5 ms·

Again? Can someone tell me if there's actual malfeasance this time or just more edgy moaning about the spy agency doing its job? I'm happy to call out the sec

Again? Can someone tell me if there's actual malfeasance this time or just more edgy moaning about the spy agency doing its job? I'm happy to call out the security apparatus when it actually oversteps its bounds (Eg the Snowden leaks). But so far as I can tell wikileaks vault 7/8 isn't a leak in the public interest. Its just anti-American wankery.

monocasa 9y ago
The amount of work that they put into throwing off attribution, while expected, is important to make it's way into public knowledge rather than just the realm of conspiracy, IMO.
- PeachPlum 9y ago
  See the Sony break in where the dubious attribution was used by Obama as a reason for more DPRK sanctions
- jhiska 9y ago
  It is vital to the intel community that their methods of attribution can't be publicly audited and that their authority is trusted on word alone.
sametmax 9y ago
Well you can't protect yourself against an hostile gov if you don't know their weapons.
- lightbyte 9y ago
  These are up to 10 year old tools, they are not going to still be in use.
  - codefined 9y ago
    In the commercial sector I seem to find myself spending a significant amount of my time working on projects that were started many decades ago that have just been improved over time. I honestly wouldn't be too surprised if a lot of these applications were used today with relatively little change.
    - lightbyte 9y ago
      This isn't the commercial sector, these kinds of things are incredibly sensitive to time.
      - ryanlol 9y ago
        Huh, why? We aren't really discussing exploits here.
  - 45h34jh53k4j 9y ago
    Repo is from 2015. Its not that old.
    - lightbyte 9y ago
      Read the page, they moved to a new repos a few years ago. If you go to the actual source files some of them are dated as early as October 1st 2007.
      - 45h34jh53k4j 9y ago
        They moved from a CVS/SVN repo to git. The history from this old repo is missing, but the (leaked) git repo is recent. Author:User#142 Date: Fri Oct 30 09:58:22 2015 EDT User's Guide date corrections.
  - sametmax 9y ago
    Given that some big exploits can fly under the radar for decades (e.g: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/02/23/linux_kernel_gets_patch_against_12yearold_bug/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/02/23/linux_kernel_gets_p...), I think it's always interesting. But the point is moot anyway: either their tools are still relevant today, in that case it's good to see what they can use against the people, or they are not, in which case it won't hurt them if we see them and it's not "anti american".
craftyguy 9y ago
> Can someone tell me if there's actual malfeasance this time or just more edgy moaning about the spy agency doing its job? Why don't you read it and decide for yourself?
ryanlol 9y ago
>Its just anti-American wankery. So what, that’s been wikileaks MO since day one. Assange has been very transparent about his intentions. Read his essay from 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20070129125831/http://iq.org/conspiracies.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20070129125831/http://iq.org/con...
- whatshisface 9y ago
  Don't you realize that the institution that's being examined isn't necessarily on your side? Without oversight, how could they possibly be kept on the good side? Having gone so long without oversight, how far have they strayed? Assuming you weren't involved in any of this, ask yourself: did I authorize it? Did the legitimate authority of my civil peers (to which I am willing to cede) authorize it? Did my representatives authorize it? (Not everyone in congress is on these top-secret commitiees, it's entirely possible that some action could be taken that the voters of an entire state had essentially zero say in.) Finally, What would happen if a cleared individual decided to take an action without asking anybody or telling anybody? You know, like Snowden, except not conscience-driven to make sure we all heard about it. It's not like established systems have ever suppressed secrets that would make them look bad if widely known, right? Right?
  - ryanlol 9y ago
    >Don't you realize that the institution that's being examined isn't necessarily on your side? CIA or Wikileaks? CIA absolutely not, Wikileaks probably yes. >Without oversight, how could they possibly be kept on the good side? CIA is the foreign intelligence agency of a particularly murderous country, they can’t possibly be kept on the good side. Wikileaks seems to have oversight built in that they need to be trustworthy enough for people to leak to them. >Having gone so long without oversight, how far have they strayed? CIA has a long history of doing terrible things, I doubt they’ve strayed too far from that. >What would happen if a cleared individual decided to take an action without asking anybody or telling anybody? What would happen if the sun came up in the morning? Things would probably be the same they were yesterday.
    - 9y ago

monocasa 9y ago

The amount of work that they put into throwing off attribution, while expected, is important to make it's way into public knowledge rather than just the realm of conspiracy, IMO.

PeachPlum 9y ago
See the Sony break in where the dubious attribution was used by Obama as a reason for more DPRK sanctions
jhiska 9y ago
It is vital to the intel community that their methods of attribution can't be publicly audited and that their authority is trusted on word alone.

sametmax 9y ago

Well you can't protect yourself against an hostile gov if you don't know their weapons.

lightbyte 9y ago
These are up to 10 year old tools, they are not going to still be in use.
- codefined 9y ago
  In the commercial sector I seem to find myself spending a significant amount of my time working on projects that were started many decades ago that have just been improved over time. I honestly wouldn't be too surprised if a lot of these applications were used today with relatively little change.
  - lightbyte 9y ago
    This isn't the commercial sector, these kinds of things are incredibly sensitive to time.
    - ryanlol 9y ago
      Huh, why? We aren't really discussing exploits here.
- 45h34jh53k4j 9y ago
  Repo is from 2015. Its not that old.
  - lightbyte 9y ago
    Read the page, they moved to a new repos a few years ago. If you go to the actual source files some of them are dated as early as October 1st 2007.
    - 45h34jh53k4j 9y ago
      They moved from a CVS/SVN repo to git. The history from this old repo is missing, but the (leaked) git repo is recent. Author:User#142 Date: Fri Oct 30 09:58:22 2015 EDT User's Guide date corrections.
- sametmax 9y ago
  Given that some big exploits can fly under the radar for decades (e.g: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/02/23/linux_kernel_gets_patch_against_12yearold_bug/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/02/23/linux_kernel_gets_p...), I think it's always interesting. But the point is moot anyway: either their tools are still relevant today, in that case it's good to see what they can use against the people, or they are not, in which case it won't hurt them if we see them and it's not "anti american".

craftyguy 9y ago

> Can someone tell me if there's actual malfeasance this time or just more edgy moaning about the spy agency doing its job? Why don't you read it and decide for yourself?

ryanlol 9y ago

>Its just anti-American wankery. So what, that’s been wikileaks MO since day one. Assange has been very transparent about his intentions. Read his essay from 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20070129125831/http://iq.org/conspiracies.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20070129125831/http://iq.org/con...

whatshisface 9y ago
Don't you realize that the institution that's being examined isn't necessarily on your side? Without oversight, how could they possibly be kept on the good side? Having gone so long without oversight, how far have they strayed? Assuming you weren't involved in any of this, ask yourself: did I authorize it? Did the legitimate authority of my civil peers (to which I am willing to cede) authorize it? Did my representatives authorize it? (Not everyone in congress is on these top-secret commitiees, it's entirely possible that some action could be taken that the voters of an entire state had essentially zero say in.) Finally, What would happen if a cleared individual decided to take an action without asking anybody or telling anybody? You know, like Snowden, except not conscience-driven to make sure we all heard about it. It's not like established systems have ever suppressed secrets that would make them look bad if widely known, right? Right?
- ryanlol 9y ago
  >Don't you realize that the institution that's being examined isn't necessarily on your side? CIA or Wikileaks? CIA absolutely not, Wikileaks probably yes. >Without oversight, how could they possibly be kept on the good side? CIA is the foreign intelligence agency of a particularly murderous country, they can’t possibly be kept on the good side. Wikileaks seems to have oversight built in that they need to be trustworthy enough for people to leak to them. >Having gone so long without oversight, how far have they strayed? CIA has a long history of doing terrible things, I doubt they’ve strayed too far from that. >What would happen if a cleared individual decided to take an action without asking anybody or telling anybody? What would happen if the sun came up in the morning? Things would probably be the same they were yesterday.
  - 9y ago