people like e.Snowden?
he's the guy that worked for the CIA then resigned so he could start working for Dell, right?
right..
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New WikiLeaks Series Details CIA's 'Specialized Unit' Dedicated to Creating iOS Exploits
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
he's the guy that worked for the CIA then resigned so he could start working for Dell, right?
right..
By the way, I don't think anyone mentioned this yet (though I didn't look through the 16 pages of comments) but these lines are important:
This is another example of why we progressives/Bernie supporters were against the government compelling Apple to backdoor their own iPhone and promising that the backdoor would be "in safe hands", while Trump and his supporters called for an Apple boycott if they won't backdoor the iPhone.
A false narrative...pathetic...that scumbag bragged about being able to sexually assault women and the low information voting, barely literate, suckers still voted for him.
[doublepost=1488945276][/doublepost]
I Forgot why people accused trump supporters of having a low IQ, being completely gullible, racist, and outright ignorant but then You reminded me of the birther nonsense.
This is exactly what I was looking for, is there a definitive list of what was compromised against MacOS or OSX? Not that it would prove anything but I would be curious to see what the government could do against the Mac desktop operating system.
You still don't get it after over 3 years?
Here's a little update: a) these agencies don't care about the law and have repeatedly went above and beyond without any working mechanisms in place that properly monitor and control these breaches.
b) an example: US gathers intel about UK residents and shares said intel with the GCHQ, meanwhile GCHQ is happy to tap US residents and forward it to the NSA.
In the end it's just semantics and you could just as well order the NSA et al to do monitor their citizens directly, the result is the same and at least you'd have to change the constitution for that if you make that official modus operandi.
Not that I'd welcome that, but at least the feigned innocence would stop, which is some of the worst bits about all this.
Glassed Silver:win
Go here and then use cmd+f to find relevant entries: https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/index.html
It seems El Capitan was fairly secure, Sierra probably provided additional patches and security.
I don't think you get it.
The BND couldn't care less about what's on your Netflix watch list, any more than the CIA cares about my Instagram postings or what I talk about in front of my Smart TV. It strikes me as the height of arrogance to think that the organs of our national intelligence community have any interest whatsoever in spying on their own citizens.
Do you know what they DO care about?
Iran's nuclear program. And North Korea's ballistic missile program. While is why the CIA and NSA have cyber-warfare programs. So they can develop tools like StuxNet - which destroyed, remotely, and without a shot being fired - most of the centrifuges that Iran was using to refine Uranium. Which is why starting a few years ago, most of North Korea's missiles starting crashing into the sea a few minutes after launch.
Guess what? We don't have deep-cover spies working inside Iran's nuclear facilities. We don't have agents inside N. Korea's missile program. But many of the scientists, engineers, technicians, and administrators who DO work in those programs have Android or iOS smartphones. And being human, they browse the web. They look up sports scores, they click on social media postings.
Which is why our Intelligence Community develops the cyber tools that they do.
I'm assuming you meant "an innocent person *can* be manipulated"?
And it's not only about manipulation; the Stasi in East Germany for example used the information gathered to just turn targeted people's lives into hell (you wanted that new job? Oh, suddenly the place is taken. You went on holidays? When you come back people are rumouring that you were on sex tourism. You come back home from work and find that someone was there, though seemingly nothing is missing. Or not? Someone switched the salt and the pepper?? Maybe I'm just going crazy? Etc...)
Aside from the basic question of why are the US tax payers paying for two agencies to do the same thing? That shouldn't be, right?
The intelligence services are dividing amongst different agencies with different oversights, so its a super big legal no-no for the CIA to do NSA's job. Sounds like oversight was totally skirted by keeping the malware unclassified, so it could be used without any oversight or repercussions. That was really short sighted because it's super way illegal to use any part of the US military or US State secret arsenal without the right oversight and accountability. Even the secret procedures, have procedures. Also it avoided any protections that classified materials and state secrets would normally get. This also gets the US into treaty violation territory, even with our own allies.
What they did is illegal enough alone from a security position, but it's likely tech companies would have a good case for suing the Federal government on two fronts because this directly impacts their products domestically and especially international sales. One for developing the malware in extralegal methods and two for being careless with them. And it's worse because previous admin agreed to share exploits with tech companies, but then didn't choosing to stockpile and hide them in this department, which shouldn't exist. How does Korean Samsung respond to the US government working to destabilize their products? Depending on what else is leaked, and if it holds up to the same authenticity of previous Wikileaks materials, likely see Samsung and others internationally sue in Federal Court.
This is a legal mess, and only the first act. If anybody wins, taxpayers will be paying for any penalty judgements for the Obama admin's authorization of all this. Get your popcorn.
Last edited:
I just think the release of this information is going to cause much more damage than good, and the person(s) responsible should go to jail for a very long time. Also, if releasing this information allows criminals, terrorists or hostile nations to damage the US or its allies, causing people to get hurt, then the leakers should be held personally liable.
It's not as though they were protecting our liberty, for we already new of the attempts by governments worldwide to monitor communications. Did we really need these leaks to understand that nothing is secure? I don't think so.
Also, there's no need for the tone you took.
"Privacy? I don't have anything to hide."
"Over the last 16 months, as I've debated this issue around the world, every single time somebody has said to me, "I don't really worry about invasions of privacy because I don't have anything to hide." I always say the same thing to them. I get out a pen, I write down my email address. I say, "Here's my email address. What I want you to do when you get home is email me the passwords to all of your email accounts, not just the nice, respectable work one in your name, but all of them, because I want to be able to just troll through what it is you're doing online, read what I want to read and publish whatever I find interesting. After all, if you're not a bad person, if you're doing nothing wrong, you should have nothing to hide." Not a single person has taken me up on that offer."
Glenn Greenwald in Why privacy matters - TED Talk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I imagine that many VPN companies are going to have a very profitable year.
https://www.privacytools.io/#webrtchttps://www.privacytools.io/#webrtc
But a VPN is not a tool for illegal activities.
"Over the last 16 months, as I've debated this issue around the world, every single time somebody has said to me, "I don't really worry about invasions of privacy because I don't have anything to hide." I always say the same thing to them. I get out a pen, I write down my email address. I say, "Here's my email address. What I want you to do when you get home is email me the passwords to all of your email accounts, not just the nice, respectable work one in your name, but all of them, because I want to be able to just troll through what it is you're doing online, read what I want to read and publish whatever I find interesting. After all, if you're not a bad person, if you're doing nothing wrong, you should have nothing to hide." Not a single person has taken me up on that offer."
Glenn Greenwald in Why privacy matters - TED Talk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I imagine that many VPN companies are going to have a very profitable year.
https://www.privacytools.io/#webrtchttps://www.privacytools.io/#webrtc
But a VPN is not a tool for illegal activities.
Last edited:
Why does that matter?
I've NEVER understood the "well, we've set up a surveillance state unmatched by the rest of the world, violating several laws including an amendment of the Constitution.....but at least we're not in the Congo right?"
Either America ACTS like the beacon of democracy and freedom that it claims to be, or it's not. There is no relativity argument to be made when it comes to massive state surveillance.
The interesting thing is the velocity of the denials of what he tweeted.
"The lady dost protest too much methinks" comes to mind.
[doublepost=1488977521][/doublepost]
No on your correction of what I said, and believe me, my family knows about the Stasi.
When the police state sifts through your actions, and they find "something" whatever that is, they can use that to manipulate you. The tax laws are an excellent example. A person files their taxes, and claims too much donated to Goodwill, and with the dossier that the government collects on you, they say, "We can make this go away if you pay the back taxes, plus a $1000 fine for the penalty for making a false claim under 22 USC 1234. If we go to trial, all of your tax returns will be examined for a trend."
You then start thinking about the mileage you wrote off for charitable church work, and then your smart car shows that it did go through that seedy part of town, and you had to get gas, ran into a high school buddy at the gas station next to a strip club, and during that audit, all it will show is that you spent an hour and a half parked next to a strip club.
Your guilt on the write off starts a bad chain of events. You going to pay the $1123 for the penalty and back taxes?
And yes, I know that this example is full of holes, and I sound all "tin foil hat" but it doesn't take that much of an imagination to go through past sins and see how co-workers or friends don't need to know this.
US Citizens the Obama administration spied on:
-James Rosen reporter for FoxNews
-Sharyl Attkisson reporter for CBS news
-Various staff of Associated Press
You were saying?
I'm guessing you forgot that instead of walking back Bush's Patriot Act, Obama ramped it up from targeted electronic data collection of citizens' conversations to foreign parties to universal data collection of all citizens, then made a scout's honor pledge that the data would only be looked at with a warrant. Then the material Snowden leaked blew that lie wide open.
The Obama administration capitulated to the Russian government's pressure to lift the embargo on Iran. Go google it. The Russians wanted to sell military arms and nuclear technology to the Iranians, this was open knowledge, direct statements from the Russian government that they wanted the embargo lifted for an arms deal. Everybody from the Obama administration to the press knew this long in advance. Run along and DuckDuckGo it.
So why is Obama then creating redundant espionage services? Seems like the really stupid expensive way of just blocking it with the US veto on the UN security council. But somehow I doubt the Obama admin's spying concerns were limited to nuclear deals they went out of their way to facilitate, especially after spying on American reporters critical of Benghazi (Attkinsson) and for an embarrassing reveal of the admin's lies about the N. Korea's nuclear program (Rosen) after Obama repeated denied any existence of it. Even geologists were talking about the strange and specific seismic activity detected in the region.
So Obama either approved or helped hide these programs, and didn't use any of the US's considerable diplomatic and military influence, coordinate with any allies, just so he could learn the sport preferences of Iranian and N. Korean nuclear scientists? Makes zero sense. And if your theory is correct, given the timeline and facts already known, that's a criminally stupid espionage plan and a complete misappropriation of the CIA. Especially when the NSA was already charged with the job and engaged in electronically stopping everywhere they could.
Here's the takeaway you should remember: big gnarly weapons (of which umbrella weaponized software falls under) is the strict domain of the DoD. The CIA being a civilian agency, and because they have very limited Congressional oversight, doesn't get their own big scary military weapons systems, or get to use them without specific DoD oversight. This includes fighter jets, bombers, naval vessels, SEALs, GI JOE and also anything considered militarized software. You might be confusing movies with the actual role of the CIA or Mission Impossible or something.
Edit: Wikileaks is now saying they have a list of 22,000 American IP addresses that were spied on by the CIA. Guess what? The CIA is no way allowed to operate domestically.
Last edited:
Since wires for communication hadn't been foreseen at the time, I can make the argument that communication over them can be considered "effects". The argument has been made that the phone media (wires, cellular signals) are the "public square" but I disagree. There is a reasonable expectation of privacy that one has when dialing a lover and talking about what they're going to do that night that can be expected, whether they are in their car, on their cell phone, or typing on their computer.
But then again, I forgot... We give up those rights of privacy when we sign those 22 page ToS when we get that phone, TV, car, house....
[doublepost=1488978020][/doublepost]
Po Tay Toe
Po Tah Toe
You believe they managed to fabricate, organize, and publish all of this data AFTER the break of the "Russian hack" news stories? REALLY?
Minutia? Too many irons in the fire? A "will they tell the truth" test? Allow exercise of free will?
Yes and No.
The wiretap would be for whatever the reason was. The disclosure and detail on the US Citizen(s) affected had to come with a secondary and higher approval. That is more likely the "Obama" aspect.
[doublepost=1488988040][/doublepost]
Heck, the crew of NCIS has been doing this for a while
[doublepost=1488988290][/doublepost]
The ability to mimic is disconcerting. Additionally, aren't these the same folks who "verify" the findings/discoveries?
This is the kind of thing that gets tossed in a real criminal case.
[doublepost=1488988477][/doublepost]
Not so sure. I mentor a class (HS) and a discussion after the SB incident, most students expressed a belief that the government does not have the ability to broadly penetrate consumer systems. The Apple pushback tended to reinforce that mindset.
No President can unilaterally order surveillance on a citizen due to laws put into place after Watergate, namely the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. If there was surveillance on someone in Trump Tower, it was most likely fired campaign manager Paul Manafort, who owns a condo in the building and has unusual Russian ties, but it would still involve an FBI counterintelligence op, the DOJ weighing in on the legality, and a FISA court ruling there was probable cause. The idea that Obama directed this in a political attack is absurd, but we're also talking about the guy that claimed he sent investigators to Hawaii and we "wouldn't believe what they'd found about Obama's birth certificate" without ever providing any proof of anything. This is his what he does - tweet first, look for evidence later.
Last edited:
I don't think they fabricated the information but they've withheld it until the time was right.
and Schumer and Pelosi and are speaking then thinking ... same effect?
You missed the point; the US Citizen is protected and redacted unless a higher authority approves the "unveiling". That would be at the cabinet level and unless they deliberately key BO in the dark (unlikely given his penchant for electronic surveillance )... Obama was all about expansion.
As for Birth Cert ... could care less.
Even the password of the vault should tell you the CIA itself is the target of Wikileaks (and for good reason). None of this Russian nonsense.