Analysis of the Blog post "The American Autumn"

View Latest Activity

Home Forums Information & Intelligence Analysis of the Blog post "The American Autumn"

Viewing 25 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #78001
      Joe (G.W.N.S.)
      Moderator

        I was asked to take a look at this and will give a brief analysis.

        Even though this Blog post is more editorial in nature than an analysis, we will treat it as an analysis for our purposes.

        This is also a good opportunity to start demonstrating the methodology I use to approach things of this nature. My methodology is one of many and is not meant limit our future MVT Analysts. The main point here is to develop a systematic approach.

        Those that have been paying attention have seen my “assumptions clearly defined and separated” as an important part of providing analysis. With that in mind any assumptions or interpretations on my part will be in italics.

        The American Autumn

        First I read the document (report, article, analysis, etc…).
        This initial reading is to get a feel for the product, depending on your reading comprehension skill (requires practice like any other skill set) you may do this more than once.

        Next we will separate facts from assumptions by the author, this is based on your known data (it maybe helpful to print a hardcopy and highlight either assumptions or facts at your discretion, however if working as part of a team standardize this practice).

        Example excerpt:

        The first installment of the leaked e-mails was released by Wikileaks at the start of the DNC convention.(Fact) More leaks have (Fact, voice mails released) and will follow (Assumption, yes Wikileaks have said they will release more, but unless Robb is part of the Wikileaks this is an assumption even though it is likely to happen. This may seem minor, but getting into the habit defining the smallest details can be important particularly the more complex the data.).

        Remember, what you identify as as fact or assumption maybe incorrect or subject to review based on changes and updates to known data.

        Examine information for bias, this maybe your first indication of deception and/or a agenda by the author.

        Example excerpt:

        The contents of the leak show a brazen (the use of such adjectives in an analysis is a demonstration of bias) attempt by the DNC to help Hillary win the primary. It also shows Dem campaign staffers to have acted inappropriately and in a prejudiced manner.

        Does anything stand out as an exaggeration or just seems suspect in your view (obviously this is very subjective and can very greatly with your world experience).

        Example excerpt:

        Based on forensic analysis of the leak (Assumption, without a source of this data it cannot be a fact. Note: Later I’ll present the probably source of his statement. For a Blog post there is nothing wrong with his statement, but we are using it as a Analysis for demonstration purposes.), it appears that the Russian government is involved (Assumption, to date I have seen nothing but conjecture on this, of course it is subject to change. Remember even if it was a Russian hacker that in itself does not mean Russian Government. Such is the value of plausible deniability in much of cyberwarfare when done well. We will look at this again in more detail later.)

        We are going to skip the rest of the Blog post temporarily. We’ll get back to it shortly.

        Consider the source (author). What do we know about this source?

        OSINT data:

        John Robb

        BS from the USAF Academy
        MBA from Yale University
        Captain, Pilot (Aircraft Commander), US Air Force (7 years 1 month)
        Senior Analyst, Forrester Research, Inc (1 year 11 months)
        President and COO, Gomez, Inc (3 years 11 months)
        CEO, COO, and President, UserLand Software, Inc (2 years 5 months)
        2 year unaccounted gap
        Senior Consultant, Keystone Strategies (4 months)
        COO/CTO, HubCast (1 year 5 months)
        Owner, Neoplat (5 years 3 months)
        Managing Editor and Founder, Resilient Communities (1 year 5 months)
        4 month unaccounted gap
        Founder, HomeFree America (1 year 2 months)
        Senior Concepts Analyst, SAIC (11 months)
        Expert, author, analyst, Self employed (Current)

        A review of the above could be viewed as a classic “American Dream” story of an individual building off one success to another or it could be the resume of a professional confidence man going from one confidence trick to another. Not enough data to support either version.

        John Robb Twitter

        John Robb Tweet:

        The country is toooo big. Democracy breaks down at this scale.

        Democracy? Aren’t we a Republic? Kind of basic for this type of discussion.

        John Robb Tweet:

        It’s amazing how far right the US has shifted. I shouldn’t complain. War is going to be an amazing business after this election.

        I am at a loss here!

        Wikipedia article John Robb (author)

        Global Guerrillas Blog

        Note: This Blog is not very impressive for a multimillionaire who made most of his money in Technology, I would expect more considering the Author is rather forward with his accomplishments. At this time this is inconclusive in itself, but could warrant future research when considered as a whole.

        About

        Excerpt:

        Here are some details on my background:

        USAF Academy: Honors Program. BS in Astronautical Engineering. Glider training. Freefall parachute training. SERE school.
        USAF pilot. Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) license.

        Tier one special ops. Deployed globally.

        Yale: Masters in Public and Private Management.

        Became world’s most popular Internet Analyst (’95/’96) while working at Forrester Research. First portal report (‘96). First social networking report (‘96). 100’s of quotes in media (WSJ, NYTimes, Fortune, Economist, Fox, CNBC, etc.).

        Co-founder and President of Gomez (online brokerage/banking). Generated over $40m/year in revenue w/in three years. Built a global performance testing network (52 cities on six continents across 23 internet backbones), a data center, and a consumer finance site (it won a Webby award). Sold company for $295 m in 2009.

        Served as COO and CEO of UserLand Software. We open sourced the RSS standard. Built/launched the first fully functional social networking system in 2001. Our tech was used to create Facebook in 2004 and Twitter in 2006.

        “Tier one special ops.”

        This seems to be quite a bit of hyperbole for a pilot, not to take away from the skill it takes to conduct high risk missions. I just get skeptical when people throw around these terms.

        Became world’s most popular Internet Analyst (’95/’96) while working at Forrester Research.

        Would be interesting to know the source of this title, we must also remember the Internet was quite new at that time.

        What agenda could this source have? Is there an attempt at disinformation? What is the quality of his analysis? Historically sources analysis has proven correct/incorrect?

        Back to the rest of the Blog post. I didn’t want to end this post on “consider the source,” hence my decision to break this up.

        Excerpt:

        Further, now that the Russian have interfered in our election, it’s possible that they will do again.

        As an Analyst we should consider all likely possibilities when insufficient data to prove a specific direction. In this case we do not have access to the data in question. This will probably be the normal situation “Post-Event.”

        In many ways this is similar to developing Courses of Action in a IPB, Most Likely Course of Action (MLCOA) and the Most Dangerous Course of Action (MDCOA), but in this case we are trying to determine how likely possibilities are to be ranked.

        The DNC hired CrowdStrike to investigate their hacked system, CrowdStrike concluded that the hack was done by:

        Excerpt from NY Times:

        The investigators determined that the hackers were part of APT 28, a group well-known among cybersecurity experts. The name is short for advanced persistent threat, which usually refers to government hackers. Security firms and law enforcement officials have also used the name Fancy Bear, a reference to a widespread belief that the group is run by Russia’s military intelligence agency, the G.R.U.

        The investigation might have ended there, but CrowdStrike discovered another, better-hidden infiltrator in the computers of the Democratic committee: A group known as APT 29, or Cozy Bear, which is considered more skillful and has been linked to the F.S.B., the main successor to the K.G.B.
        Cozy Bear, it seemed, had had complete access to the committee’s systems for almost a year.

        CrowdStrike last year received $100 million in a new round of financing, this financing was lead by Google Capital, one of the technology giant’s venture capital arms.

        Two other cybersecurity firms Fidelis Cybersecurity and Mandiant have confirmed CrowdStrike’s conclusion.

        Fidelis Cybersecurity a subsidiary of General Dynamics, is a major contributor to Democrats. Phebe Novakovic Chairman of the Board and CEO at General Dynamics is also a major supporter. Note: They provide money to both parties in abundance.

        Mandiant is a subsidiary of FireEye, Inc. which as you guessed is also a contributor.

        It wouldn’t be too far a stretch for these companies to provide the desired results to support a desired agenda, this is of course speculation on my part, but the more you dig into the symbiotic nature between government and these politically astute businesses the more corrupt it appears.

        Now of course this isn’t to say the Russian Government isn’t ultimately the hacker responsible for the leaked data!

        Remember in this case we are looking at multiple possibilities, both for real analysis of this Blog post and as demonstration of methodology. As part of the real analysis: Whose agenda seems more likely? Democrats, Russians, or a as yet unknown actor? Or even combinations?

        Excerpt:

        This could be done through more leaks or as Bruce Schneier has pointed out: a hack of poorly secured voting machines on election day.

        This threat does exist, but in my opinion the greater threat of voter fraud comes from the Democrat party, not Russia.

        The Democrats have a long history of everything from Deceased, Illegal, Made up, and even Cartoons voting. There have even been cases of more people voting in a particular precinct than there are registered voters or even more than population present.

        Excerpt:

        …any overt attempt to rig (through disruption or hacking) the outcome of the election could result in widespread violence and/or a national fracture.

        I would say this maybe the result regardless of cause.

        Something left out by this author is the fact that regardless of who hacked this information, it is legitimate information that has not been tampered with.

        If you are going to play with fire you sometimes get burned. The DNC could have avoided this by simply following their own rules created by the DNC or changed the rules to reflect their bias.

        I know it’s far fetched, politicians playing by their own rules!

        Of course they could have taken some of the money they line their pockets with and upgraded their security.

        Excerpt:

        Trump’s rhetorical suggestion that Russian hackers should find Hillary’s deleted e-mails. This has led many people in the establishment to contend that Trump committed ‘treason and is now a clear and present danger to the security of the US.’

        Article III, Section 3, Clause 1

        Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

        The crime of treason requires a traitorous intent. If a person unwittingly or unintentionally gives aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States during wartime, treason has not occurred. Similarly, a person who pursues a course of action that is intended to benefit the United States but mistakenly helps an enemy is not guilty of treason. Inadvertent disloyalty is never punishable as treason, no matter how much damage the United States suffers.

        This seems to be quite the hurdle even considering the times we live in.

        Excerpt:

        This national security angle — the overt interference by Russia in US governance — could make it possible to block Trump as a candidate on national security grounds.

        I consider this to be fearmongering at best, anti-Trump wet dream at worst! A sarcastic remark by Trump, a remark many of us would make under similar circumstances leading to his removal from the Presidential Election? One day maybe, but we aren’t that far gone yet.

      • #78002
        Joe (G.W.N.S.)
        Moderator

          Such is the value of plausible deniability in much of cyberwarfare when done well.

          I wanted to expand on this.

          Many things here in the US still rely on selling something to the public.

          So if you are going to say the “Russian Government did it!”

          The American people will want some form of proof. In some case this proof may not exist, but there is a more difficult problem to deal with.

          Government may have proof, but to share this proof would reveal how we obtained it.

          Which is more important “the Selling” or “keeping the methods and sources hidden!”

          In a “Post-Event” this maybe something that needs consideration, particularly when networking with other groups.

          The release of said information outside of your control could compromise the source of information and prevent further use. In the case of HUMINT (Human intelligence) the death or doubling (becoming a OPFOR Asset) of the person.

        • #78003
          HiDesertRat
          Participant

            G.W.N.S.,

            What would you suggest as a starting point for reading to develop improving the forum members methodology in terms of intelligence, the gathering, analyzing, etc.?

            Interestingly, your comment:

            “Government may have proof, but to share this proof would reveal how we obtained it.”

            Reminds me of some things William Binney wrote concerning the email content from hillary and what can be deduced by foreign players by its content.

            This guy Robb did have an interesting viewpoint about Trump, despite revealing lots of shortcomings in his work, namely the comparison of Trumps campaign to insurgency. It is in someways not unlike some of the commentary by Scott Adams, of Dilbert fame, concerning Trump. It seems Trump is dumb like a fox. But enough of politics. I enjoy your insight.

          • #78004
            Joe (G.W.N.S.)
            Moderator

              What would you suggest as a starting point for reading to develop improving the forum members methodology in terms of intelligence, the gathering, analyzing, etc.?

              I will have more on this shortly.

              Interestingly, your comment:

              “Government may have proof, but to share this proof would reveal how we obtained it.”

              Reminds me of some things William Binney wrote concerning the email content from hillary and what can be deduced by foreign players by its content.

              This is part of the basis of the classification of material. The actual piece of data isn’t what is important in many cases. It’s the ability to identify the source of of the data.

              The material that Clinton allowed to be compromised caused much damage and in all likelihood lives were lost due to the nature of some it.

              I am not exaggerating.

            • #78005
              wildbill
              Participant

                The material that Clinton allowed to be compromised caused much damage and in all likelihood lives were lost due to the nature of some it.

                Is this fact or assumption? If fact there may be some present and former military members that may take exception to politicians playing fast and loose with classified information that gets their friends killed (just an assumption).

              • #78006
                Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                Moderator

                  The material that Clinton allowed to be compromised caused much damage is a fact.

                  The likelihood that lives were lost due to the nature of some it is an accurate assumption.

                  Note: These could be US or various foreign assets from a variety of departments, agencies, or other.

                  The following is the best I can do in an OSINT enviroment.
                  Inspector General: Hillary Clinton’s Private Server Contained ‘Special Access Programs’ Intel

                  Special access program (SAP)

                  If indeed this caused death(s) due to the nature of such involvement it would likely be part of various highly classified reports. It is unlikely such reports would be declassified for quite some time.

                • #78007
                  gramma
                  Participant

                    OK – you can kick me out, if I’m just hopelessly naive.

                    I have read this article – and taken some grief because I argued the position that there isn’t enough clear proof/data YET to accuse the Russians of being responsible for the breach. People immediately jumped to the defense of the author and an assumption of his trustworthiness as a source.

                    But the key word for me, was responsibility. It provides some context for analysis that is helpful, with this type of article and event. Clearly, the DNC had the responsibility for securing their servers and data, to the best of their ability. No assessment of that security is published, that I’ve found.

                    Furthermore, having been somewhat involved in stopping and tracing network breaches in a “former life”, I know that this takes time. And while we don’t have facts on when the investigation actually started and the date(s) the breach occurred, there was almost no time between announcing the breach and the accusation of the Russians. As I recall, both things were stated as “fact” in the initial reports. As if it was more important to shift responsibility for security – onto someone, anyone that could be cast in the light of meddling in the election. (An assumption on my part). That would also require concocting a motive, which in this case was characterized as trying to help Trump win the election.

                    We can speculate till the cows come home about what this really means and the desired results from casting the accusations this way. But latest reports are the NSA is now hacking the Russians, hoping to find the data that was allegedly stolen. Zerohedge is casting this as “open cyberwarfare”, without referencing the number of years mutual spying has gone on between the US and Russia and how that did not lead to open war.

                    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-30/cyberwars-begin-nsa-hackers-target-russian-cyber-spies-kremlin-says-it-being-attacke

                  • #78008
                    Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                    Moderator

                      I have read this article – and taken some grief because I argued the position that there isn’t enough clear proof/data YET to accuse the Russians of being responsible for the breach.

                      You are correct there isn’t sufficient evidence at this point.

                      Clearly, the DNC had the responsibility for securing their servers and data, to the best of their ability.

                      There is convincing evidence that few politicians regardless of affiliation take there security serious. In many cases they seem more concerned with possible investigation from US Law Enforcement.

                      As I recall, both things were stated as “fact” in the initial reports.

                      The so called media is of course heavily in bed with the Socialists.

                      Remember that the relationship between Russia and American Socialists (AKA Democrats) is similar in nature to the relationship between the Soviets and Nazi’s pre-invasion.

                      Zerohedge is casting this as “open cyberwarfare”, without referencing the number of years mutual spying has gone on between the US and Russia and how that did not lead to open war.

                      It is important to remember that during the Cold War there were actual small scale engagements that resulted in losses on both sides yet War was avoided. Of course these may not have been covered up as easily with our current Internet.

                      Many if not most of these “Doom and Gloom” Blogs/sites have there own agenda and tend to jump on any Tinfoil Bandwagon the comes along that supports their distorted views.

                    • #78009
                      Sam Brady
                      Participant

                        G.W.N.S.
                        Spot on analysis.
                        I have often thought the Israelis would be a good possibility regarding the hacking and leaking of emails….
                        Any country that has potentially damaging emails from Hildabeast is in a great position to black mail her. Think about it this way, China has a really damning email, she is advised of that and knows this might “turn” the election….the Chinese tell her, we are going to peacefully re unify China and Taiwan….she agrees…
                        Or, a clever well engineered series of fake emails could be released…since no one seems to no what was in the 33,000 emails her attorney’s deleted…..

                      • #78010
                        Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                        Moderator

                          I have often thought the Israelis would be a good possibility regarding the hacking and leaking of emails….

                          That is certainly possible both considering the strained relations under BHO and their history of making things look like someone else is responsible for the action.

                          Any country that has potentially damaging emails from Hildabeast is in a great position to black mail her.

                          Absolutely! :good:

                          Or, a clever well engineered series of fake emails could be released…

                          More difficult, but not impossible.

                          Something seldom brought up, but I would be shocked if a certain Maryland Agency didn’t have the 33,000 emails all this time.

                        • #78011
                          RRS
                          Participant

                            No computer expert but I would hazard it could be anyone, how many contractors worked on these networks and who might they work for and where in the software can they place admin priveleges or back up priveleges. Then I have heard from computer literate individuals that Chinese chipsets are suspect for hardware level back doors.

                            Thieves just trying to keep other thieves “honest.”

                          • #78012
                            wildbill
                            Participant

                              Since the assumption has been made concerning possible deaths linked to possible breach of Clinton’s email server, then my question is would large military operations i.e. Seal mission be something that she would have information about (Extortion 17)?

                              Obviously my question is how much information is passed to State from DOD about missions especially cross border raids?

                            • #78013
                              Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                              Moderator

                                Obviously my question is how much information is passed to State from DOD about missions especially cross border raids?

                                It varies some, but typically operations within a single country would not receive any message traffic beyond possible AAR’s. Certain cross border operations limited message traffic, particularly so if we are attempting to gain sanctioned access.

                                …concerning possible deaths…

                                Note: These could be US or various foreign assets from a variety of departments, agencies, or other.

                                The most likely deaths would be non-military Intelligence assets.

                                This is speculation, but is one of the aspects of SAP’s.

                              • #78014
                                HiDesertRat
                                Participant

                                  LOL!

                                  Its official now, no need for everyone to pontificate on this topic anymore.

                                  Per hillary rotten clinton:

                                  “We know that Russian intelligence services hacked into the DNC and we know that they arranged for a lot of those emails to be released and we know that Donald Trump has shown a very troubling willingness to back up Putin, to support Putin,” Clinton said in an interview with “Fox News Sunday.”

                                  So I suppose they have those state department deleted emails also. Bad Ivan, bad dog, you ate my homework. Its an f***in circus out there.

                                  Everyone have a great day.

                                • #78015
                                  wildbill
                                  Participant

                                    Thanks @G.W.N.S. for the guidance and trying to reign in conspiracy theories by helping to separate the BS from the facts.

                                  • #78016
                                    gramma
                                    Participant

                                      Thanks @G.W.N.S. for the guidance and trying to reign in conspiracy theories by helping to separate the BS from the facts.

                                      This is a full-time job these days. :-(

                                    • #78017
                                      Thomas
                                      Participant

                                        @wildbill, the amount of information provided depends on the mission. The ambassador in the country where the operation will take place is, with rare exception, briefed that US military forces will operate in the host country. The ambassador may receive a full briefing or simply be informed that a mission will take place. The information may be passed after the fact, but the ambassador is informed. No ambassador wants to find out from the host country that US forces have operated in the area from his hosts. The ambassador sees the reports that go out of the embassy so knows the five W’s on what is happening in the country.

                                        A second part to this is the ambassador works for the president directly. Ambassador’s can and will call the president when they feel the need to do so.

                                        As far as hrc blaming the Russians, the question is what does she gain from this story line?

                                      • #78018
                                        wildbill
                                        Participant

                                          As far as hrc blaming the Russians, the question is what does she gain from this story line?

                                          Diversion from what the emails reveal it is easy to hate the big bad Russians. If caught with your hands in the cookie jar blame someone else.

                                        • #78019
                                          HiDesertRat
                                          Participant

                                            Well after my sarcastic post regarding clintons statement of ‘fact’ that Ivan was responsible for the hack, none other than William Binney
                                            suggests its the work of a whistleblower in the NSA. Since he was the architect of their entire surveillence program, one should not discount his conjecture. He is of the opinion that disclosure of her manipulations is retaliation for the manner in which hillary rotten clinton endangered lives in such a cavalier fashion and skated on the issue. In other words, its payback time. And she cannot fight opposition that remains behind the curtain. Fitting justice for her, like fighting fire with fire. Quite frankly, it is my belief that no one has the ability to become the president unless they have the full faith and backing of countrys’ security services and military, which she appears to lack.

                                          • #78020
                                            Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                            Moderator

                                              I want you to think about what we covered here:

                                              Established some facts.

                                              Demonstrated some assumptions and pointed out some bias.

                                              Started getting into some basic methods.

                                              This DNC hack is interesting, but does it really matter?

                                              I don’t really care who hacked the DNC!

                                              I am glad that many got to see a little of what really goes on within such groups.

                                              I suspect that if the RNC got hacked it would be equally enlightening.

                                            • #78021
                                              HiDesertRat
                                              Participant

                                                Does who or where any hack occur matter, no.

                                                My only concern is that the I do not believe our country, what is left of it, what little I still recognize, will not survive if the current regime continues into the next election cycle. I sincerely pray ‘that woman’ gets her karmic mail, and soon. So exposure of her misdeeds is of paramount importance. I apologize for the politics as it is not appropriate and yet somehow it is. And exposure of “a little of what really goes on within such groups” helps people to choose wisely in all matters, if they are informed. And you sir, are begining to teach how to winnow the wheat from the chaff in our era of mis/dis information. An admirable task indeed.

                                              • #78022
                                                Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                Moderator

                                                  The material that Clinton allowed to be compromised caused much damage is a fact.

                                                  The likelihood that lives were lost due to the nature of some it is an accurate assumption.

                                                  Note: These could be US or various foreign assets from a variety of departments, agencies, or other.

                                                  “The likelihood that lives were lost due to the nature of some it is an…” it would seem this can now be moved from accurate assumption to fact.

                                                  This is something I was waiting for more information before bringing it to the attention of the Forum.

                                                  Erik Prince: Hillary Clinton ‘Very Likely Caused’ Iranian Nuclear Scientist’s Death

                                                  State won’t discuss Clinton email link to Iran executing nuke scientist spy

                                                  This is one of many such deaths that will; in time, be attributed to these emails. Of course this is an accurate assumption on my part.

                                                • #78023
                                                  Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                  Moderator

                                                    With the continued propaganda “the Russians did it” I thought it would be interesting to revisit this Thread just shy of a year old.

                                                    Remember the point of the Thread is not just about analysis of the actual topic, but an example “how to” for practicing analysis methods.

                                                  • #78024
                                                    Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                    Moderator

                                                      With the continued propaganda “the Russians did it” I thought it would be interesting to revisit this Thread just shy of a year old.

                                                      Remember the point of the Thread is not just about analysis of the actual topic, but an example “how to” for practicing analysis methods.

                                                      Worth a friendly reminder!

                                                    • #78025
                                                      Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                      Moderator

                                                        Joe (G.W.N.S.) wrote:
                                                        The material that Clinton allowed to be compromised caused much damage is a fact.

                                                        The likelihood that lives were lost due to the nature of some it is an accurate assumption.

                                                        Note: These could be US or various foreign assets from a variety of departments, agencies, or other.
                                                        _______________________________________________________

                                                        “The likelihood that lives were lost due to the nature of some it is an…” it would seem this can now be moved from accurate assumption to fact.

                                                        This is something I was waiting for more information before bringing it to the attention of the Forum.

                                                        Erik Prince: Hillary Clinton ‘Very Likely Caused’ Iranian Nuclear Scientist’s Death

                                                        State won’t discuss Clinton email link to Iran executing nuke scientist spy

                                                        This is one of many such deaths that will; in time, be attributed to these emails. Of course this is an accurate assumption on my part.

                                                        It appears another “accurate assumption” can be moved to the fact category.

                                                        REVEALED: Chinese Govt. Killed and Imprisoned 18-20 CIA Spies After Penetrating Hillary Clinton’s Private Server

                                                        Hillary’s carelessness and criminal actions may have led to the deaths of 20 CIA operatives in China.

                                                        The Chinese government killed or imprisoned 18 to 20 CIA operatives in China from 2010 to 2012.

                                                        At the same time a Chinese-owned company operating in the Washington, D.C., area hacked Hillary Clinton’s private server throughout her term as secretary of state.

                                                        The Chinese government was obtaining Hillary Clinton’s emails in real time.

                                                        Her criminal behavior severely damaged US foreign policy.

                                                        Business Insider reported:

                                                        China killed or imprisoned 18 to 20 CIA sources from 2010 to 2012, hobbling U.S. spying operations in a massive intelligence breach whose origin has not been identified, the New York Times reported on Saturday.

                                                        Investigators remain divided over whether there was a spy within the Central Intelligence Agency who betrayed the sources or whether the Chinese hacked the CIA’s covert communications system, the newspaper reported, citing current and former U.S. officials.

                                                        The Chinese killed at least a dozen people providing information to the CIA from 2010 through 2012, dismantling a network that was years in the making, the newspaper reported.

                                                        One was shot and killed in front of a government building in China, three officials told the Times, saying that was designed as a message to others about working with Washington.

                                                        The breach was considered particularly damaging, with the number of assets lost rivaling those in the Soviet Union and Russia who perished after information passed to Moscow by spies Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen, the report said. Ames was active as a spy in the 1980s and Hanssen from 1979 to 2001.

                                                        The CIA declined to comment when asked about the Times report on Saturday.

                                                        I only hope this would be pursued and prosecuted, however I won’t hold my breath!

                                                      • #147108
                                                        Joe (G.W.N.S.)
                                                        Moderator

                                                          In light of new information from recent DNI declassifications, this is worth a revisit.

                                                          I highly suggest all read from the beginning of Thread.

                                                          The DNC hired CrowdStrike to investigate their hacked system, CrowdStrike concluded that the hack was done by:

                                                          Excerpt from NY Times:

                                                          The investigators determined that the hackers were part of APT 28, a group well-known among cybersecurity experts. The name is short for advanced persistent threat, which usually refers to government hackers. Security firms and law enforcement officials have also used the name Fancy Bear, a reference to a widespread belief that the group is run by Russia’s military intelligence agency, the G.R.U.

                                                          The investigation might have ended there, but CrowdStrike discovered another, better-hidden infiltrator in the computers of the Democratic committee: A group known as APT 29, or Cozy Bear, which is considered more skillful and has been linked to the F.S.B., the main successor to the K.G.B.
                                                          Cozy Bear, it seemed, had had complete access to the committee’s systems for almost a year.

                                                          CrowdStrike last year received $100 million in a new round of financing, this financing was lead by Google Capital, one of the technology giant’s venture capital arms.

                                                          Two other cybersecurity firms Fidelis Cybersecurity and Mandiant have confirmed CrowdStrike’s conclusion.

                                                          Fidelis Cybersecurity a subsidiary of General Dynamics, is a major contributor to Democrats. Phebe Novakovic Chairman of the Board and CEO at General Dynamics is also a major supporter. Note: They provide money to both parties in abundance.

                                                          Mandiant is a subsidiary of FireEye, Inc. which as you guessed is also a contributor.

                                                          It wouldn’t be too far a stretch for these companies to provide the desired results to support a desired agenda, this is of course speculation on my part, but the more you dig into the symbiotic nature between government and these politically astute businesses the more corrupt it appears.

                                                          CrowdStrike Had No Evidence of Russians Stealing Emails From DNC, Declassified Transcript Shows

                                                          Shawn Henry, the president of CrowdStrike Services, told the House Intelligence Committee in late 2017 that his firm had no evidence that the alleged Russian hackers stole any data from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) servers.

                                                          “There’s not evidence that they were actually exfiltrated,” Henry said. “There’s circumstantial evidence, but no evidence that they were actually exfiltrated.”

                                                          If needed I’ll link to the actual declassified doccuments.

                                                      Viewing 25 reply threads
                                                      • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.