Slashdot Mirror
FBI Admits It Controlled Tor Servers Behind Mass Malware Attack
MikeatWired writes "It wasn't ever seriously in doubt, but the FBI yesterday acknowledged that it secretly took control of Freedom Hosting last July, days before the servers of the largest provider of ultra-anonymous hosting were found to be serving custom malware designed to identify visitors. Freedom Hosting's operator, Eric Eoin Marques, had rented the servers from an unnamed commercial hosting provider in France, and paid for them from a bank account in Las Vegas. It's not clear how the FBI took over the servers in late July, but the bureau was temporarily thwarted when Marques somehow regained access and changed the passwords, briefly locking out the FBI until it gained back control. The new details emerged in local press reports from a Thursday bail hearing in Dublin, Ireland, where Marques, 28, is fighting extradition to America on charges that Freedom Hosting facilitated child pornography on a massive scale. He was denied bail today for the second time since his arrest in July. On August 4, all the sites hosted by Freedom Hosting — some with no connection to child porn — began serving an error message with hidden code embedded in the page. Security researchers dissected the code and found it exploited a security hole in Firefox to identify users of the Tor Browser Bundle, reporting back to a mysterious server in Northern Virginia. The FBI was the obvious suspect, but declined to comment on the incident. The FBI also didn't respond to inquiries from WIRED today. But FBI Supervisory Special Agent Brooke Donahue was more forthcoming when he appeared in the Irish court yesterday to bolster the case for keeping Marque behind bars."
Nope, the NSA controlled the servers, it led to an NSA controlled IP address and they have the hackers needed. The BIG FAT LIE was that this block could be used by other agencies. Since potentially NSA broke the law for USA domestic Tor users, we have the FBI stepping forward to take the blame.
But we know its the NSA that tracks and monitors TOR because it was in their leaked document as one of their many excuses for surveillance:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/jun/20/exhibit-b-nsa-procedures-document
Also go read the first leaked warrant that let the NSA collect all the data (link below), it had the FBI's name on it. It was an FBI request to hand the data from Verizon's phone records to the NSA, a simple reacharound the domestic spying laws. The FBI acts as wing man for the NSA:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/jun/06/verizon-telephone-data-court-order?guni=Article:in%20body%20link
FBI doesn't have the experts, or the IP address or the interest in Tor, it was NSA and it was timed just as the NSA was trying to prevent further leaks from its own analysts. At best the FBI simply provides the excuse, as it did with the Verizon incident.
Land where Freedom will not be tolerated.
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
Remember when we used to think that U.S. LEOs still had some sense of ethics and would never actually send child porn to anyone to make a case? Now we know that, at least for a while, the FBI was running the servers. The FBI was responsible for serving up, by all accounts, half the *.onion-based child porn sites in the world.
Is this the first time they crossed this line? Or have they done so before?
Its called "unauthorized access of a computer" which is a federal offense.
You're a fool if you actually believe their attack was against pedophiles.
Lets just face it already. Our government is out of control and it won't be easy to stop now that things are so far in motion.
First they came for the pedophiles on Freedom Hosting, and I said nothing because pedophiles are scum.
Then they came for the drug dealers on Silk Road, and I said nothing because drug dealers are scum too.
Then they came for the leakers on {Wiki|Live|you pick one}Leaks, and I said nothing because I don't have time to read that stuff anyway.
Then they passed a law against using privacy tools such as Tor, Mixmaster, proxies, and crypto, because terrorists 9/11 OMG, and I said nothing because I have nothing to hide.
Then I tried to fly to my Dad's funeral and found out that I'm on the no-fly list. I still am. No one will tell me why, and there's nothing I can do to change it.
Then the police broke down my door because I had set up my wireless router wrong and someone had done something illegal over my connection, and it took me three years to get the charges dropped, and I lost my job and had to file bankruptcy, and I never did get my computer back. And what happened to the government agents who had wrongly prosecuted me? Nothing whatsoever. And what compensation did I get? The court ruled that the government had not violated its rules and therefore I was not owed anything. Have a nice day.
You joke about that but the county next to mine just had the sheriff arrested for that very thing. He would find his opponents or others who made him angry, arrest them for child porn, plant the child porn, and then splash their name all over the news to ruin their reputation. He finally got caught when he arrested the wrong person. This guy called the FBI and the County District Attorney, who both pressed charges against him. I think the total charge count is around 30 felony counts of evidence tampering, witness tampering, intimidation, and other corruption issues. This stuff is too good to be made up sometimes.
Uhh ... given that he who was the gold makes the rules, if there was a court order allowing it, or a clause in some law allowing it, it was authorized, just not by the owners of the computers.
Sorry, but I'm failing to follow your point here. Since when is an electronic device a waiver to standard privacy and due process?
Perhaps if the FBI were trying to break into my car I would understand this analogy better, but my point still stands. A "computer" is not automatic grounds for illegal wiretaps (and when I use the term "illegal", I'm referring to my Constitutionally protected Rights, not some secret court horseshit that "authorized" a waiver around said Rights, which remains illegal no matter who granted it.)
How is any of this remotely legal? Every day we have a new article explaining how the feds have been pounding our apparently imagined liberties in the goat ass, they get 300-500 comments (a lot for ./ these days) and then nothing happens. I'm a healthy skeptic, but this is literally the paranoid conspiracy-theorist's worse nightmare incarnate. I'm flabbergasted. In all seriousness, do we need to just move to a different country at some point? Is this what the start of a pseudo-democracy looks like and we just can't believe the warning signs are real? Just crazy...
Buy your next Linux PC at eightvirtues.com
If there's a court order behind this, it's less problematic in my mind. Not all court orders are publicized even by normal courts; search warrants aren't provided to the targets to challenge before execution precisely so they can't hide or destroy evidence.
The problem I have with this operation is that it was conducted on servers located in France, which means that either French law enforcement was also involved (very possible) or the FBI is hacking servers across international boundaries. That puts at risk any agents involved as they could be tried under French law for such trespass, though given that it was to deal with child pornography, the political result is that it probably wouldn't result in much more than a warning.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
And now they can serve gigabytes of child porn to pedophiles, then serve malware to practically everyone who uses Tor, pedo or not, and even stupid fascists who love to ramble on about justice and other shit to justify practically everything will still defend them.
Maybe next they can sell crack too schoolchildren in an attempt to find the crackheads who steal it from them.
The bank account in Las Vegas means that he was paying for (and perhaps profiting from) the servers. That provides US jurisdiction no matter where the data was being stored. The same thing happens around the world: if part of an action happens within a given country and it's illegal in that country, jurisdiction applies. They may have to work through extradition, but in this case, France may also look to get a piece of him, especially if he's not convicted in the US. France may then go through extradition to get him into their courts for storing child porn on French soil.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
So what source do you have to prove this?
Because no one wants pedophiles. There's been many suggestions to deport all of them to a small (5*10 meters) island in the pacific ocean (Pedoph Isle), but funding is unavailable at this time.
yes! stand up for rights and freedom regardless.
"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all." -- H. L. Mencken
A US court order might as well be toilet paper in France or anywhere else in the world. No US court has the authority to authorise that.
In fact many countries would take that as an act of war.
France should take it as such too!
Surrender in 5...4...3...2...
It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon.
The presidents of European nations all heal to the same masters as ours. Seen a NYTimes photo of Turkeys elected leader. Same suit, same tie, same generic lapel pin, on the same side. They are uniformed soldiers doing their duty. If there's any outrage from a local or lower government official it will just be to placate the masses, save face, the end of said officials careers. Might as well be clones IMO.
Its not the first time I have read about it. I read about an incident similar to this several years ago in a mainstream news outlet... NYTimes, Time, or some other magazine.
The problem is that it occurs more then once every few years.
I have no strong feelings on this controversy.
Paedophiles, huh?
So you have no strong feelings against YOUR rights being violated as long as it's to catch paedophiles.
Greeting citizen, you have passed the first step towards being permitted to remain a citizen.
This might be the story, or at least a similar one: http://www.wlox.com/story/23305442/look-back-mike-byrds-career-as-sheriff
Yes, that is the implication. If they take away your right to speech by targeting the pedos first, then yes. It's your rights that are gone, and if you don't speak up for the social democrats or gypsies, there won't be anyone left to speak up when they come for you.
That saying was just a re-telling of "All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
Learn to love Alaska
This is why the ACLU gets so much bad press. They tend to protect the rights of everyone by protecting he rights of the worst of us.
Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
Oh good since I'm in Australia I can hack the CIA with impunity! :D
not correct
for some yet to be explained well reason
ff 17.0 and up in the tor-bundle
have "allow javascript " turned ON BY DEFAULT !!!!!
you as the user must DISABLE IT !!!!!!
the BS reason so far has been
"we want more people to use tor on the "clear net" and most clear-net sites NEED javascript
"I don't pitch OpenSUSE Linux to my friends, i let Microsoft do it for me
You're probably on that list for being an opinionated online malcontent.
And for openly giving money to WikiLeaks :)
Now you touch the point the FBI relies on... Yell childporn and most people shy away. Defending rights and such is nice and well, but who want to be seen as defending childporn. And so people happily ignore the rights of other users being ignored. It works equally well with terrorism. The RIAA screaming how illegal downloading supports terrorists. By now any bittorrent traffic is seen as something illegal.
There is no "right" to molest children.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all." -- H. L. Mencken
Brilliant, as most of the stuff Mencken said/wrote!
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
Yes, including this: "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." - H. L. Mencken
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
So the FBI had a treasure trove of evidence that would lead to the prevention of actual children being abused, and instead of tracking down all those leads they decided to prosecute the people who provided them that treasure trove.
There. FTFY.
Were I director of the FBI, I'd be obtaining warrants based on this info left and right. That would be perfectly legitimate; but NooooO. They have to go after the network instead. Why? Is it possible that they actually depend on pedos? Kinda like the DEA--make drugs a public health issue rather than a law enforcement issue, and they're out of a job. Get the actual kiddie porn producers off the street, and a lot of FBI agents might be out of jobs too.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
http://www.wlox.com/story/23301502/byrd-indictment-details-charges-involving-surveillance-sex
might be more relevant
http://ftpcontent4.worldnow.com/wlox/Byrd%20Indictment.pdf
However although there are charges essentially relating to misuse of police resources and abuse of his position. There are no charges relating to planting of evidence with regards to the 2 cases of child porn and cannabis where the defendants were cleared. However if there were such charges then you would have to assume that any cases brought by his department may be tainted and that is a massive can of worms to open.
Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
That's a bad one, since he hacked an American server.
A better one would have been Richard O'Dwyer, who had never been on the U.S. and that the Americans demanded to be extradited because he had a website set up for streaming TV shows.
straw men much?
Nor is there a right to trample over the rights of everyone to get a very few...
Don't really have time to debunk this properly, but I do recall that the ACLU has defended the right of Nazis to have a parade. How does that jibe with your claim?
Murderers have rights. Pedophiles have rights. Rapists have rights.
They have rights because the best of us and the worst of us share these rights. The powers-that-be want to nibble away at rights of the seemingly most deserving parts of the community, but we'll ALL suffer if these rights cease being universal. As someone else here quoted : "The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all." -- H. L. Mencken
Get Linus to perm block NSA IP addresses in the linux kernel.
Get every one at home and at all levels of business etc... and android phones/tablets to block all those IP addresses too in all firewalls/modems.
Infact we could probably black list dozens of A classes by default, and not one would notice.
We need a distributed ipchains black list that includes all governments of all countries.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
If you blame drug dealers for messing up your brother's life, you also have to blame bartenders for all the alcoholism, convenience store clerks for all the smoking related deaths, farmers for the obesity epidemic, etc, etc, etc. Or you could just admit that your brother made his own choices and it's no one's fault but his own.
France should take it as such too! Surrender in 5...4...3...2...
Dude, it's 2013, not 2003. France are the US's new best chums now, because they were going to help with the planned strikes in Syria. In fact, John Kerry referred to France as their "oldest ally" in a manner widely interpreted as a snub to the UK, whose parliament had voted against taking part (although the Prime Minister had been in favour).
Of course, we've been here before with the positions reversed- we all remember when the UK went along with the Iraq war and France were against, how pathetically childish Bush was towards France and how he publicly flattered the UK and Tony Blair as the US's closest ally and best chum. Of course, Blair being an egotistical ***** continued sucking up to the US in the belief that this would buy further influence over them long after it was obvious to anyone that the US only did what it would have done anyway (and admitted as much in private). I commented on this circa 2007 and also noted that- even though Bush was still in power then- France (and Germany's) defiance of the US earlier in the decade had not resulted in any long term damage to their relationship with them, just as the UK had not gained any substantial influence with its sucking up.
In short, even if one is an amoral realpolitician (realpolitikian?!), it shows that public sucking-up to- and being publicly flattered as a junior partner by- the US buys little substantial long-term influence, and isn't worth worrying about as much as paranoid-about-losing-global-power British leaders like to think.
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
Corrupt sheriffs and cops getting busted for planting evidence against political opponents is all-too-common where I'm from in the South. I can think of dozens of cases just off the top of my head. It's almosr a shock here to encounter cops who AREN'T corrupt.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
That's a common argument that is told to conservatives to convince them that the ACLU is an evil liberal organization who should be hated. It was, as you point out, originally created to defend Communists from unconstitutional harassment, but that had a lot to do with the fact that Communists and people with communist ideas were unconstitutionally targeted by the US government from about 1880 until about 1990.
Some examples of causes the ACLU has helped protect their civil rights:
- National Socialist Party of America.
- Westboro Baptist Church
- atheist Michael Newdow
- NAMBLA
- Anyone who drives
- Anyone who wants to be able to view adult images on the Internet
- Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KT)
- An ISP that didn't want to spy for the government
I am officially gone from
Noone said they did, so pack away that straw man. ;) The argument is our privacy is sacred, and even though it can sometimes shield the guilty it shields the innocent from tyranny too.
So. has TOR now been permanently compromised?
So let's follow your logic to its final conclusion.
I accuse you of being a pedophile. By your own admission, you now have NO rights what so ever, as pedophiles don't have the right to rape children, which I claim you did.
I have a secret court order that I can't show you, and you can't even tell anyone about under penalty of death.
You'll just have to trust me on that one (Clearly not a problem for one such as yourself who admits people such as yourself have no rights)
Now you have just given me the right to murder you, I mean "kill you" as you put it. (Murder is the crime, killing is when its legal like this)
If you resist, I can rely on the fact you have no rights due to being called a pedophile that rapes children, which you have no right to do, and you make no distinction based on if you have actually done it or not so thankfully that detail doesn't matter.
If you DON'T resist, I can also kill you, since the secret court order I can't show you says I can, despite the fact you can't even verify that as truth.
Lastly, not only are you dead, but due to your opinions on the law, literally anyone can kill anyone else using the same rules you setup justifying your own murder.
Way to destroy freedom, pedo!
Murderers have rights. Pedophiles have rights. Rapists have rights.
That's right, they do. They have the same rights as the rest of us, including the right to a speedy, fair, trial by jury, and the right to remain silent. What they don't have is the right to murder, molest children, and to rape. I don't know how people don't get that.
I don't see anyone here suggesting otherwise.
In a cybernetic fit of rage she pissed off to another age...
... a US court order granting permission to hack a computer in France isn't legal in the US either.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
How the hell did they miss "possession of child porn"? Are they too slow to figure out that you can't plant child porn if you don't posses it?
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
I know what you mean. I think we can fairly criticize them for not taking their unlimited temporal, manpower, and financial resources and failing to defend every wrong. Whomever came up with the idea that you have to pick your battles clearly was a scoundrel!
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Actually, reading more carefully perhaps one could argue they did. I don't think that was the meaning, but if it was I guess they'd be saying "all men have the freedom to be good or evil, unless they don't in which case they are not free". I wouldn't agree - it sounds libertarian to me, and I'm not of that flavour and believe that some impingements on freedom given human failings are warranted. In the tradeoff between dangers, however, an out-of-control secret service is FAR more terrible than even a pedo epidemic, and terrorists are a pathetic crazy few unless they actually have a legitimate grevance or their host population is humiliated enough to give them popular support eg. parts of Iraq and Afghanistan. I've also got family history backing up the danger of secret services and state power too (disappeared family members, multiple state-based dark events to escape from over the years). Hell, democracy is based on division of power precicely because concentrated it is so corrupting and dangerous.
It must have been the line "are you suggesting that people "stand up" for pedophiles and drug dealers?" that confused me. For some reason I thought that meant that they don't have the right to due process. In my defense, that is because that is exactly what you implied.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
For those of us that aren't averse to conspiracy, Masonic symbolism is a big one =)
Tracking down root suppliers is difficult, time-consuming, and potentially even dangerous. It also has the possibility of actually reducing the amount of crime. On the other tentacle, busting users is easy because they're ubiquitous and seldom much of a threat. Even better, no matter how many you arrest, harass, or fine, it's unlikely to do much to the demand and is thus unlikely to negatively impact the perceived need for and importance of your job.