12 ms·

>"He has been detained simply for investigation purposes" And then >"Ecuadorian diplomats told their counterparts in the UK that they were worried that Assang

>"He has been detained simply for investigation purposes" And then >"Ecuadorian diplomats told their counterparts in the UK that they were worried that Assange’s associates would try to seek revenge with cyberattacks and information leaks if he was handed over. Britain agreed to assist Ecuador in shoring up its cybersecurity, the newspaper reported." If I'm reading the subtext here, correctly, Bini was arrested but not charged with anything, presumably as a measure to keep him from orchestrating "retaliation". >"Ecuadorian officials believe Bini may be part of a blackmail ring assembled to pressure President Lenin Moreno and his government to allow Assange to remain in the embassy, according to the Times of London." I don't see how they can claim blackmail, if the INA Papers were released before they ousted Assange. Isn't this the antithesis of how blackmail works...? Edit: Ecuador is now saying hacking is the charge, it sounds like (admittedly, my Spanish isn't that great). https://www.fiscalia.gob.ec/ciudadano-sueco-fue-procesado-por-presunto-ataque-a-la-integridad-de-sistemas-informaticos/ https://www.fiscalia.gob.ec/ciudadano-sueco-fue-procesado-po...

jm4 8y ago
It was reported that Assange had a “panic button”. The report said that he had directly threatened the government of Ecuador with with retaliation if anything happened to him. I don’t have a link handy, but it shouldn’t be hard to find. There were also those strange tweets back in 2016 - codes or something, I don’t remember clearly - and speculation about some sort of dead man switch. Who knows if it’s true, but this seems to be what they’re worried about.
- sschueller 8y ago
  I doubt Assange would rely on anyone other than himself. So if there is a "panic button" it would more than likely be a dead mans switch.
  - 13415 8y ago
    Assange has relied on many people in the past, so there is not much evidence for your claim other than personal sentiment. What seems more credible is that only he has the keys to some data kept by other persons and he could release these keys via others like e.g. his lawyers. Arresting others who might help him with releasing the data once they have the key makes "sense" from that perspective, although it could be illegal (but IANAL in Ecuador).
  - SahAssar 8y ago
    A panic button is pretty much the opposite of a dead mans switch.
  - squarefoot 8y ago
    Which could explain why they waited just over one year after cutting his internet access to arrest him: if after one year still nothing happened, it's pretty much safe assuming he doesn't have a working dead mans switch (anymore). If true, this could also mean they were in agreements with the Ecuador govt. to arrest him a long time ago.
    - ddalex 8y ago
      A dead man's switch is not necessarily based on a timeout when your internet connection is not guaranteed. If the leak is nuclear level - e.g irrefutable proof that the ruling class ARE reptilians - you want to keep that unreleased for as long as you can. I can imagine a bot somewhere scanning top 10 international newspapers daily and looking for the words 'Assange' and 'dead' before the countdown begins.
- blhack 8y ago
  People have claimed this dead man switch thing, but it just seems to counter to what Wikileaks has been doing for the last 10+ years. If they had some crazy leak to make, it doesn’t seem like something they would just sit on to use as personal leverage for assange.
  - wybiral 8y ago
    > If they had some crazy leak to make, it doesn’t seem like something they would just sit on to use as personal leverage for assange. Really? They seem to have a narrow focus of interest with their leaks. I wouldn't put something like that beyond them at all.
    - codewiz 8y ago
      Could you elaborate? Have they been leaking selectively?
      - wybiral 8y ago
        They seem to only care about stories that are critical of Western intelligence while ignoring the (or withholding?) leaks that don't align with that agenda.
        wesammikhail 8y ago
        do we know what they have access to and what they are withholding? if we knew what they are withholding then we know what it is so... Sounds to me like we´re trying to read minds and apply a narrative that we cannot possibly verify. Not saying it isn´t the case but as far as I know, and I might be very wrong here, we have no evidence of them doing that. right?
        wybiral 8y ago
        There were private messages of Assange saying he wanted the GOP to win because they wouldn't be able to get anything done, which is a hint about how he feels for US government. Maybe it's just a coincidence that they only leaked Russian-hacked emails from the GOP opponent who was critical of WikiLeaks while ignoring ongoing stories about Russia itself and remaining silent on the many GOP scandals. They were also really critical of the Panama Papers leak which exposed several cases of corruption, but again it was probably just a coincidence those were more of a condemnation of Russian oligarchs than Western intelligence.
- notyourday 8y ago
  > It was reported that Assange had a “panic button”. The report said that he had directly threatened the government of Ecuador with with retaliation if anything happened to him. I don’t have a link handy, but it shouldn’t be hard to find. If Assange has a panic button rather than a dead man switch, he is much dumber than he is portrayed at which point most of the claims that are dismissed as ridiculous (i.e. a smart man would not do X) become not only plausible but likely.
- hackermailman 8y ago
  I believe the implicit threat is releasing unredacted intel dumps, so very large torrent files with thousands of classified military intelligence documents they normally would not release, floating around encrypted with a few people close to Assange possessing the password(s) to leak them in case of being shut down though some Guardian journalist already leaked the password to one of the dumps years ago reporting on what Assange wrote on a napkin when they met which allowed Guardian readers to decrypt the whole archive. I think Assange is kind of crazy for playing brinkmanship with the world's intel agencies but I will definitely miss a lot of their leaks, for example that leaked CIA guide to bypassing airport security while undercover, where used as an example in the guide (if I remember correctly) a field agent using a diplomatic passport who was detected by airport screening trying to transit through European airports while having explosives residue on him, and how he successfully lied and talked his way out of being arrested while undercover. This of course leads to the question, why are intel agents assembling/transporting explosives around European cities and one of the reasons I liked having Wikileaks around to embarass these agencies and their invisible shenanigans but I guess the party is over.
  - jm4 8y ago
    I’ll respond to the part about undercovers transporting weapons and/or explosives. It’s easier to stay undercover flying commercial so a team may assemble in a location by taking separate flights and take their equipment with them. That way none of them are spotted in a known military or agency location. Or it may be a place where they can’t easily take military transport or some highly covert mission where they’d all be disavowed if they were caught. The book Rogue Warrior talks about it a little bit. If I remember correctly, everyone in Seal Team 6 had to sneak a weapon onto a commercial flight as part of training.
  - sneak 8y ago
    https://wikileaks.org/cia-travel/secondary-screening/WikiLeaks_CIA_Assessment_on_Surviving_Secondary_Screening.pdf https://wikileaks.org/cia-travel/secondary-screening/WikiLea...
marcosdumay 8y ago
The title says it's hacking. The article body says they apprehended a lot of electronic equipment on his house, and many credit cards. It also says he travels a lot. I'm not getting into any specifics because the article doesn't get into them either... Also, it says nothing about what he actually hacked.
- throwawayjava 8y ago
  He was not (necessarily) charged with actual unauthorized access. Ecuador has quite strict computer crime laws. E.g. distribution of hacking tools is illegal. The law he is being charged with violating reads: "Diseñe, desarrolle, programe, adquiera, envíe, introduzca, ejecute, venda o distribuya de cualquier manera, dispositivos o programas informáticos maliciosos o programas destinados a causar los efectos señalados en el primer inciso de este artículo." which google translates as: Design, develop, program, acquire, send, introduce, execute, sell or distribute any malicious means, devices or programs or programs intended to cause effects indicated in the first paragraph of this article. Laws that criminalize creation/distribution of "hacking tools" are dangerous and scary because there's really no bright line as to what constitutes a hacking tool; e.g., it's even possible that Ola's work on JOpenSSL or OTRv4 could be construed as a "hacking tool" under this law :( A good if unfortunate reminder to anyone who works in computer security to check local laws before traveling and especially before emigrating.
maxaf 8y ago
> If I'm reading the subtext here, correctly, Bini was arrested but not charged with anything, presumably as a measure to keep him from orchestrating "retaliation". Hope they’re keeping him away from telephones: wouldn’t want to see him whistle any nucular launch codes... /s
Theodores 8y ago
The authorities have nothing to fear. There is a deeper problem with the notion of Assange having a 'dead man's switch'. Imagine that in the crown jewels of Wikileaks secret secrets there is some hypothetical document proving that a senior government figure was directly responsible for a high profile murder. The family of the victim may have been suffering without knowing what happened for years. Now, this being a juicy scandal, Assange, in his great wisdom decides to hold this one back for the purpose of blackmail. He also has another somewhat less juicy scandal about how some politician has not returned a library book on time. Then there are stories in-between, a whole smorgasbord of things for the 'dead man's switch'. Now, if he reveals the scandal about the library book then everyone is going to say 'so what?'. But then, at the other end of the scale, if he reveals the one about the high profile murder then it puts him in the class of people that 'harbour terrorists'. In effect he would have been covering up the crime by being silent about it and not putting it in the public domain. He would have caused undue suffering to the victim's family and allowed the police to waste resources searching in the wrong direction. If one of his minions in his little cult decide to 'go nuclear' and reveal all the secret secrets held back by Wikileaks then it is the same problem. They won't be viewed favourably for being complicit in the cover up to date. Imagine there is the fictional incident of a senior government figure guilty of murder, if that got brought to trial and justice prevailed then, even though Wikileaks might have provided the breakthrough needed for the investigation, holding back evidence would still be a crime. Wives of murderers who harbour their other halves can get prosecuted for being silent even if they are the ones that eventually snitch. So Assange has got nothing? Well, there is a however. Some scandals are far too taboo for the era and you need a new generation to be able to discuss them. So Assange may have content that is too hot for any sane journalist to want to touch and ultimately it is always the mainstream media that disseminates wikileaks. If Wikileaks have something that damns all of them then that ain't gonna get an audience, no matter how punchy it is.
- ddalex 8y ago
  What if they have something that is so nuclear that a high profile murder looks like a walk in the park... for example, perhaps clear proof that Putin controls both the Democrats and the Republicans... or that reptilian elites are real... or perhaps even they don't have the keys to the insurance files because they're just the mouthpiece, so the insurance is not theirs :o
gcb0 8y ago
When a power grab (change of hands) is happening, little attention is paid to due process, laws and even proper reasoning. Everything is written-of by some very dumb reason that looks OK on the surface. It is the epitome of "think of the children" reaction. it can be a completely unfounded claim that was never official in any way and just started as hearsay and then the press makes it official ("officials believe Bini may be part of a blackmail ring") or downright avoiding the discussion ("national security". "nothing to see here"). The point is, avoid the issue, do what you want. You are the state, there will be no consequences. For more information see https://www.amazon.com/Coup-dEtat-Practical-Handbook-Luttwak/dp/0713900679 https://www.amazon.com/Coup-dEtat-Practical-Handbook-Luttwak...
- toyg 8y ago
  No need to go into conspiracy theories: a lot of places are simply deficient when it comes to respecting the rule of law every day. This is particularly true in South America, where de-facto dictatorships are still common. This is simply the new Ecuadorian strongman doing a favour to his NorthAmerican friends. It changes nothing in how the Ecuadorean justice system works (or doesn't work).
  - cheez 8y ago
    Which places do you think are less deficient when it comes to respecting the rule of law?
    - toyg 8y ago
      A good rule of thumb is the Corruption Perception Index: https://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/overview https://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/overview Ecuador is n. 114.
  - gcb0 8y ago
    JFK wasn't killed in a south american or african nation. You should dismount that high horse.

jm4 8y ago

It was reported that Assange had a “panic button”. The report said that he had directly threatened the government of Ecuador with with retaliation if anything happened to him. I don’t have a link handy, but it shouldn’t be hard to find. There were also those strange tweets back in 2016 - codes or something, I don’t remember clearly - and speculation about some sort of dead man switch. Who knows if it’s true, but this seems to be what they’re worried about.

sschueller 8y ago
I doubt Assange would rely on anyone other than himself. So if there is a "panic button" it would more than likely be a dead mans switch.
- 13415 8y ago
  Assange has relied on many people in the past, so there is not much evidence for your claim other than personal sentiment. What seems more credible is that only he has the keys to some data kept by other persons and he could release these keys via others like e.g. his lawyers. Arresting others who might help him with releasing the data once they have the key makes "sense" from that perspective, although it could be illegal (but IANAL in Ecuador).
- SahAssar 8y ago
  A panic button is pretty much the opposite of a dead mans switch.
- squarefoot 8y ago
  Which could explain why they waited just over one year after cutting his internet access to arrest him: if after one year still nothing happened, it's pretty much safe assuming he doesn't have a working dead mans switch (anymore). If true, this could also mean they were in agreements with the Ecuador govt. to arrest him a long time ago.
  - ddalex 8y ago
    A dead man's switch is not necessarily based on a timeout when your internet connection is not guaranteed. If the leak is nuclear level - e.g irrefutable proof that the ruling class ARE reptilians - you want to keep that unreleased for as long as you can. I can imagine a bot somewhere scanning top 10 international newspapers daily and looking for the words 'Assange' and 'dead' before the countdown begins.
blhack 8y ago
People have claimed this dead man switch thing, but it just seems to counter to what Wikileaks has been doing for the last 10+ years. If they had some crazy leak to make, it doesn’t seem like something they would just sit on to use as personal leverage for assange.
- wybiral 8y ago
  > If they had some crazy leak to make, it doesn’t seem like something they would just sit on to use as personal leverage for assange. Really? They seem to have a narrow focus of interest with their leaks. I wouldn't put something like that beyond them at all.
  - codewiz 8y ago
    Could you elaborate? Have they been leaking selectively?
    - wybiral 8y ago
      They seem to only care about stories that are critical of Western intelligence while ignoring the (or withholding?) leaks that don't align with that agenda.
      - wesammikhail 8y ago
        do we know what they have access to and what they are withholding? if we knew what they are withholding then we know what it is so... Sounds to me like we´re trying to read minds and apply a narrative that we cannot possibly verify. Not saying it isn´t the case but as far as I know, and I might be very wrong here, we have no evidence of them doing that. right?
        wybiral 8y ago
        There were private messages of Assange saying he wanted the GOP to win because they wouldn't be able to get anything done, which is a hint about how he feels for US government. Maybe it's just a coincidence that they only leaked Russian-hacked emails from the GOP opponent who was critical of WikiLeaks while ignoring ongoing stories about Russia itself and remaining silent on the many GOP scandals. They were also really critical of the Panama Papers leak which exposed several cases of corruption, but again it was probably just a coincidence those were more of a condemnation of Russian oligarchs than Western intelligence.
notyourday 8y ago
> It was reported that Assange had a “panic button”. The report said that he had directly threatened the government of Ecuador with with retaliation if anything happened to him. I don’t have a link handy, but it shouldn’t be hard to find. If Assange has a panic button rather than a dead man switch, he is much dumber than he is portrayed at which point most of the claims that are dismissed as ridiculous (i.e. a smart man would not do X) become not only plausible but likely.
hackermailman 8y ago
I believe the implicit threat is releasing unredacted intel dumps, so very large torrent files with thousands of classified military intelligence documents they normally would not release, floating around encrypted with a few people close to Assange possessing the password(s) to leak them in case of being shut down though some Guardian journalist already leaked the password to one of the dumps years ago reporting on what Assange wrote on a napkin when they met which allowed Guardian readers to decrypt the whole archive. I think Assange is kind of crazy for playing brinkmanship with the world's intel agencies but I will definitely miss a lot of their leaks, for example that leaked CIA guide to bypassing airport security while undercover, where used as an example in the guide (if I remember correctly) a field agent using a diplomatic passport who was detected by airport screening trying to transit through European airports while having explosives residue on him, and how he successfully lied and talked his way out of being arrested while undercover. This of course leads to the question, why are intel agents assembling/transporting explosives around European cities and one of the reasons I liked having Wikileaks around to embarass these agencies and their invisible shenanigans but I guess the party is over.
- jm4 8y ago
  I’ll respond to the part about undercovers transporting weapons and/or explosives. It’s easier to stay undercover flying commercial so a team may assemble in a location by taking separate flights and take their equipment with them. That way none of them are spotted in a known military or agency location. Or it may be a place where they can’t easily take military transport or some highly covert mission where they’d all be disavowed if they were caught. The book Rogue Warrior talks about it a little bit. If I remember correctly, everyone in Seal Team 6 had to sneak a weapon onto a commercial flight as part of training.
- sneak 8y ago
  https://wikileaks.org/cia-travel/secondary-screening/WikiLeaks_CIA_Assessment_on_Surviving_Secondary_Screening.pdf https://wikileaks.org/cia-travel/secondary-screening/WikiLea...

marcosdumay 8y ago

The title says it's hacking. The article body says they apprehended a lot of electronic equipment on his house, and many credit cards. It also says he travels a lot. I'm not getting into any specifics because the article doesn't get into them either... Also, it says nothing about what he actually hacked.

throwawayjava 8y ago
He was not (necessarily) charged with actual unauthorized access. Ecuador has quite strict computer crime laws. E.g. distribution of hacking tools is illegal. The law he is being charged with violating reads: "Diseñe, desarrolle, programe, adquiera, envíe, introduzca, ejecute, venda o distribuya de cualquier manera, dispositivos o programas informáticos maliciosos o programas destinados a causar los efectos señalados en el primer inciso de este artículo." which google translates as: Design, develop, program, acquire, send, introduce, execute, sell or distribute any malicious means, devices or programs or programs intended to cause effects indicated in the first paragraph of this article. Laws that criminalize creation/distribution of "hacking tools" are dangerous and scary because there's really no bright line as to what constitutes a hacking tool; e.g., it's even possible that Ola's work on JOpenSSL or OTRv4 could be construed as a "hacking tool" under this law :( A good if unfortunate reminder to anyone who works in computer security to check local laws before traveling and especially before emigrating.

maxaf 8y ago

> If I'm reading the subtext here, correctly, Bini was arrested but not charged with anything, presumably as a measure to keep him from orchestrating "retaliation". Hope they’re keeping him away from telephones: wouldn’t want to see him whistle any nucular launch codes... /s

Theodores 8y ago

The authorities have nothing to fear. There is a deeper problem with the notion of Assange having a 'dead man's switch'. Imagine that in the crown jewels of Wikileaks secret secrets there is some hypothetical document proving that a senior government figure was directly responsible for a high profile murder. The family of the victim may have been suffering without knowing what happened for years. Now, this being a juicy scandal, Assange, in his great wisdom decides to hold this one back for the purpose of blackmail. He also has another somewhat less juicy scandal about how some politician has not returned a library book on time. Then there are stories in-between, a whole smorgasbord of things for the 'dead man's switch'. Now, if he reveals the scandal about the library book then everyone is going to say 'so what?'. But then, at the other end of the scale, if he reveals the one about the high profile murder then it puts him in the class of people that 'harbour terrorists'. In effect he would have been covering up the crime by being silent about it and not putting it in the public domain. He would have caused undue suffering to the victim's family and allowed the police to waste resources searching in the wrong direction. If one of his minions in his little cult decide to 'go nuclear' and reveal all the secret secrets held back by Wikileaks then it is the same problem. They won't be viewed favourably for being complicit in the cover up to date. Imagine there is the fictional incident of a senior government figure guilty of murder, if that got brought to trial and justice prevailed then, even though Wikileaks might have provided the breakthrough needed for the investigation, holding back evidence would still be a crime. Wives of murderers who harbour their other halves can get prosecuted for being silent even if they are the ones that eventually snitch. So Assange has got nothing? Well, there is a however. Some scandals are far too taboo for the era and you need a new generation to be able to discuss them. So Assange may have content that is too hot for any sane journalist to want to touch and ultimately it is always the mainstream media that disseminates wikileaks. If Wikileaks have something that damns all of them then that ain't gonna get an audience, no matter how punchy it is.

ddalex 8y ago
What if they have something that is so nuclear that a high profile murder looks like a walk in the park... for example, perhaps clear proof that Putin controls both the Democrats and the Republicans... or that reptilian elites are real... or perhaps even they don't have the keys to the insurance files because they're just the mouthpiece, so the insurance is not theirs :o

gcb0 8y ago

When a power grab (change of hands) is happening, little attention is paid to due process, laws and even proper reasoning. Everything is written-of by some very dumb reason that looks OK on the surface. It is the epitome of "think of the children" reaction. it can be a completely unfounded claim that was never official in any way and just started as hearsay and then the press makes it official ("officials believe Bini may be part of a blackmail ring") or downright avoiding the discussion ("national security". "nothing to see here"). The point is, avoid the issue, do what you want. You are the state, there will be no consequences. For more information see https://www.amazon.com/Coup-dEtat-Practical-Handbook-Luttwak/dp/0713900679 https://www.amazon.com/Coup-dEtat-Practical-Handbook-Luttwak...

toyg 8y ago
No need to go into conspiracy theories: a lot of places are simply deficient when it comes to respecting the rule of law every day. This is particularly true in South America, where de-facto dictatorships are still common. This is simply the new Ecuadorian strongman doing a favour to his NorthAmerican friends. It changes nothing in how the Ecuadorean justice system works (or doesn't work).
- cheez 8y ago
  Which places do you think are less deficient when it comes to respecting the rule of law?
  - toyg 8y ago
    A good rule of thumb is the Corruption Perception Index: https://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/overview https://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/overview Ecuador is n. 114.
- gcb0 8y ago
  JFK wasn't killed in a south american or african nation. You should dismount that high horse.