Slashdot Mirror


Privacy Advocate Jacob Appelbaum Reports Break-In Of Berlin Apartment

Jacob Appelbaum isn't shy about his role as a pro-privacy (and anti-secrecy) activist and hacker. A long-time contributor to the Tor project, and security researcher more generally, Appelbaum stood in for the strategically absent Julian Assange at HOPE in 2010, and more recently delivered Edward Snowden's acceptance speech when Snowden was awarded the Government Accountability Project's Whistleblower Prize. Now, he reports, his Berlin apartment appears to have been burglarized, and his computers tampered with. As reported by Deutsche Welle, "Appelbaum told [newspaper the Berliner Zeitung] that somebody had broken into his apartment and used his computer in his absence. 'When I flew away for an appointment, I installed four alarm systems in my apartment,' Appelbaum told the paper after discussing other situations which he said made him feel uneasy. 'When I returned, three of them had been turned off. The fourth, however, had registered that somebody was in my flat - although I'm the only one with a key. And some of my effects, whose positions I carefully note, were indeed askew. My computers had been turned on and off.'" It's not the first time by any means that Appelbaum's technical and political pursuits have drawn attention of the unpleasant variety.

194 comments

  1. Paranoia by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not paranoia when they really are out to get you.

    1. Re:Paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not paranoia when they really are out to get you.

      The distance between paranoia and reality has narrowed considerably.

    2. Re:Paranoia by cold+fjord · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is always an interesting question though as to which "they" it is. Appelbaum has access to documents that Snowden leaked. Is it the Russian government trying to get their hands on the full cache of documents that Snowden leaked, assuming they don't have it already? Germany is crawling with Russian spies. Is it the German government looking for more information on US and British activity? Chancellor Merkel brought a former intelligence officer into her government recently. Is it the US government? Is it the Iranian government looking for ways to avoid detection of its agents? Is it another nation, impatient to see if there are any revelations about intelligence involving it but not wanting to wait for newspaper publication that may never come? Is it another advocacy group looking for information to share in the limelight? Is it another hacker group looking for clues as to how to avoid government surveillance of their activities, or for information they can crib into attacks? It is criminal gangs looking for information that can be exploited in many ways - making a profit and avoiding police surveillance? Is it a former lover looking for revenge? All that can be said is that he claims that something happened, but what it means is very much an open question. Various people will claim to know that it was this, or that, but Appelbaum doesn't know exactly what, how could anyone else but the perpetrators.... if they exist?

      --
      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
    3. Re:Paranoia by KingOfBLASH · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not paranoia when they really are out to get you.

      The distance between paranoia and reality has narrowed considerably.

      Where's +1 Sad when you need it?

    4. Re:Paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Burglars wouldn't bother to touch the computer unless they were going to steal it.

    5. Re:Paranoia by houghi · · Score: 1

      On they Internet NOBODY is paranoia. They ARE following you.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    6. Re:Paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What documents from Snowden has Applebaum had access to? I know that he has been interviewed for some of the pieces that were related to Tor, but not that they had him working directly on the documents.

    7. Re:Paranoia by Tackhead · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's not paranoia when they really are out to get you.

      The distance between paranoia and reality has narrowed considerably.

      Where's +1 Sad when you need it?

      Trust the Computer. Happiness is mandatory. You are happy, aren't you, Citizen?

    8. Re:Paranoia by cold+fjord · · Score: 3

      Snowden ally Appelbaum claims his Berlin apartment was invaded

      Appelbaum ... is one of the few people with access to some of the data held by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

      You tell me.

      --
      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
    9. Re:Paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry? He is most certainly NOT sad by any stretch..

      However this does make for depressing news.

    10. Re:Paranoia by CanHasDIY · · Score: 3

      I guess that depends on which group accuses him of having CP on his machine, here in a week or two.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    11. Re:Paranoia by icebike · · Score: 0

      Burglars were an invention of the Summary Writer, Timothy, who is famous for this type of stuff. The link to the story makes no mention of burglars and does not suggest any physical object was stolen.

      Who knows how much data may have been siphoned off. That might constitute Burglary, but he was not deprived of anything but piece of mind.

      He doesn't seem to be able to tell tell what they took, or what they did on his computers. Seems odd a security researcher
      can't determine this, (or maybe he just doesn't want to tip his hand).

      In any event, I would't trust those computers again, even to read email.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    12. Re:Paranoia by timothy · · Score: 2

      Burglary and theft aren't the same. (I used to think they were; as a 3 or 4-year-old, I thought burglars had a fun-looking job, but I guess my moral sense was still developing ...but I also thought that burglars and bank-robbers were pretty much the same thing. I was a burglar for Hallowe'en when I was 4, not realizing that the black-and-white stripes are really only for burglars who aren't at present pursuing that line of work.)

      Wikipedia puts it this way: "Burglary (also called breaking and entering[1] and sometimes housebreaking)[2] is a crime, the essence of which is illegal entry into a building for the purposes of committing an offence. Usually that offence will be theft, but most jurisdictions specify others which fall within the ambit of burglary."

      At least in many jurisdictions, the "in the night" aspect of common law burglary is really ignored, and (as above) pretty much any structure can fill in for the old requirement that it be a "dwelling" that's invaded.

      --
      jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
    13. Re:Paranoia by quantaman · · Score: 1

      10 years ago my first thought probably would have been along the lines of "probably just some random burglars, he's probably just paranoid". Now? No one seems to question that it was government agents who likely broke in.

      I think that's one of the strongest indictments of the NSA spying scandal I've seen yet, previously people assumed government spooks only went after other government spooks, serious criminals or terrorists, or in the very rare case, high level political subversive elements. The idea that a spook would target a somewhat ordinary activist was mostly thought to have stopped in the US after COINTELPRO.

      I think we've relearned that we can't trust any government not to screw with ordinary law-abiding folks who pique their interest.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    14. Re:Paranoia by morethanapapercert · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Criminals skillfully disabling alarm system after alarm system, entering and leaving with next to no trace are the stuff of jewel heist movies. For decades, the advice of experts has been to make things difficult (not impossible) for thieves to steal your stuff. That's because thieves are usually a) lazy b) stupid c)) feeding a habit or d) some combination thereof. As a rule, they are looking for the quick score. The will not spend hours disabling alarms in order to steal your TV/computer/jewellery/etc when there are numerous other apartments in the same building or homes in the same neighbourhood that don't have that protection.

      Even if we stipulate, for the sake of argument, that some criminal did break into his home in this manner, that leaves us the obvious question of why the fuck wasn't anything taken? Thieves takes things, that's pretty much the definition! Whoever broke in could have taken all of his valuables, but didn't. Ergo, he, she or they weren't interested in valuables.

      Then there is the fact that it would appear that some care was taken to leave minimal traces of the illicit visit. Again, this is not the behaviour of your typical burglar. B&E guys know that most of the time cops won't bother with the whole forensic fingerprints, DNA analysis etcetera. As long as they don't leave clear prints in obvious places, the cops will usually just file a report and move on. It is just not cost effective to spend tens of thousands of department funds to pursue your typical B&E.

      The only logical conclusions we can make here is that:

      a) The perpetrator(s) were far more skilled and patient than your average burglar

      b) They weren't after fence-able valuables

      c) They were interested in something they thought he had that none of his neighbours had.

      d) Based on the access to his computers, what they were interested in was electronic data of some sort.

      e) Given his long standing political views, he may have been investigated by the German intelligence community on general principles, but given his well known connection to Edward Snowden, it is highly probable that he was being investigated by someone with a strong interest in that situation.

      f) Virtually all of the groups with access to people with those skills and with a strong interest in the Snowden case are state actors, mostly in the covert community.

      I'll concede that there is a small chance that some private sector group might be involved with this. There may be a group on the scale of Anonymous that also acts on the real world/physical level and is (therefore) more paranoid about associating themselves with any actions. One could hypothesize that such a group was looking for data so that they could reach out and help Snowden with his agenda without leaving any clues for other agencies to follow as to how they found him, but I think that is a very low probability. (it would make for a great plot for some cyberpunk novel though wouldn't it?)

      --
      I need a wheelchair van for my son. Help me get the word out. https://www.gofundme.com/wheelchair-van-for-jj
    15. Re:Paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Burglars wouldn't bother to touch the computer unless they were going to steal it.

      While your point is quite true, TFS didn't say he was burgled. It says he was burglarized - and as we all well know, burglarizers are a different thing completely.

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

      In which case Cobalt 60 would be handy. That is known to take care of most pests.

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

      Actually breakins performed just to show that it can be done etc. is a standard intimidation tactic. Luke Harding (Guardian reporter) wrote a book about it [1] (someone else reviewed it [2]). Harding describes that techniques such as breaking in and opening a window, leaving the phone off hook, switching towels etc. are things done just to make you uncertain of yourself. The technique was used by the Soviets from the earliest days of their regime. FSB (KGB successor) seems to have taken up the practice. The Stasi (of course) developed it into a science with dedicated chairs in the psychology departments of universities for studying this type of tactic. etc.

      It's not completely outrageous to imagine these tactics used against someone like Appelbaum. However, here is a suggested counter-tactic; Do exactly as Appelbaum does: When the intimidation happens, report it. Immediately and in detail. This turns the intimidation inside-out. Instead of making the victim feel isolated and defenseless, it makes the "intimidators" seem banal, stupid and stereotyped. They are of course banal stupid and stereotyped, and that is no disadvantage in an oppressive environment, since banality just emphasises the message of "we're in control". It works very well. On the other hand, the tactic of intimidation becomes much less effective it is not applied in in the hidden and in poorly documented Russian or East German flats, but in the glaring daylight of the Internet.

      [1] http://www.amazon.com/Mafia-State-Luke-Harding/dp/085265247X
      [2] http://understandingevil.wordpress.com/2012/07/21/luke-hardings-experience-with-the-russian-mafia-state-and-lessons-for-us/

    18. Re:Paranoia by Catbeller · · Score: 1

      Three of the four systems he had installed (good man!) were deactivated. The agency who broke in just weren't expecting that many layers (they will now be aware of super-tinfoilhatting). Whipping out the Occam's Razor, they are doing this to every effective anti-spying activists they can - but those hundreds or thousands of targets didn't have four layers of armor.

      Now the challenge: let's get some pictures! Let's see these little sneaks.

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

      Would random burglars be savvy enough to find and turn off three of his four alarms? Most of them aren't that bright and probably wouldn't even imagine that anyone would have three alarms to protect their property. And would a burglar switch the computer on, well some of them are idiots, so I suppose that is possible, but not if they are also the type to find and disable three alarm systems. From the title you might assume it was just some random burglars, but the information from the summary alone makes it clear he was targeted even if you were reading this 10 years ago.

  2. seems a little bit sloppy by Trepidity · · Score: 2

    So someone managed to turn off three alarm systems, but didn't think to make sure that the contents of the apartment were all left in the same position that they found them?

    1. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by wjcofkc · · Score: 3, Funny

      Just because they are spooks doesn't make them competent.

      --
      Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
    2. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by nurb432 · · Score: 2

      They may have tried, but you can set things up so that you can notice when even the best has come and gone.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    3. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by cold+fjord · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You can't overlook the possibility that they were leaving a message, whoever it was.

      --
      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
    4. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Indeed. And even the 3 that were "turned off" are a dead giveaway already. But turning the computers on is just plain gross incompetence. On the other hand, the NSA had all its crown-jewels stolen by a contractor, so the level of incompetence and stupidity in the "intelligence" community seems to be just what you would expect from government employees.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    5. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      almost surely *not* gummint employees, which is -to a large extent- the problem...
      no, these are prob *EX* gummint spooks who are now private contractors doing the dirty work of unka sam...

      can you say : plausible deniability, sure, i knew you could...

    6. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by Jawnn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So someone managed to turn off three alarm systems, but didn't think to make sure that the contents of the apartment were all left in the same position that they found them?

      Only if your aim was to hide the fact that you were ever there.

    7. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      They probably weren't expecting someone who memorises the placement of every pen and paperclip on their desk just in case this happens.

    8. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure they were; otherwise they would have, oh, I don't know - perhaps TURNED the alarms back on again? I mean it is pretty obvious someone has been there if the alarms that were active are no longer active (assuming they still had power, etc.). Why bother putting every last thing back in place if you aren't going to be able to arm the alarms again?

    9. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by AK+Marc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My desktop computer moves when I make hardware changes. The dust is medium and consistent. Someone moving the computer to clone a drive or plug something in the back will make it so I can tell, unless they can also clean it and age the dust 8 months. You don't have to be OCD to notice changes. It just helps.

    10. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by Nyder · · Score: 1

      So someone managed to turn off three alarm systems, but didn't think to make sure that the contents of the apartment were all left in the same position that they found them?

      Going to point out since they missed the 4th alarm system, it's not surprising that didn't put everything back in the same place.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    11. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by Nyder · · Score: 5, Funny

      My desktop computer moves when I make hardware changes. The dust is medium and consistent. Someone moving the computer to clone a drive or plug something in the back will make it so I can tell, unless they can also clean it and age the dust 8 months. You don't have to be OCD to notice changes. It just helps.

      I use the same excuse as a reason not cleaning my apartment.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    12. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My computers had been turned on and off

      They were not very good at it as they clearly had to call their tech support and were advised to turn his computers on and off again.

    13. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're goal is to become a spy, there isn't a whole lot of non-government agencies you could work for. I suppose there's always corporate espionage, but that just doesn't seem as thrilling.

    14. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And now that he's made it public, he's going to need FIVE alarm systems from now on.

    15. Re: seems a little bit sloppy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Knowing if papers and effects have been tampered with is basic tradecraft. It's a shame that journalists have to learn the same tricks as diplomats and spies, but that is the world we live in.

    16. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by mcneely.mike · · Score: 0

      But turning the computers on is just plain gross incompetence.

      Turn the computer off/reboot into a forensic linux cd/dvd, examine the hard drive, do what you want, switch some system files for files more under your control, then hope he doesn't notice you've done these things.... then follow his computer activity/trail, his tor activities....

      --
      soylentnews.org Go there to enjoy the people!
    17. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by jd · · Score: 3

      Very true. Instill an element of fear in someone who you know will talk about it, creating an element of fear over the wider community. PsyOps. Which we know governments practice.

      The Russians know no more than the rest of us - Snowden has made it clear he gave all documents to others, and this is extremely believable. It makes it pointless to limit damage - or even establishing what damage there is to be limited - by capturing or killing him.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    18. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by HiThere · · Score: 1

      And while they turned off three of them, apparently they didn't turn them back on before leaving. So they weren't hiding that they had been there.

      OTOH, they also didn't go out of their way to create a mess. So they weren't police.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    19. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by icebike · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So someone managed to turn off three alarm systems, but didn't think to make sure that the contents of the apartment were all left in the same position that they found them?

      They might have had no alternative but to turn off the three alarms. After all a loud ringing alarm will soon bring investigators of one sort or another.

      Who knows just how persnickety his staged positioning of items in the room might have been. That magazine might overlap that envelope on the table "just so", and he could have had photos on his smartphone that he could match better than even a professional team could restore.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    20. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by icebike · · Score: 2

      Snowden has made it clear he gave all documents to others,

      He has made it clear he has given encrypted copies to others, and he releases encryption keys selectively as the need arises.
      Which suggests he as a very good memory, or access to something to retrieve the next key or the key specific to the topic he chooses.

      He hasn't made the whole trove accessible to all of the holders yet.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    21. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by icebike · · Score: 1

      almost surely *not* gummint employees, which is -to a large extent- the problem...
      no, these are prob *EX* gummint spooks who are now private contractors doing the dirty work of unka sam...

      can you say : plausible deniability, sure, i knew you could...

      So you thing the NSA doesn't have it best teams on this issue, and instead are going with a Michael Westin solution?
      That's crazy.
      Why would they need plausible deniability? Who's going to arrest them? Certainly not the BfV or BND.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    22. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by icebike · · Score: 4, Interesting

      But turning the computers on is just plain gross incompetence.

      Turn the computer off/reboot into a forensic linux cd/dvd, examine the hard drive, do what you want, switch some system files for files more under your control, then hope he doesn't notice you've done these things.... then follow his computer activity/trail, his tor activities....

      No "security researcher and hacker" would have his computer set up to boot from the CDrom, or have his bios un-password protected, or his hard drive unencrypted. If they were "Really Good" at computer forensics they might have simply removed the drives cabled them up and cloned them, encrypted partitions and all. (It would be impossible to add their own versions of software to an encrypted drive. Of course this assumes he's not running Windows).

      If done right, and everything put back in place, the only thing he would have to determine that the "computers" were turned on would be the power on count in the drive's SMART data.

      Of course, he could have gone old-school, and placed a tuft of cotton fuzz in the fan vent. Someone who uses 4 alarms might just be that careful.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    23. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He has not sent anything and not been active in any releases. All releases have been made solely by the journalists that were entrusted with the entire archive. Don't believe the attempts to paint new releases as coming from him, except as an origin.

    24. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by icebike · · Score: 1

      So someone managed to turn off three alarm systems, but didn't think to make sure that the contents of the apartment were all left in the same position that they found them?

      Going to point out since they missed the 4th alarm system, it's not surprising that didn't put everything back in the same place.

      After three went off loudly, they might have been forced to turn these off, and they totally missed the silent one. If all his alarms were the noisy kind, they might stop worrying when it got quiet.

      What I want to know, is why he doesn't have pictures. Four alarms and memorized placement, and no hidden wireless cameras?

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    25. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by icebike · · Score: 2

      He doesn't have to SEND anything. As clearly stated in my post and published in many sources, he had distributed encrypted copies to many different locations.

      The means by which he releases encryption keys is unknown. But what is known is that not ALL the information has been decrypted by the holders.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    26. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps he does not trust wireless security cameras to be sufficiently secure. If someone has access to your cameras, they can watch every move you make, which is a rather immense privacy violation.

    27. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by Richy_T · · Score: 2
    28. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by allo · · Score: 1

      Maybe the fourth is not there, and he wants the spooks to be paranoid next time.

    29. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      You can't overlook the possibility that they were leaving a message, whoever it was.

      "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." -- While disagree with the foolish absolutist term "never" Hanlon used in this quote, it's more probable sloppiness otherwise why bother disabling the other 3 alarms or turning off the computers? I mean, stealing the computers and ransacking the place to appear as a burglary would have been so much easier.

      The best defense is a good offense. This explains my odor, and why I insist mother brings my food down to the basement, so as not to leave the computers unattended.

    30. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by icebike · · Score: 1

      Or, you could, unplug them when home? Nah, what was I thinking, that's crazy talk.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    31. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by quantaman · · Score: 1

      So someone managed to turn off three alarm systems, but didn't think to make sure that the contents of the apartment were all left in the same position that they found them?

      If you came home after a trip and all your alarms had been turned off that's generally a better indication that you were broken into than having some items in a different position. Question is did they leave the alarms off as a practical manner (too hard to turn back on) or as a "we were here" message that some have suggested.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    32. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      I know this was a laptop but some desktops have case fans so you might at least be able to know that the case was opened.

    33. Re: seems a little bit sloppy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Key of today:
      Bush was a bad boy.

    34. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      A fairly simple attack against encrypted systems is to infect the small unencrypted bootloader and kernel (which are almost always stored on the same drive in an unencrypted partition) and put a backdoor into that. You could even clone the drive, then put in a backdoor which would save the encryption key (when he booted next time) and send it to you over cover channels.

    35. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you came home after a trip and all your alarms had been turned off that's generally a better indication that you were broken into than having some items in a different position. Question is did they leave the alarms off as a practical manner (too hard to turn back on) or as a "we were here" message that some have suggested.

      Agreed that that is the question. Why would they turn the computer(s) back off but not turn the alarms back on? Which of course also leads to the question of whether or not everything they did was completely intentional...

    36. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by furbyhater · · Score: 1

      The Guardian journalists have access to all the documents he's released to them. He doesn't regurarly send them keys for decryption. The only thing only he holds a key for is his mysterious "insurance" file.

    37. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      The first couple stages of the bootloader really have very little space to work with. I would think that the very first stage would just initialize the hardware and jump to the second, which for secure versions just decrypts the third-stage, maybe does some sort of verification, and jumps there. (At least that's how I would do it. And that's how they did it for the original X-Box.*) If it's supposed to be a secure system, why the hell would they leave the kernel lying around unencrypted?

      I would not call it "fairly simple," however I admit I'm not familiar with the subject.

      * http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fOjGLCctEY

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    38. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by RavenLrD20k · · Score: 1

      Or he could also have considerably more than just 4 systems, but since the burglars only disabled 3 he didn't have to reveal that there are 37 other alarms. Just had to reveal one more than they found to rub in their failure at the same time as make them feel special that they were "almost" able to get away with it.

    39. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by Catbeller · · Score: 1

      Scientology operatives of various levels of competence love to let you know they've been there. Basic tactics: make the person insecure and neurotic about their home and theirr privacy, especially as law enforcement will not believe you, or care. The target lives a miserable life, and the thugs don't even have to make a return visit. Once does it.

    40. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      which gets defeated by a little piece of invisible teflon tape that they won't know is even there till they try to open your pc case.

      if properly paranoid, set up a laser tripwire, since I don't think EM countermeasures are part of a black bag job kit. bonus points if you put dazzlers and car alarms and other stuff in it. Last thing your budding spy wants is the target building to light up like a disco and alert every law enforcement and civilian in a mile radius (hard to hide that sort of thing)

    41. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by Zorpheus · · Score: 1

      Don't bioses have master passwords anymore?

    42. Re:seems a little bit sloppy by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      Oh, of course there are many physical security measures you could take. Hell, you could lock the whole computer in a safe if you really wanted to. I just wanted to point out that full disk encryption has some fairly simple workarounds.

  3. There's going to be more of this to come. by dclozier · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As we improve our ability to keep private things private the government's orginizations will find it easier to snoop by gaining physical access first. There's no doubt we're on the slippery slope. I have to wonder, which orginization broke into his apartment? Or maybe it was a combined effort and they are sharing in the information gained, if any.

  4. For the Lulz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    I'd break in, move some stuff around, and turn his computers on and off just to fuck with his head.

    1. Re:For the Lulz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Common tactic of the German Stasi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi#Zersetzung

    2. Re: For the Lulz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what proof do we have that you are not a bot ? ? ?
      surely, more than MR. Applebaum is his own agent provocateur...

  5. time to buy some new equipement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    There's no way he can trust using the electronic devices that were in the apartment now. In fact, he should probably move to a new place, or go all Gene Hackman on it.

    1. Re:time to buy some new equipement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      He should put his wireless router in a faraday cage so the US government can't spy on him.

    2. Re:time to buy some new equipement by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Although that is clever, in more ways than one, how do you know he doesn't have copper wallpaper?

      --
      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
    3. Re:time to buy some new equipement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Won't work. The NSA has the ability to intercept packets sent to the wireless router BEFORE they get to the f.c., and they can intercept packets from the wireless router by measuring the audio output from its ASIC hardware.

    4. Re: time to buy some new equipement by RelativeKny · · Score: 1

      As someone working every day with high sensitivity electronics and signal processing, I can tell you with absolute certainty, that intercepting mega/gigabit-per-second data packets using a microphone(!) is never going to work. Try calculating a) the background audio noise density compared to reasonable signal levels and b) path attenuation loss of a 100 MHz sound wave in air It is far easier sneaking a wire with a tiny antenna at each end through the cage. Also, a Faraday cage is actually far more complicated to build than simple copper wall paper. Usually you will want electrical power (and Internet connection?) inside because running all of your hardware on batteries gets rather annoying quite quickly, so you need to build filtering on the power lines, and that even before you start wondering where to ground your cage in relation to both power and signal lines.

  6. What an idiot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seriously, if you don't want the American secret police to dig around through your shit, kidnap, torture, and possibly kill you (while making your body disappear), don't piss off anyone in the American government.

    I'm not being sarcastic.

    1. Re:What an idiot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why did you get modded down for stating a fact?

    2. Re:What an idiot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You got modded down because you were too blunt about your statement. Had you phrased it in a more insightful way you may have received mod points.

      The fact is that some of us Americans will mod down posts just because we want to defend our government from outside condemnation. We can bitch and moan about them all we want, but someone else? Not so much.

    3. Re:What an idiot... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      You just pissed off someone in the American Government.

    4. Re:What an idiot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " The US hasn't even been shown to... " Rubbish, lol. You blind old coots are a hoot. Read a book idiot.

    5. Re:What an idiot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if you don't mind watching the world around you turn into a tyrannical police state where you could simply disappear in the middle of the night for not "voting" correctly, then just do nothing!

      I'm not being sarcastic either.

    6. Re:What an idiot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jack Barnaby

    7. Re:What an idiot... by jd · · Score: 1

      Nobody knows what would piss off the wrong people to that extent. The CIA apparently had "rogue" missions being launched by "enthused" controllers. We don't know if that's true, but since I am defining the scope of ignorance, anything we can rationally say we are ignorant of is in scope. In this case, we can rationally say that the best information we have makes it possible that upsetting relatively low-level employees of any security agency may be sufficient to warrant (in their eyes) a visit.

      I dispute the conclusion that you should avoid saying X, Y or Z, because avoiding the elephant in the room (or the penguin on the television) may be precisely what upsets them. It would be considered suspicious by some and if those some are amongst the controllers, not mentioning things could also get you a visit.

      Hell, we know Rumsfeld held prayer sessions as head of the DoD and is alleged to have held strange superstitions about cats. If someone that bizarre could become head of a department, someone just as bizarre could be involved in CIA operations. There is a finite, non-zero probability that being an Odinist or a crazy cat lady could also attract CIA attention.

      The fact is, if you are breathing (or not breathing but still functioning), you will upset someone. There is nothing you can do to avoid it, there will almost always be nothing you can do to defend against it (sorry, that's just how it is), so the old advice still holds true. Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow you may die.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    8. Re:What an idiot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US hasn't even been shown to kidnap and kill al Qaida members

      Have you heard of a chap called Osama bin Laden? The U.S. government was quite public about doing exactly that to him.

    9. Re:What an idiot... by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      You're making the fallacious assumption that the list of things that pisses them off is reasonable.

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
  7. Perceptions by Gonoff · · Score: 2

    It's surprising that there are still some people in the USA who are surprised that your spooks are generally perceived, all over the world, to be criminals.

    --
    I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
    1. Re:Perceptions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would it be surprising that people tasked to break the laws as a matter of course...

    2. Re:Perceptions by csumpi · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Let's just not get carried away and think that Russians, Germans, the Brits, Canadians, you name it, don't engage in similar activities. Maybe it's just that in those countries nobody has the balls to leak the info.

    3. Re:Perceptions by cold+fjord · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's surprising that there are still some people in the USA who are surprised that your spooks are generally perceived, all over the world, to be criminals.

      It is surprising that some people are unable to conceive of the idea that many nations would like to get their hands on the information that Snowden took, and which Appelbaum has access to. For all you know it could be Russians, Chinese, Iranians, Germans, French, Israelis, Swedes, or just about any other country's agents. That is before you consider criminal gangs or hacker groups. Your imagination is far too limited to consider the range of possibilities.

      --
      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
    4. Re:Perceptions by mcneely.mike · · Score: 0

      We lost our balls when we heard our first Celine Dion song... plus when we saw her face, our dicks fell off. Moooooo!

      Proud Canadian... except for Celine Dion, Bryan Adams.... and now Stephen Harper. But Bob and Doug Ford/MacKenzie are a RIOT!!! ;)))

      --
      soylentnews.org Go there to enjoy the people!
    5. Re:Perceptions by inode_buddha · · Score: 1

      So... you'd fuck Bob-n-Doug McKenzie?.... somehow I'm not surprised. It must get awfully boring in the igloo when there's a blizzard out and nowhere to go....

      --
      C|N>K
    6. Re:Perceptions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not Bob or Doug, but Spuds...oh yeah, if it's Spuds we are talking about then a definite yes!

  8. Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by grumbel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Come on, he installed four alarm system and didn't bother with a single surveillance camera? I am not saying that there wasn't somebody in his apartment, but it's hard not to think this might have just been a case of a malfunctioning alarm system and a whole bunch of paranoia on top. If the government is after you, at least make sure you get some pretty pictures of them, cams are cheap these days.

    1. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by flyingfsck · · Score: 2

      Yup - pics or it didn't happen.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    2. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with cameras is that they are also on while you're at home alone. Once the government catches you on video making a sandwich or writing an email they can use it against you. Better to claim you just sit and watch a blank TV all day.

    3. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by nurb432 · · Score: 2

      Better not try to turn off that TV either.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    4. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by dadelbunts · · Score: 1

      You can set them to be only on when you leave. Wouldnt be too hard, and certainly not too hard for this guy to do.

    5. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by dadelbunts · · Score: 1

      My thoughts exactly. All this security system but no cameras? If you are that worried about people breaking into your house, and think it has happened before, wouldnt you want to know WHO broke into your house?

    6. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      maybe one of them was. 3 were turned off.

    7. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Maybe the cameras were part of one of the three alarm systems that was turned off.

    8. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

      And then do what, go to the police? What'll they do? Put it on youtube? Who'll see it?

      --
      Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
    9. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      It is very easy to set up a motion capture alarm - Google for 'Linux Motion' for example.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    10. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see why you post as anonymous coward, but why not petulant and idiotic coward? That certainly applies better than your anonymity.

    11. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Also, it seems very unlikely that he's the only one with a key to his flat. If it's a flat, that means it's in a shared building. If he's renting the landlord has a key, for emergency and notified inspection purposes. If he's got a condo, the superintendent has a key for emergency purposes. Unless he owns the building and has a pick-proof lock, his claims on physical security seem to be overstated. OK, I guess he could have an extraordinary contract, but a power outage seems more likely given the information we have.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    12. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by spacefight · · Score: 5, Informative
    13. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by vux984 · · Score: 1

      If he's got a condo, the superintendent has a key for emergency purposes.

      I don't know if you mean something different by "condo"; but I've lived in a couple and live in one now, and there is no 'superindentent'. There is a strata corporation with a president and council who are elected from the owners, a 3rd party management company who provides some legal services, and a variety of contracts with trades... but nobody has a key to all the units. Hell, most owners re-key them as a matter of course when they buy them.

    14. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by icebike · · Score: 1

      The problem with cameras is that they are also on while you're at home alone. Once the government catches you on video making a sandwich or writing an email they can use it against you. Better to claim you just sit and watch a blank TV all day.

      Oh come on. People who have cameras know they have cameras, and turn them off when they don't want them on. Especially (justifiably) paranoid people.
      If you don't get notified that your camera took a picture and maybe have it emailed to you, you're doing it wrong.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    15. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by icebike · · Score: 1

      Flat, in Germany refers to an apartment, not a condo.

      However, there is nothing (other than his rental agreement) that would prevent him from having his locks changed out, even if he did it himself. Its trivial, and your building super might not notice for years, if you are always there to let him in.

      Him having the only key means nothing if he bought a common lock, many of which are still being made to this day that are susceptible to bump keys.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    16. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by icebike · · Score: 1

      He has pictures.

      https://twitter.com/ioerror/status/394042003928776704

      Nothing in that thread says he actually has photos. He merely implies it, and suddenly worries about the ethics.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    17. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by icebike · · Score: 2

      Come on, he installed four alarm system and didn't bother with a single surveillance camera? I am not saying that there wasn't somebody in his apartment, but it's hard not to think this might have just been a case of a malfunctioning alarm system and a whole bunch of paranoia on top. If the government is after you, at least make sure you get some pretty pictures of them, cams are cheap these days.

      That triggered alarm bells in my head as well. Maybe those "alarms" that were disabled were really cameras sending pictures to someplace, these are cheap and getting cheaper these days. If he was using something from a commercial service (like Dropcam) those accounts would have been disabled before the break in crew arrived at his door step. If they were watching his internet stream they would have known about such things.

      Still, a guy that worried would have a cam somewhere.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    18. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Hell, most owners re-key them as a matter of course when they buy them.

      What happens when smoke starts coming from one of the units? Or, less dramatically, if there's maintenance that needs to happen for shared systems (plumbing, etc.)?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    19. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by echucker · · Score: 2

      The tweet is from October, yet the story is released now. Either the two are unrelated, or the story is being released due to the current climate.

    20. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If need be you simply kick in the door, or let the fire dept do it so that you don't fuel the fire which they will be ready to deal with. There's no need to have keys floating around. Not that I know that there even exists any real unpickable lock.

    21. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Renting an apartment in Germany means you get full rights to the unit during that time. The landlord can only enter once a year if he needs to (with appointment) to inspect the unit. Otherwise they, or any building super don't have any right to enter the premise without your consent. Its not common to install your own locks when moving in.

    22. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If we suspect state actors then a simple linux box running motion detection software might not cut it. They surely have a list of all your SIM cards / DSL lines and can temporarily shut off all wireless access in the area as well.

    23. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hell, most owners re-key them as a matter of course when they buy them.

      What happens when smoke starts coming from one of the units? Or, less dramatically, if there's maintenance that needs to happen for shared systems (plumbing, etc.)?

      In a non-emergency, then the onsite representative hired by the owner (via the board) schedules an appointment at the owners convenience as contractually agreed.

      If there is a fire, the fire department has master keys, commonly called "axes" to every unit. the super isn't going stick around in a burning building. And the fire department is not going to wait for the super to get back from break and find the key to every possible unit they might need to check. Three loud knocks and then BAM goes the smoking door if no one is answering.

      Plumbing issues result in a call to a plumber, as well as a locksmith if the owner can not be contacted if and as contractually agreed.

    24. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      Who says he didn't think of it? He probably decided not to install them for a reason (perhaps one of the ones enumerated above).

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    25. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by dadelbunts · · Score: 1

      What will the police do with video that shows who broke into your house? Is that a serious question? Police are lazy bastards but not THAT lazy.

    26. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by vux984 · · Score: 1

      In my case; its about the same as a house.

      In any sort of real emergency, I presume the fire department would just break in. The condo I'm in now is are duplex and row-home style units so its pretty much exactly like houses.

      But my previous condos were 'apartment style' and there was no master keys their either; and I presume they'd just break the door down.

      In a non emergency, they notify the owners in advance or coordinate with them if its just a particular unit, and its up to the owners to let them in. A good recent example of a mandatory check is the annual inspection of the smoke detectors and sprinkler systems. The strata and management company picks a day, sends out a notice and the inspectors come out, and its up to the owners to let them in or make arrangements to let them in. (Usually there's someone on strata available that you can leave a key with for the day, or you can leave it with your neighbor, etc...)

      Any units that they can't gain access too on the original day, get picked up on a subsequent day, coordinated directly with the owner(s) that got missed, and at those owners expense.

      Its never happened that an owner has refused or been totally uncooperative with these checks; however my understanding is that we need these inspections to meet bylaw as well as insurance requirements. I'm honestly not sure what would happen if an owner refused to cooperate; whether it would or could be escalated to the police to force the issue, or what...?

    27. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by Catbeller · · Score: 1

      Spooks don't need keys. They either have masters or have a little toy or two that opens the locks. Our doors and windows are paradoxically designed so that they can be opened, not to keep people out. If we had real door locking tech - steel frames/door plates and amazing locks - firemen couldn't get in, and police would be REALLY pissed off and have them outlawed... hmm. Probably are outlawed.

    28. Re:Four alarm systems and not a single camera? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Police are lazy bastards but not THAT lazy.

      That depends. I worked for CISPES* for a while in the mid 1980s. The office was broken into three times over about two months, and each time only the membership diskettes were taken. I screamed at those idiots for repeatedly leaving the data where it could be found, and eventually quit because they were such amateur fools, but the point of the story is that the Cambridge, MA police seemed baffled, perplexed, confused, and just plain dumbfounded by these breakins and were simply at a loss to explain, solve, or even bother to investigate them. Funny how that works...

      * Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador, a non-violent political organization fighting Reagan's little bush war down there in favor of the rich elite. Oh, by the way, Reagan and his minions had the FBI classify us as "terrorists", and that's when our troubles started.

  9. This assumes it was US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And not German Intel, who are apparently complicit in much if not all of the NSA spying. Something the rest of the world seems to conveniently elide...

    1. Re:This assumes it was US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And not German Intel, who are apparently complicit in much if not all of the NSA spying. Something the rest of the world seems to conveniently elide...

      The germans, the french even the italian intel agencies are the lapdogs of the americans.
      Hell we even renditioned our own citizens to the yanks bypassing our laws.
      So no, most of the world doesn't ignore these things. The french especially are duplicitous, they like to beat on their chest how they are independent from the US but when push comes to shove they will align with them all the while telling lies to the french citizens.
      It's time for another french revolution. A real one.

  10. Time to move to a free country. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no way he can keep up with a government that is bent on destroying freedom and privacy. Since his fellow citizens want their government to curtail all freedoms and keep voting for the two parties which stand for the abolishment of freedom, privacy, and justice, he needs to look for other fellow citizens.

  11. BIOS Attacks by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 4, Informative

    Plug in UEFI bootable USB stick.
    Turn off
    Turn on
    Keylogger and remote backdoor installed.

    So those machines are toast. He needs new ones.

    --
    I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    1. Re:BIOS Attacks by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And then go over the EFI boot partition, and find some way to compare the firmware with the file from the manufacturer's site. If they have been compromised, don't pass up the chance to document exactly how it was done.

    2. Re:BIOS Attacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Or, he could be real savvy;

      Use a computer of a different architectural type, (Say ARM or PPC) and an EEPROM programmer. Clamp the connector onto the compromised system's UEFI bios, and dump it.

      Compare the dump against the vendor's stock image.

      Note the differences, Decompile the differences.
      Report on the hows and whys of the keylogger.

      Reflash the bios with the vendor's stock image, then nuke all harddrives from orbit. (Harddrives also contain updatable firmware, which may be harder to ensure are in a sane condition.)

    3. Re:BIOS Attacks by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd swap out the keyboards as well. Just sayin'

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    4. Re:BIOS Attacks by multiround · · Score: 1

      it's a toshiba t3200 what he needs! no uefi and enough RF interference from the plasma display to tempest all his (and his neighbor's) RF emissions

    5. Re:BIOS Attacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why I use outdated hardware. Hard to be subject to UEFI attack, if your bios doesn't support it.

      There will be a time, in the near future, where retro computing will become a norm, out of complete transparency of operation and communication, yet encryption will still be retained. You can't do that with current over the counter tech. It's still questionable down to silicon.

    6. Re:BIOS Attacks by citizenr · · Score: 1

      ARM machines dont have uefi (yet), + some have bootcode inside cpu + some have manufacturer debugging code inside cpu behind crypto handshake

      --
      Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
    7. Re:BIOS Attacks by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      You can attack old school bioses as well. Just flash it.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    8. Re:BIOS Attacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At that point, why not just donate the computer to some internet cafe, get lots of noise on their listening channel.

  12. Time for some counter-espionage by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This computer holds the latest and greatest they have in espionage software and possibly hardware. I'd say get it thoroughly examined so we know what to look for on other machines.Make good forensic copies of anything that is able to hold data in the device and only work on copies of copies so you'll always be able to start from scratch if you mess up or want to prove your findings.

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
    1. Re:Time for some counter-espionage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably not. They don't use espionage tools like that, the "latest and greatest" isn't burned on Jacob Applebaum, security researcher.

    2. Re:Time for some counter-espionage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However, if they DID deploy an espionage kit, even a lackluster, older one-- the analysis of that deployment can help identify the spooks in question.

      Remember Flame? Remember how security researchers suggested it smacked of the US and Israel?

      Yeah. That.

    3. Re:Time for some counter-espionage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But that target wasn't a security researcher, it was an air-gapped nuclear enrichment operation in a "secret" facility, with Flame/Stuxnet. Big difference really.
      There are NUCLEAR STATE RESOURCES behind that kind of attack program, for a reason. Keeping tabs on Applebaum or other hacktivists is much easier.

      The alleged facts are that they broke in to tamper with his machines, presumably because he's in Germany and not the US or "LEO-controlled" nations.
      If he were, they wouldn't even need to move, they'd just send a few emails and everything Applebaum did online would be in a file already.

    4. Re:Time for some counter-espionage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two words: NIC firmware.

    5. Re:Time for some counter-espionage by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Two words: NIC firmware.

      Sounds like the name of a secret agent for the 21st century, a German one at that, and appropriate for the story.

      Who's that? Nicholas "Nic" Firmwehr, Bundesnachrichtendienst

      --
      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
    6. Re:Time for some counter-espionage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flame and Stuxnet made its way onto the internet proper.

    7. Re:Time for some counter-espionage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was always part of the plan, they just didn't expect it to get so widespread.

  13. Ugh... by koan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    None of your hardware can be trusted any longer, your apartment is bugged, and man do I feel for you having to clean it up.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:Ugh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can somebody like this justify having a desktop? If the device is ever out of his physical custody, it's compromised. This means mobile computing devices only.

    2. Re:Ugh... by allo · · Score: 1

      maybe its a trap.

    3. Re:Ugh... by steelfood · · Score: 1

      Nothing a good faraday cage won't solve. Metallic wallpaper. The only signal that'd escape would be through the LAN.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    4. Re:Ugh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... your apartment is bugged...

      I am surprised this isn't spoken of more in the comments, as this seems like it would be the far greater concern, especially since you can easily throw a computer out. With today's technology you can fit a bug in anything. Essentially all of your belongings and inside and outside of your walls, lightbulbs, everything is now compromised. Even your toothbrush.

  14. Privact advocate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or spook? Live by the sword...

  15. common sense by aissixtir · · Score: 1

    many agencies would be interested in those files...

  16. So this is the first time he's noticed. by matbury · · Score: 2

    Competent spies can do it without you noticing. Perhaps "they" are getting sloppy? Maybe "they" subcontracted it out to a 3rd party private security agency? Maybe it was deliberately sloppy and intended to send a message to Appelbaum? Or maybe it was aliens? We can speculate about this all week if we want to ;)

    1. Re: So this is the first time he's noticed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I can set it up so even the most competent spy can be detected.

      Insert USB dongle in laptop that tracks power on/off cycles, motion sensor, etc. with RF transmission as well.

      Remotely record the RF transmission with scanner (not a paired device); check that device, which can readily be hidden anywhere (including a block or two away).

      A custom device like this is simple, but unless you are truly absolutely exceptional you're not going to bypass it. And that level of exceptional only exists in people's imaginations.

      (You could block the rf signal, if you expected the possibility, but how do you fix its flash storage if it's on chip like many low end processor designs? And how do you not trigger the watchdog event timer on the remote device when it expects to be received, but you have it shielded?)

    2. Re: So this is the first time he's noticed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Arrive prepared.

      You dont turn on any of the subject's equipment. Not even a surge supressor. (It could be a pnyplug, afterall.)

      Kit includes:
      Battery operated 12V DC power supply
      portable ARM (due to power constraints) based exploit installation platform, with:
      EEPROM programmer
      SATA leads
      12v MOLEX and SATA power connectors.

      You install the UEFI backdoor kit using the eeprom programmer by clamping it to the existing installed BIOS chip, and then reprogramming it with the payload. Motherboard for the target remains unpowered.

      Hard drives have their firmware reflashed after being attached to the infiltration kit, and powered by the infiltration kit. Drives are imaged first, for forensic analysis. Additional spyware and espionage payloads are delivered at this time.

      Close up shop, and leave.

    3. Re: So this is the first time he's noticed. by icebike · · Score: 1

      So many imaginary solutions, so easily reeled off.
      Let see you do that in real life, with out disturbing the dust near the computer.

      Go out side and play kid.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    4. Re:So this is the first time he's noticed. by matbury · · Score: 1

      Once more, Jacob Appelbaum blows our minds with what he's found in Snowden's leaked documents: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0w36GAyZIA

      Nothing's safe.

  17. He must be doing something right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    By the sound of it, he's doing a lot of things right. Read his bio. I'm very glad and thankful there are still brave men left.

  18. Someone broke into my house by khelms · · Score: 2

    and replaced all my furniture with exact duplicates.

    1. Re:Someone broke into my house by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not that surprising since egg crates are not that hard to come by.

  19. This was a message by argStyopa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sure, there are probably some surveillance things tossed in mainly "to be found", but the fact is that a break-in like this - where 3/4 of the systems weren't even turned back on is either a) laughably amateur, or b)(more likely) a deliberate message TELLING him he's under surveillance.

    If he's practicing even moderately good security measures, he's likely beyond all but governments' ability to crack. And if they're after him, there are few things that he could do to PREVENT such surveillance.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:This was a message by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If he's practicing even moderately good security measures, he's likely beyond all but governments' ability to crack.

      Don't be dense. They had physical access to his apartment for an extended period of time. They could have tampered with his hardware or even swapped his real computer for a duplicate that had been specially created to spy on him. Those systems are compromised and can never be trusted again.

    2. Re:This was a message by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't alarm the place, rig it to blow. Rig it to film them breaking in from the outside, and to watch them getting blown to smithereens.

      Then to convict you, they'd have to admit they did it. The only good spy is a dead spy.

    3. Re:This was a message by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      It's people like you that make firemen nervous when they're searching a building for trapped survivors.

    4. Re:This was a message by pipedwho · · Score: 1

      The 'spy' would most likely turn out to be an unidentifiable homeless 'kid' having a bit of b&e 'fun' and then gets killed by your booby trap. Since booby traps are illegal in most jurisdictions, you'll be going down with your own evidence helping to convict you,

      So, no, 'rig it blow' is never a good idea.

    5. Re:This was a message by phorm · · Score: 1

      Or (c) they require a special method to re-enable that wasn't doable in the time-frame available to the intruders.

  20. Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He might have made it easier to turn the first 3 alarms off than it is to turn them back on again. If they are increasingly hard to turn off, he can use the number of disabled alarms to get a good idea of the sophistication of the people who broke in. If they are hard to turn back on, he can make sure that they can't hide the attempt.

  21. Now a smart message by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They got their agents caught on video, which probably was not intended to be part of the message. Maybe he just set things up so that turning his alarms back on was far harder then turning them off.

  22. Worry about planted nasties by Bruce66423 · · Score: 1

    Child porn either hidden on his computer or on cds hidden in the depths of the apartment somewhere. On his computer a timer to reveal it in a few days time; the disks are 'stumbled across' at some point in the future. He needs to check the apartment and totally shred the computer disks... Any bets anyone?

    1. Re:Worry about planted nasties by VortexCortex · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Your web browser will download anything from anywhere the pages you visit tell them to. Even if you browse only encrypted sites the site itself can be trivially exploited via XSS, SQL injection, or the zero-day exploits purchasable on the black market. Now, some of the pages you've been browsing can contain hidden <iframe> tags or if JS is enabled XMLHTTP Requests to download child porn. You'll never see the images, but there it is: an ISP record that your computer regularly made requests to child porn sites and downloaded kiddie porn. The spy agencies can simply put CP on your systems remotely, and give them "probable cause" to search. A physical copy would be quite a nice touch.

      This isn't a hypothetical warning. I clean up servers linking to CP about 3 times a year. The government doesn't even have to do anything but make possession of certain strings of 1's and 0's illegal. Then the angsty teen skiddies with a copy of Metasploit inject the illegal pictures to ordinary sites in protest that sexting pics of themselves is illegal. Now, your Internet history clears after a period of time, so if it's not in there right now, it could have been and probably still resides on your drive's free sectors. You should be using whole drive encryption for this reason alone -- Although that doesn't rid the ISP record of your apparent obsession with disgusting perverse illegal imagery.

      A police state has two prime tools:
      0. Ensure it's impossible to obey every law.
      1. Selective enforcement of the law.

    2. Re:Worry about planted nasties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't have the source on me, but I do recall a judge striking down "evidence" of CP possession in a case where a guy only had it in his browser cache.

  23. Why Modded down? Re: For the Lulz, by icebike · · Score: 2

    He doesn't need help with a messed up head...who wants to bet this is some stunt? What proof we have besides the word of a wacko?

    Seriously, people, why is this modded down into oblivion?
    Is it not at least plausible, and worth discussing?

    No proof, no details, no explanations on how he "knows" these things? No Pictures? Four alarms, carefully positioned objects, and not one camera?
    Sure he might not want to give away his trade-craft, but then why give away his knowledge that it happened?

    We all want to blame the three letter agencies these days, but we should at least entertain the thought that this might be cheap self aggrandizement.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  24. A FORMER intelligence officer? by Bruce66423 · · Score: 1

    Do you really believe they ever really leave the organisations they used to work for? Putin is clearly still KGB...

  25. Iraq war. by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    The French didn't drink cool aid.

    1. Re:Iraq war. by blackbeak · · Score: 1

      The French didn't drink cool aid.

      No, it was "que oo lait".

      --
      Everything and its opposite is true. Get used to it.
  26. Lets hope by allo · · Score: 1

    he finds the nice hardware and software and analyses them. I guess he's clever enough not to use his systems after this.

  27. It was Hired Thugs or Cops, same difference. by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

    Considering that the computers weren't just taken, it was hired thugs or police. The GCHQ, NSA, etc. simply exploit your system remotely with the zero-day-exploits purchasable on the black market.

    1. Re:It was Hired Thugs or Cops, same difference. by citizenr · · Score: 1

      no.
      GCHQ, NSA, CIA use contractors all the time.

      --
      Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
    2. Re:It was Hired Thugs or Cops, same difference. by Burz · · Score: 1

      The GCHQ, NSA, etc. simply exploit your system remotely with the zero-day-exploits purchasable on the black market.

      Did it occur to you they might not be able to?

  28. more... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    more the first ones and the lasts.

  29. Where is the protection from the Fatherland ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not paranoia when they really are out to get you.

    The break-in ocurred in Berlin, a city inside the territory of the Deutsche Vaterlands.

    The government of the Deutsche Vaterlands has the obligation to protect its own citizen from being harm / intimidated by foreign terror groups, including NSA.

    Where is the government of the Deutsche Vaterlands ?

    Why has it failed to protect to Mr. Appelbaum ? Just because the word "Appelbaum " sounds Jewish ?

    Shame on Deutsche Vaterlands for kow-towing to America !

    1. Re:Where is the protection from the Fatherland ? by Askmum · · Score: 1

      I have not seen a reference to your "Deutsche Vaterlands" yet (what is it supposed to mean?), but Jacob Appelbaum is still a US-citizen.

    2. Re:Where is the protection from the Fatherland ? by V+for+Vendetta · · Score: 1

      Why has it failed to protect to Mr. Appelbaum ? Just because the word "Appelbaum " sounds Jewish ?

      You're asking too much here - I mean, we're not even able to protect our own Bundeskanzlerin, let alone a mere mortal foreign citizen ...

  30. not enough information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We could speculate all we like, the truth is that we lack a sufficient amount of information to properly assess the situation.

  31. Old Cold Fjord is at it again ! by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 0

    Trying to hoodwink us with your fairy tales again, Cold Fjord ?

    Just a few days ago NSA admitted that they have NO IDEA HOW EXTENSIVE IS THE SNOWDEN'S SECRET FILE COLLECTION ( http://www.dailydot.com/politics/nsa-snowden-files-unknown/ ) and the one who has the BIGGEST PANIC ATTACK is NSA, not Russia, not China, and of course, not the Germans.

    The fact that the Berlin apartment of one Jacob Appelbaum was invaded, with 3 of his 4 alarms cut off, and his computers tempered with, signifies the SHEER PANIC ATTACKS NSA is suffering right now !

    Had the Ruskies so hard up for the files, Edward Snowden is IN THEIR HAND RIGHT NOW and KGB sure knows a lot of ways to GET RESULT OUT OF PEOPLE WHO REFUSE TO TELL THEM ANYTHING.

    And btw, Cold Fjord, you are NOT the only one who has worked in clandestine projects.

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  32. Taco Cowboy - Inventive & Deceptive by cold+fjord · · Score: 2

    Trying to hoodwink us with your fairy tales again, Cold Fjord ?

    Quoting from a major German paper is deceptive?

    Just a few days ago NSA admitted that they have NO IDEA HOW EXTENSIVE IS THE SNOWDEN'S SECRET FILE COLLECTION ) and the one who has the BIGGEST PANIC ATTACK is NSA, not Russia, not China, and of course, not the Germans.

    My post had nothing to do with panic, but rather the lack of evidence about who actually entered Applebaum's apartment.

    The fact that the Berlin apartment of one Jacob Appelbaum was invaded, with 3 of his 4 alarms cut off, and his computers tempered with, signifies the SHEER PANIC ATTACKS NSA is suffering right now !

    Interesting. What is the source of your claimed knowledge that it was NSA, and not some other country or intelligence service? Are you making it up, or is there a clue in this line in your post:

    And btw, Cold Fjord, you are NOT the only one who has worked in clandestine projects.

    That seems to be quite an admission on your part. Who are you working for? Is that why you are trying so hard to discredit the NSA and the US?

    Had the Ruskies so hard up for the files, Edward Snowden is IN THEIR HAND RIGHT NOW and KGB sure knows a lot of ways to GET RESULT OUT OF PEOPLE WHO REFUSE TO TELL THEM ANYTHING.

    Even the KGB/FSB can't get something that doesn't exist. If Snowden didn't bring the files with him, as people keep claiming, then there is nothing for them to get, is there? Are you claiming that is a lie, and that he really has the files with him?

    --
    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
  33. leaving a computer behind? by schlachter · · Score: 1

    if i was him, i'd leave a computer behind with disinformation on it, while always carrying my laptop which would have the real information on it.

    --
    My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
  34. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ARM machines dont have uefi (yet)

    And are unlikely to any time soon. UEFI is too complex for a system that is intended for single-purpose use. Until ARM systems go down the route of modularised hardware designed to be used for multiple purposes, they will continue to use simple single-purpose boot systems like uBoot.

  35. "assuming they don't have it already" by DrYak · · Score: 1

    Is it the Russian government trying to get their hands on the full cache of documents that Snowden leaked, assuming they don't have it already?

    My opinion too: it's very likely that these documents doesn't contain much that the FSB (which has been at this spying game even before it was renamed from TcheKa to KGB) isn't already aware of through their own information channel.
    The reason we can trust when snowden tells that he hasn't handed anything over to Russia (nor China), is that very probably they won't gain much that they don't know already. It's simply not worth going through the hassle and public disapproval of using this controversial source (publicly known) whereas their own intelligence channel (secret) already to a decent enough job.

    Chance are, if someone like Snowden (who is very intelligent, very savvy in the way of intelligence handling, keeping secure, etc. and very cautious BUT who is still simply a single former consultant) can get his hands on these, it's very likely that institutions like FSB (who are whole big institutions, with vastly more resources, with budget backed by whole governments, and vast experience in the field accumulated during the whole existence which has spanned a significant chunk of the recent history) have also knowledge of the same informations.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  36. Not mutually exclusive by DrYak · · Score: 1

    The Russians know no more than the rest of us - Snowden has made it clear he gave all documents to others, and this is extremely believable.

    These two are separated.
    The fact that Snowden has already given away the documents and doesn't have them any more, DOES NOT prevent the Russians from already knowing the information contained in the Snowden documents (not because they read the actual Snowden documents, but simply because they already have competent intelligence service with a very long experience dating back from the cold war and even before and vastly more ressource: Russians have probably already gathered similar amount of informations through their own intelligence channels).

    In fact, its probably even the opposite. It's very likely that the Russians knew already the same information, and thus, once Snowden has also acquired them, Russians have no interest in trying to get Snowden's file. It's highly unlikely that there anything of interest in those files, thus there's no interest for Russian to go through all the hurdles (getting associated this politically highly controversial source of information) with no gain for them. Better avoid touching this publicly known probletamtic source and keep rellying on their own secret channels.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  37. Less likely by DrYak · · Score: 1

    For all you know it could be Russians, Chinese, Iranians, Germans, French, Israelis, Swedes, or just about any other country's agents.

    There's 2 reasons why some countries might want to avoid getting their hand on Snowden's documents:

    1. These documents are known to exist, and are highly pollitically controversial. Although Germany representative would be free to bitch and moan about things published in the news papers about NSA spying them (after all these specific information where published for anyone to see, and are the consequence of news papers, not germany's own services), things will be very different if word got out the Russian or Chinese secret service managed to steal a full copy of the Snowden files. Then it will be th USA bitching about Russia and China using stolen docuements and trying to sanction them in some way (at least degrading diplomatic ties and maybe unfavoring some economic ties).
    In short: getting caught with these documents in your possession can end up being bad publicity.

    2. Snowden is just a single guy. He is very intelligent. He is very savvy about information handling. He is good at following "security best practice" to the letter. He's good at covering his arse. He is very-very-very cautious. (And thus he managed to pull these leak without getting caught up and left rotting in a prison next to Chelsea Manning's cell). But he is still a simply a former consultant with limited ressource. Some of the nations you mention have been big players with intelligence services having vast ressources (both technical and financial) and having also vast experience spanning a huge chunk of the recent history (Russia's FSB has been at this spy game even before they got renamed... from Tcheka to KGB). When even Snowden whose ressource are more or less limited to his brain can manage to steal this documentation... When even small neutral countries like Switzerland have efficient intelligence gathering programs (remember onyx and the "accidental leaks" of diplomatic faxes about US outsourcing their torture to black sites ?)... What makes you think that snowden has anything in his documents that the big players haven't already learned long ago through their own information channels?

    Because of the combination of these 2 elements (Snoden documents are problematic, better stick to your own secret spying which probaly knows even more since long ago), its very likely that the big players like Russia, China, etc. won't bother getting the Snowden files. They already know the same information from their own secret services (FSB, MSS, etc.) and don't want the potential diplomatic backlash.
    It's very likely that Snowden is indeed sincere when saying that Russia and China has not gotten access to them.

    It's very likely that, if they were indeed trying to get Applebaum's copy of the Snowden files, the intruders weren't working for the big ones.

    Possible actors are:
    1. much smaller player who don't already know the information inside snowden files, and have less fear of potential diplomatic problems. And who also don't have the ressource to afford a realy invisible and unnoticeable data heist. Had the burglary happened in eastern europe, I would have had pointed fingers to local mafia.
    2. big players wanting to get otherthing, like US opperative trying to gather newer evidence about snowden (trying to determine the extent of the snowden files, trying to determine the latest where abouts of recent dissidents like Assange and Snowden, etc.)
    3. done to mess with him and harass him, like the last 12 times that Applebaum got detained at the US border.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  38. Some do by DrYak · · Score: 1

    ARM machines dont have uefi (yet)

    Some do. The whole "Linux vs. Windows 8 and Secure UEFI" debacle is about the fact that, because Windows 8 mandates Secure UEFI, althrough *PC* vendor are required to let their customer around Secure UEFI (allowinf customer to disable it and allowing customer to put other signing keys there), the same requirement don't apply for ARM hardware.
    You can install linux on a Secure UEFI Windows 8 x86 desktop.
    You are not guaranteed to be able to install Linux on a ARM tablet with Secure UEFI and Windows 8 RT.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  39. Exposing cameras by phorm · · Score: 1

    One of the responders makes a good point:

    Surely you don't want to expose the locations of your hidden cameras ?

    Of course, one could just move the cameras afterwards. But releasing pics does give the intruder an idea of what was installed where for next time.

  40. Fucking Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't leave your stuff lying around where it can be found.

    Don't leave on your machines, in easy to find places, data you're trying to hide.

    God dammit, if you're going to "fight the man" expect the hammer to fall on you and be set yourself up so that hammer falls on nothing.

    Idiots.