Slashdot Mirror


NYT Quietly Pulls Article Blaming Encryption In Paris Attacks

HughPickens.com writes: Inside Sources reports that the NY Times has quietly pulled a story from its website alleging the attackers used encrypted technology. The original piece, which has since been removed, can be found on the Internet Archive. It stated, "The attackers are believed to have communicated using encryption technology, according to European officials who had been briefed on the investigation but were not authorized to speak publicly. It was not clear whether the encryption was part of widely used communications tools, like WhatsApp, which the authorities have a hard time monitoring, or something more elaborate. Intelligence officials have been pressing for more leeway to counter the growing use of encryption."

A link to the NY Times article now redirects readers to a separate, general article on the attacks, which does not contain the word "encrypt." The Times later posted a second article citing an anonymous "European counterterrorism official" who was quoted saying authorities' "working assumption is that these guys were very security aware," but clarified officials "offered no evidence."

21 of 259 comments (clear)

  1. The hilarity it keeps growing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is like watching a Hollywood spy movie where they're astounded at how the elite criminals are using Unix!

    It's an open question to me whether it's the media that is dumb, the alleged government spokespeople, or somebody is just faking it to bullshit the generally dumb public who doesn't know any better.

    Here's a hint how to defeat these terrorists. Go about your daily life as if nothing happened, and don't let the government do anything different.

    Then they'll lose and you won't lose either.

    1. Re:The hilarity it keeps growing. by postbigbang · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Perhaps it was more like this:

      Ostensibly erudite reporter was given inside information with the carefully planted bugaboo word: encryption, so as to allow the information provider to cast a negative shadow upon encryption, so as to favor the arguments of those tireless government officials that are seeking to permit governmental backdoors into encryption methods.

      Or, perhaps more likely, the erudite reporter merely salted their story for street creds.

      In either case, it was seemingly rapidly corrected.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    2. Re:The hilarity it keeps growing. by kilfarsnar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's an open question to me whether it's the media that is dumb, the alleged government spokespeople, or somebody is just faking it to bullshit the generally dumb public who doesn't know any better.

      I'm going with option C. The authorities want to be able to see what we're doing. Encryption interferes with that. Linking encryption with terrorism in the public mind might change public sentiment when it comes to the question of back doors. The public is largely unsophisticated in this area and the government and media like that just fine.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    3. Re:The hilarity it keeps growing. by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm going with option C. The authorities want to be able to see what we're doing. Encryption interferes with that. Linking encryption with terrorism in the public mind might change public sentiment when it comes to the question of back doors. The public is largely unsophisticated in this area and the government and media like that just fine.

      If they can also somehow tie the terrorist encryption to child pr0n, then they will have the crowd behind them to ban common citizen encryption without backdoors.

      This of the children!!

      Think of the terrorists!!

      I think the two of those are likely to be the keys to the Constitution, at least in the US>

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    4. Re:The hilarity it keeps growing. by phishybongwaters · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I personally read these articles to find the name of the apps they say are "hard to monitor" and make sure I in no way ever use them. Think about this long and hard. Why would they tell "them" exactly what apps to use because they can't monitor them? They wouldn't. But.... they sure as hell would like to direct as many people as possible to use the apps that have easy access to, namely any app that appears by name in any of these articles. Hell, they even tried to blame snowden.

    5. Re:The hilarity it keeps growing. by SecurityGuy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      NPR had a great piece on this yesterday where they openly stated that if strong encryption was backdoored, some kid would just write an app in his basement implementing strong encryption without a backdoor. The algorithms are public, and honestly not that complicated. The iPhone encryption that has everyone in such a lather is a Federal standard, after all.

      Some of the media gets it.

    6. Re:The hilarity it keeps growing. by AK+Marc · · Score: 5, Funny

      Or, perhaps more likely, the erudite reporter merely salted their story for street creds.

      The reporter should have hashed it after salting.

  2. dear national security personnel: by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Insightful

    do your fucking job. spying on suspects

    not hoovering everything from everyone and thinking a search query will give you magic intelligence. intelligence work is *work*

    the encryption is not important. your gumshoe work is. get out of your fucking cubicle you lardass and find these dirtbags

    and if you can't do that maybe your useless security theatre job should be axed

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:dear national security personnel: by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Preview is your friend. As is being able to spell "blockquote" reliably....

      do your fucking job. spying on suspects

      not hoovering everything from everyone

      Your mistake is not understanding that to "national security personnel" EVERYONE is a suspect.

      The question is not whether you've done something wrong, but exactly what you've done wrong, and whether they want to prosecute you for it, far as they're concerned....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  3. The Most Shocking Thing About the France Attacks by EmagGeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The most shocking thing to me is that our (the US) security agencies seemed to be completely unaware that anything was being planned. No reports of chatter. No outwardly visible concern. Even the President was briefed that ISIS was "contained" and "under control," and he reported as much on national television days before the attack.

    This begs the question of where our intelligence agencies are focusing their efforts. Are they really scouring the world for terrorist activity, or are they too busy spying on their own citizens?

    We live in dark and scary times when my government knows everyone I call or email, and when, and records all of that communication, but they can't catch wind of a major terrorist attack in its planning stages.

  4. In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    "The attackers are believed to have transported themselves and their weapons using modern automobile technology, including (but not exclusively) internal combustion engines, air-pressurized tires and asphalted roads. They may even have used advanced public transportation technologies".

    Speechless.

    Are our so-called leaders *that fucking incompetent*?

  5. Eh. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This sort of 'reporting' is a farce, of which they really ought to be ashamed. Aside from the dubious wisdom of parroting 'unnamed intelligence sources who definitely wouldn't have any reason to be spinning the media after a dramatic and gruesome attack on their watch'; there's a pretty aching gap in even basic critical thinking if you treat 'the working assumption is that the guys were pretty security aware' as some sort of insight.

    FFS, any pot dealer who has stayed out of prison for a couple of years would count as 'pretty security aware' in the vacuous "well, we didn't realize that they were up to something until they had already executed it" sense of the term. Of course some degree of care was used in orchestrating a coordinated attack involving a number of people, some of who had had run-ins with the law before. Why would you expect otherwise?

    Plus, historical examples suggest that terrorists aren't complete morons about security: Al Qaeda and the Taliban both had a healthy distrust of cellphones, even before we learned what 'dirtboxing' was; and the guys who pulled the Mumbai attacks in 2008 used Blackberries specifically because BBM is way more resistant than SMS. I realize that somebody had a burning need to fill column inches; but what pitiful dreck.

  6. Re:Of course they'd blame technology by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 5, Informative

    bordering on treason

    In the USA, "treason" is defined in the Constitution, and has a very narrow meaning. Do keep that in mind when tossing the word about.

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  7. Here it comes by JoeyRox · · Score: 4, Informative

    Paris Attacks Renew Call for Access to Encrypted Messages

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/...

  8. Re:The Most Shocking Thing About the France Attack by misexistentialist · · Score: 4, Informative

    Brennan also said the United States had strategic warning about the terrorist attack in Paris, but did not provide details, other than to say it was not a surprise.
    The same subordinate status that makes it OK for the ruling class to violate citizens' privacy means it's not a big deal if they are blown up. Sheep are herded, sheep are slaughtered.

  9. Re:Of course they'd blame technology by Tom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How do you fit the fact that all of the identified attackers so far are european nationals into your narrative?

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  10. They did it to themselves... by coolmoose25 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've been watching the media coverage (and listening - NPR) on this whole encryption mudslinging by law enforcement. The media is eating it up, and while they are careful to say that the jury is out on whether or not the terrorists in Paris used encrypted communications, they are quick to say that law enforcement and intelligence agencies had no inkling that this attack was on the horizon. I will leave aside the notion that Occum's Razor can be used to evaluate the two scenarios - one where the agencies and law enforcement were simply incompetent and are now blaming this evil encryption for being caught flatfooted, vs. their premise that the terrorists MUST be using encryption now...

    What is lost on all of them (agencies, law enforcement) is THAT THEY DID THIS TO THEMSELVES either way. Law enforcement and intelligence agencies have been "hoovering up" all available communications data and metadata. They demanded and got kangaroo courts (FISA - I'm looking at you) where secret search warrants are being executed. There is no regulation by the citizenry, only by government "you can trust us" types who don't understand that when the stories about this stuff break, consumers begin to demand secure communications. Every time the government executed these warrants on the communications and computer industries, they gave them both an incentive to ditch the whole cooperation thing, and finally those companies started encrypting things in a way that they did not have the ability to "listen in" because lets face it, that is a pain in the neck and takes them away from their core mission.

    Now they are crying about encryption, without understanding that the ship already sailed... And they are the ones that kicked it out of the harbor.

    --
    Brawndo: It's what plants crave!
  11. Especially stupid because ENCRYPTION by honestmonkey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Hey there, we're all going to meet up in London in two weeks. Be sure to bring a sweater because it'll be cold. We're stopping at Bill's place first, then going out to eat. Maybe we'll catch a concert. How's that sound?"

    Come to Paris in three days. Bring AK-47 and ammo. Akmed will provide suicide vests to attack the restaurants and concert hall. Allah Akbar!

    Seriously, nobody with a brain is going to use actual encryption, that's a red flag. They'll come up with a code first, something that sounds normal. I can just see the CIA now: "Oh no, these two people say they're going to the movies! Code Red! Code Red!"

    --
    Everything you know is wrong, Just forget the words and sing along.
  12. Re:How do I explain it? by Tom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, look at the attackers. None of them came with the recent wave of refugees (the one Syrian passport found has since been identified as a fake). So closing the borders now accomplishes - pretty much nothing.

    We need to figure out why there are people living in our countries that hate those same countries so much they are willing to die just for the joy of expressing their hatred.
    We didn't and we let it foster, that is our first fault.
    Our second fault was not facing the problem, believing too much in a peaceful co-existence and multi-cultural society to not see that some parts of the same want to fucking kill us.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  13. Temporary crises lead to permanent rights-losses by mi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It sure passes the "don't let a crisis go to waste" smell test to me.

    Well, of course! The Statist types always complain about encryption and anonymity (and personal weapons, BTW) making their jobs more difficult. They are sincere, and what they say is true. It is just that at normal times we can rationally resist their urging, while at the times of crisis our collective rationality weakens and we allow major freedom-infringements to happen...

    Rolling them back is hard, because the things like having to present an ID or even submit to a pat-down are not too tedious and the burden never reaches a crisis level of its own, despite occasional trouble-making by some prominent figures.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  14. Re:The solution: Muslim profiling by drooling-dog · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You mean Muslims like Timothy McVeigh, or the IRA?