3 ms·

Amazing work, but I'm genuinely surprised that you can uncover top spy identities, just using publicly, and leaked, material available over the internet.

throwaway23785 8y ago
I wouldn't call "In our source’s words" or "from two separate sources with access to [passport] databases" as public material on the Internet. In fact, it very much reads as a classical parallel construction [1], e.g. some secret service identified the suspect through their work (anything from double agents to court-ordered wiretapping to illegal wiretapping) and back-fed details to some independent organization to create a train-of-thought from it and publish it. Especially since the public group photo is marked "[we] do not claim" and the truly exposing details come from secret databases from secret "sources". That is not public or verifiable information. We had things like that here (here being a former eastern-bloc non-USSR country, where people are extra cautious of manipulations because being spoon fed with propaganda for 40 years) exposed fairly recently trough leaked wiretapping files. It was in all combinations. A journalist begging secret operatives to give her anything saying she would publish that immediately. Operatives feeding true information to unwitting journalists. And so on... 1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction
ethbro 8y ago
It's difficult to rewrite the digital past, and every undercover officer was a civilian at some previous point. Essentially it's a defense in depth game. You can sever links between cover identities and real identities, but you can't erase real identities with history as easily. Pierce the obsfuscated link, browse through someone's normal digital life. Starts to make plastic surgery look downright cheap.
Muromec 8y ago
Or maybe it's just bellingcat constructing parallel evidence for already known fact.
pixelperfect 8y ago
Especially when they grew up in a tiny town with population 300 before attending a nearby military academy. This guy's background was very obscure.
jpfr 8y ago
They had to make some very unlikely connections. Look for the jumps in their analysis where they suddenly know what to Google for. Because of what? A photo from somebody in Chechnya that looks not at all like the guy they want. Could be they knew what they had to find... Anyway, they have some great sources for an open source analysis joint! ;-)
- zzzcpan 8y ago
  Bellingcat has a lot of background investigating Kremlin deeds. Of course they had good assumptions to start with.
- palant 8y ago
  > Could be they knew what they had to find... Or, more likely, you are simply looking at the result of extremely tedious trial & error, with the failed lines of investigation omitted from the final writeup.
emmelaich 8y ago
The head of MI6's wife had a Facebook account and she shared pictures of their holiday at the beach. (2009) Information leaks easily. Which is the reason you shouldn't believe the vast majority of "conspiracy" theories. Not even a little bit.

throwaway23785 8y ago

I wouldn't call "In our source’s words" or "from two separate sources with access to [passport] databases" as public material on the Internet. In fact, it very much reads as a classical parallel construction [1], e.g. some secret service identified the suspect through their work (anything from double agents to court-ordered wiretapping to illegal wiretapping) and back-fed details to some independent organization to create a train-of-thought from it and publish it. Especially since the public group photo is marked "[we] do not claim" and the truly exposing details come from secret databases from secret "sources". That is not public or verifiable information. We had things like that here (here being a former eastern-bloc non-USSR country, where people are extra cautious of manipulations because being spoon fed with propaganda for 40 years) exposed fairly recently trough leaked wiretapping files. It was in all combinations. A journalist begging secret operatives to give her anything saying she would publish that immediately. Operatives feeding true information to unwitting journalists. And so on... 1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction

ethbro 8y ago

It's difficult to rewrite the digital past, and every undercover officer was a civilian at some previous point. Essentially it's a defense in depth game. You can sever links between cover identities and real identities, but you can't erase real identities with history as easily. Pierce the obsfuscated link, browse through someone's normal digital life. Starts to make plastic surgery look downright cheap.

Muromec 8y ago

Or maybe it's just bellingcat constructing parallel evidence for already known fact.

pixelperfect 8y ago

Especially when they grew up in a tiny town with population 300 before attending a nearby military academy. This guy's background was very obscure.

jpfr 8y ago

They had to make some very unlikely connections. Look for the jumps in their analysis where they suddenly know what to Google for. Because of what? A photo from somebody in Chechnya that looks not at all like the guy they want. Could be they knew what they had to find... Anyway, they have some great sources for an open source analysis joint! ;-)

zzzcpan 8y ago
Bellingcat has a lot of background investigating Kremlin deeds. Of course they had good assumptions to start with.
palant 8y ago
> Could be they knew what they had to find... Or, more likely, you are simply looking at the result of extremely tedious trial & error, with the failed lines of investigation omitted from the final writeup.

emmelaich 8y ago

The head of MI6's wife had a Facebook account and she shared pictures of their holiday at the beach. (2009) Information leaks easily. Which is the reason you shouldn't believe the vast majority of "conspiracy" theories. Not even a little bit.