Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Suspect Identified In CIA 'Vault 7' Leak (nytimes.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the search-and-destroy dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The New York Times: In weekly online posts last year, WikiLeaks released a stolen archive of secret documents about the Central Intelligence Agency's hacking operations, including software exploits designed to take over iPhones and turn smart television sets into surveillance devices. It was the largest loss of classified documents in the agency's history and a huge embarrassment for C.I.A. officials. Now, The New York Times has learned the identity of the prime suspect in the breach (Warning: source may be paywalled; alternative source): a 29-year-old former C.I.A. software engineer who had designed malware used to break into the computers of terrorism suspects and other targets.

F.B.I. agents searched the Manhattan apartment of the suspect, Joshua A. Schulte, one week after WikiLeaks released the first of the C.I.A. documents in March last year, and then stopped him from flying to Mexico on vacation, taking his passport, according to court records and family members. The search warrant application said Mr. Schulte was suspected of "distribution of national defense information," and agents told the court they had retrieved "N.S.A. and C.I.A. paperwork" in addition to a computer, tablet, phone and other electronics. But instead of charging Mr. Schulte in the breach, referred to as the Vault 7 leak, prosecutors charged him last August with possessing child pornography, saying agents had found the material on a server he created as a business in 2009 while he was a student at the University of Texas.

4 of 106 comments (clear)

  1. Yeah, they'd never frame him for that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yeah, cuz it's not like they wouldn't PLANT child porn on his computer to incriminate him, would they?

    1. Re:Yeah, they'd never frame him for that... by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even ignoring the possibility of a government frame job, if we accept the possibility that it was planted, who is to say that the CIA et al were the ones who planted it? If someone is talented enough to steal from one of the world's elite cracking teams, don't you think that person would also be smart enough to make sure someone else takes the fall for it?

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    2. Re:Yeah, they'd never frame him for that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Seeing as "... and we found kiddie porn" happens each and every single last time this situation comes up, there is no question it was planted.

      The worse part is, no matter how much one might disagree if it should be, the fact of the matter is that it's already an imprisonable crime for a clearance holder to disclose classified documents.
      They didn't even need to go with the already-so-tired goto of planting/claiming child porn!

      Actually the only reason I can think they would do this is that if they prove or frame this guy for releasing those documents, then they can't frame or accuse anyone else of doing the same thing in the future.
      This way they can lose this guy in the federal prison system and on paper not having caught the leaker. Then they can accuse someone else of that crime in the future, and still keep their boogie man.

  2. Wrong order... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He did things in the wrong order. You go to a non-extradition country, and THEN you leak what you need to leak. Assuming he leaked anything and isn't just a fall guy for piss-poor security at the CIA.