Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

'Motherlode' of Data Seized At Bin Laden Compound

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the i-saw-an-unclelode-once dept.

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?'"

14 of 718 comments (clear)

  1. 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 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)

    2. 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.
    3. 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.

    4. 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.

    5. 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!
    6. 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.
    7. 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
  2. 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.
  3. Disappear by More+Trouble · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If I thought I'd appear in any of that data, I'd already have disappeared.

  4. 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..."

  5. 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...
  6. 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.

  7. 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.