I would like to read what they find someday, but I think it's reasonable to have to wait 10 years before doing so.

    5. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by DaScribbler · · Score: 1

      About as long as it would take for some schmoe to decide it's worth signing his/her own death warrant.

    6. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by jjohnson · · Score: 1

      What does "legally" have to do with "war"?

      --
      Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
    7. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by Cytotoxic · · Score: 1

      Not death warrant. "Sit around naked in a cold, bare concrete cell in total solitary confinement for the next 60 years" warrant. That's the precedent anyway. Sounds like you might spend some of your 60 years wishing it had been a death warrant.

      I dunno, maybe they gave the guy his clothes back by now. I haven't followed it that closely.

    8. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by cfalcon · · Score: 1

      Do you need to go to war to round up a terrorist?

      This isn't like, a suspected terrorist, or someone held without rights or a trial, this is the admitted boss of a terrorist organization, who gloated when he killed civilians.

      No war required.

    9. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by mr1911 · · Score: 1

      Countries go to war with one another. You can't go to war with a terror organization, legally (whatever the hell that means with respect to war) or not.

      It is unfortunate that the spin machines call everything "the war on [insert whatever you find unfavorable here]". It makes the duller members of society think that Congress had declared war somewhere.

      --
      This post comes with a double-your-money-back guarantee!
      Any offense taken to this post is at your sole discretion.
    10. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by smelch · · Score: 1

      You added nothing to this conversation except for to make yourself look like a complete and total douchebag by arguing a detail that makes no difference to the situation. War does not always mean the act of congress as defined in the Constitution. See the war on drugs, the war on poverty and the war on terror.

      --
      If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
    11. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      years. probably decades. what a silly question.

    12. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by DaScribbler · · Score: 1

      I'm would think that if somebody were to post a juicy tidbit of Al Qaeda intel, the member(s) of AQ who come calling won't be putting much thought into locking the person up.

    13. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Pretty sure there hasn't been a legal (by Congress) declaration of War since WWII.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    14. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by Jaysyn · · Score: 0

      Words mean things jackass, stop being an idiot. If we aren't at war than this isn't "war" intelligence.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    15. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I would applaud Julian for getting his hands on this data from the collective clutch of the CIA (something that very few KGB agents were able to do during the cold war), I would ask him to delay release of each bit of data until the person that data is about is captured. Then release the corresponding data points about them so we can make up our own minds about the validity of said capture. To release it beforehand would completely invalidate that data, and even announcing they found the data is going to cause a whole crapload of terrorists to burn hard drives and move if they haven't already upon hearing of their leader's death.

    16. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by smelch · · Score: 1

      The concept of war predates the US legal definition. Since then it has also been used extensively to mean things other than the legal definition. Remember those examples I gave you? Please, do tell, how does this intelligence differ from other "war" intelligence, including any information we had on the Germans, English or Japanese before we officially declared war in WWII. Please, enlighten me how the difference between what you term "War Intelligence" and what the OP described as "War Intelligence" has any difference in terms of what it means in relation to the conversation at hand. Specifically if the information should be leaked. Please, go ahead. I'm waiting for you.

      --
      If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
    17. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by Coren22 · · Score: 2

      Um...congress did declare war...

      Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq
      Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists

      Or do you believe that an Authorization for the Use of Military Force isn't equivalent to a Declaration of War?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    18. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by Coren22 · · Score: 1
      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    19. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      One of the possibly penalties for treason while at war is the firing squad, it would not surprise me if someone got that penalty.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    20. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by ffejie · · Score: 1

      In the US, Congress has to declare war for the country to "legally" be at war.

      The grandparent seems to be mistaken that the US isn't at war. PL 107-40 specifically gives the military authority to use force against those who committed the terrorist acts of September 11th, 2001. The US is legally at war with terrorists, as difficult as they may be to define.

      This is counter to what is going on in Libya with Operation Odyssey Dawn, which has not been authorized by Congress, but instead is defined as a limited scope operation, which does not need Congress' approval. There is criticism of this, and if the US operation should expand to regime change, would probably have to be authorized by Congress.

      --
      Disagreeing with me does not mean you get to mod me troll.
    21. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      This.... Many politically motivated people tend to forget that use of military force was authorized by congress.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    22. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should try holding your breath while you wait, moron.

    23. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      We invaded several countries with ground forces. Yes, war required.

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
    24. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by snl2587 · · Score: 1

      The U.S. is at war. Congress authorized the military action.

      In your own oft-repeated words, stop being an idiot.

    25. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by jjohnson · · Score: 1

      I'm asserting that, as a practical matter, the legalities surrounding war are niceties bearing little relation to how wars start, are fought, and ended.

      --
      Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
    26. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by jjohnson · · Score: 1

      You demonstrate my point for me: legalities about war are window dressing with little practical effect on whether the U.S. goes to war, or finishes it. They're a post facto fig leaf to the decision.

      --
      Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
    27. Re:Where's wiki-leaks? by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

      In all seriousness, how long until this finds it's way onto Wikileaks?

      What if Bin Laden already had a copy of the entirety of Wikileaks? If his hard drive would be leaked to Wikileaks, you'd get a Wikileaks leak that... included a copy of Wikileaks. You know, a leak like that might not do wonders to the allegations of excessive self-importance of the project.

  13. Unfortunately... by MetalliQaZ · · Score: 2

    ... he wasn't actively commanding his organization since going into hiding. However I would hope that his data contains names of most of the AQ leadership, so perhaps some new names will come to light. It would be nice if the location of his #2 was discovered and exploited.

    --
    "Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
    1. Re:Unfortunately... by alta · · Score: 1

      his #2? I would think that is probably in some nearby hole. I don't think they have a municipal sewer system there.

      --
      Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
    2. Re:Unfortunately... by brainboyz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Imagine the shitstorm if several names turn up from the recently re-established governments.

    3. Re:Unfortunately... by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Good point, I wonder if any Pakistani officials are sweating right now.

    4. Re:Unfortunately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think that's why this information was made public (political fallout) rather than kept quiet and acted upon.

    5. Re:Unfortunately... by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

      It would be nice if the location of his #2 was discovered and exploited.

      Why would you wasnt his #2. Are you into Coprophilia? Maybe that's how Al Queda is being funded?

      --
      Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
    6. Re:Unfortunately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... he wasn't actively commanding his organization since going into hiding. However I would hope that his data contains names of most of the AQ leadership, so perhaps some new names will come to light. It would be nice if the location of his #2 was discovered and Exploded.

      Fixed that for you.

    7. Re:Unfortunately... by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Even if he wasn't actively commanding - that doesn't mean he wasn't consulting and guiding or being kept in the loop. The courier that turned out to be the key to locating bin Laden almost certainly had to be carrying something worth bin Laden taking the risk of maintaining a communications link considering the measures he took to sever other links.

    8. Re:Unfortunately... by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Indeed, you could probably blackmail quite a few people by simply suggesting that you have evidence linking them to OBL now, even if you don't. If they fall for it then they obviously had something to hide.

    9. Re:Unfortunately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      pakistani?

      pft

      saudis. chinese. anti-us eurofags... even us citizens.

      pakky mooj will be the least interesting; just more hellfire fodder

    10. Re:Unfortunately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be nice if the location of his #2 was discovered and exploited.

      From Stratfor:

      It [al Qaeda] clearly foresaw the possibility that one of its apex leaders could be taken out and planned accordingly. This means keeping bin Laden and his deputy, Egyptian physician Ayman al-Zawahiri, in different locations and having a succession plan. There is also very little question that al-Zawahiri is firmly in command of the core group. Even prior to bin Laden's death, many analysts considered al-Zawahiri to be the man in charge of most of the operational aspects of the al Qaeda group - the "chief executive officer," with bin Laden being more of a figurehead or "chairman of the board."

    11. Re:Unfortunately... by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      Yes, blackmailing suspected members of lethal terrorist organizations looks like a profitable and risk-free venture :)

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    12. Re:Unfortunately... by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

      Good point, I wonder if any Pakistani officials are sweating right now.

      at this moment, it's 88. But later it's going to be 110. So if those Pakistani officials aren't sweating now, they're going to be!

    13. Re:Unfortunately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, he was communicating sporadically with the rest of AQ via letter. That was how they burned him; They finally tracked down his courier and then followed him to that house.

    14. Re:Unfortunately... by Knuckles · · Score: 1

      People have still not understood that Al Quada never was a hierarchical organization with global reach? Oh my.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    15. Re:Unfortunately... by scragz · · Score: 1

      By exploited, do you mean murdered?

    16. Re:Unfortunately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why are you interested in his #2? errr

    17. Re:Unfortunately... by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Yes, blackmailing suspected members of lethal terrorist organizations looks like a profitable and risk-free venture :)

      Well, if you're the US government you're already on their target list already, and the fact that you're still alive means that they lack the means to do anything to you for the most part.

      If you're Joe Citizen, then yes, unless you also happen to be Superman on the side I wouldn't recommend taking on the ISI or whatever.

    18. Re:Unfortunately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you know what he was commanding how? Hmmm......

    19. Re:Unfortunately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be nice if the location of his #2 was discovered and exploited.

      Yes. I am a large child for snickering at that.

    20. Re:Unfortunately... by blair1q · · Score: 1

      I have no doubt that the instant the news that Abbottabad had been hit there were a number of people high-up in Pakistan and Afghanistan who browned their trousers.

    21. Re:Unfortunately... by superwiz · · Score: 1

      Not so worried about finding names of the leadership. I am pretty sure we know that part. The more interesting part that they may find there is the names of his bankers, suppliers, etc.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  14. Umm by trifish · · Score: 1

    "Can you imagine what's on Osama bin Laden's hard drive?"

    I would imagine properly encrypted... something?

    1. Re:Umm by chill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Encryption only really works if you do it right, every time. Screw up only once, and you could leave enough crumbs to compromise it all.

      He's been holed up in that place for 6 years now, with no one even coming close. Time for him to get comfortable and slipshod. The odds of him not slipping up at all during that time are slim.

      Maybe it is all encrypted, or maybe there are enough clues left around to provide some real, useful information.

      Besides, the real question isn't what is on there. It is who in the various governments and industry are quaking in their boots thinking THEY may be on a list identifying them as supporters.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    2. Re:Umm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was my first thought too. Then again, if he and the folks he surrounded himself with weren't on the internet (the house didn't have any, or phone lines), they probably were not keeping up at all on technology, and what is needed for computer security. They might just have known that any cell/land-line/internet stuff could be traced, and so stayed away from that, relying on couriers instead. And so never bothered to take into their inner circle anyone that had a clue about computer security.

    3. Re:Umm by The+Grim+Reefer2 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Encryption only really works if you do it right, every time. Screw up only once, and you could leave enough crumbs to compromise it all.

      We're talking about the NSA getting this drive. So by doing it right you mean everything's encrypted and in the event of a raid the drive is melted with thermite, mixed with neodymium magnet dust, placed in a 5T magnetic field, stepped on by five elephants, mixed into bird food and fed to a flock of >100 migratory birds.

    4. Re:Umm by Anrego · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is, this is just the kind of ultra important stuff where some is _actually_ going to use obscene amounts of processing power and analysis if required to get access to the data.

      Encryption is a deterant.. 99% of the time the effort required to break said encryption is out of imagination for the value of the data... in this rare case, all the resources of the US military and possibly even other governments are available for use. They'd analyse every IC in the machine and put entire server farms to work on it to get the key.. unless he was very good with his computing practices... they'd get their data.

    5. Re:Umm by Surt · · Score: 4, Funny

      And then the guys at the NSA say: hmm, interesting challenge!

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    6. Re:Umm by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Encryption only really works if you do it right, every time. Screw up only once, and you could leave enough crumbs to compromise it all.

      Right, and 'do it right' is very specific. How much entropy did his passphrase have? Was he smart enough to store a certificate offsite and only bring it in to boot the computers? They only have 14 hours a day or so of power there, but presumably he could afford some batteries.

      He's been holed up in that place for 6 years now, with no one even coming close. Time for him to get comfortable and slipshod.

      Or bored out of his mind with plenty of time to implement proper security.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    7. Re:Umm by billcopc · · Score: 0

      Or maybe this is just a continuation of the bullshit factory, so they can use this made-up "intelligence" to further violate human rights.

      - Sir, you're being shipped off to Gitmo. We, uh, "found" your name on Bin Laden's iPad.
      - B-B-BUT I'M CMDRTACO!?!?!
      - That's right, "Commander Taco". It's on the iPad. The one we so conveniently found next to that totally not photoshopped picture of the dead terrorist. The one we totally didn't invent just to generate trillions in profits for the military-industrial complex.
      - B-B-BUT I'M A FUCKING I.T. GUY
      - Sure you are, but it says right here on the iPad: "I, Osama Bin Laden, think Commander Taco is the most awesomest terrorist evar." And that's, like, totally admissible evidence, you know, because, like, we have the guns.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    8. Re:Umm by mr1911 · · Score: 1

      Try more boring aspects like backing up your encrypted container. Or using an encrypted partition rather than an encrypted drive. Or making multiple containers with the same passphrase. Or a whole host of other things that can give a determined attacker a place to start cracking your encryption. These things are pretty well detailed in the TrueCrypt manual.

      --
      This post comes with a double-your-money-back guarantee!
      Any offense taken to this post is at your sole discretion.
    9. Re:Umm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We're talking about the NSA getting this drive. So by doing it right you mean everything's encrypted and in the event of a raid the drive is melted with thermite,
      mixed with neodymium magnet dust, placed in a 5T magnetic field, stepped on by five elephants, mixed into bird food and fed to a flock of >100 migratory birds.

      We find it hilarious that you forgot the only step that actually matters - overwriting the filesystem with a random pattern (or even just zeros, really) before destroying it. We're tracing the birds now...

    10. Re:Umm by zeptic · · Score: 3, Funny

      Is that African or European swallows?

    11. Re:Umm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I for one welcome our flattened, hyper-magnetic, flaming avian overlords.

    12. Re:Umm by tomcode · · Score: 1

      He finally got tired of typing out that password and clicked, "Remember me on this site"

      --
      f u cn rd ths u cn gt a gd jb n cmptr prgmng
    13. Re:Umm by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      The drive? How about your RAM chips and CPU? Those store data too, and there is no theoretical basis for assuming that the data is not retrievable after the device is powered down.

    14. Re:Umm by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      One "dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdx" would do the job.* The US government considers this good enough to guard against their enemies, and should therefore be good enough to guard against the US government, unless they're assuming they have stupid enemies. Physical destruction is pretty much a formality.

      *Although you should really use a special tool that can overwrite bad blocks as well.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    15. Re:Umm by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      If the drive is actually encrypted, you need only overwrite the header that contains the (also encrypted) key. Although a single pass of zeroing the drive is more effective than any of those other components, mostly because thermite is inconvenient and blatantly obvious.

    16. Re:Umm by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

      Encryption only really works if you do it right, every time. Screw up only once, and you could leave enough crumbs to compromise it all.

      We're talking about the NSA getting this drive. So by doing it right you mean everything's encrypted and in the event of a raid the drive is melted with thermite, mixed with neodymium magnet dust, placed in a 5T magnetic field, stepped on by five elephants, mixed into bird food and fed to a flock of >100 migratory birds.

      And it would've worked if they hadn't kept those backups readily available on all those thumb drives!

    17. Re:Umm by afidel · · Score: 1

      Uh, nope. A drive which contains TS information is required to be physically destroyed after running a certified wipe program.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    18. Re:Umm by afidel · · Score: 1

      In theory AES256 with a good passphrase would take all the energy of a star running until the universe dies of heatdeath to cover a small fraction of the keyspace.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    19. Re:Umm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least Wiley Coyote will get something to eat tonight.

    20. Re:Umm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...mixed into bird food and fed to a flock of >100 migratory birds."

      African or European?

    21. Re:Umm by Kamiza+Ikioi · · Score: 1

      The birds won't help. The NSA has completed all levels of Angry Birds, with 3 stars, and found all the hidden golden eggs!

      --
      I8-D
    22. Re:Umm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In theory AES256 with a good passphrase would take all the energy of a star running until the universe dies of heatdeath to cover a small fraction of the keyspace.

      Except for the fact they don't even need to try all possible passphrases, rather just the good (or likely) ones. In addition, they could just try all possible keys, rather than passphrases. This also completely ignores the fact that there are many attacks on AES besides a brute-force attack that require much less complexity (Including related key attacks) which cuts drastically into both the key space and time required. Not to mention the various side-channel attacks and attacks on particular implementations. Plus if they took anyone alive, they can use a $5 wrench to possibly get the key or passphrase.

    23. Re:Umm by onkelonkel · · Score: 1

      "there is no theoretical basis for assuming that the data is not retrievable after the device is powered down"

      Is this what Slashdot has come to? How sad.

      RAM and CPU are DRAM and will lose data if not refreshed about every 64 ms or less. Once the power is off the refresh stops and the DRAM cells lose their charge (and their stored data) in less than a tenth of a second.

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    24. Re:Umm by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      RAM and CPU are DRAM and will lose data if not refreshed about every 64 ms or less. Once the power is off the refresh stops and the DRAM cells lose their charge (and their stored data) in less than a tenth of a second.

      Really? I wasn't aware of any physical process that was capable of reducing the electrical potential between two objects to exactly zero. You can reduce the potential difference to any value arbitrarily close to zero by waiting longer and longer periods of time. Are you suggesting that after only 64ms there will be less than 1/10^10^100 volts of charge difference?

      The best you can say is that the potential of the capacitors in the ram is too low to be measured with the equipment you're using to do it. Are you willing to bet that the NSA doesn't have better equipment?

      And, I doubt that after a mere 64ms of time that the voltage drops to a level unmeasurable with even fairly accessible hardware.

      The reason that RAM needs to be refreshed is so that you don't need some kind of crazy SQUID setup to read the contents of your RAM - not necessarily because it isn't possible to do so.

    25. Re:Umm by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Despite all the evidence to the contrary, WHY do you believe the guy would use a technically advanced, even though freely available, tool like encryption?

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    26. Re:Umm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US government could literally utilize millions of processors to break this encryption. A few years back I remember reading an article about how they were setting up all their workstations to do distributed computation. So in addition to the supercomputers at NSA, they also have millions more desktops to add to the mix. I wonder what their collective processing capability is? Also, I'm sure they could requisition all the other super computers in the US government if need be. How many national labs have super computers facilities? In the Top 500 supercomputer list, the US has 274 of the spots with a total of peak of 31483946 gigaFLOPS. That's 31 petaFLOPS. And that's just the Top 500 known super computers, I bet the NSA has something specialized for encryption breaking... It is conceivable that the US government could muster exaFLOPS of computing power...

    27. Re:Umm by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Ooh NERD FIGHT!!!!!

    28. Re:Umm by tftp · · Score: 1

      The best you can say is that the potential of the capacitors in the ram is too low to be measured with the equipment you're using to do it. Are you willing to bet that the NSA doesn't have better equipment?

      No, the NSA doesn't have the better equipment, simply because the measuring equipment is built into the DRAM chip and can't be replaced with anything. So you are stuck with a device that is intentionally designed to return 0 or 1, and to switch from 1 to 0 takes a couple of missing refreshes.

      But even if those capacitors are somehow connected to external pins (impossible - not enough pins) you still have the problem of the thermal noise. Once the bit charge sufficiently dissipates all you are measuring is the noise. Since we know that the decision threshold is reached in, say, 100 ms the thermal noise level will be reached in 10 or 20 seconds. This time is too short to open the chip up and connect super-sensitive probes to the chip's internal wiring.

    29. Re:Umm by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Before very long -- we're talking seconds here -- the remaining charge falls below the noise level. No recovery possible.

      Before very long -- we're talking seconds here -- the remaining charge (statistically speaking) falls below 1 electron. No recovery possible.

      Sense circuits aren't perfectly balanced down to the last electron. This also makes recovery from memory and CPU registers more difficult.

      Flash memory keeps its data. Battery backed RAM keeps its data. Physically large (1970 technology) CMOS flipflops usually keep data down to 1/10 volt or so. Other than that, nobody on earth will recover significant chunks of data from the semiconductors in a computer that's been off for as long as it takes to open the case.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    30. Re:Umm by dkf · · Score: 1

      The best you can say is that the potential of the capacitors in the ram is too low to be measured with the equipment you're using to do it. Are you willing to bet that the NSA doesn't have better equipment?

      Yes. If there was better equipment (that didn't require a laborious remounting of the RAM in some kind of special rig, all while keeping it powered; that whole process would be very easy to screw up) then it would be being used by RAM manufacturers already in order to speed up and/or reduce the power consumption of their products. Seriously, DRAM is run close to the edge of what's possible because that gives it the best performance characteristics. (I used to know someone who worked on DRAM circuitry; they were using some really hairy tricks to boost speed and cut power. The best way to describe how hairy is to note that RAM is really an analog device, not a digital one; it just pretends to be digital...)

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    31. Re:Umm by junglee_iitk · · Score: 1

      That is clearly wrong. Number of elephants must be prime!

    32. Re:Umm by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      To brute-force it, yes, but in a case like this you'd expect those trying to crack it to be rather more intelligent about it (while most likely *also* setting off a brute-force attempt in parallel).

    33. Re:Umm by The+Grim+Reefer2 · · Score: 1

      That is clearly wrong. Number of elephants must be prime!

      How is five not a prime number exactly?

    34. Re:Umm by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      That's right, but according to NIST standards for data destruction, a single overwrite is supposed to be good enough to wipe a modern drive, so the physical destruction, while a required part of the protocol for deleting TS information, is overkill.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  15. goat porn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Goat Porn?

  16. Whats on Bin Laden's hard-disk? by joesteeve · · Score: 1

    "Can you imagine what's on Osama bin Laden's hard drive?"

    Porn? :P

    1. Re:Whats on Bin Laden's hard-disk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Goat porn.

  17. Can you imaginne what's on Osama's hard drive? by moberry · · Score: 1

    Bur-qua porn?

    1. Re:Can you imaginne what's on Osama's hard drive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI - they wipe their faces with the bur-qua at the end

    2. Re:Can you imaginne what's on Osama's hard drive? by internettoughguy · · Score: 1

      Yeah I imagine it would be something really dirty like:

      Reformist Shi'ite women show some knee, Vol. 3.

  18. obl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Eh, why speculate on what was found when we'll be seeing it on Wikileaks within a news cycle, anyway?

    No doubt it will emerge that Osama Bin Laden had been negotiating with two presidents for his safe surrender and talks broke down because Hilary wanted to raise the price of Indian Subcontinent opium to $140/kilo and Osama wasn't having any of it.

    1. Re:obl by sfunk1x · · Score: 1

      No doubt it will emerge that Osama Bin Laden had been negotiating with two presidents for his safe surrender and talks broke down because Hilary wanted to raise the price of Indian Subcontinent opium to $140/kilo and Osama wasn't having any of it.

      That is a dirt cheap kilo of opium. Many, many times cheaper than it is now.

  19. I think he cheated by SuperCharlie · · Score: 4, Funny

    Nobody has a score that low on minesweeper...

    1. Re:I think he cheated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The game gets easier when you aren't worried about blowing up one of the mines

    2. Re:I think he cheated by The+Great+Pretender · · Score: 1

      So he's Bu.Rogers!

      --
      A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
    3. Re:I think he cheated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody has a score that low on minesweeper...

      it may be years before the Farmville analysis is complete. we must be patient.

  20. Try the fish... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q: Do you know what the first thing was that they found on Bin Laden's computer?
    A: His brains!

    [badump-tish]

    Thank you very much, I'll be here all week.
    Please tip your waiter, and try the fish!

  21. Can you imagine what's on Osama's hard drive? by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 5, Funny

    Obama's real birth certificate?

    --
    "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
    1. Re:Can you imagine what's on Osama's hard drive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, you mean a "Certificate of Live Birth" is not the same as a birth certificate?(which also usually has an embossed seal on it)

    2. Re:Can you imagine what's on Osama's hard drive? by sycorob · · Score: 1

      (Whoosh!)

    3. Re:Can you imagine what's on Osama's hard drive? by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Proof that al Quaeda did 9/11?

    4. Re:Can you imagine what's on Osama's hard drive? by polle404 · · Score: 1

      how about Donald Trump's real birth certificate?

      --

      ~men are from earth. women are from earth. deal with it.~
  22. Ten Most Wanted by dasdrewid · · Score: 2

    He was on the FBI's "10 Most Wanted" list, right?

    Yeah, I'm going with porn.

    --
    No trespassing. Violators will be shot. Survivors will be shot again.
    1. Re:Ten Most Wanted by bughunter · · Score: 1

      Either that or pirated Disney movies.

      --
      I can see the fnords!
  23. Wikileaks by goombah99 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I would imagine a big old truecrypt partition, though perhaps he didn't encrypt things for some reason?

    Well I'm reading through the files from bin laden's drives that were posted on wikileaks an hour ago and it looks like they he used steganography based on goat porn.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Wikileaks by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "Well I'm reading through the files from bin laden's drives that were posted on wikileaks an hour ago and it looks like they he used steganography based on goat porn.?"

      Works great, I must say. No one will ever find the goat porn hidden in my goat porn.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    2. Re:Wikileaks by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      You keep saying that. Those are baby goats. Osama was into kiddie porn.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    3. Re:Wikileaks by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Check the URI. That's /.

    4. Re:Wikileaks by sincewhen · · Score: 1

      No, they've now analysed all the files and there is no steganography - it's just goat porn.

      --
      -- Braden's law of data: All data spends some of its lifetime in an excel spreadsheet.
  24. My guess is ATM porn by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    Though I understand that bin Laden was disappointed to find out that goatse didn't have anything to do with goat porn.

    Also, bin Laden's harddrive is said to contain every game released by SKIDR0W since 1998. He's big into hidden object and adventure puzzle games. Also Team Fortress 2. His handle was "donteatswine69".

    Something tells me that an upcoming episode of South Park will have more details regarding the raid on the bin Laden compound. Something else to look forward to.

    Seriously, though, I've got a feeling that if you look in bin Laden's Outlook contact list you'll find George W Bush's personal email address.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:My guess is ATM porn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "George W Bush's personal email address."

      You seriously think GW knows how to use a computer? I suspect the TV remote is a challenge for him.

    2. Re:My guess is ATM porn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't they already kill Bin Laden in South Park?

    3. Re:My guess is ATM porn by Tigersmind · · Score: 1

      Didn't they already kill Bin Laden in South Park?

      Yep, in the Jersey episode I think.

    4. Re:My guess is ATM porn by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Because South Park has never killed the same character multiple times. Never!

    5. Re:My guess is ATM porn by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      Something tells me that an upcoming episode of South Park will have more details regarding the raid on the bin Laden compound. Something else to look forward to.

      They killed Bini.

    6. Re:My guess is ATM porn by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      Oh my Allah! They killed Bini, those infidels!

  25. Osama Missed Wikileaks Tweet Of Location? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    on or near April 25, 2011.

    1. Re:Osama Missed Wikileaks Tweet Of Location? by wjousts · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Another good reason why Bradley Manning needs to be locked up for good.

    2. Re:Osama Missed Wikileaks Tweet Of Location? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      I'm sure the Pakistanis gave him a warning to keep his head down that week.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    3. Re:Osama Missed Wikileaks Tweet Of Location? by Beelzebud · · Score: 1

      Oh so you can prove that Manning leaked that info?

    4. Re:Osama Missed Wikileaks Tweet Of Location? by obarthelemy · · Score: 1

      yep. obviously that leak prevented the US from killing OBL.

      Oh, wait ...

      --
      The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
    5. Re:Osama Missed Wikileaks Tweet Of Location? by wjousts · · Score: 0

      It could have. And exactly what was the benefit of that leak anyway?

    6. Re:Osama Missed Wikileaks Tweet Of Location? by MakinBacon · · Score: 2

      on or near April 25, 2011.

      Link doesn't say that anybody actually knew he was there, just that US troops were in the neighborhood.

    7. Re:Osama Missed Wikileaks Tweet Of Location? by wjousts · · Score: 2, Informative

      He boasted about all the material he leaked.

    8. Re:Osama Missed Wikileaks Tweet Of Location? by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      And I was the guy who shot Osama.

    9. Re:Osama Missed Wikileaks Tweet Of Location? by WNight · · Score: 1

      It's value is that together with every other leak it forms a complete picture of what our government is/was doing.

      Do you appreciate having to vote blind, it being illegal to inform you of the true actions of your representatives?

    10. Re:Osama Missed Wikileaks Tweet Of Location? by wjousts · · Score: 1

      Rubbish, it was widely known and no secret that the US was providing military aide to Pakistan, what purpose did leaking the exact details have? It only puts those involved at risk while telling the average US voter nothing they didn't already know.

    11. Re:Osama Missed Wikileaks Tweet Of Location? by WNight · · Score: 1

      There's a world of difference between the bullshit of "providing military assistance" and details of their operations. We've known meaningless nothings forever but before Wikileaks concrete details were rare. That some US operations are somewhat rushed is thoroughly unimportant before the public's obligation to know what's being done in their names.

      If the USA wanted cooperation in keeping secrets they shouldn't have killed so many people with their lies.

    12. Re:Osama Missed Wikileaks Tweet Of Location? by wjousts · · Score: 1

      Bullshit back at you. There is no value in revealing operational details, regardless of what you think of the politics of what might be happening. Revealing operational details puts lives at risk.

    13. Re:Osama Missed Wikileaks Tweet Of Location? by WNight · · Score: 1

      Depends which side you're on. I'm sure you're all over exposing Osama's operational secrets and putting his network's lives at risk.

      For the rest of the world, *you're* the cockroaches. We kick piles of garbage and see you villainous fucks scatter for the shadows. Revealing your operational details saves lives, or at least explains how they were lost.

      As long as you value your secrets more than our lives we're pretty much required to ferret them out and expose them, for safety.

  26. I know how they found him! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I bet Osama regrets having a playstation account with Sony now.... should have had an xbox live account instead.

  27. He hasn't left the compound in years? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obviously his World of Warcraft account.

  28. It's Obvious. by Zarjazz · · Score: 2

    Angry Birds

    1. Re:It's Obvious. by blair1q · · Score: 1

      But he wouldn't have had a phone to play it on. Maybe not a shitter, either.

  29. could be a trap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He may also have put misleading and false information on his computer to foil the good guys in case the good guys ever get him. I'd use that data with caution.

  30. RIAA cease-and-desist letters by enaso1970 · · Score: 3, Funny

    In the end, sharing that Black Eyed Peas song came back to haunt him much more than leading a worldwide terrorist movement.

    1. Re:RIAA cease-and-desist letters by synapse7 · · Score: 1

      The navy seal strike preempted the RIAA strike by a week, he's probably lucky.

    2. Re:RIAA cease-and-desist letters by enaso1970 · · Score: 1

      Definitely a tough call. The SEALs are kinder I hear.

  31. Disappear by More+Trouble · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If I thought I'd appear in any of that data, I'd already have disappeared.

    1. Re:Disappear by Anrego · · Score: 1

      All kidding aside, I'm amazed they announced this for exactly this reason. Unless the bad guys are completely incompetent, they are gonna be doing anything they can to mitigate the impact of this data getting out. Sure, there is gonna be a big chunk that can't be changed.. but why announce it. Is the PR value from this really worth decreasing that "actionable data" percentage?

    2. Re:Disappear by chemicaldave · · Score: 2

      It could very well be misinformation to throw them off their game. There might be no intelligence at all, but it doesn't hurt to say we have some.

    3. Re:Disappear by Sir_Sri · · Score: 1

      Bin laden wasn't stupid. Crazy yes, stupid, no. He knew the americans were after him. He knew one day he'd either have to flee or he'd be caught/killed. If he had anything important on those computers I'd be very surprised. How much stuff have al qaeda operatives either had to drop when they ran (say from tora bora), or was taken when they were captured.

      He knew when the americans were tracking his phone it was time to never use the phone again - this is not a man who embraced technology for efficiency sake. Yes, his courier seems to have been his undoing (and not intentionally), but if he'd though carrier pidgins more secure I'm sure he'd have used those.

      Granted, I could be completely wrong. But he could also have had a hard drive full of information on the breeding and raising of rabbits (apparently his family gave some out to neighbouring children).

    4. Re:Disappear by archen · · Score: 1

      Considering almost no one had direct contact with him, I doubt anyone in Al Qaeda even knows the extent of the stuff on that hard drive. Any organization that could pull off hiding someone that notorious with a $25 million bounty on his head for 10 years is going to assume the worst case scenario anyway.

    5. Re:Disappear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes,

      This is one of the biggest paradoxes in the intelligence field. If I use this information the source risked their lives to obtain I will have drawn attention to the source and I will have risked the life of the source further and more importantly risk not getting more important information from the source later. Now that everybody knows they got all of bin laden's info the scope of people that might know this particular secret has grown much larger, and the source is safer after you take action.

    6. Re:Disappear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That may be the point. Issue a statement and have everyone watching for the cockroaches to scatter.

    7. Re:Disappear by PRMan · · Score: 1

      I think they are hoping that half of Al Qaeda blends into the general population and tries to hide. The best war is the one you never have to fight.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    8. Re:Disappear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My guess is this all happened >1 week ago. They have a bunch of actionable intel, and are already sitting on those it implicates. Then they release all this info to the news and see where the rats scatter to...

    9. Re:Disappear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless they really don't have much and it's a ploy to flush key Al Qaeda members out from hiding. The best thing the top Al Qaeda members have going for them is that no-one knows their whereabouts and if they're anything like bin Laden, they've been in hiding for a long time. Now they may be scared enough to move which means possibly surfacing and exposing themselves.

    10. Re:Disappear by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Unless they're completely incompetent (and their amazing ability to manage not to blow up bombs makes that not a really safe assumption) they've already assumed that they know everything bin Laden knows. I mean killed and dumped the body in the ocean? That's exactly what they'd say if the captured him and have been torturing him for information non-stop ever since. (I don't think they have, but surely if you were a bad guy you have to assume it's all compromised - you either go to ground or you do whatever you planning for the coming weeks/months right this minute).

    11. Re:Disappear by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      So, you get the "actionable data"? What are you going to do with it? Obama is already taking heat for not shutting down Guatanamo. If you pick the guys up, knowing damn well how dangerous they are, what are you going to do? Drag them to New York for a civilian trial?

      Remember all the intelligence and military equipment the Taliban left behind when the US drove them out of Afghanistan? I would hope for the same response. If we pick you up, you become a lightening rod or martyr. If we let you scatter like the cockroaches your are, you eventually die an ignoble death while sweating in some Afghan rat hole. I'd chose B for them.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    12. Re:Disappear by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Stupid is contextual. He knew a lot about guns and explosives. Those were the tools of his trade. If I were in his position/mindset, I would think that my instinct would be to load the computer with explosive, with the mentality that I could blow it up. Most people here immediately think encryption as a solution, because that is a tool THEY are comfortable with.

      Of course, he was living under the shadow of the Pakistan military. He had already been tipped off when Clinton tried to bomb him. He probably thought he was plenty safe from harm. He wasn't expecting us to break international protocol and invade Pakistan without getting permission (allowing him to get another tip-off).

      Obama has pretty much been a complete buffoon for his entire Presidency, but he got this one right.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    13. Re:Disappear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even then, international authorities knowing your name or at least an alias is more than they may have had before. Every little bit helps.

    14. Re:Disappear by subreality · · Score: 1

      It's not PR. I'd guess they're after several things: #1, they're hoping some percentage of those people will decide now is a good time to retire. Al-Qaeda's attrition rate is going to be quite high this year. #2, those who aren't quitting are still going to scramble for cover for a bit. They're watching to see who's looking nervous. #3, straightforward psy-ops: With the top level guy out of action the next move is to get all the second-level guys mistrusting each other and infighting rather than unifying behind a new leader. #4, believing all their communications channels are compromised (true or not) will greatly slow them down for years.

    15. Re:Disappear by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      You should have posted Anonymously then.

    16. Re:Disappear by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      Art of war.

      When you are weak, come on strong.
      When you are strong, display weakness.

      paraphrased from memory, sorry.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
  32. how to find a terrorist, 5/3/11: look for poop by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    I'm guessing there are lots and lots of cells of Al Qaeda whose presence can be identified by the giant brown stains spreading across the floor.

    Certainly, OBL wasn't stupid - he'll have kept himself as cut-out as possible, against just this eventuality. Nevertheless, most intelligence is valuable when triangulated with other data, and oh man did we just gain a doozy of a viewpoint.

    The immediate targets this will provide may only be good for about 6 months before the value evaporates. The subsequent ripples of suspicion and fratricide however could be good for 2+ years in the future.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:how to find a terrorist, 5/3/11: look for poop by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Certainly, OBL wasn't stupid - he'll have kept himself as cut-out as possible, against just this eventuality.

      Stupidity or intelligence often doesn't cover up for emotional foibles. "That information is on a need-to-know basis, and I don't need to know it.", is a good movie line, but rarely heard in the real world. Do you think the guy could really keep his fingers completely out of the pie? I don't have a psychological analysis, but I would find that hard to believe.

      The immediate targets this will provide may only be good for about 6 months before the value evaporates. The subsequent ripples of suspicion and fratricide however could be good for 2+ years in the future.

      They got the nickname of the courier ten years ago from waterboarding. Even unreliable intelligence has a very long shelf life.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    2. Re:how to find a terrorist, 5/3/11: look for poop by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Aside from the tautology of "immediate" and "6 months", no, any names or nicknames in this thing will, per the example shown by this action, be useful to the intelligence community for years and years.

      They'll create a perp object with an empty real-name field, put the alias in it, link it to the parent node it came from (Osama's picture just grew a forest of trees below it), and fill it in as new information appears. Then, years from now, when someone finds or hears something that fills in that puzzle piece, they'll traverse the trees looking for other linkages, and come up with a new organizational scenario to analyze and exploit.

      The spooks never forget.

  33. so bin Ladin was a moron ? by cinnamon+colbert · · Score: 1

    The guy has a 25 *million* dollar bounty on his head, he knows the worlds biggest military is hunting him 24/7, and he has large amounts of data near his person ?
    ?Whenever you hear or read of someone who is descrbing bin Ladin as the evil mastermind, you can take out the mind part....
    Or, as Smiley says, Moscow rules - you write on edible paper, one sheet of paper at a time on a glass surface, and always have a means of disposing of hte info should you be captured.

    1. Re:so bin Ladin was a moron ? by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      He managed to hide from the most power nation in the history of the planet for 10 years with a $25 million bounty on his head. To paraphrase an investigator I once heard, at ONE million dollars moms start turning in their children. They had a helluva system and probably political protection from the Pakistanis. That's not something a moron can pull off.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    2. Re:so bin Ladin was a moron ? by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Oh absolutely.

      In fact, I hear he started monologuing during the fight. Definitely an evil mastermind.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    3. Re:so bin Ladin was a moron ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      at ONE million dollars moms start turning in their children

      most children don't have a planet full of suicidal mooj at their disposal

    4. Re:so bin Ladin was a moron ? by timeOday · · Score: 1
      Maybe he figured, "if they get in here, I won't be around for the aftermath anyways."

      I suppose if somebody (somehow) raided the White House they would find some secrets, too. Except a lot of them are on wikileaks anyways.

    5. Re:so bin Ladin was a moron ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course he's a moron, he fucked with the greatest super power in the world. Does that seem smart to you?

    6. Re:so bin Ladin was a moron ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Abbottabad was... merely a setback!

    7. Re:so bin Ladin was a moron ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He managed to hide from the most power nation in the history of the planet for 10 years with a $25 million bounty on his head. To paraphrase an investigator I once heard, at ONE million dollars moms start turning in their children. They had a helluva system and probably political protection from the Pakistanis. That's not something a moron can pull off.

      To accomplish this, he had to practically isolate himself from leading al-Qaeda, move to a semi-rural mountain town, stop using all electronic communications, add numerous layers of couriers just to stay updated on various happenings, remain hidden inside an almost prison like home-fortress, rarely venturing outside, sit idly by as his friends and fellows were captured or killed for his cause, and still likely needed the help of various Pakistani political figures.

      Not to mention the seizure of his personal family monies (some $300M), likely ostracization from his entire extended family and a majority of the world, living in fear of every helicopter, jet, or gunshot heard, suffering from numerous serious medical conditions and receiving only adequate care, knowing that his actions were used by the US government to invade and conqueror numerous countries of his fellow muslims, and finally watching as rebellions swept through various muslim countries on their way to becoming more westernized.

    8. Re:so bin Ladin was a moron ? by mywhitewolf · · Score: 1

      a suicidal mooj would probably take 1million dollars to relocate his family to greener pastures, Terrorism is born out of desperation, not insanity.

  34. 3 to 1 by jimmerz28 · · Score: 1

    Let me guess he had a lot of child pornography as well as an Outlook contact list chock full of marihuana suppliers?

    Finally we'll see how the war on terror, child pornography and drugs mesh together!

    1. Re:3 to 1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pathetic comments...

  35. I'll bet the Siemens has been there. by Virtucon · · Score: 1

    Did they find Stuxnet too?

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  36. I know ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A bootleg copy of "72 Virgins, One Cup"?

  37. I searched Bin Ladin's hard drive... by cadeon · · Score: 1

    And all I found was Burka Porn.

  38. Can you imagine what's on Osama bin Laden's hard d by SlashDPC · · Score: 1

    "Can you imagine what's on Osama bin Laden's hard drive?"

    Lots and lots of porn! Why else would the feds want to raid his compound?

  39. And they found ... by gfreeman · · Score: 5, Funny

    22 million email addresses in a file marked "sony.dat"

    --
    Ceci n'est pas un sig.
    1. Re:And they found ... by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      no, he had the names and addresses of those in sony CORPORATE. they were next on his list.

      that's why sony had him killed.

      (wait. you think it was navy seals? sorry, it was actually sony that had him killed. they had to.)

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    2. Re:And they found ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL!!! Great !!

  40. lots and lots of nude women wearing burqa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the answer is obvious, lots and lots of pr0n with women wearing burqa.

    1. Re:lots and lots of nude women wearing burqa... by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      Yes, but they are showing off their ankles and hair. So risque!

    2. Re:lots and lots of nude women wearing burqa... by NevarMore · · Score: 1

      Even have some with hairy ankles for the fetishists.

  41. Sticky Note by medv4380 · · Score: 2

    Did they remember to grab the sticky note with the 128 bit key written down?

    1. Re:Sticky Note by Sectoid_Dev · · Score: 1

      Yes, his passphrase was "d3ath 2 amer1ca"

    2. Re:Sticky Note by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 2

      So insightful.

      As I sit here looking at the note with mine I had to write after I was required to change my password about 5 times in 30 days and the last change entirely invalidated my existing secure scheme.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    3. Re:Sticky Note by Tigersmind · · Score: 1

      Did they remember to grab the sticky note with the 128 bit key written down?

      This was Navy Seals. They took the note, the wall it was on AND the asshole who wrote it.

  42. Comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The comments here are abit distressing. I sincerely hope people in the comments dont work in IT where they have to handle other people's data with privacy, tact and respect.

    The way people are reacting in the comments, with sick insinuations about the contents of hard drives shows a clear lack of maturity.

    Data is data, respect and due diligence is just that, no matter if you like the person who it belongs to. Basic ethics 101

    1. Re:Comments by Sectoid_Dev · · Score: 1

      oh sure, ruin a good schadenfreude

    2. Re:Comments by mr1911 · · Score: 1

      Osama Bin Laden and basic ethics do not belong in the same thought.

      If you can't stand jokes about OBL and goat porn (or actually read the linked article) Slashdot is not for you.

      --
      This post comes with a double-your-money-back guarantee!
      Any offense taken to this post is at your sole discretion.
    3. Re:Comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's well known that "due diligence" is dead in American IT. Not only are they entitled to whatever inflated salary they receive right before their job is outsourced, but all of the perks as well -- such as their customer's data.

  43. RIAA is gonna open up a can of whoop-ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Once they find unlicensed music on there, al Qaeda is soooo gonna be in a world of pain.

    1. Re:RIAA is gonna open up a can of whoop-ass by tchdab1 · · Score: 1

      Never mind the music, the DOD is in deep poop if they start using his software without permission from the copyright holder.

  44. Hope it is not full of reports like this: by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
    To the most exalted Emir of the al-Umma: Hope this report finds Your Caliphate in excellent health and kind disposition. Our Third Sher-e-Umma division has breached through the shores of Dover, England and we hope to annex it and bring the UK from dar-ul-haarb to dar-ul-islam in a few days, inshah allah. On the other side of the Atlantic the Zulficar-e-Islami army has conquered Alabama, Texas and Kentucky. We will soon be besieging the capital of the Great Satan next month. inshah allah.

    To reward the commanders of these armies, we humbly request your highness to authorize a sum of 250,000 USDollars from the Treasury of the new Ummah. Signed your most faithful and obedient servant al- Zawahiri.

    Glossary:

    al-Umma = the (islamic) world

    Sher-e-umma = Tiger of the islamic world

    dar-ul-haarb = World at war (where the usual Quaranic rules of kindness and charity does not apply. Usually the countries not ruled by muslims)

    dar-ul-islam = World at peace (!dar-ul-haarb)

    inshah allah = God willing

    Zulficar-i-islami = Sword of peace

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  45. 'Mother of all loads' by davidwr · · Score: 1

    'Mother of all loads' of Data Seized At Bin Laden Compound

    There, fixed that for you.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  46. On his hard drive? by Cable · · Score: 1

    Divx "my little pony" video files.

    The Koran in LOLCAT.

    Elton John MP3 files.

    How to form a terrorist network for dummies in ms word 2.0 format.

    Bacon, ham, and shellfish recipes.

    Nude photos of Bea Authur in Mac paint format.

    The plans for a "Death Star" to be put on the Moon to hold the world ransom for one million dollars because the sharks with frigging lasers on their heads plan didn't work. :)

  47. It could be a trap by davidwr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If he's smart he would've not only encrypted everything but most of the information would be intentionally misleading or low-value, making whoever got it not only have to work to decrypt it but to have sort out what's real and useful and what's not.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:It could be a trap by Cytotoxic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If he had foresight and a sense of humor there's a bunch of emails from Bush and Cheney saying "Thanks old buddy, us boy's from Texas really appreciate all the help..."

    2. Re:It could be a trap by corbettw · · Score: 1

      He was on record as saying he thought he could bankrupt the US by dragging us into a war in the Middle East. So no, he wasn't smart, not even a little bit.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    3. Re:It could be a trap by mean+pun · · Score: 2

      He was on record as saying he thought he could bankrupt the US by dragging us into a war in the Middle East. So no, he wasn't smart, not even a little bit.

      Well, the price tag of the Afghan and Iraq war is pretty staggering, and the US is in dire need of money, so he got close, didn't he?

    4. Re:It could be a trap by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      Uhm... how many people come as close as he did to pulling in a country into a war succesfully, and getting them to spent gazillions of dollars they don't have? Anyone coming this close to his stated intentions is (or was) a very dangerous strategist.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    5. Re:It could be a trap by Americano · · Score: 2

      Unfortunately, all of the bad and low-value data was in a Windows folder named "My Misleading Documents," making it pretty easy to separate the wheat from the chaff.

    6. Re:It could be a trap by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      We need to get Admiral Akhbar on this! He'll be able to tell us if it's a trap.

    7. Re:It could be a trap by Falconhell · · Score: 1

      Yeh because your economy is going along really well eh? At least i am enjoying the high $au to US peso exchange rate.

    8. Re:It could be a trap by mywhitewolf · · Score: 1

      he thought he could bankrupt the us economy? what with your trillions of dollars surplus? he must be stupid... oh wait, considering how broke America is now and the fact that the war isn't over, I'd say he is at least smarter than you.

    9. Re:It could be a trap by Gumbercules!! · · Score: 1

      And then we can say Akhbar Hu Akhbar!

    10. Re:It could be a trap by grant420 · · Score: 0

      If he were smart he wouldn't be living (er, uh dying) in Pakistan behind 20 foot tall walls in a 1 million USD mansion.

    11. Re:It could be a trap by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      The US, with Obama's complicity, is doing a far better job of destroying itself that Osama bin Laden ever could.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    12. Re:It could be a trap by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      He was on record as saying he thought he could bankrupt the US by dragging us into a war in the Middle East. So no, he wasn't smart, not even a little bit.

      Yes, because luckily the US responded calmly to 9/11 and didn't send troops into Afghanistan and Iraq at an enormous cost. And the US economy is certainly the healthiest in the world. So OBL was nowhere near achieving his aims.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    13. Re:It could be a trap by corbettw · · Score: 1

      No, our economy is shit right now. But the war in Afghanistan didn't cause that, other, completely unrelated issues did.

      If you think $444 billion over 10 years is enough to sink the US economy, you're not paying attention to just how large it is.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
  48. Hard Drive Contents? by Striikerr · · Score: 1

    "Can you imagine what's on Osama bin Laden's hard drive?"

    I'm going to guess pirated copies of Different Strokes and The Cosby Show... Osama probably loved walking around his compound saying "what you talkin' 'bout Ahmed" while wearing some loud, multi-colored sweaters...

  49. Osama martini recipe found by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    2 shots and a splash of water.

    I stole that from the KC Star newspaper blogs.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    1. Re:Osama martini recipe found by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2 shots and a splash of water.

      I stole that from the KC Star newspaper blogs.

      2 shots, put on ice, with a splash of water.

  50. Hopefully they got the post it note? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If all the stuff is encrypted, I hope they remembered to look *under* the keyboard for the encryption passwords -- you know on the canary yellow sticky notes. But maybe OBL was sneaky and ate the notes-- better do the Perry Mason and color over the top of the notepad next to the computer too. Failing that, maybe adeaq-la? 'Course if you try and use OBL's siblings' names it'll take for ever and brute force may work best.

  51. ecrypt and throw away the key via randomness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about creating total randomness? I can think of more reliable destruction methods for his HDD:

    Rig explosives on the drive in the case that immediate destruction is required.

    cs

  52. the name is Osama, not bin Laden by Creepy · · Score: 2

    Minor annoyance - his name is Osama - bin Laden is "from Laden," not really a last name, so it's like if you were George from New York and everyone called you New York all the time.

    1. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      I think, especially now, people will often use "Bin Laden" instead of "Osama" to keep people from making the Obama-Osama error (either in writing down the name or in people reading the name). Of course, even if it were a last name, calling him "Bin Laden" would make things difficult for others who shared that last name. I know if someone with my last name went on a killing spree, I'd feel uneasy with news reports declaring "Levine murdered 10 today."

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    2. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I know exactly what you mean.

      Regards
      John Hitler

    3. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by jfengel · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Bin Laden" is "of the Laden family". The "bin" is akin to the Hebrew "ben", "son of" (e.g. "Yeshua ben Yosef", "Jesus son of Joseph".) The Arab equivalent to "of" (in this context) is "al", e.g. Saddam Hussein al Tikriti, Saddam Hussein from Tikrit.

      As with other patronymics (e.g. the Scottish "Mac"), it's often used as a general family name, inherited for multiple generations. Osama bin Laden's father is Muhammad bin Laden. The original "Laden" is unknown, but goes back at least a century.

      So it's perfectly reasonable to call him "bin Laden". It's his family name, at least a few generations back. Confusion arises only as with every other family name, in that there are a lot of bin Ladens out there, and you'd have to use his full name to be clear. But using just his first name would be equivalent to referring to the Chancellor of Germany as "Angela" or the Prime Minister of the UK as "Gordon": it's their personal name, and rarely used alone in public discourse.

      You could use it that was as a deliberate insult of over familiarity. The New York Times took the unusual step of referring to him just as "bin Laden" rather than "Mr. bin Laden", which they reserve generally for the worst of the worst.

    4. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by plopez · · Score: 2

      Like "Manfred von Richthofen" being called "von Richthofen"?

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    5. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      Yea and that guy with the last name Hansen, where the sen means son of, where the last name means son of han. It would certainly be inappropriate to refer to him as Mr. Hansen.
      [/sarcasm]

    6. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But using just his first name would be equivalent to referring to the Chancellor of Germany as "Angela" or the Prime Minister of the UK as "Gordon": it's their personal name, and rarely used alone in public discourse.

      Or referring to the President of Russia as "Joseph"...

    7. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by Zorque · · Score: 1

      A) I don't know where you're getting that "bin" means from, and B) I think Leonardo da Vinci would like a word with you.

    8. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by Urban+Garlic · · Score: 2

      > ...or the Prime Minister of the UK as "Gordon"...

      Particularly odd, as the Prime Minister of the UK has been David Cameron for a year or so...

      --
      2*3*3*3*3*11*251
    9. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for the lesson, Einstein.

    10. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by jfengel · · Score: 2

      Give me five minutes and then check Wikipedia.

      (Of all the stupid mistakes to make...)

    11. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      But using just his first name would be equivalent to referring to the Chancellor of Germany as "Angela" or the Prime Minister of the UK as "Gordon"

      I suspect nothing would annoy the Prime Minister of the UK more than referring to him as "Gordon".

    12. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Bin is short for Ibin, which means "son". Bin Laden is actually Ibn Al Din, which means son of religion. So it's probably a nickname, since his dad's name probably isn't "Religion".

      Your George example would be like people calling George, "Larry's son".

      Since Arab speakers refer to Bin Laden as Bin Laden and not Osama, I would say his name is Bin Laden.

    13. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Bin is the short form of Ibn, which means son. Bin Laden is also a shortened (for ease of speech) form of Ibn al-Din, which means Son of Religion (or child of religion), which is a perfectly common last name in Islamic culture. Kind of like how western culture last names often come from the profession of our ancestors (Smith, Hunter, etc. etc.)

    14. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Or any Dutchman with the last name Van Der ....

    15. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by Saroful · · Score: 1

      You are right in regards to "bin" meaning "son". However, "al" is a definite article, i.e. the equivalent of "the". There is no Arabic equivalent for "of", as it is implicit. Your example of "Saddam Hussein al Tikriti" is similar to saying "John Doe the New Yorker."

    16. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by Katatsumuri · · Score: 1

      The New York Times took the unusual step of referring to him just as "bin Laden" rather than "Mr. bin Laden", which they reserve generally for the worst of the worst.

      "Excuse me, mister, but I'm a mister, too -
      And you're giving "Mister" a bad name, misters like you!
      So I'm taking that "Mister" part out of your name,
      'Cause it's misters like you who put the rest of us to shame."
      (Ben Harper)

    17. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually read that the "bin" translated roughly into "goat fucker"

    18. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      Gordon? You seem to have missed some news.

    19. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by twebb72 · · Score: 1

      Nice point, but I'd contend that the language gap covers this illogical surname.
      Personally, I find it more annoying when a brit calls a router a 'rooter.' But that's me.

    20. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by twebb72 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I like this concept of names associated to places.
      That way Fox News can report in a couple weeks how your 'George from New York', just ripped out the eyes of Osama from Sheepfuckerville.

    21. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just so you know, Gordon hasn't been Prime Minister for over a year. It's now an amalgamation known as Jamick Cameregg. No, we're not asking to see his / it's birth certificate. We're too scared.

    22. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by Shrike82 · · Score: 2

      But using just his first name would be equivalent to referring to the ... Prime Minister of the UK as "Gordon":

      That'd be even worse since his name is David.

      --
      You can advertise in this sig from as little as £99.99 a month!
    23. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Referring to the Prime Minister of the UK as "Gordon" is the same as referring to the President of the US as "George" ;)

    24. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can imagine David Cameron would be pretty pissed off if you called him "Gordon" ;)

    25. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      But using just his first name would be equivalent to referring to the Chancellor of Germany as "Angela" or the Prime Minister of the UK as "Gordon": it's their personal name, and rarely used alone in public discourse.

      Calling the British Prime Minister Gordon would just confuse him, as his name is David.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    26. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or even calling the UK Prime Minister by his name which is "David". I'm guessing you're from the USA?

    27. Re:the name is Osama, not bin Laden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or the Prime Minister of the UK as "Gordon"

      Gordon Cameron? Don't you mean "David"?

      Man, I though the ignorant yank thing was a stereotype.

  53. Re:Truecrypt--Not "if", but "when." by MarkvW · · Score: 1

    The real question is not whether the NSA can crack a Truecrypt partition. The question is WHEN can the NSA crack it. Can they do it now; will it require a lot of processing; or will it require the development of new technology? Sooner or later, they are going to get it.

  54. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  55. never by circletimessquare · · Score: 2, Insightful

    wikileaks, in regard to the big pfc manning data dump, was a one time event only

    the huge size of sensitive info depended upon a government policy that encouraged information sharing between departments. this allowed pfc manning to get access to the data

    so now, due to the wikileaks embarrassment, we have government departments adjusting their policies, discouraging information sharing and keeping their info segregated

    that's a shame, because the more open sharing policy was a result of 9/11, which showed that departments not sharing data contributed to the intelligence failure that allowed 9/11 to happen

    so, thanks to wikileaks leading to a decrease in information sharing between departments, maybe we'll have another intelligence failure that will lead to another 9/11

    isn't wikileaks wonderful?

    i know a lot of teenagers and adults with immature teenaged mentalities thinks government secrets are pure evil, but guess what: when it comes to fighting terrorism, they are absolutely necessary. for example: do you think bin laden would be alive or dead right now if the intel that led to him were more widely available?

    people really have to grow up and understand that government secrets are actually a good thing. all teenaged idealism to the contrary

    i'm sure wikileaks will find a few more government info gems. and i actually welcome wikileaks in the realm of corporate intel and nonmilitary government secrets. but when it comes to terrorism intel, wikileaks is a disaster, and may even contribute to the next terrorist attack succeeding

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the huge size of sensitive info depended upon a government policy that encouraged information sharing between departments. this allowed pfc manning to get access to the data

      Which wouldn't have meant a damn thing if he wasn't able to burn it to a CD-R labelled "Lady Gaga" in Sharpie and just walk out with it.

      Fundamental failures in physical security procedures were the reason for a the Manning leak.

    2. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i know a lot of teenagers and adults with immature teenaged mentalities thinks government secrets are pure evil, but guess what: when it comes to fighting terrorism, they are absolutely necessary.

      But would terrorism exist without evil governments?

    3. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are going to blame immature people, you could at least try to type with proper capitalization so you don't come off as a child.

    4. Re:never by CBR1kboy · · Score: 1

      As is often the case, many organizations swing too far in the other direction when implementing changes. I suspect there is a "sweet spot" somewhere between the current data-sharing practices and pre-9/11 hyper-compartmentalization.

    5. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, except the danger from the wikileaks dump in question comes from the fact that it documents a lot of nasty policies and things the US did, not that it leaks intelligence data. The threat from increased terrorism would come from people knowing the truth and not liking it. Your solution is that classified data should not be leaked. Uh, how about we not classify crap that should not be classified? Maybe have humane policies? How about requiring a reasonable sunset date for classified information, or at least decent oversight?

      So what exactly do you think the chances are for democratic governance when the government can keep whatever it wants secret?

    6. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know what would be cool? A zombie bin Laden film. You should try that out.

    7. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, blame wikileaks, for the policy decisions of elected officials. And you wonder they appear largely accountable only to corporate interests and emotional reasoners who can be motivated to vote in unison with the corporate interests.

      *Facepalm*

    8. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats pretty strong rhetoric. Im not saying every little bit of information needs to be revealed, but when your government is prone to lying to its population, how can we ever be sure of what they are saying?

      I think its pretty dangerous giving the government a free pass, would you really want them commiting crimes against civilians and covering it up, as they have time and time again?

    9. Re:never by cheesecake23 · · Score: 1

      for example: do you think bin laden would be alive or dead right now if the intel that led to him were more widely available?

      You're right, he'd probably be alive now. But if widely available intel had forced the government to be more open when we started our underhanded weaponizing and financing of his organization in the first place, he'd probably have been relatively harmless in the grand scheme of things.

      I know which of these alternative realities I would choose to live in ...

    10. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US government departments being idiots isn't something that can be blamed on others. That's solely their own fault.

      But nice try. :)

    11. Re:never by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As I recall, Wikileaks leaked very little counterterrorism intel. Most of it was governmental and corporate shenanigans. So, governments do underhanded deals that they have absolutely no business doing, and departments clam up on info sharing because governments want to keep those shady deals (not counterterrorism intel) a secret from the general public, and you're blaming Wikileaks for the next terrorist strike? Nice...

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    12. Re:never by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Governments don't actually face a choice between "share info and have leaks" or "don't share info and don't". That's a false dichotomy.

      Leaks tend to happen when things are being covered up that should not be covered up. Leakers take huge risks, as the sad case of Mannings treatment shows. They don't tend to do it for shits and giggles, or because of some anarchic belief that all secrets are bad. In the case of the Manning dumps he did it because he thought there were a lot of scandals and other things being wrongly suppressed .... and he was right!

      So we can see there's a third option, which is, don't cover up large numbers of scandals. Instead when you screw up, admit it, and ensure everyone can see the measures to take to prevent repeat incidents. There are plenty of organizations that do this. The US Govt is not one of them.

    13. Re:never by danhaas · · Score: 1

      Maybe after wikileaks the USA government will think twice before opening up another concentration camp (guantanamo) or invading a country for oil (http://anz.theoildrum.com/node/4675). Or at least be more discrete about it. That might help with the terrorism thing.

      And when it comes to data security, anyone inside an organization should have easy access only to the data one *needs*. Access to unusual information, but to which one is entitled to know, should be easily granted, but monitored.

      Otherwise, please explain to me why a soldier in Afghanistan should have automatic access to Venezuelan cables from the 80s.

    14. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's a shame, because the more open sharing policy was a result of 9/11, which showed that departments not sharing data contributed to the intelligence failure that allowed 9/11 to happen

      That must be why they created the intersect!

    15. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and here i was thinking that the bulk of that leak was diplomatic cables, not terrorism intel.
      when the most trivial shit imaginable is withheld from the public, and foia requests are serviced as slowly as possible, it's safe to say that there's a big problem with transparency in government.
      that being said, the solution is not for people to leak things.

      captcha: civics

    16. Re:never by Knuckles · · Score: 1

      so now, due to the wikileaks embarrassment, we have government departments adjusting their policies, discouraging information sharing and keeping their info segregated

      You may agree or not, but that is precisely Assange's stated goal, http://cryptome.org/0002/ja-conspiracies.pdf

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    17. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      people really have to grow up and understand that government secrets are actually a good thing. all teenaged idealism to the contrary

      How many lives are lost in your country to terrorism annually? If they managed to pull off a 9/11 every year, would it be worse than traffic accident fatalities? (Hint: no)

      How many lives are your freedoms worth? I will assume your calculation of this value is greater than the number of lives lost protecting it thus far (otherwise you would advocate surrender to the next threat). Is this number more like the traffic-fatalities number, or the terrorism number?

      So your opinion makes sense only if you trust your government not to abuse secrecy to take away your freedoms.

      When you grow up, you will realize you can't, and your opinions about things like wikileaks will get a bit more nuanced and, maybe, worth listening to...

      now get off my lawn...

    18. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      isn't wikileaks wonderful?

      In intent? Yes! In execution? I'd call it 60/40 on yes.

      It would seem that, by your estimation, wikileaks is automatically guilty by proxy for any future terrorism event. The fact that the 'free-est' country in the world is hypocritical w/ regard to attrocities during war, speaks volumes to your lack of perspective in the damning of an open information portal.

      False equivolence?

      We can't claim the moral high-ground unless we actively exhibit it at all times.

    19. Re:never by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      let's get into this: are you saying the us ambassador to, for example, malaysia can't be frank in his or her appraisals of the malaysian government and its personalities? he or she has to be careful what he or she says? because a transparency in diplomatic pouches means that the ambassador can't speak honestly about his or findings, out of fear of offending the government of malaysia

      how in any way is this sort of transparency superior?

      obviously, secrets are far superior in the realm of military, diplomacy, terrorism, war. this doesn't mean i think that some congresscritters shady deal with xyz corp should be a secret. and i welcome wikileaks leaking corp espionage

      but i unfortunately get the impression a lot of teenaged idiots out there actually believe in government transparency to a ridiculous extent. they celebrate what pfc manning did, thinking it was a blow against corruption. no, he hurt diplomatic and war time efforts. if you don't understand how or why what pfc manning did hurt the usa, hurt you, you are a naive idealistic teenaged idiot, even if you are chronologically an adult

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    20. Re:never by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      that was some nice rhetoric

      unfortunately, what you written doesn't mean anything, because yes, the choice is between full public disclosure and secrecy. that's not a false dichotomy, that's the actual choice that was made with the pfc manning data dump

      and i'm glad that pfc manning, all on his own, made the judgment that the usa's secrets needed to be aired. i'm certain the dude's judgment was impeccable.

      pffffffffffffft

      are you telling me the us ambassador to, for example, malaysia can't be frank in his or her appraisals of the malaysian government and its personalities? he or she has to be careful what he or she says? because a transparency in diplomatic pouches means that the ambassador can't speak honestly about his or findings, out of fear of offending the government of malaysia?

      and you support it when some junior analyst goes "the ambassador said WHAT about the malaysian PM? omg, TMZ has to hear about this! to wikileaks! lol"

      really? you support that judgment call? because that's exactly what this asshole manning did

      how in any way is this sort of transparency superior? you really want you to defend your characterization of what manning did as somehow better for the usa and the world?

      obviously, secrets are far superior in the realm of military, diplomacy, terrorism, war. do you understand that or not? this doesn't mean i think that some congresscritters shady deal with xyz corp should be a secret. and i welcome wikileaks leaking corp espionage

      but i unfortunately get the impression a lot of teenaged idiots out there actually believe in government transparency to a ridiculous extent. they celebrate what pfc manning did, thinking it was a blow against corruption. no, he hurt diplomatic and war time efforts. if you don't understand how or why what pfc manning did hurt the usa, hurt you, you are a naive idealistic teenaged idiot, even if you are chronologically an adult

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    21. Re:never by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 1

      If being skeptical of what daddy says in speeches makes a teenage mentality, then believing what he says makes a toddler mentality.

      None of the wikileaks fiasco involved interdepartmental communication, so please get off your soapbox and stop talking out your ass.

      Classifying material that exposes corruption isn't protection of our secrets, it's censorship, no matter how you try to homogenize the data.

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    22. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't give a damn if OBL is alive or dead, compared to how much I care that my government treats everyone (citizens, non-citizens, foreign nations) with justice, obeys its own laws, and does not exceed its commission. Although if it had done all of those things, 9/11 never would have happened in the first place, so OBL would be a non-issue for Americans.

    23. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i know a lot of teenagers and adults with immature teenaged mentalities thinks government secrets are pure evil, but guess what: when it comes to fighting terrorism, they are absolutely necessary.

      Didn't the US government create and fund said terrorists in the first place? Wasn't it because they were fighting someone who rivalled our governments desire for world domination? Wasn't that pretty much a secret to the vast majority of the populace?

      I call bullshit, sir or madam. You need to stop drinking the kool-aid.

    24. Re:never by suomynonAyletamitlU · · Score: 1

      i know a lot of teenagers and adults with immature teenaged mentalities thinks government secrets are pure evil, but guess what: when it comes to fighting terrorism, they are absolutely necessary. for example: do you think bin laden would be alive or dead right now if the intel that led to him were more widely available?

      Hey, guess what sunshine: you're not talking about fighting terrorism, you're talking about fighting terrorists. The institution of terrorism--that is, the mindset that gives birth to people who think "Yes, blowing up civilians is a perfectly acceptable tactic"--requires the idea that you can't change the system, that weak people don't have a voice, and that people can't escape from suffering without violence. All of those things are enhanced when governments are allowed to keep secrets. Similarly, every country leader everywhere who's a giant asshole is sitting pretty on their throne because the people who could do something about it--foreign or domestic--don't know how to stop them without unending sacrifices or oodles of cash that they either can't or refuse to afford.

      Every human being in existence searches for a means to their ends. Terrorism is a means. It is a well-known means in their part of the world, and it is one that many people feel pressured towards. The ends? Common things like not dying, and keeping their families from dying, driving off a race of people that they're quite sure are going to murder them in their sleep, that sort of thing. It's a social problem, not a military one, and there's no military way to end it short of genocide or... benevolent despotism.

      If you want to fight terrorists, fight them, keeping whatever secrets you like along the way. When you decide you want the conflict to end instead, we'll be waiting.

      thanks to wikileaks leading to a decrease in information sharing between departments, maybe we'll have another intelligence failure

      That won't happen unless the intelligence agencies are understaffed/underfunded and without a clear and overriding mandate to fix the problem. So yes, I imagine it's going to happen. Believe it or not? It's not actually that hard. Since the computer revolution started, the entirety of the world has started working on ways to share data and ways to secure it. One full generation has grown to maturity with the internet being a fact of everyday life. There are experts on the subject. There are professionals. There are multitudes of volumes of work on the subject. And if none of that is used because the government's stupid, then the reason for the inevitable failure is the government's stupidity, not because someone pointed it out.

      If your choice of invective is "grow up and understand," try to think things through a little better.

    25. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Governments don't actually face a choice between "share info and have leaks" or "don't share info and don't". That's a false dichotomy.

      Leaks tend to happen when things are being covered up that should not be covered up.

      Leakers leak because they are pissed and want to piss off the piss-ee. The idea that their motive is justice by exposing a "covered up" is hard to prove, because the extent and distinction between a "cover up" and just "embarrassing potty talk" is a subjective opinion, and an easy scapegoat to attribute the original source of pissiness. I gotta use urinal now.

    26. Re:never by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      how are OBL's motivations the fault of the usa?

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    27. Re:never by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      OBL did what he did because of OBL. not because of the USA

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    28. Re:never by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      pfc manning disclosed diplomatic and military secrets

      true or false?

      "Classifying material that exposes corruption isn't protection of our secrets, it's censorship"

      i agree 100%. i look forward to continued wikileaks on corporations. i wonder why you believe what manning did is only exposing corruption though, where you got this false impression

      "it's censorship, no matter how you try to homogenize the data."

      homogenizing the data in determining the heroicism/ villainy of what manning did seems to be your judgment failure sir, not mine

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    29. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a fucking idiot. Wikileaks never leaked any Counter-Terrorism intel.
      The stuff they leaked was all about backroom deals. Shit no free countries Government should be doing behind closed doors.
      Its people like you that let the Government think they can get away with shit like ACTA in secret.

    30. Re:never by silanea · · Score: 1

      Oh well. Maybe there would not have been a Bin Laden if certain three letter agencies had not propped him up as a useful idiot a wee while ago, you know?

      Seriously, we have been getting this live here in Germany for years now: Every single suspected terrorist has had some connection to a government agency. Every last one of them. From the Red Army Faction to the Oktoberfest bomber(s) to the poor sods currently on trial. Every single terrorism trial has seen some prosecutor pissing their pants over the embarrassing details that came to light. Hell, an attempt to ban our neo-fascist party the NPD was thrown out by the judges because it was impossible for them to tell the true Nazis from the police informers and undercover agents various agencies had planted in the party for years.

      I do not doubt that there are genuine terrorists out there, but just how much of the whole terrorism theatre is true and how much is fake - I am not sure even the agencies themselves really know anymore.

      --
      Rudolf Hess edited Mein Kampf. He was the very first grammar nazi.
    31. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People like you are the reason my local police got away with physically restraining me from displaying my middle finger,

      You'd get more sympathy if you weren't behaving like a juvenile delinquent. I'm a little bit more concerned about actual respectable citizens being mistreated, not children acting out who get pissy when confronted with consequences.

    32. Re:never by stewbacca · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Leaks tend to happen when things are being covered up that should not be covered up.

      They also tend to happen when our lax background check/security clearance granting process lets fucked up teenagers get a clearance when there is no reason to believe they'd be able to keep secrets based on the readily available information in the teenagers troubled past.

    33. Re:never by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      this is apparently a common ridiculous delusion

      that the motivations of OBL is somehow the fault of the usa, or some other government

      that his motivations are never the fault of gee, i dunno, maybe they are the fault of OBL?

      wha?! nonunimpossible!

      pffffffffft

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    34. Re:never by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      You make it sound like we (the entire western civilization) provoked the poor terrorists. They commit terrorism against us because of their egocentric, 18th century worldview, uneducated, dogmatic beliefs that western progress is a sin. They'd want to kill us if we left them alone, because we aren't like them and they are uneducated buffoons who don't have the mental capacity to understand a western staple such as tolerance.

    35. Re:never by dave562 · · Score: 1

      You must have missed the whole Iran Contra scandal.

    36. Re:never by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Wikileaks leaked the very data that identified the existence of a courier to Osama that could be tracked.

      If Manning had done his data dump in the past couple of months, and the Obama administration hadn't been eyes-only on the August identification of the courier and allowed the information to be on the SIPRNet, then Wikileaks could have released that, and, as we've seen, Wikileaks doesn't understand what it's doing so it wouldn't know not to tip these guys off.

      I won't be surprised a bit if Osama's hard drive doesn't contain a copy of everything Wikileaks has released so far. Nor that al Quaeda had people going through it carefully to assess and shut down the vulnerabilities we may know about them.

      If the courier's real name and location had been in any of the Wikileaks releases, Osama could already have been moved.

      Wikileaks could have prevented us from getting to bin Laden. And probably would have considered that a good thing.

    37. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's a nickel, kid. Go buy yourself a shift key.

    38. Re:never by lennier · · Score: 1

      The institution of terrorism--that is, the mindset that gives birth to people who think "Yes, blowing up civilians is a perfectly acceptable tactic"

      was embraced by all the major powers in World War II as "Strategic Bombing", and then became the cornerstone of the United States' Cold War nuclear strategy as the "balance of terror".

      It's difficult for the militaries of the West to oppose the idea of bombing civilians without abandoning Nuclear Deterrence. Which would be a huge step forward for humanity, actually, if we managed to survive the ensuing period of chaos.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    39. Re:never by xero314 · · Score: 1

      i actually welcome wikileaks in the realm of corporate intel and nonmilitary government secrets.

      Why do you hold Corporations and non-military personnel to a higher standard than the military? You are basically saying that the military can be as corrupt as they want to be, but no one else can. You are advocating a police state whether you understand that or not. Your ignorance is just not even worth trying to point out since you profess it so openly in words.

      You are a fool, and one of the few people in this country that actually deserves it when their military turns on them, or creates enemies that turn on them, or makes some drastic mistake that otherwise cause the destruction of the nation. Please don't think your siding with the military will stop them from assassinating you, in secrecy, when they decided they don't like something you have do or say.

    40. Re:never by Falconhell · · Score: 1

      Yeh Wikileaks is a marvellous organisation, unlike the US govt which cant keep secrets. How come you didnt manage an irrelevant bitch about Iran in your grammatically abomnible post?

    41. Re:never by Algae_94 · · Score: 1

      Everyone knows the Malaysian ambassador is a real piece of work, be as frank as you want about him.

      Seriously though, if there weren't so many scandals and coverups, Pfc Manning would not have felt the need to leak the data. Then there wouldn't have been any military and terrorism intel leaked.

      The point people are trying to make is that departments can communicate freely, and there isn't an increased risk of leaks, unless they are conspiring in shenanigans. No Shenanigans, and Pfc Manning probably wouldn't have leaked any info.

    42. Re:never by internettoughguy · · Score: 1

      Ultimately it just boils down to the fact that people with statist attitudes, such as yourself, are cowards. People with a spine will agree that a govts open nature may well interfere with its a ability to wage wars both figuratively and literally, but that's a price we're willing to pay for real democracy.

    43. Re:never by mywhitewolf · · Score: 2

      how do you suggest manning handle leaking out the corruption in government then?

      manning released what equates to "insider trading" to the "stakeholders", the government belongs to the people and is accountable to them, not the other way around. not all secrets should be revealed, but I'm yet to find one that shouldn't have due to the negative repercussions of the release. no one has died due to the release (OBL is speculation at best) yet how many people have died from keeping the information secret?

    44. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      an alternative reality that had a publicly accessible network like the Internet in the late 70s/early 80s?

    45. Re:never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't Osama Bin Laden became big after the US funded his terrorist endeavors against Russia? Doesn't that nullify your whole point?

    46. Re:never by superwiz · · Score: 1

      Everything released by Manning was classified. I don't believe the gp blames Wikileaks for a terrorist strike. The intentional disregard (by you) for the subtle is plainly obnoxious. But hey, it could be my personal bias against logical fallacies.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    47. Re:never by superwiz · · Score: 1

      The only unfair thing about Mannings' treatment is that he isn't getting a death penalty. He leaked classified information while wearing a uniform (ie, while under oath to lay down his life to protect that information). That's bona fide treason. The fact that he hasn't been charged with anything which could lead to a death penalty is a spit in the face of every man and woman in uniform.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    48. Re:never by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Leaks tend to happen when things are being covered up that should not be covered up.

      Irrelevant. Leaks come from spying, errors by people who know better or should know better, and people who believe that they are uncovering things that shouldn't be covered up.

      The propriety of leaking the information bears no relation to the leak, only the belief in the propriety does.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    49. Re:never by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      Todays top story: Wikileaks did have a second big leak recently, with details for the prisoners from Guantanamo. After Osamas death, it has been discovered that his hideout was mentioned several times in the leaks, and it is speculated that the leak prompted the US military to take immediate action, before it was Osama realized the US had atleast considered his actual hideout a likely suspect for his whereabouts and had done so since 2006.

      I am still surprised this story hasn't been on slashdot, yet, but then; it could be a coincidence. It is easier to see what information from tortured prisoners is correct, and which is incorrect once you know the right answer.

  56. A selfish man who had others die for him. by MarkvW · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A selfish man who had others die for him is not likely to be overmuch careful about protecting the people who remain alive after he is dead.

    I bet he was really sloppy and undisciplined.

    1. Re:A selfish man who had others die for him. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I bet he was really sloppy and undisciplined.

      In bed!

      (Not just for fortune cookies any moer!)

    2. Re:A selfish man who had others die for him. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MarkvW, yours is an idiotic comment. A selfish man who had others die for him? Leaders are less replaceable than foot soldiers and generals are rarely on the front lines of any conflict. Regardless, bin Laden was most certainly a true believer for his cause and, while living, would have cared very much about the protection of his fellow believers after his death. Moreover, I have no insight into his record keeping habits and neither do you.

    3. Re:A selfish man who had others die for him. by Que914 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A selfish man who had others die for him

      That's kind of a trite and glib statement, and one we've heard a lot. When I was in the military I heard people say quite often "If Osama thinks strapping a bomb to your chest to kill infidels is such a good idea, why doesn't he do it?" The answer to that is simply, the same reason George W. Bush didn't grab an M-16 and head to Fallujah.

    4. Re:A selfish man who had others die for him. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet he was really sloppy and undisciplined.

      A "sloppy and undisciplined" person would not be able to withstand the most intensive manhunt in history for as long as he did, while also being able to stay as visible (releasing tapes and statements) as he was.

    5. Re:A selfish man who had others die for him. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      the same reason George W. Bush didn't grab an M-16 and head to Fallujah.

      He got an exemption thanks to his dad?

      Oh wait, wrong war.

    6. Re:A selfish man who had others die for him. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A selfish man who had others die for him is not likely to be overmuch careful about protecting the people who remain alive after he is dead.

      I bet he was really sloppy and undisciplined.

      Yeah, that must be why he evaded the most powerful nation in the world for 10 fucking years... Sloppiness and lack of discipline.

      I don't agree with what he did. I think he was an 'evil' man. That being said, so are most of the political leaders in the USA. The biggest difference is, they try to hide it, while OBL was honest about his intentions.

      The problem I have with your statement is, you're doing what so many Americans do best. You falsely attribute negative qualities to someone you don't like, as if your insulting them somehow does good. Your statement is FAR more accurate if aimed at American politicians, and it's those very idiots who teach people to use the foolish tactics your comment is written with.

      Don't forget, your logic regarding a leader sending suicide bombers can be applied to the leaders of almost any country who send their soldiers to war.

    7. Re:A selfish man who had others die for him. by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      The answer to that is simply, the same reason George W. Bush didn't grab an M-16 and head to Fallujah.

      Osama was also a chickenhawk draft dodger?

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    8. Re:A selfish man who had others die for him. by Mana+Mana · · Score: 1

      > him is not likely to be overmuch careful about protecting

      What has amazed me is that the lamestream media (jajaja) hasn't asked some pinted questions about his state of mind at the time of his death. Basic stuff like

      * Wasn't he going to kill himself when catpure was imminent?

      * Wasn't he to have seconds, seppuku like, so he would absolutely die "when catpure was imminent?"

      * Why wasn't all his bit data tripple badass ecncrypted?

      * Why was he alone, without "tripple badass" escortS?

      Apparently that niga went soft and lazy after vetting himself a legend in his own mind.

      Brian Ross, Charlie Rose, Jonathan Dienst, David Martin, wazzup?

    9. Re:A selfish man who had others die for him. by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      Not to support Bin Laden in any way, but doesn't your comment apply equally to any high ranking military commander, or any civilian head of the military?

  57. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  58. A blend of 11 herbs and spices? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe he found out the Colonel's secret recipe?

  59. HDD content by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can just imagine a whole folder devoted to bacon and pork products

  60. Not much use by sjbe · · Score: 1

    Why use something which can be defeated with a $5 wrench [xkcd.com]?

    Your $5 wrench isn't much use if the person who has the password is already dead.

    1. Re:Not much use by khallow · · Score: 1

      Your $5 wrench isn't much use if the person who has the password is already dead.

      Obama wouldn't have been the only person with passwords. I don't know anything about the raid, but it sounds like they were able to go over the place afterward.

    2. Re:Not much use by pipedwho · · Score: 1

      Why use something which can be defeated with a $5 wrench [xkcd.com]?

      Your $5 wrench isn't much use if the person who has the password is already dead.

      That's because someone was doing it wrong.

  61. Burqa by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

    described by an anonymous government source as 'the motherlode of intelligence.'

    It had better be wearing a Burqa, or there will be serious repercussions in the Islamic population.

    --
    Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
  62. Heh heh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Can you imagine what's on Osama bin Laden's hard drive?"

    Gay Asian midget bukkake pr0n, probably; with camels, no doubt.

  63. Always assume you're being watched by plopez · · Score: 1

    And act accordingly. In the 60's, and probably up to this day, the FBI and others had infiltrators in all sorts of organizations; SNCC, Weather Underground, Martin Luther King's organization, AIM etc. I am sure most of the organizations like the Green Party, the Tea "Party", Libertarians, Green Peace, Wobblies, etc. have infiltrators in them. So, just act accordingly. Those organizations plan things openly to make sure there is no doubt they are not terrorist organizations.

    See the ALF and ELF sites for further information.

    Though infiltration can cut both ways, you can use infiltrators to mislead the authorities and also in the process burn the infiltrators.

    It's really interesting stuff.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    1. Re:Always assume you're being watched by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      And act accordingly. In the 60's, and probably up to this day, the FBI and others had infiltrators in all sorts of organizations; SNCC, Weather Underground, Martin Luther King's organization, AIM etc. I am sure most of the organizations like the Green Party, the Tea "Party", Libertarians, Green Peace, Wobblies, etc. have infiltrators in them. So, just act accordingly. Those organizations plan things openly to make sure there is no doubt they are not terrorist organizations.

      See the ALF and ELF sites for further information.

      Though infiltration can cut both ways, you can use infiltrators to mislead the authorities and also in the process burn the infiltrators.

      It's really interesting stuff.

      That's fine if you are a peaceful political party. If you actually are a vioolent terrorist, it's slightly different.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  64. Re:Truecrypt--Not "if", but "when." by Rich0 · · Score: 1

    There is no guarantee that technology like AES will ever be broken. History suggests that it will be, but the complexity of modern symmetric ciphers is such that we may never break them.

    Now, what we might come up with is some way to read bits out of RAM chips that has been powered off for years, or other ways to side-step the cipher itself. If the encryption key was selected from a limited keyspace (such as the set of all hashes of 8-character alphanumeric strings) then that would also allow a practical attack.

    However, if you encrypt something with a truly random AES key, and completely destroy all vestigial traces of the key and plaintext, then there is no current reason to believe that the plaintext will be recovered before the heat death of the universe, if every atom in the universe is used to construct a computer used to crack it. The keyspace is THAT large...

  65. For which they have the password by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    I would imagine properly encrypted... something?

    They were monitoring the compound for months. You have to assume that included all the most advanced possible electronic monitoring - they probably have a record of every keystroke on every computer in the house going back months. I don't care what kind of encryption you have, it doesn't matter if I have a record of you typing the password. Trying out combinations of every letter typed over several months as random passwords is still several orders of magnitude faster than exploring the entire keyspace.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  66. Bin Laden's Bookmarks by ajcoon · · Score: 0
  67. Amazing how /. by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

    turns into 4chan at the mention of OBL. Grow up kids...

    --
    http://www.acetonestudio.com
    1. Re:Amazing how /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, because off-topic meta-bitching is mature and unheard of on 4chan. Oh wait.

      Fuck off, you're no better than anyone else.

    2. Re:Amazing how /. by HeckRuler · · Score: 1

      Well considering yours is the first mention of it I've seen, I think you need a mirror.

    3. Re:Amazing how /. by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

      Your comment makes absolutely no sense.

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
  68. Source Code by Cyrano+de+Maniac · · Score: 1

    So now we're stuck waiting on the NSA to release Duke Nukem Forever?

    --
    Cyrano de Maniac
  69. I can imagine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can you imagine what's on Osama bin Laden's hard drive?

    I sure can. Eight hundred gigabytes of tentacle pr0n.

  70. uhmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    why are they telling people? if it's so good, why alert the organization that it's vulnerable?

    i suspect it may not be as good as they are letting on. maybe they just want to upset the sense of security of Al Qaeda rather than actually crack it.

  71. whats on Osamma's Drive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lots of what his culture thinks of as taboo , so I'm guessing baywatch , jerry springer ,and a bacon of the month calendar.

  72. It's all about the money... by dtjohnson · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Osama Bin Laden's organization needed a LOT of money to keep going. Money to pay for food and housing for all of the thousands of followers who are not actually working or doing anything useful. Money for travel, equipment, supplies, bribes, etc. Those hard drives will probably show exactly WHO was supporting these terrorists. Which banks were laundering money money donations to make it available to Osama Bin Laden? Maybe JPMorgan Chase was Osama's banker like they were Bernie Madoff's banker. Who was issuing them credit cards? Which foreign governments were enabling them to travel by issuing passports, visas, and other documents? The Osama Bin Laden people were very sophisticated in how they approached their terrorist activities...that was OBL's 'innovation'...and now it may all come unraveled. There are plenty of young men with rifles running around the Afghanistan hills who hate the West...or what little they know of it...but that does not make them into terrorists capable of carrying out a sophisticated act of terror in another country. That OBL data may help ID a few new faces but mostly it will be the leads to the money trail that will bring the global terror activities to an end.

    1. Re:It's all about the money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funding? A Haliburton subsidiary, started during Cheney's time as CEO...

      We'll never be told and wikileaks isn't taking new info...

    2. Re:It's all about the money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but that does not make them into terrorists capable of carrying out a sophisticated act of terror in another country.

      Yeah, sophisticated like "let's hijack the planes with box knives then fly them into buildings".

      You want terror? Five snipers in different major cities, a few kills each spread over each month and move city every now and then by train or bus. Sophistication is not needed. Neither's much of a budget.

      Steady stream of volunteers willing to get captured or killed is a bit trickier. That's the real limit.

    3. Re:It's all about the money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      INSIGHTFUL +3

    4. Re:It's all about the money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My bet is there's a trail leading back to Rupert Murdoch somehow. The guy had the tea party built through Fox News, and is now scared it's an engine he can't stop, so he's distancing himself from it by having Fox News discredit it. (Cf. Daily Show of 2nd week of April)

      That and a number of unhappy semi-rich people in developing nations hoping to destroy their competition through any means necessary. Why else finance global terrorism? Oh, right. Add the gun makers and defense contractors to that list.

    5. Re:It's all about the money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bingo! This could prove almost as embarrassing to Saudi Arabia as it was to Pakistan.

    6. Re:It's all about the money... by secondhand_Buddah · · Score: 1

      Well, you've certainly drunk the cool-aid. Al-Qaeda was the name of a CIA database, and not actually the name of any organisation. The database contained a list of subversives, extremists, fundamentalists, and militants. The actual conspiracy is that Al-Qaeda is this large international terrorist organisation, where in reality there is probably, at most, only a loose affiliation among small sub-groups within the database which actually poses very little real threat to any sovereign state.

      --
      Participatory Governance : The only feasible option for a real democracy, where everyone really does have a say.
  73. Iphone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A picture of him with his new white iphone

  74. He left his browser pointed at SlashDot by CrispyZorro · · Score: 0

    Looked like he was previewing a post as Anonymous Coward on: http://idle.slashdot.org/story/11/04/19/161239/FAA-Suspends-2-for-Movie-Watching-While-on-Duty

  75. Re:Truecrypt--Not "if", but "when." by St.Creed · · Score: 1

    The problem being that "later" means "useless" because it's not exactly a secret that OBL was killed and all his information retrieved. All procedures will have to be changed, safehouses abandoned, banking accounts switched... it's a major blow for Al Qaeda even without any information actually being readable, even without the impact of OBL's death. Decrypting it in a few months will mean you will catch a few idiots who didn't get the message to pack up and leave, but not much else.

    Now, if everything was in plaintext...

    --
    Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
  76. Always use unconventional and unpopular encryption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know what really confounds the NSA? When you use an encryption that hasn't been standardized. For example, don't use Rjindael, instead use something like say Serpent256 it almost won AES and is just as good. And, because they haven't spent as much effort on cryptanalysis of it, they're behind the curve comparatively. That's also why Backorifice used to use Serpent for it's communications encryption plugin. However, you'll notice that they're playing ball with the NSA now and have switched to the extremely weak Triple DES. The author of the Serpent plugin has sequestered his project and no longer offers the plugin download on his website. Also, I think if you use multiple layers of different encryption on the same data, they're going to really scratch their head. And, provide a lot of extra random noise around your data and fake encrypted partitions with useless crap on it. They'll spend an eon decrypting the wrong data. This is all just academic speculation. Personally, I'm glad they nailed Bin Laden to the wall! :-) I bet even if the guy was using encryption, he left himself logged in or wrote passwords down. One of the problem with keeping a complex password around and changing them often is people often write post-it notes and stick them on monitors. Passwords really are a bad joke these days. Also, they can deep freeze memory chips and steal data from them now. I'm sure as part of this plan to get him, the CIA/NSA were already in Afghanistan waiting for these hard drives when the mission even began. Oh, and your pagefile can be a trove of information. And, they should check for deleted files and undelete them. There's so much intelligence they're going to get from this, it's huge. Hopefully, they do it right. They should check which keys he pressed more often by detecting wear, sometimes that relates to the password as well.

  77. I'm 100% certain I know... by QilessQi · · Score: 1

    Ones and zeroes. Lots of them.

  78. Bruce Willis lied? by Guidii · · Score: 1

    I thought he put two in his head, one in his computer? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2HzhDBF5Nw

  79. Osama's Hard Drive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, I can imagine what was on Osama's hard drive.

    This:

    http://www.lolcats.com/view/24483/

  80. interesting that they weren't expecting it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they emphasized no phone or internet access. So they were probably surprised there was any computer at all. So given TEMPEST etc what must the setup have been? I'm guessing a whole boatload of deep cycle car batteries chained together, all in a self-contained room made of aluminum foil and outside the little self-contained room, the bigger room is also covered in aluminum foil. And the whole thing is at the bottom of a well. Of course, they would not ever tell us (since this setup was indetectable) - they would not want other terorrists reporducing it.

  81. Re:Assuming does... by blueg3 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Probably from TFA.

    Title: "Reports: Computers seized at bin Laden compound"
    Subtitle: "U.S. authorities removed hard drives, CDs, DVDs, USB sticks in what is described as a 'motherlode' of data"

    I'm guessing that maybe the bin Laden compound had computers, hard drives, CDs, DVDs, and USB sticks, which U. S. authorities seized. But that's just my uninformed guess.

  82. My final, dying post against the infidel Americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "They cleaned it out. Can you imagine what's on Osama bin Laden's hard drive?"

    it turns out that Osama Bin laden is ... Anonymous Coward.

    * Anonymous Coward on the brink of death- fading fast from wounds inflicted by the infidel American forces, if anyone adds anything to this post as me in the future it's Barack Obama being an asshole

    HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS

  83. Find the membership list. by elucido · · Score: 0

    Find that list, and then unleash the terminators.

  84. Apparently we're not that smart... by alispguru · · Score: 1

    ... or we would have broadcast "we have the computers, but they're encrypted" already, instead of TFA above.

    --

    To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
  85. RTI! by angiasaa · · Score: 1

    I thought it was really far-fetched to think Osama would be savvy enough to even dream of using a computer, let alone process information from one. Still, assuming that he did, and the stories are true, I'm quite sure we'd all like to have a look at the stuff he had on it. Anyone seeding an Osama Torrent? or do we have to wait till they get around to processing a request for Right To Information?

    --
    Geekism is your _only_ God!
  86. Re:Truecrypt--Not "if", but "when." by Americano · · Score: 2

    This presumes that we're not already watching those suspected safehouses and banking accounts, and won't also make not of a sudden flurry of activity hours after it was announced that Osama Bin Laden was dead. If they suspect that we will get access to it sooner or later, then they have to make their changes quickly. If you suddenly see 30 men with RPGs and AK-47's rushing out of a suspected safehouse carrying dozens of crates labeled "Caution: High Explosive!", well... perhaps those guys are worth watching regardless of whether or not we have confirmation that their names & location are on that encrypted volume.

  87. Considering How easy it was to raid the place... by brunokummel · · Score: 1

    ACME blueprints?

    --
    What is best in life? To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you and to hear the lamentations of their women.
  88. Re:It's all about the money - NOT by Animats · · Score: 2

    Osama Bin Laden's organization needed a LOT of money to keep going.

    Not really. The 9/11 attack only cost about $200,000 to execute. Al-Queda was never that big. In recent years it's been more of a loose coordinating group for various militant factions. In its best years, Al-Queda raised maybe $30 million. That decreased as the US found ways to cut off its funding sources.

  89. Yes, I can guess what's on Bin Laden's hard drive. by Cytlid · · Score: 1

    Goat porn.

    --
    FLR
  90. Re:Truecrypt--Not "if", but "when." by St.Creed · · Score: 1

    True - and my guess is that a lot of people within the three-letter-acronyms are watching the SWIFT bankrecords. I'd suspect we'd see at least some money moving out of suspected accounts into fresh ones.

    --
    Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
  91. Re:Truecrypt--Not "if", but "when." by MarkvW · · Score: 2

    You are totally right. The leaking of the "treasure trove of intel" is definitely designed to motivate flight behavior.

  92. if you read my comment by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    you see i write at the bottom:

    "i'm sure wikileaks will find a few more government info gems. and i actually welcome wikileaks in the realm of corporate intel and nonmilitary government secrets. but when it comes to terrorism intel, wikileaks is a disaster, and may even contribute to the next terrorist attack succeeding"

    are you trying to say no war intel was in the pfc manning wikileaks? a lot of it was military intel/ war intel/ terrorism intel

    also a lot of state dept intel

    so let's get into this: are you saying the us ambassador to, for example, malaysia can't be frank in his or her appraisals of the malaysian government and its personalities? he or she has to be careful what he or she says? because a transparency in diplomatic pouches means that either the ambassador can't speak honestly about his or findings, out of fear of offending the government of malaysia

    how in any way is this sort of transparency superior?

    obviously, secrets are far superior in the realm of military, diplomacy, terrorism, war. this doesn't mean i think that some congresscritters shady deal with xyz corp should be a secret. and i welcome wikileaks leaking corp espionage

    but i unfortunately get the impression a lot of teenaged idiots out there actually believe in government transparency to a ridiculous extent. they celebrate what pfc manning did, thinking it was a blow against corruption. no, he hurt diplomatic and war time efforts. if you don't understand how or why what pfc manning did hurt the usa, hurt you, you are a teenaged idiot, even if you are chronologically an adult

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:if you read my comment by merchant_x · · Score: 1

      So let's get into this. The point you are trying to make is that we either agree with your assessment of the Manning incident or we are teenaged idiots?

      We only get those two choices? No adolescent fool, or middle aged buffoon, just teenaged idiots?

    2. Re:if you read my comment by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      it depends.

      if you think corp intel should be released in the manning model, we have no argument. and i look forward to, for example, more wikileaks data of the type on the bank of america shenanigans

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/13/bank-of-america-leak-anonymous-wikileaks_n_835185.html

      but if you think military or diplomatic intel should be released in the manning model, then yes, you're a fucking moron, and there is no possibility to respect your opinion, because you lack the cognitive ability to understand the dangers with releasing publicly this kind of info

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    3. Re:if you read my comment by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Since PFC Manning was an all-source intelligence analyst in the Army, I'd say 100% of the stuff he had legal access to was leaked was military intel. He'll probably get a second life sentence for leaking all that other stuff he wasn't supposed to have access to in the first place.

    4. Re:if you read my comment by mywhitewolf · · Score: 1

      because a transparency in diplomatic pouches means that either the ambassador can't speak honestly about his or findings, out of fear of offending the government of malaysia

      considering international law dictates that diplomats are not to be performing any sort of intelligence gathering activities, then yes, i think this is a good thing.

    5. Re:if you read my comment by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      Oh bullshit. You're a fucking moron if you think that's what we're talking about. We're not talking about diplomats breaking into facilities of the governments they're communicating with. We're talking about their ability to return honest reports on the conversations they had with their counterparts back to the State Department, the White House, and Congress. That isn't illegal in any universe.

  93. Motherlode of misinformation? by kiehlster · · Score: 1

    If I were a terrorist leader and expected to be raided/killed, I'd also disappear off the radar, put a bunch of computer in my house, cut off the Internet, and fill those computers with juicy misinformation too delicious to pass up.

  94. Could amount to nothing by Odonian · · Score: 1

    The house had no internet, satellite, phone, and if I remember right, OBL gave up on using cell phones and radios also. It's possible the operation in the house was a zero-tech kind of thing, couriers, word-of-mouth only. There were kids in the house, perhaps the only thing they will find on the computer is Dora the Explorer.

    1. Re:Could amount to nothing by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      The house had no internet, satellite, phone, and if I remember right, OBL gave up on using cell phones and radios also. It's possible the operation in the house was a zero-tech kind of thing, couriers, word-of-mouth only. There were kids in the house, perhaps the only thing they will find on the computer is Dora the Explorer.

      "Hi, I'm Dora. Let's sing our song: I speak English, and Arabic too. I hate the decadent imperialist infidel West, how about you?"

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  95. Microsoft Windows? by littlewink · · Score: 0

    The OS of choice for 9 out of 10 terrorists.

  96. thank you by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    i refer to the stereotypical immature naive teenaged mentality, and you show up on cue as example A

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:thank you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i refer to the stereotypical immature naive teenaged mentality, and you show up on cue as example A

      If you hadn't gathered from my previous post, I hate people that think they have authority over me. Here you show up on cue as example A.

      I'm not sure why you feel the need to label me as a stereotype, either. I posted the truth. I can't fly on airplanes anymore because I refuse to have my rectum searched by anyone other than the doctor performing my prostrate exam. That is maturity, if you didn't know. Young men like you obviously don't get prostrate exams except when flying?

      My anecdotal evidence as to my reasoning on why government authorities get away with subjugating the free people of the US is not stereotypically immature either. Perhaps you'd like to have your 1st Amendment right trampled on, followed immediately by a trampling on your 4th Amendment rights? Mayhaps you enjoy being subjugated? I'm all for your freedom to be a submissive, but you should really know where your leash ends before you go proselytizing to freedom lovers such as myself.

      Finally, if anyone is displaying any immaturity here it's the person quickest to jump to the defense of the 'authorities'. IMHO that makes you full of as much bullshit as I believe my government is.

    2. Re:thank you by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      i don't have any authority over you. i don't have anything to do with you, thank god. because you're clearly a spastic immature moron

      how do i derive that judgment?

      by how you inject completely unrelated paranoia about basic rights into the discussion. meaning: you're a moron, because you don't understand why the topic you are responding to has nothing to do with the topics you are discussing. your inability to keep track of the topic matter is a demonstration of your spastic unfocused mentality. the freewheeling and wide ranging nature of the vastly unconnected issues that bother you shows a scattershot and feeble mind at work

      finally, you are immature. that's not an insult, that's a hope for you. because then you have some the possibility of some future mental growth ahead of you. or, if you are an adult, you're a paranoid schizophrenic hysteric, and you are beyond redemption. either way, you exist in complete loserville right now, deeply and debilitatingly concerned about issues you don't even understand the rudiments of

      either way, go do some more drugs, get more paranoid, and fuck off, you rambling twit. your mind is nothing but useless annoying low iq diarrhea

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  97. Forget the intelligence by PPH · · Score: 1

    The MPAA is going to get the first crack at it. I mean, saving lives by preventing terrorism is one thing. But illegal copies of Showgirls must be seized!

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Forget the intelligence by N0Man74 · · Score: 1

      You beat me to this thought...

      I was going to comment that they will probably find tons of copyrighted content, and it can then be used as a justification for ACTA...

      Then the derogatory term for copyright forefingers will be officially changed from "pirates" to "terrorists".

    2. Re:Forget the intelligence by polle404 · · Score: 1

      well, if he's been watching Showgirls, it stands to reason he'd want to destroy Hollywood, at least...

      --

      ~men are from earth. women are from earth. deal with it.~
  98. Encryption? by sco_robinso · · Score: 1

    I'm just really, really surprised that the world's #1 terrorist would be stupid enough not to implement basic encryption. It's always funny how you see otherwise very intelligent people who do all sorts of shady stuff on a computer, and end up not using some sort of encryption. But then again, shows like 24 show the public that any good analyst can bypass it in a few seconds, so it's all useless anyway.

    But still, seems odd.

  99. Re:Truecrypt--Not "if", but "when." by Americano · · Score: 1

    I have a friend who was a state cop (now working in the IT field). He told me that one of their favorite tactics when bored on patrol was to pull up to a red light or a busy intersection, and hit their lights and sirens.

    When I asked why they'd do that, he said, "To see if anybody spooks and runs."

  100. Match.com encrypted profiles of 72 virgins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only catch, the original profiles belonged to 72 virgin goats.

  101. High security and encryption? I doubt it. by dtml-try+MyNick · · Score: 1

    One report I read about the data seizure spoke of hundreds of dvds, cds, usb-sticks, memorycards and harddrives that were captured during the raid.

    While I am sure OBL and his organization took security *very* seriously I however doubt that such a pile of data is all encrypted in equal thorough fashion.
    As some posters already mentioned, it takes only one good fuck-up to compromise everything. I'm willing to bet that in such an a huge volume of data/media there is a fuck-up somewhere.

    Also, while I'm also sure his organization had some good it-experts on it's payroll the majority of the people surrounding him, including OBL himself, were probably not very skilled in the use of computers and other modern media/information techniques.
    A 54 year old man who spent the better part of his life fighting and hiding in hills and caves.. I wouldn't be surprised at all if he actually *did* write down his password(s) somewhere. Especially considering the fact he lived in the same compound for several years and must have felt relatively safe.

    His form of security came in physical form, guns blazing, relocating often (though he fucked up on that one) and trust in the people surrounding him. He understood guns and bullets, not bits and bytes.

    --
    Life starts at the end of your comfort zone.
    1. Re:High security and encryption? I doubt it. by blair1q · · Score: 1

      If they didn't also take all the post-its, they'll never figure out the encryption keys...

  102. Good opportunity for a phychological operation by eth1 · · Score: 1

    While there are already lots of comments humorously suggesting various variations of porn, it would be an interesting opportunity to "find" a lot of anti-Islamic stuff, and trumpet it far and wide.

    "Not only was your leader killed, his computer was full of pornographic infidels, anti-Islamic rants, plans to turn the world against Islam, bacon recipies, etc.!!"

    1. Re:Good opportunity for a phychological operation by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      While there are already lots of comments humorously suggesting various variations of porn, it would be an interesting opportunity to "find" a lot of anti-Islamic stuff, and trumpet it far and wide.

      "Not only was your leader killed, his computer was full of pornographic infidels, anti-Islamic rants, plans to turn the world against Islam, bacon recipies, etc.!!"

      I hope to God no-one important reads slashdot and picks up on that idea. "What could possibly go wrong?" barely covers it.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  103. How Pfc Manning really did it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're full of it. Manning didn't get the data out because it was being shared. He got the data out to wikileaks because of the staggering incompetence of the military to secure their systems.

    http://firedoglake.com/merged-manning-lamo-chat-logs/

    ---
    (01:52:30 PM) Manning: funny thing is⦠we transffered so much data on unmarked CDsâ¦
    (01:52:42 PM) Manning: everyone did⦠videos⦠movies⦠music
    (01:53:05 PM) Manning: all out in the open
    (01:53:53 PM) Manning: bringing CDs too and from the networks was/is a common phenomeon
    (01:54:14 PM) Lamo: is that how you got the cables out?
    (01:54:28 PM) Manning: perhaps
    (01:54:42 PM) Manning: i would come in with music on a CD-RW
    (01:55:21 PM) Manning: labelled with something like âoeLady Gagaâ⦠erase the music⦠then write a compressed split file
    (01:55:46 PM) Manning: no-one suspected a thing
    (01:55:48 PM) Manning: =L kind of sad
    (01:56:04 PM) Lamo: and odds are, they never will
    (01:56:07 PM) Manning: i didnt even have to hide anything
    (01:56:36 PM) Lamo: from a professional perspective, iâ(TM)m curious how the server they were on was insecure
    (01:57:19 PM) Manning: you had people working 14 hours a day⦠every single day⦠no weekends⦠no recreationâ¦
    (01:57:27 PM) Manning: people stopped caring after 3 weeks
    (01:57:44 PM) Lamo: i mean, technically speaking
    (01:57:51 PM) Lamo: or was it physical
    (01:57:52 PM) Manning: >nod(02:03:22 PM) Manning: i even asked the NSA guy if he could find any suspicious activity coming out of local networks⦠he shrugged and said⦠âoeits not a priorityâ
    (02:03:53 PM) Manning: went back to watching âoeEagleâ(TM)s Eyeâ
    ______________________________

    (02:12:23 PM) Manning: so⦠it was a massive data spillage⦠facilitated by numerous factors⦠both physically, technically, and culturally
    (02:13:02 PM) Manning:: perfect example of how not to do INFOSEC
    (02:14:21 PM) Manning: listened and lip-synced to Lady Gagaâ(TM)s Telephone while exfiltratrating possibly the largest data spillage in american history
    (02:15:03 PM) Manning: pretty simple, and unglamorous
    (02:16:37 PM) Manning: *exfiltrating
    (02:17:56 PM) Manning: weak servers, weak logging, weak physical security, weak counter-intelligence, inattentive signal analysis⦠a perfect storm
    (02:19:03 PM) Manning: >sigh
    (02:19:19 PM) Manning: sounds pretty bad huh?
    (02:20:06 PM) Lamo: kinda :x
    (02:20:25 PM) Manning: :L
    (02:20:52 PM) Lamo: i mean, for the .mil
    (02:21:08 PM) Manning: well, it SHOULD be better
    (02:21:32 PM) Manning: its sad
    (02:22:47 PM) Manning: i mean what if i were someone more malicious
    (02:23:25 PM) Manning: i couldâ(TM)ve sold to russia or china, and made bank?

    1. Re:How Pfc Manning really did it. by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      i don't understand what you are trying to say

      if you don't lock your doors, and i go into your house and steal your jewelry, i'm innocent?

      for not locking your doors, you're a fool. but for going into a house uninvited and taking what is clearly not mine, that makes me a thief, no matter how incompetent you are

      if a woman is drunk in a bad neighborhood, does she deserve to be raped? by your understanding of how morality is supposed to work, it would seem so. your way of thinking is "blame the victim". you actually aren't alone in this cognitive failure. i see a lot of people who rationalize crime this way: "they didn't resist properly, they didn't have adequate security, therefore, they deserve what happened to them"... and, the perpetrator of the crime is innocent

      no, that's not morality

      look: if you place $100 on your front porch for all to see who walk by, yes, you are an idiot. but whomever goes on your porch and takes that $100 is a thief, plain and clear. he took what clearly wasn't his

      the difference is the difference between stupidity and evil. you seem interested in condemning the stupid, and forgiving the evil. real morality is about forgiving the stupid, and prosecuting the evil

      if you transgress against that which is not yours uninvited, you are immoral. it doesn't matter how much resistance or security is involved by the victim of your crime. that has nothing to do with judging you

      in the same way, what manning did is wrong, and he deserves to be punished. this is an observation that exists completely independent of how incompetent the us government is

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    2. Re:How Pfc Manning really did it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here let me repeat it for you:

      He got the data out to wikileaks because of the staggering incompetence of the military to secure their systems

      Had nothing to do with inter-agency/military intelligence sharing and none of those channels will be affected. It had everything to do with the military's almost traitorous failure to secure their systems even to a level that you'd find present in most high school computer labs. Everything else you write is just pablum.

    3. Re:How Pfc Manning really did it. by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      hey genius: yes, you've told us how he got the info off the system. now you tell me WHY the info was on that system. i'll give you some time for your vast intelligence to come up with the answer you are now denying. the sharing. HERP DERP HURR DURR DERP DERP

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    4. Re:How Pfc Manning really did it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's your fucking lame-ass premise that intelligence sharing led to the leaking of information, so you defend it, Sally. You made the assertion, so prove it. Let's see some links to some official government documents, congressional hearing testimony, some fucking Rand reports, or maybe a war college dissertations Just come up with anything that supports your position other than your own moronic statements.

    5. Re:How Pfc Manning really did it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you can do a movie about a hacker zombie.

  104. The Real Reason for a Raid by pz · · Score: 1

    When I heard about the treasure trove of intelligence recovered it instantly struck me: that's the real reason there was a raid with boots on the ground rather than a bomb. DNA can be recovered from a bombed site with sufficient effort. Intelligence in the form of computerized or printed records is not so readily recoverable.

    --

    Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    1. Re:The Real Reason for a Raid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of coarse they wanted to gather any information he had present. If you looked at where he was located on a map though you'd understand he hid in a location that would be impossible to justify bombing, He built a stronghold surrounded by schools churches and hospitals. You can't exactly blow stuff up next to those places or worse miss and blow up one of those places. Especially if you aren't entirely sure that he was in there. This would not endear us to Pakistan at all. It would have been bad enough if he wasn't there and the operation still came to light when using a team on the ground.

  105. I wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they found it and immediately buried it at sea too.

  106. Re:Truecrypt--Not "if", but "when." by HeckRuler · · Score: 1

    Yes. Given the exponential rate of computational progress, the NSA WILL be able decrypt (most) encryption of today, eventually. As will everyone else given a few more years.
    But that's largely beside the point. An archeologist uncovering a forgotten NSA computer that finally decrypted Osama's porn stash from 500 years ago is going to be quaint.
    When something will take decades to centuries for even the beefiest and most determined of opponents, then it is, for all practical purposes, immune to cracking.

  107. Re:It's all about the money - NOT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are plenty of young men with rifles running around the Afghanistan hills who hate the West...or what little they know of it...but that does not make them into terrorists capable of carrying out a sophisticated act of terror in another country.

    Erm... I'm pretty sure $200,000 is going to be out of reach for the people he mentioned given that their GDP per capita is only $589.

  108. Re:It's all about the money - NOT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So Al-Quaeda spent $200,000 on 9/11. The US spent $1.3 trillion dollars on killing him (including a few diversion on route, but hey at this rate a billion here or there is chump change).

  109. Nothing by koan · · Score: 1

    There is nothing on Osama's hard drive, if there was it would've been heavily encrypted, or, if you are willing to believe they are that stupid then how did they pull off 9/11....doesn't say much for the USA that he did and we couldn't catch him until he was irrelevant.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:Nothing by blair1q · · Score: 1

      They pulled off 9/11 by immigrating in plain sight, openly attending airliner flight schools but asking to get out of takeoff/landing training they said they didn't need, bringing simple box-knives through "are you carrying a bomb in that bassinet, ma'am" security checkpoints, exploited the airlines well-known policy of placating and negotiating with hijackers (the well-known-ness of which led to the compliant attitude of every passenger on those flights, save Flight 93, whose riders only took action when they received cell-phone calls (in the air at 400 mph) that advised them that the hijackers were not intending to negotiate), and flying the planes as giant bombs into literally the biggest man-made landmarks on the planet.

      They were hyper-arrogant, not hyper-intelligent. I don't put any sort of situation regarding encryption of data out of thier range of ability.

      Some of it may be in RSA with a 4-KiBit key, and some of it may be ROT-13, and some may simply be in plaintext.

    2. Re:Nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's more to it than that, this was orchestrated by more than some sauds with razors.

  110. Spelling rant - "motherlode" used correctly! by billstewart · · Score: 1

    W00t! Somebody actually used the term "motherlode" correctly, and didn't spell it "mother load"! You don't see that every day, and loosing correct grammar upon the world isn't an everyday experience! W00t!

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:Spelling rant - "motherlode" used correctly! by blair1q · · Score: 1

      It's still two words.

      Mother lode.

    2. Re:Spelling rant - "motherlode" used correctly! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      W00t! Somebody actually used the term "motherlode" correctly, and didn't spell it "mother load"! You don't see that every day, and loosing correct grammar upon the world isn't an everyday experience! W00t!

      W00t! Somebody actually used the term "loosing" correctly, and didn't mean "losing"! W00t!

      And that was a nice touch with "every day" and "everyday.

    3. Re:Spelling rant - "motherlode" used correctly! by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up for the one and only time "loosing" has been the correct spelling in the history of the internet.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    4. Re:Spelling rant - "motherlode" used correctly! by billstewart · · Score: 1

      My wife once saw a sign that had both "everyday" and "every day" on it, and they were both used correctly - she was highly impressed.

      --

      Bill Stewart
      New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  111. bin Laden's an important enough target to rate it by billstewart · · Score: 1

    Osama bin Laden is a sufficiently important target that he rates a personalized attack. They'd might or might not have wanted to capture him alive, but they very certainly would want to be able to say "We got Osama bin Laden himself, here's the evidence" as opposed to "We bombed the house and killed an old guy with a beard, but he's too burned to be sure if it's him", not only because they lose the chance to brag, but because otherwise they've got to keep hunting. It's one thing if you think he's somewhere in the Tora Bora mountainsides, but if you think you know which house it's worth a raid.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  112. Slashdot Editor BLOWS Matt Welsh in bathroom stall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This would explain....
    "Are Linux users lemmings collectively jumping off of the cliff of reliable, well-engineered commercial software? -- Matt Welsh"
    being at the bottom of every page for the last week or so.....
    BTW you have a little Welsh's on your chin.....

  113. Admiral Akbar knows the drill. by goodmanj · · Score: 1

    I'm guessing they found nothing of interest. If they did find any leads, they need to act on them *before* the suspects find out, or the suspects will bolt and the info will be useless. Which means that announcing that you've captured data is the last thing you want to do.

    But if you've got nothing, you can *say* you've got the "motherlode", and watch and wait for people to panic and catch 'em as they flee.

  114. Obligatory by supersloshy · · Score: 1

    Can you imagine what's on Osama bin Laden's hard drive?

    Obligatory XKCD

    --
    "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
  115. the REAL QUESTION by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    What operating system did he use?

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  116. Al Qaeda has a custom encryption software by waldicksoriano · · Score: 1

    I've heard about it because Brazilian Federal Police arrested an Al Qaeda member (or sympathizer) in Sao Paulo last year and has taken precautions to ensure that his computer was turned on at the moment of the arrest. The software is called Mujahideen Secrets. Schneier has a small article on it: http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/02/mujahideen_secr_1.html

  117. What do you think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Super-hentai tentacle porn.

  118. Re:Truecrypt--Not "if", but "when." by dave562 · · Score: 1

    The human mind can only hold so much information. It can only hold an individual chunk of a fairly limited size. How complex of a password do you think bin Laden could have kept in his head without having to write it down? For random bits of information, the general population can only hold between 5 and 9 unrelated characters in their memory. There are tricks like chunking and mnemonic devices that can increase that amount, but not by a statistically significant number. How large of a key space do you really think they have to compute?

  119. Bad governments cause terrorism! by hellfire · · Score: 1

    i know a lot of teenagers and adults with immature teenaged mentalities thinks government secrets are pure evil, but guess what: when it comes to fighting terrorism, they are absolutely necessary.

    I personally think that a government is a necessary institution meant to help guarantee rights and equal opportunity across social, racial, ethnic, and economic lines. I also am not so naive as to believe that governments are necessary to fighting terrorism quite simply because certain governments are the root cause of terrorism! Specifically bad governments. For example, American companies and the American government traveling to countries with lots of oil and giving them tons of money to support brutally oppressive regimes just so we can power all of our little TVs, PCs, smart phones, and gas guzzling cars. Also note that the people voted for said American government. Those people being oppressed who feel they have no other choice, can easily follow that straight line right back to the American populace, who is of course the target of the terrorism. After all, our government is of the people, by the people, and for the people right?

    Your statement makes it sound like terrorists spawn like in some kind of randomly generated Call of Duty map. Now that's an immature teenage mentality.

    --

    "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

  120. Ob. Python quote by ozbird · · Score: 1

    Suicide Squad Leader: We are the Judean People's Front crack suicide squad! Suicide squad, attack!
    [they all stab themselves]
    Suicide Squad Leader: That showed 'em, huh?

  121. YRO? by jensend · · Score: 1

    What has this got to do with my rights online?

    1. Re:YRO? by blair1q · · Score: 1

      That depends on whether bin Laden's use of the Internet leads the authorities to institute junk-checks to anyone attempting to surf.

    2. Re:YRO? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If an article refers in any way to (a) the internet or (b) the government, it is tagged YRO.

  122. We'll find out when it gets onto Wikileaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A lot of it is probably pirated intelligence from China, Russia, India, Pakistan, and the middle east as a region.

  123. This would be great if.. by Paracelcus · · Score: 1

    This would be great if there REALLY WAS A RAID, that there REALLY WAS A COMPUTER, that Bin Ladin WASN'T ALREADY DEAD, that everything that the US Government EVER SAYS isn't a SELF SERVING LIE!

    Proof!
    Proof!
    Proof!
    Absolutely NO PROOF!

    --
    I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
    1. Re:This would be great if.. by Majin+Bubu · · Score: 1

      There is no doubt AT ALL that there was a raid on something, if only b/c of the fire, crashed helicopter, of which there is independent confirmation.
      For the rest, feel free to believe in conspiracies. I'd rather take Occam's Razor.

      --
      Ander

      @=

  124. Re:Assuming does... by dcw3 · · Score: 1

    Because of stuff like this from http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/osama-bin-laden-unarmed-killed-white-house/story?id=13520152&page=2
    Before they left, the SEALs gathered a trove of evidence from among bin Laden's personal possessions, from computer hard drives to CDs and papers.

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
  125. Re:Truecrypt--Not "if", but "when." by tftp · · Score: 1

    There are tricks like chunking and mnemonic devices that can increase that amount, but not by a statistically significant number.

    Top terrorists can afford to be exceptions. OBL could have used a serial number of his foot warmer as a password, for all I care; or a 2,000 characters long quote from Koran (or worse, from some other religious text.) That's what spies often used; a shelf full of books is not a crime, and a tiny mark on a page is not a crime either ... but multiply day and month together, add the checksum of the author's name of the first page article in Süddeutsche Zeitung, count that many words from that point, and here is your key for the day. Easy to handle but very hard to discover without knowing the secret algorithm.

  126. This is weird. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TPTB and the media have been telling us for a long time that Osama did not permit computers - or even telephones - to be anywhere near him or his hideouts.

    Now they are saying he was surrounded by them?

    It's nice to know who to trust, and, in the words of Mulder's old buddy, 'Deep Throat': "Trust no-one!"

  127. Religion? by Major+Variola+(ret) · · Score: 0

    Vi or Emacs? Or wordperfect?

  128. His Hard Drive? by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    Camel porn, I imagine. From www.livecamelporn.com. Which, if it isn't registered when I write this post will certainly be by the time you read it.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  129. Re:It's all about the money - NOT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Osama Bin Laden's organization needed a LOT of money to keep going.

    Not really . . . In its best years, Al-Queda raised maybe $30 million . . .

    OK. That doesn't begin to compare to the US military budget, for example, but it my books, that is still a LOT of money to be raised by a fringe lunatic group such as this.

  130. In the Navy: by Hartree · · Score: 1

    "They wouldn't send 40 Navy SEALs after "goat porn"."

    Depends on how kinky the SEALS are.

    If they've been cooling their heals on a submarine or destroyer for too long, I wouldn't take any bets.

    1. Re:In the Navy: by treeves · · Score: 1

      Penguin brings his car in for service, tells the service advisor it leaks oil, and leaves it at the dealership while he goes over to the Dairy Queen.
      Comes back about an hour later.
      So the service guy says to the penguin, "Look like you blew a seal."
      Penguin replies, "No way, that's just ice cream on my chin!"

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
  131. Say Mother Lode regardless of what's found: by Hartree · · Score: 1

    Most of the people in Al Qaeda won't be sure what info he had.

    So, you say you found lots of info even if you found bupkus.

    Then, you watch who gets nervous and tries to communicate with others to try to find out what's been compromised.

  132. You working for NSA, right? by xded · · Score: 1

    fed to a flock of >100 migratory birds.

    Birds moving in a flock follow highly correlated routes. This leaves room for statistical analysis and, with a sufficient number of captured birds, parts of the message may be recovered.

    Now please stop trying biasing our agorithms...

  133. Won't See Osama's Stuff on Wikileaks by BoRegardless · · Score: 1

    The sad part for sleuth junkies is that the true nature of what was found will not be revealed for decades if ever.

    A part not mentioned is the chance of the US CIA putting double agents & operatives in businesses who interact with the likes of moneymen and couriers and transporters of goods that Al Queda used, such that the CIA/NSA continually finds out more and more about how these guys work.

    Some 3000 years ago the Chinese warrior Sun Tzu who wrote the "The Art of War" noted he would rather have 1 good spy than 10,000 good soldiers.

  134. Contents are posted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They've started leaking the drive contents:

    http://binladensharddrive.tumblr.com/

  135. Re:Truecrypt--Not "if", but "when." by artor3 · · Score: 1

    Not everything can be changed. Let's say they have a few corrupt bankers handling their money for them, and a few months from now we decrypt the drives and get names, addresses, phone numbers. We can find those bankers pretty easily at that point. It's non-trivial to replace people like that.

  136. RIAA and MPAA supoena bin Laden disks by peterofoz · · Score: 1

    In a another fishing expedition for illegal downloads of music and videos, lawyers for the two organizations hope to land a huge payout of $25 million for songs and videos at $6,666 per song or video found on the drives.

  137. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  138. What operating system does Al Qaeda use? by felixdzerzhinsky · · Score: 1

    What operating system does Al Qaeda use? What has been found on captured computers in the past? Windows, Linux, Mac?

    --
    "Flags are bits of colored cloth that governments use first to shrink-wrap people's brains..."
  139. hard drivfe? by nanospook · · Score: 1

    Pictures of 70 virgins?

    --
    Have you fscked your local propeller head today?
  140. Osama bin Laden's mind... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can you imagine what's on Osama bin Laden's hard drive? If you can, imagine the data in his mind. Enough to track down Zwahiri and others, financiers in Saudi Arabia, links in ISI etc. I am surprised no one finds it strange when the highest valued terrorist was not captured but eliminated.

  141. Re:Truecrypt--Not "if", but "when." by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    For random bits of information, the general population can only hold between 5 and 9 unrelated characters in their memory. There are tricks like chunking and mnemonic devices that can increase that amount, but not by a statistically significant number.

    In this context, even one extra character memorized is a "statistically significant number", because it multiplies the total number of possibilities (by the number of characters in the alphabet). Personally, I can (I know because I actually do) memorize three passwords consisting of 8 unrelated Latin characters (lower and upper distinct) and digits each. If treated as a single password, this would make it 24 characters, with an alphabet of 62 (26 lower + 26 upper + 10 digits). That is 10^43 possible combinations, or the equivalent of a 143-bit key. Last I checked, even 128-bit encryption cannot presently be bruteforced.

  142. games by Guelph666 · · Score: 1

    I'm more interested in what he had installed. Did he like to play Sim City with destruction cheats? Did he prefer Chrome or Firefox? Or was he really into Opera's mouse gestures? Most importantly...was he a pirate? Maybe the anti-piracy organizations can step up their infomercials a notch and say downloading an album from the internet is the same as being Obama. Excuse me I mean Osama.

  143. not over yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, the endless wars must go on, now there will be another list of targets to hit from this supposed data.

  144. Re:It's all about the money - NOT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    200k to learn how to fly a boeing? Me thinks not.

  145. OK, I'm waiting for Wikileaks to publish it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This might be an interesting reading for a weekend or two.

  146. Names of all the CIA agents ... by zimtmaxl · · Score: 1

    He perfidiously collected names of all the CIA agents in the world...
    dates when they entered his organization allegedly,
    fictitious amounts of their salaries,
    and how they benefited his organization...

    --
    how IT is changing the world - http://max.zamorsky.name
  147. seen it before by tibbar · · Score: 1

    Wikileaks had it first....

  148. Seriously by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    what else did you expect them to say while crowing and patting themselves on the back?

  149. In which case the real question is... by RadioElectric · · Score: 1

    What kind of hardware was he rocking? Was he an infidel Windows-user? I guess you'd want something that had good heat-management. Do laptops handle very warm climates?

  150. What's on Bin Laden's hard drive? by AdamWill · · Score: 1

    "Can you imagine what's on Osama bin Laden's hard drive?"

    That 'Hang in there, baby!' cat poster. For *sure*.

  151. Re:Truecrypt--Not "if", but "when." by dave562 · · Score: 1

    If 128-bit is so secure, why are all of the major SSL cert auths recommending 256? Just because you and I don't have the hardware, or more importantly, the algorithms to brute force them, does not mean that the NSA doesn't. Hell, CAs are only protecting regular commerce. That means that 128bit is not even good enough for business, much less serious secrets.

  152. Re:Truecrypt--Not "if", but "when." by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    If 128-bit is so secure, why are all of the major SSL cert auths recommending 256?

    Because it's cheap to double the key length, but the strength goes from "unbreakable in reasonable time" to "unbreakable ever".

    ust because you and I don't have the hardware, or more importantly, the algorithms to brute force them, does not mean that the NSA doesn't

    They'd need more than algorithms for that. They'd need new math.

    Not saying that it's entirely impossible, but then neither is the existence of Flying Spaghetti Monster.