3 ms·

Barrett Brown Update: New Defense Team, Feds Fish For Activists

24 points by dil8 13y ago

zaroth 13y ago
This reminded me to look into CloudFlare getting subpoenaed. I guess it's old news (4/5/13) --http://leaksource.wordpress.com/2013/04/05/doj-issues-subpoena-for-info-on-barrett-browns-project-pm-site/ http://leaksource.wordpress.com/2013/04/05/doj-issues-subpoe... but better late than never. The type of information requested in the subpoena; all subscriber information, type of service, payment and billing records, other domain names served by CF associated with the same customer, DNS configuration, and *account access history including any and all authentication, file transfer, web server logs or other transaction logs containing source Internet Protocol addresses related to the subscriber's use of the CloudFlare services. Cryptome.org raised some good questions about what are CF's policies for retaining access logs to customer sites; http://cryptome.org/2013/04/cloudfare-logs.htm http://cryptome.org/2013/04/cloudfare-logs.htm. >> When Brown went to jail, work on ProjectPM ground to a halt. Even worse, the DoJ now took an interest in everyone else who had participated in ProjectPM. On April 2, the DOJ served the domain hosting service CloudFlare with a subpoena for all records on the ProjectPM website, and in particular asked for the IP addresses of everyone who had accessed and contributed to ProjectPM, claiming it was a criminal enterprise. The message was clear: Anyone else who looks into this matter does so at their grave peril. (https://whyweprotest.net/community/threads/barrett-brown-threats-to-fbi-raid-by-fbi.105089/page-19 https://whyweprotest.net/community/threads/barrett-brown-thr...) The good news is CF claims they don't retain this data, and there is no legal requirement for them to do so; http://blog.cloudflare.com/what-cloudflare-logs http://blog.cloudflare.com/what-cloudflare-logs
- dil8 13y ago
  I have been reading about this story of late, and the my impressions are that Brown was in the progress of doing some real investigative work on the these security/intelligence companies and their links with the US gov. And based on the severity of the charges against him, it seems that this is yet another case of DoJ going after people for political reason. The small amount of detail that was uncovered seems to be the tip of the iceberg. Are any other journalists looking into?
dil8 13y ago
A great article from a couple of days ago http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/01/cyber-intelligence-complex-useful-idiots?CMP=twt_gu http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/01/cyber-in...
joering2 13y ago
On April 17, Magistrate Judge Paul Stickney had ordered the seizure of thousands of dollars in defense funds, [...]. Although the funds were apparently listed in a still-sealed financial affidavit provided by Brown’s former court-appointed attorney, it remains unclear how the money could be legally seized. And it doesnt matter. It doesnt matter HOW; what matters is that the judge is doing it and nobody can stop him. The judge is getting nasty by trying to play this game of time and funds that US government has been guaranteed with unlimited resources of both. You cannot win this one. Not unless you buckle up with year or so of time and strong financial backbone to appeal his decision. But how can you appeal and hire attorneys to do so if ... your funds have been "legally" seized?? Ladies and Gentleman: tyranny, dictatorship and despotism at its best! Welcome to the North American Union -- the U.S.A.

24 points by dil8 13y ago

This reminded me to look into CloudFlare getting subpoenaed. I guess it's old news (4/5/13) --http://leaksource.wordpress.com/2013/04/05/doj-issues-subpoena-for-info-on-barrett-browns-project-pm-site/ http://leaksource.wordpress.com/2013/04/05/doj-issues-subpoe... but better late than never. The type of information requested in the subpoena; all subscriber information, type of service, payment and billing records, other domain names served by CF associated with the same customer, DNS configuration, and *account access history including any and all authentication, file transfer, web server logs or other transaction logs containing source Internet Protocol addresses related to the subscriber's use of the CloudFlare services. Cryptome.org raised some good questions about what are CF's policies for retaining access logs to customer sites; http://cryptome.org/2013/04/cloudfare-logs.htm http://cryptome.org/2013/04/cloudfare-logs.htm. >> When Brown went to jail, work on ProjectPM ground to a halt. Even worse, the DoJ now took an interest in everyone else who had participated in ProjectPM. On April 2, the DOJ served the domain hosting service CloudFlare with a subpoena for all records on the ProjectPM website, and in particular asked for the IP addresses of everyone who had accessed and contributed to ProjectPM, claiming it was a criminal enterprise. The message was clear: Anyone else who looks into this matter does so at their grave peril. (https://whyweprotest.net/community/threads/barrett-brown-threats-to-fbi-raid-by-fbi.105089/page-19 https://whyweprotest.net/community/threads/barrett-brown-thr...) The good news is CF claims they don't retain this data, and there is no legal requirement for them to do so; http://blog.cloudflare.com/what-cloudflare-logs http://blog.cloudflare.com/what-cloudflare-logs

dil8 13y ago
I have been reading about this story of late, and the my impressions are that Brown was in the progress of doing some real investigative work on the these security/intelligence companies and their links with the US gov. And based on the severity of the charges against him, it seems that this is yet another case of DoJ going after people for political reason. The small amount of detail that was uncovered seems to be the tip of the iceberg. Are any other journalists looking into?

dil8 13y ago

A great article from a couple of days ago http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/01/cyber-intelligence-complex-useful-idiots?CMP=twt_gu http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/01/cyber-in...

joering2 13y ago

On April 17, Magistrate Judge Paul Stickney had ordered the seizure of thousands of dollars in defense funds, [...]. Although the funds were apparently listed in a still-sealed financial affidavit provided by Brown’s former court-appointed attorney, it remains unclear how the money could be legally seized. And it doesnt matter. It doesnt matter HOW; what matters is that the judge is doing it and nobody can stop him. The judge is getting nasty by trying to play this game of time and funds that US government has been guaranteed with unlimited resources of both. You cannot win this one. Not unless you buckle up with year or so of time and strong financial backbone to appeal his decision. But how can you appeal and hire attorneys to do so if ... your funds have been "legally" seized?? Ladies and Gentleman: tyranny, dictatorship and despotism at its best! Welcome to the North American Union -- the U.S.A.