3 ms·
>"But US prosecutors never presented any forensic evidence to specifically tie Schulte to the publication of the CIA hacking materials on WikiLeaks." I mean, g
by criley2 4y ago
>"But US prosecutors never presented any forensic evidence to specifically tie Schulte to the publication of the CIA hacking materials on WikiLeaks."
I mean, getting into forensic evidence of what he did at the CIA would likely require exposing top secret classified material in a court room. Suffice to say, prosecutors generally can't do this except as a last resort.
When the guy left his phone full of passwords, and his computer full of encrypted child sex assault material, I'm not so sure the prosecutor feels the need to burn CIA secrets in court anymore.
- mandmandam 4y ago"Sprinkle some crack on him Johnson" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ESzLDC4B14 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ESzLDC4B14
- aaaaaaaaata 4y agoA CIA hacker "left his phone full of passwords, and his computer full of encrypted child sex assault material". This doesn't sound weird to you?
- criley2 4y agoNot really, opsec is a fascinating thing but in my personal experience very very few people, even trained professionals, actually go through the hassle of rigorous opsec for their personal projects and lives. The idea that a CIA hacker didn't follow rigorous opsec is about as believable as the idea that the NSA left their hacking tools publically available https://thehackernews.com/2016/09/nsa-hacking-tool-exploits.html https://thehackernews.com/2016/09/nsa-hacking-tool-exploits.... Although, based on the strength of the assumption that it must be planted, I would say that working for the CIA would be a strong cover for a pedophile, since it's apparently impossible in the public eye for someone there to authentically trade in CSAM
- formerkrogemp 4y agoDoes it seem plausible that someone would be that stupid? Sure. Is it convenient for the CIA to attack this person's character? Also reasonable.