Slashdot Mirror


Federal Criminal Probe Being Opened Into WikiLeaks' Publication of CIA Documents (cnn.com)

A federal criminal investigation is being opened into WikiLeaks' publication of documents detailing alleged CIA hacking operations, CNN reports citing several U.S. officials. From the report: The officials said the FBI and CIA are coordinating reviews of the matter. The investigation is looking into how the documents came into WikiLeaks' possession and whether they might have been leaked by an employee or contractor. The CIA is also trying to determine if there are other unpublished documents WikiLeaks may have. The documents published so far are largely genuine, officials said, though they are not yet certain if all of them are and whether some of the documents may have been altered. One of the biggest concerns for the federal government is if WikiLeaks publishes critical computer code on how operations are conducted, other hackers could take that code and cause havoc overseas. Security expert Robert Graham, wrote on Tuesday: The CIA didn't remotely hack a TV. The docs are clear that they can update the software running on the TV using a USB drive. There's no evidence of them doing so remotely over the Internet. The CIA didn't defeat Signal/WhatsApp encryption. The CIA has some exploits for Android/iPhone. If they can get on your phone, then, of course they can record audio and screenshots. Technically, this bypasses/defeats encryption -- but such phrases used by Wikileaks are highly misleading, since nothing related to Signal/WhatsApp is happening. [...] This hurts the CIA a lot. Already, one AV researcher has told me that a virus they once suspected came from the Russians or Chinese can now be attributed to the CIA, as it matches the description perfectly to something in the leak. We can develop anti-virus and intrusion-detection signatures based on this information that will defeat much of what we read in these documents. This would put a multi-year delay in the CIA's development efforts. Plus, it'll now go on a witch-hunt looking for the leaker, which will erode morale.

41 of 236 comments (clear)

  1. Where is the Federal Criminal Probe on the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Where is the Federal Criminal Probe into illegal spying by our own government?

    1. Re:Where is the Federal Criminal Probe on the CIA? by TWX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It gets muddier when it comes to US operations that are not on US soil, and that's also supposed to help firm-up the distinction between the FBI as a mostly-conventional federal law enforcement agency that operates domestically and the CIA as an espionage agency that is supposed to operate outside of the borders of the United States.

      Obviously these distinctions are not as cut and dried as they're supposed to be, and it gets worse when the NSA and other agencies get involved. The compartmentalization that's supposed to prevent federal agencies from treading upon the rights those within the borders of the United States has been eroded in the name of the Wahr on Terrah to where if they want to circumvent, they can circumvent.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:Where is the Federal Criminal Probe on the CIA? by oic0 · · Score: 2

      I see you posted "Anonymously" . Let me know how that works out for you lol.

    3. Re:Where is the Federal Criminal Probe on the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      > The compartmentalization that's supposed to prevent federal agencies from treading upon the rights those within the borders of the United States has been eroded in the name of the Wahr on Terrah to where if they want to circumvent, they can circumvent.

      There's also that rule Obama signed right before Trump came in that lets them share data with everyone now. I'm not sure there's any clear line between the departments any more. Nor why Obama wanted to do something like that right before Trump came in.

      Given the CIA's long history of overthrowing governments, even democratic governments, to further US interests, I'm not sure what to make of things any longer.

    4. Re:Where is the Federal Criminal Probe on the CIA? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Perhaps there were real security concerns vis a vis

      Irrelevant and completely subjective. Where was this "concern" when Hillary ran her unpatched and protected private email server that was "less secure than Gmail"?

      I'm sorry, but I have a VERY hard time believing anything coming from the Dark Shadow Government. Remember, it was Clapper who said they didn't collect any data on any US citizen, only to have it come out that they collect a shit ton of data on everyone, not just those they are "watching".

      These people will lie with a straight face, and believe that they are entitled to lie about lying. AND if you trust your government still, you're just not paying attention or are so partisan that Trump could cure cancer and you'd have a conniption fit about it being from a Nazi or some shit.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    5. Re:Where is the Federal Criminal Probe on the CIA? by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Where was this "concern" when Hillary ran her unpatched and protected private email server that was "less secure than Gmail"?

      Interminable congressional investigations and literal yards of MSM reporting on even the fluffiest of details? What, were you asleep or something?

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    6. Re:Where is the Federal Criminal Probe on the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For a very long time, one needed to be of above-average intelligence (including cognitive power and awareness of relevant information) in order to figure out that the government was a huge pack of liars.

      Modern technological advances, however, are giving us the ability to expose government corruption very publicly, so that much more ordinary people can see the plain truth. Their biases will only withstand the onslaught of evidence for so long.

      When "the masses" start accepting the reality of government corruption, and collectively realize that "necessary evil" is the only sane attitude to take when dealing with the government, we might see some real political pressure brought to bear on issues of transparency and public accountability.

      But...those wheels turn slowly.....

    7. Re:Where is the Federal Criminal Probe on the CIA? by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 2

      This is, by far, the weirdest nerd nitpick I've ever encountered in my 15 years on this site. Congrats to you, good sir.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    8. Re:Where is the Federal Criminal Probe on the CIA? by edtice1559 · · Score: 2

      As has been pointed out elsewhere, the distinction between operating domestically and overseas was eroded when we started dealing with bits and bytes that flow around the world. Should the CIA stop an investigation of two foreign terrorists if they use an email server located in a US data center? I am not a fan of our intelligence agencies and tend to think that they've completely ignored civil rights. But I'm also cognizant that separating domestic from foreign activities is no longer a good way to define the various agencies' behavior.

    9. Re:Where is the Federal Criminal Probe on the CIA? by bongey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And the Democrats still nominated her for the President.

      Clapper said Obama didn't order a wiretap on Trump , said nothing about whether wiretap actually happened.

    10. Re:Where is the Federal Criminal Probe on the CIA? by guises · · Score: 2

      I kinda like it, though I like it more for political reasons than I do for it's nerdy factor. MSM (as it's used on TV) is a buzzword intended to lump everyone who disagrees with you together into an outgroup - "You shouldn't listen to the MSM, they're all the same. Only we, who are not the MSM, only we are trustworthy."

      These kind of buzzwords get used for a lot of stuff. AGW, for example, was originally a denier phrase: global warming was becoming increasingly difficult to deny completely, so the 'A' was tacked on to imply that the human element wasn't certain. Go to Google and search for "climate change" and then search for "anthropogenic global warming" and compare the results - you'll get a lot more fringe sites and conspiracy theorists with the second search.

      Or how about Xbox One? Microsoft's marketing department thought that they could sell some additional Xbones by confusing people into thinking they were buying something else.

      Sure you can laugh at all the smoke and mirrors, but if you start adopting their terms then you're granting them, in some measure at least, exactly what they're after. So I appreciate this resistance to using the stupid buzzwords. It serves a function, even if it is pedantic.

    11. Re:Where is the Federal Criminal Probe on the CIA? by Xenographic · · Score: 2

      > If Clapper had answered the questions posed to him in a PUBLIC hearing he would have been violating US law.

      But he did answer, and said 'no', instead of saying "I can't answer that." Lying to Congress is also a violation of US law, though it's one that only gets punished on political terms, so...

    12. Re:Where is the Federal Criminal Probe on the CIA? by Uberbah · · Score: 2

      But I'm also cognizant that separating domestic from foreign activities is no longer a good way to define the various agencies' behavior.

      It is when your couch is more likely to murder you than a terrorist. You're falling into the same authoritarian mindset that you have to surrender your Constitutional rights because it means somewhere, sometime, some pedophile might get away with it if law enforcement can't search his computer with a warrant.

      Stop doing that. And that's putting the fact that the worst purveyor of violence and terrorism in recent worldwide history is the United States aside entirely.

    13. Re:Where is the Federal Criminal Probe on the CIA? by Reziac · · Score: 2

      Judge Napolitano on the debacle:
      http://jewishworldreview.com/0...
      ===========
      "Here is the back story.

      The president can order the National Security Agency to spy on anyone at any time for any reason, without a warrant. This is profoundly unconstitutional but absolutely lawful because it is expressly authorized by the FISA statute.

      All electronic surveillance today, whether ordered by the president or authorized by a court, is done remotely by accessing the computers of every telephone and computer service provider in the United States. The NSA has 24/7/365 access to all the mainframe computers of all the telephone and computer service providers in America.

      The service providers are required by law to permit this access and are prohibited by law from complaining about it publicly, challenging it in court or revealing any of its details. In passing these prohibitions, Congress violated the First Amendment, which prohibits it from infringing upon the freedom of speech."
      ==============

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  2. Kill The Messenger by sdinfoserv · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, Just like Snowden, let's ignore the purportedly criminal and corrupt activity of the US Government and it's elected thugs - and just kill the messenger. Sweep the body under the run and strong arm anyone with evidence to go away.
    Case Closed, mission accomplished, normality achieved.

    1. Re:Kill The Messenger by nycsubway · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wikileaks is a highly political organization. They're not an equal opportunity leaker. The timing and subjects of their leaks is definitely geared toward specific political goals.

    2. Re:Kill The Messenger by Rockoon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thats what the Democrats told you.

      But in reality, the Democrats just have a lot lot lot lot lot more to hide.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    3. Re:Kill The Messenger by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I am not sure that WikiLeaks is partisan issue at all. The Republicans hated it when it was leaking stuff they wanted hid (and the Democrats loved it), now the shoe is on the other foot, and the roles are reversed. I have said in the past, when people ask me how I view Snowden, I say he is a Traitorous Hero. They have no concept that he can legitimately be both Hero and Traitor. Such is the world painted with only black and whites.

      Which is why I find the whole (R) good/bad (D) bad/good arguments amusing.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    4. Re:Kill The Messenger by pastafazou · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You're missing several key points.
      Michael Hastings was possibly assassinated by these very tools because he was investigating the director of the CIA.
      The CIA may have lost control of all of these tools to the hacking community at large
      The CIA may have been using these tools on US citizens.
      The CIA may have been using these tools as a politicized weapon.

    5. Re:Kill The Messenger by Baloroth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's weird how Wikileaks was "just trying to get the information out there" and "serving the people" when they leaked information critical of a Republican, but now they're leaking information critical of Democrats, they're a "highly political organization" that's carefully timing their leaks. Or did you forget how Wikileaks came into being? When they leaked information about the Bush administration? I swear, it's like people on the Internet have the memory of a goldfish.

      Since people are going to inevitably make the accusations: I'm not a Republican, not a Trump supporter, and also not a Democrat, and not a Clinton supporter. Also not an Assange supporter (he's a jackass who's just claiming the US is going to extradite him to avoid facing the charges and to keep himself in the limelight), though WikiLeaks itself frequently serves a useful and necessary purpose. I just think people are so blinded by partisanship they can't see that both sides of the political aisle in the US are corrupt, self-serving corporate sellouts who need to be replaced.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    6. Re:Kill The Messenger by pastafazou · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well I don't think you're going to get the smoking gun email where dude says "kill him" and minion replies "ok, I hacked his car, he just accelerated into a tree". We have motive, means, opportunity, and suspicious cause of death. It certainly requires an investigation. But who investigates the CIA?

    7. Re:Kill The Messenger by BradleyUffner · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wikileaks is a highly political organization. They're not an equal opportunity leaker. The timing and subjects of their leaks is definitely geared toward specific political goals.

      Why does that mean we should ignore what they leak?

    8. Re:Kill The Messenger by BronsCon · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Right. The difference is, we don't tell soldiers "here's where you might get shot; we could give you body armor, but then everyone would have it, so... good luck." Which is exactly what the CIA is doing.

      here's where you might get hacked; we could give you patches for these vulnerabilities, but then everyone would have them, so... good luck.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    9. Re:Kill The Messenger by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 2

      Hint: Spying on US citizens is illegal....

    10. Re:Kill The Messenger by fiver-hoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      All the right wing people I know were calling for Manning to be publicly hung or publicly executed by firing squad. Outspoken conservative commentator Sean Hannity has gone on record as recently as last week that he was against Wikileaks and thought they were all traitors 10 years ago and is now a supporter.

  3. FTFY: by fishscene · · Score: 2

    One of the biggest concerns for the people of the United States is if WikiLeaks publishes critical computer code on how operations are conducted, CIA/FBI hackers could take that code and cause havoc overseas AND/OR at home and blame someone else. False-flag ops are standard I hear.

  4. Worried about exploits getting leaked? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe they should have thought of that before hoarding vulnerabilities instead of disclosing them. Security by obscurity is equivalent to no security at all. The responsible thing for the CIA to do now is a disclosure of all known vulnerabilities to the parties of those products so they have some chance to patch them before exploits are in the wild. What they will do instead is waste taxpayer money on this investigation and continue to go after WikiLeaks while continuing to hoard vulnerabilities and continue illegal domestic spying.

  5. I like WikiLeaks more every day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Gotta keep cleaning house until all Democrat moles are gone.

  6. Re:Probe this by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

    Remember when it emerged that the NSA was intercepting Cisco hardware during shipping, installing malware on it and then sending it on to the buyer? I imagine that's how they infect most of the Samsung TVs, not some Mission Impossible dangling from a wire shit.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  7. Here CNN... by pastafazou · · Score: 2

    The documents published so far are largely genuine, officials said, though they are not yet certain if all of them are and whether some of the documents may have been altered. However, WikiLeaks thus far has a 100% accurate record, so it would be absolutely shocking if even a single document is not authentic. One of the biggest concerns for the federal government is if WikiLeaks publishes critical computer code on how operations are conducted, other hackers could take that code and cause havoc overseas. Of course, the federal government is merely deflecting blame on WikiLeaks, when it appears likely the CIA has already lost control of these tools to the hacking communities and agencies of the world.

    ...FTFY

  8. Can't trust the CIA by jediborg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    10 Times today it was repeated on CNN that the CIA "Only spies on foreign citizens, not on US citizens"

    I don't believe that for one second. Knowing how little oversight the CIA gets from congress they could dragnet all of American communications and lie to congress and say they weren't doing it. Actually, wait isn't that exactly what the NSA did? Didn't Former NSA director James Clapper lie under oath to congress when he professed the NSA wasn't spying on americans, just a few months before snowden proved that they where? Why should we expect the CIA to do any different, just because their mission statement say's they don't have jurisdiction to spy within american borders?

    Nobody's watching this watcher, which is why we shouldn't trust them one iota.

  9. Re:Probe this by lgw · · Score: 2

    This. Heck, the NSA even had a program where they would infect with malware all the PCs/laptops shipped to an area, just in hopes the target would buy one. I'm sure the CIA could do the same with TVs.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  10. Tricky problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you hire a bunch of honest people who are loyal to their country, and then ask them to do illegal and immoral things, eventually they rat you out (that being the decent thing to do, and all).

    If you hire a bunch of crooks who have no qualms about betraying others for your profit, eventually they will betray you for their profit.

    If you hire people stupid enough to believe that patriotism is the same thing as unquestioning obedience to government officials, they won't be competent enough to do their jobs.

    I realize that government officials absolutely abhor transparency and public accountability...but....the new technological landscape is eliminating some options for secrecy that once allowed corruption to thrive.

    1. Re:Tricky problem. by TWX · · Score: 2

      It's almost like humans act as human nature causes them to act.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  11. Re:Probe this by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2

    Just and FYI, most of the commercial product hacks are known. There is very little security on IoT devices, including "smart" TVs that it is trivial to compromise one. And I've seen active "hacks" of vehicles in videos, not quite as trivial as IoT devices,

    In general, I already suspected much of what was revealed by WikiLeaks, even if I couldn't actually prove it. Most of the IT people I am familiar with, understood the possibility and even the likelihood that the tools existed, and weren't surprised when WikiLeaks said as much.

    Most people don't want to know how deep the surveillance state goes. Very few of us are terrified of it.

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  12. Atttribution by jbmartin6 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    here's a nice tidbit that, to me, nicely illustrates the problem with attribution: "one AV researcher has told me that a virus they once suspected came from the Russians or Chinese can now be attributed to the CIA" Bear this in mind the next time someone says "that guy did it"

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  13. This is why Backdoor encryption is bad by ripvlan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It occurs to me that this Leak could be used as the argument for why placing a backdoor into encryption is a bad idea. At some point in time - somebody will figure it out and leak it to the world.

    The idea that the government is going to be trusted with these BIG secrets and they won't get out is preposterous. See see -- don't look over there!! Ignore the man behind the curtain.

  14. Try this at home: by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

    Go get Wikileaks' "summary" of the first Vault7 release. You'll know you're on the right one because it's a list of bullet points.

    Now get the actual first Vault7 release from Wikileaks. You'll have to do a little searching, but see for yourself if the summary (made to be released to the Western media) actually corresponds to anything in the Vault7 release itself.

    You will be surprised, especially if you think Wikileaks is a force for transparency.

    If you're really lazy, go read some posts by infosec experts and pro-privacy bloggers. They're already doing some of this work for you, and you will still be surprised at what they say. I don't want to spoil it by telling you.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:Try this at home: by Uberbah · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You will be surprised, especially if you think Wikileaks is a force for transparency.

      Well, they do have that 100% record for the accuracy of what they've leaked.

      If you're really lazy, go read some posts by infosec experts and pro-privacy bloggers. They're already doing some of this work for you, and you will still be surprised at what they say. I don't want to spoil it by telling you.

      Hmm, sounds more like "go do some work to prove my vague assertions so I don't have to get my lazy butt off the couch". Must not be familiar with Hitchen's razor.

  15. Overseas lmafo by burtosis · · Score: 2

    One of the biggest concerns for the federal government is if WikiLeaks publishes critical computer code on how operations are conducted, other hackers could take that code and cause havoc overseas.

    Criminals that get ahold of this will loot AMERICA. This is exactly what every single security expert has warned against, pretty much since the internet existed.

  16. Re:Perhaps not... by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

    Wikileaks allegedly leaked the CIA's toolkit. I see nowhere in the leak where that toolkit is being used in the way you claim it is. Now I wouldn't be surprised if that was happening, unfortunately, but at the moment spying on US citizens still requires FISA approval, and so long as these tools are used in that context when spying on US citizens, then no law has been broken.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.