3 ms·
According the the affidavit, the "witness" claims: "I was an electronic intelligence analyst under 305th Military Intelligence" Which doesn't really say a who
by nobody9999 6y ago
According the the affidavit, the "witness" claims:
"I was an electronic intelligence analyst under 305th Military Intelligence"
Which doesn't really say a whole lot, because the 305th Military Intelligence Battalion[0] is:
"part of the United States Army's 111th Military Intelligence Brigade located at Fort Huachuca, Arizona. It consists of three companies: A-Alpha Company, B-Bravo Company, and C-Charlie Company. The battalion's mission is primarily to train Initial Entry Training Soldiers for Military Occupational Specialties (MOS) 35F - All Source Intelligence Analyst, and 35G - Geospatial Imagery Intelligence Analyst."
That group is a training battalion, not actively engaged in intelligence activities.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/305th_Military_Intelligence_Battalion_(United_States) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/305th_Military_Intelligence_Ba...
- tyc85 6y agoThanks for digging out the details of hit credentials. It's possible that his credentials may not be as "qualified" to make such big allegation? I don't think I can make a judgement just based on the information you provided until I know what's his real duty and his past experience are. I tend to judge just based on the information he provided. And thanks to your other information, I see the flaws :) Here's an "expert" affidavit that shows the name (Navid Keshavarz-Nia): https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mied.350905/gov.uscourts.mied.350905.1.19.pdf https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mied.350905... At least I want to know whether the system is really vulnerable, since if it is, it can go either way. Perhaps this should be another thread :)