6 ms·

Here's the criminal complaint. Check Paragraph 12, sounds like he just liked to take work home with him. I'm leaning on the side that this IS NOT ShadowBrokers.

by dguido 10y ago

Here's the criminal complaint. Check Paragraph 12, sounds like he just liked to take work home with him. I'm leaning on the side that this IS NOT ShadowBrokers. https://lawfare.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/staging/2016/Martin%20Criminal%20Complaint.pdf https://lawfare.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/staging/2016/Mart... EDIT: Yeah, Martin is not even being charged with unauthorized disclosure. Not ShadowBrokers, sorry to burst everyone's bubble.

NN88 10y ago
MANY have said that its possible there was another NSA patsy covering for Snowden or definitely at least another spy. http://observer.com/2016/08/the-real-russian-mole-inside-nsa/ http://observer.com/2016/08/the-real-russian-mole-inside-nsa... http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/01/world/europe/wikileaks-julian-assange-russia.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/01/world/europe/wikileaks-jul...
- ChoHag 10y ago
  Many == Russia?
karpodiem 10y ago
Sounds like is being made the fall guy for this.
SEJeff 10y ago
What's to say $FOREIGN_INFOSEC_ACTORS don't try to target employees like him? Maybe he did "take his work home" and a FSB operative stole it from his home or hacked his home computer? I'm saying this as if this was Russia and he was a Russian infosec guy, I wouldn't put it past the NSA TAO to go do just that.
- nickff 10y ago
  Yes, this is dangerous; people shouldn't be allowed to bring government secrets home with them... unless they are cabinet level officials?
  - SEJeff 10y ago
    Exactly! They should go to jail as well, but well you can't win them all... Clinton should be in jail.
  - askvictor 10y ago
    Actually, this argument has some merit, as cabinet level officials probably have a security detail, and hence much less likely to be infiltrated than a random contractor (at least physically; electronically is another matter)
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- ChoHag 10y ago
  That would in fact be their job. Far more so than monitoring each of their fellow citizens for shits and giggles. And porn.
matheweis 10y ago
Whilst trying to remain as politically neutral as possible, isn't this basically what Clinton did?
- jwtadvice 10y ago
  Whilst trying to remain as politically neutral as possible, this the kindest possible interpretation of one thing that Clinton did.
- roywiggins 10y ago
  Nobody has managed to find any documents that passed through Clinton's email server that were labeled as classified, let alone Top Secret. (One or two documents had classified sections, which were labeled with small (c) marks. The document should have had big CLASSIFIED marks, but since it didn't, missing a (c) next to a paragraph is not an arrestable offense)
  - cvwright 10y ago
    Spilling the beans on classified information is still illegal, even if it's not properly portion marked in big capital letters.
    - comex 10y ago
      Yes, but the presence of three or so poorly marked emails among tens of thousands of them over four years does not do a great job of establishing intent - as opposed to this case, where the Booz employee was found with tons of presumably clearly marked classified documents.
      - Someone1234 10y ago
        Even the destruction of evidence is illegal. The State Department ordered her to return all emails, she had staff (incidentally without security clearance) delete tens of thousands of them. The state department has recovered emails sent and received to her (for official functions) which she failed to turn over. This is in the FBI's report and also in the private lawsuit filed by the Republican group.
OscarCunningham 10y ago
So there have been at least three leaks from the NSA? That's ridiculous; they need some drastic changes and urgently.
- sqeaky 10y ago
  People enforce all security physical and digital. If people don't believe in the mission there will be leaks. The biggest change might simply be that they need to start doing unambiguous good or their workers will keep leaking stuff.
  - Grishnakh 10y ago
    >The biggest change might simply be that they need to start doing unambiguous good or their workers will keep leaking stuff. Didn't James Earl Jones address this idea in "Sneakers"? "We're the US government: we don't do that sort of thing!"

by dguido 10y ago

NN88 10y ago

MANY have said that its possible there was another NSA patsy covering for Snowden or definitely at least another spy. http://observer.com/2016/08/the-real-russian-mole-inside-nsa/ http://observer.com/2016/08/the-real-russian-mole-inside-nsa... http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/01/world/europe/wikileaks-julian-assange-russia.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/01/world/europe/wikileaks-jul...

ChoHag 10y ago
Many == Russia?

karpodiem 10y ago

Sounds like is being made the fall guy for this.

SEJeff 10y ago

What's to say $FOREIGN_INFOSEC_ACTORS don't try to target employees like him? Maybe he did "take his work home" and a FSB operative stole it from his home or hacked his home computer? I'm saying this as if this was Russia and he was a Russian infosec guy, I wouldn't put it past the NSA TAO to go do just that.

nickff 10y ago
Yes, this is dangerous; people shouldn't be allowed to bring government secrets home with them... unless they are cabinet level officials?
- SEJeff 10y ago
  Exactly! They should go to jail as well, but well you can't win them all... Clinton should be in jail.
- askvictor 10y ago
  Actually, this argument has some merit, as cabinet level officials probably have a security detail, and hence much less likely to be infiltrated than a random contractor (at least physically; electronically is another matter)
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
ChoHag 10y ago
That would in fact be their job. Far more so than monitoring each of their fellow citizens for shits and giggles. And porn.

matheweis 10y ago

Whilst trying to remain as politically neutral as possible, isn't this basically what Clinton did?

jwtadvice 10y ago
Whilst trying to remain as politically neutral as possible, this the kindest possible interpretation of one thing that Clinton did.
roywiggins 10y ago
Nobody has managed to find any documents that passed through Clinton's email server that were labeled as classified, let alone Top Secret. (One or two documents had classified sections, which were labeled with small (c) marks. The document should have had big CLASSIFIED marks, but since it didn't, missing a (c) next to a paragraph is not an arrestable offense)
- cvwright 10y ago
  Spilling the beans on classified information is still illegal, even if it's not properly portion marked in big capital letters.
  - comex 10y ago
    Yes, but the presence of three or so poorly marked emails among tens of thousands of them over four years does not do a great job of establishing intent - as opposed to this case, where the Booz employee was found with tons of presumably clearly marked classified documents.
    - Someone1234 10y ago
      Even the destruction of evidence is illegal. The State Department ordered her to return all emails, she had staff (incidentally without security clearance) delete tens of thousands of them. The state department has recovered emails sent and received to her (for official functions) which she failed to turn over. This is in the FBI's report and also in the private lawsuit filed by the Republican group.

OscarCunningham 10y ago

So there have been at least three leaks from the NSA? That's ridiculous; they need some drastic changes and urgently.

sqeaky 10y ago
People enforce all security physical and digital. If people don't believe in the mission there will be leaks. The biggest change might simply be that they need to start doing unambiguous good or their workers will keep leaking stuff.
- Grishnakh 10y ago
  >The biggest change might simply be that they need to start doing unambiguous good or their workers will keep leaking stuff. Didn't James Earl Jones address this idea in "Sneakers"? "We're the US government: we don't do that sort of thing!"