Slashdot Mirror
NSA Sent Coded Messages From Its Twitter To Communicate With Foreign Spies (gizmodo.com)
Matt Novak reports via Gizmodo: During the first Cold War, American and British spies would sometimes place coded messages in newspaper classified ads to communicate with each other. And according to new reports in the New York Times and The Intercept, the National Security Agency (NSA) has updated the tactic, using its public Twitter account to send secret messages to at least one Russian spy. That's just one relatively small detail in much more salacious articles about NSA and CIA agents traveling to Germany in an effort to recover cyberweapons that had been stolen from U.S. intelligence agencies. A Russian spy allegedly offered up the stolen cyber tools to the Americans in exchange for $10 million, eventually lowering his price to just $1 million. The Russian spy allegedly claimed to even have dirt on President Trump.
According to the reports, the unnamed Russian met with U.S. spies in person in Germany, and the NSA sometimes communicated with the Russian spy by sending roughly a dozen coded messages from the NSA's Twitter account. The one important question: Were the messages sent via direct message or were they sent out as public tweets? The New York Times report leaves some ambiguity, but according to James Risen in The Intercept they were very public.
According to the reports, the unnamed Russian met with U.S. spies in person in Germany, and the NSA sometimes communicated with the Russian spy by sending roughly a dozen coded messages from the NSA's Twitter account. The one important question: Were the messages sent via direct message or were they sent out as public tweets? The New York Times report leaves some ambiguity, but according to James Risen in The Intercept they were very public.
I'm not surprised that Twitter / Facebook and so on are used like this, the Bot Nets have been using them for Command and Control for ages. But why use the "official" NSA Twitter Twaddle? It's pedestrian to discover who accesses specific sites... Why not something more benign like Britney Speers Twitter?
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
This happened in June of 2017, so it's much more likely that Trump was using the NSA and CIA to try to get this kompromat and bury it. Remember, by that time, they were working for Trump.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The "cyberweapons" is a bullshit cover story.
NSA and CIA agents traveling to Germany in an effort to recover cyberweapons that had been stolen from U.S. intelligence agencies. A Russian spy allegedly offered up the stolen cyber tools to the Americans in exchange for $10 million, eventually lowering his price to just $1 million. The Russian spy allegedly claimed to even have dirt on President Trump.
Why would you pay anything for a copy of "stolen cyber tools"?!?!?! The Russians aren't about to give the CIA their last copy no matter how they're paid, and the NSA and the CIA already have them and don't need another copy.
Even if you think the NSA should offer patches for every bug they found the NSA doesn't agree.
If the NSA knows exactly what was stolen that does 3 things for them.
1) They know which tools are now useless (or if they work you might have hacked a honeypot).
2) The more you know about what was stolen the easier to figure out who stole it and how they did it.
3) You know which vulnerabilities you need to patch.
This was the CIA trying to get dirt on Trump - no more, no less.
According to the article the CIA was against the investigation because the head of the CIA is a Trump loyalist who didn't want dirt on the President. I wouldn't be surprised if the CIA was the source of the leak for this story.
I stole this Sig
Intelligence services will usually keep a foreign agent in place, where they can follow the flow of information. And now, with the change in Page's legal team, it appears that he's cut a deal with the FBI to give up someone more senior.
You are welcome on my lawn.
If they're coded messages, it literally doesn't matter.
In fact, that's kind of the point of encrypted and coding - people can read your message AND STILL not understand what it says.
Sending as direct message would link the two parties conclusively. Putting a public message doesn't - literally anyone who viewed it could have been the intended recipient and there's no way to tell who it was.
Stupid headline/summary/article is stupid.
Any agency that wanted to get a message to an agent who can't reveal themselves would often find the best way to do so would be to publicly broadcast a coded message using a system that only that agent has the facility / knowledge / key to understand.
Everything from numbers stations, to messages in newspapers, to Twitter... it's the right way to do it without revealing the message, or the intended recipient.
Encrypt the message. Don't try to obfuscate/obscure the medium. Anything radio can be captured, anything visible can be photographed, anything written can be intercepted, anything electronic can be sniffed, anything audible canbe recorded. Pretty much the entire basis of things like TLS, SSH, etc. - who cares if the underlying medium is secure... form a secure channel over it using methods that EXPECT it to be actively monitored by an enemy (e.g. Diffie-Hellman, etc.).