4 ms·

It has been known for a pretty long time that the Crypto AG is affiliated with or controlled by intelligence services. It was also always firmly in the "securit

It has been known for a pretty long time that the Crypto AG is affiliated with or controlled by intelligence services. It was also always firmly in the "security through obscurity of our own cipher designs" department. Their C-52 (52 as in "1952") cipher machines were designed to enable decryption by Western intelligence. > Le Temps has argued that Crypto AG had been actively working with the British, US and West German secret services since 1956, going as far as to rig manuals after the wishes of the NSA. These claims were vindicated by US government documents declassified in 2015. http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-9088423.html http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-9088423.html (1996) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_AG#Compromised_machines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_AG#Compromised_machines

fanf2 7y ago
Also https://web.archive.org/web/20130902003901/https://ciphermachines.com/hagelin https://web.archive.org/web/20130902003901/https://ciphermac...
Ragnarork 7y ago
> Andreas Linde, the chairman of the company that now holds the rights to Crypto’s international products and business, said he had no knowledge of the company’s relationship to the CIA and BND before being confronted with the facts in this story. I'm quite curious about this. As you said it's been known for a long time that, without knowing the full extent of the ties, there was ties between Crypto-AG and US agencies (at least). I find hard to believe the candor that this M. Linde displays here...
eternalban 7y ago
I saw this article and that is exactly the first thought that popped up. Second thought was why is Washington Post feigning ignorance of this fact.
- rtsil 7y ago
  They didn't, following the arrest in Iran and subsequent release of a Crypto AG salesman in 92, they cite the salesman as talking with news organizations, they also cite a Swiss TV broadcast in 1994 and reports from Baltimore Sun in 1995. The new fact is that the company was co-owned, then fully owned by the CIA.
AndyMcConachie 7y ago
This thread needs to be at the top of the heap. I've read the WaPo article and it would be interesting to know exactly what's newly being revealed in it.
- xhkkffbf 7y ago
  They have a little bit at the top claiming that it's newsworthy because they had access to a complete internal history which is rarely declassified. Okay. I'll buy that. And at the end, they mention a good article from the Baltimore Sun that is MORE THAN 20 YEARS OLD! But that's at the end. Along the way, I wouldn't blame any reader for assuming that this is entirely new information.
  - beerandt 7y ago
    The main (new) thing is that it was 100% CIA and German Intelligence owned, followed by 100% CIA owned. Not sure exactly how big of deal that really is... (Edit: other than being a longtime profit center for CIA slush money.) It's all a bit fishy, especially since it's admittedly sourced from within the agency. A lot depends on if it was an approved leak or not. With the divestment in 2018, and no other really new information, I would suspect sanctioned leak, as there was nothing to lose. The question is what was gained by whom? And why the timing? There's nothing in the story that's pressing topical information. Between the Amazon government cloud contract lawsuit, and being 1 week post impeachment, there's quite a few opposing angles that would all seem plausible. Wapo reward for some Agency cooperation maybe? Rabbit holes in every direction.
    - xhkkffbf 7y ago
      I'm guessing it's a sanctioned leak because they want the world to understand the danger with Huawei. Now that others are playing the same game, they need to stop it!
    - rurban 7y ago
      They forgot to add that after the CIA ownership, which was blown by Buehler's and Bamford's books, it was 100% Mossad owned via Marc Rich.
jumelles 7y ago
> There were also security breaches that put Crypto under clouds of suspicion. Documents released in the 1970s showed extensive — and incriminating — correspondence between an NSA pioneer and Crypto’s founder. Foreign targets were tipped off by the careless statements of public officials including President Ronald Reagan. And the 1992 arrest of a Crypto salesman in Iran, who did not realize he was selling rigged equipment, triggered a devastating “storm of publicity,” according to the CIA history. > But the true extent of the company’s relationship with the CIA and its German counterpart was until now never revealed.

fanf2 7y ago

Also https://web.archive.org/web/20130902003901/https://ciphermachines.com/hagelin https://web.archive.org/web/20130902003901/https://ciphermac...

Ragnarork 7y ago

> Andreas Linde, the chairman of the company that now holds the rights to Crypto’s international products and business, said he had no knowledge of the company’s relationship to the CIA and BND before being confronted with the facts in this story. I'm quite curious about this. As you said it's been known for a long time that, without knowing the full extent of the ties, there was ties between Crypto-AG and US agencies (at least). I find hard to believe the candor that this M. Linde displays here...

eternalban 7y ago

I saw this article and that is exactly the first thought that popped up. Second thought was why is Washington Post feigning ignorance of this fact.

rtsil 7y ago
They didn't, following the arrest in Iran and subsequent release of a Crypto AG salesman in 92, they cite the salesman as talking with news organizations, they also cite a Swiss TV broadcast in 1994 and reports from Baltimore Sun in 1995. The new fact is that the company was co-owned, then fully owned by the CIA.

AndyMcConachie 7y ago

This thread needs to be at the top of the heap. I've read the WaPo article and it would be interesting to know exactly what's newly being revealed in it.

xhkkffbf 7y ago
They have a little bit at the top claiming that it's newsworthy because they had access to a complete internal history which is rarely declassified. Okay. I'll buy that. And at the end, they mention a good article from the Baltimore Sun that is MORE THAN 20 YEARS OLD! But that's at the end. Along the way, I wouldn't blame any reader for assuming that this is entirely new information.
- beerandt 7y ago
  The main (new) thing is that it was 100% CIA and German Intelligence owned, followed by 100% CIA owned. Not sure exactly how big of deal that really is... (Edit: other than being a longtime profit center for CIA slush money.) It's all a bit fishy, especially since it's admittedly sourced from within the agency. A lot depends on if it was an approved leak or not. With the divestment in 2018, and no other really new information, I would suspect sanctioned leak, as there was nothing to lose. The question is what was gained by whom? And why the timing? There's nothing in the story that's pressing topical information. Between the Amazon government cloud contract lawsuit, and being 1 week post impeachment, there's quite a few opposing angles that would all seem plausible. Wapo reward for some Agency cooperation maybe? Rabbit holes in every direction.
  - xhkkffbf 7y ago
    I'm guessing it's a sanctioned leak because they want the world to understand the danger with Huawei. Now that others are playing the same game, they need to stop it!
  - rurban 7y ago
    They forgot to add that after the CIA ownership, which was blown by Buehler's and Bamford's books, it was 100% Mossad owned via Marc Rich.

jumelles 7y ago

> There were also security breaches that put Crypto under clouds of suspicion. Documents released in the 1970s showed extensive — and incriminating — correspondence between an NSA pioneer and Crypto’s founder. Foreign targets were tipped off by the careless statements of public officials including President Ronald Reagan. And the 1992 arrest of a Crypto salesman in Iran, who did not realize he was selling rigged equipment, triggered a devastating “storm of publicity,” according to the CIA history. > But the true extent of the company’s relationship with the CIA and its German counterpart was until now never revealed.