WikiLeaks promises to supply CIA's hacking tool code to vendors WikiLeaks has promised to release software code of CIA hacking tools to tech firms. The promise from chief Wikileaker Julian Assange – now ensconced in Ecuador's London embassy for four and a half years – came on Thursday during a internet-streamed press conference on Vault 7, its recent CIA cyber-weapons documents dump. "We …
Hes hardly the good guy in this, releasing data for purely altruistic reasons.
The timing of his release of this information gives Trump a "get out of jail" card regarding the accusations of Russia getting him into power.
The "Vendors" can tell what the exploits were just by look at the already released data.
Assange seems to have done a deal with the new administration to get off the hook, and this is his half arsed way of trying to save face. Pity he never included Manning in his deal....
"Hes hardly the good guy in this, releasing data for purely altruistic reasons."
What so we're not entitled to privacy? We're not entitled to know we're being spied on?
That stuff might turn you on, but buddy I care about my privacy. I'm not a terrorist, rapist, murderer, anything like that. I'm a human being with the right to live a life freely and without living it under scrutiny.
I could not give a damn about whatever bullshine comes out of America saying Putin this Putin that. Bottom line is that the CIA and other agencies in America treat it's citizens and the citizens of the world with abhorrant contempt. They are spying on us, they are collecting our data en masse and we're not meant to know or have a say in this at all?
#1 Search engine: Google
#1 Mobile OS: Android
#1 Browser: Chrome
We have no right to complain about privacy when we have freely given it away...
Think of privacy as being a bit like sex. If someone chooses to sleep with half the neighbourhood, that doesn't give the other half of the neighbourhood the right to rape them.
We seem to be in a minority,
people at work think i'm some sort of paranoid conspiracy merchant who is against the world.
The sad fact is that most people are the chimps in the first space trials,
surrounded with technology they know nothing about & totally unaware of what is about to happen to them.
The timing of his release of this information gives Trump a "get out of jail" card...
Actually, Trump doesn't need the defense. The news broke two days ago that Obama issued a FISA order to wiretap all communications through Trump Tower one month before the election. Obama's Attorney General Lynch signed off on the FISA order.
This comes shortly after Hillary released an embarrassing video where she looks like the crazy cat lady, ranting on about defiance and resistance. As if the middle class are swayed by angry protesters blocking the streets making them late for work.
Look, I believe in the two-party system where each party keeps the other party in check, but if Trump de-classifies the FISA order along with the FISA court transcripts and proceedings, we could be looking at an extinction event for the DNC. The RNC can then run rampant
-- or it didn't happen. A quick Google did not turn up news that "Obama issued a FISA order to wiretap all communications through Trump Tower one month before the election". Except from the alt-right liars' outlet, Breitbart, and we all know Breitbart's "news" is 90% fake.
Also:
1. Obama could not "issue a FISA order". Only a judge on the FISA court can issue said warrant.
2. The Obama administration -- including the President himself -- could not even ask the FISA court for such a warrant. Such requests must come from the Justice Department or a law enforcement agency.
Given that your post is ignorant of the real-world facts on FISA and warrants, I'm pretty sure you've been imbibing leachate from the "alternative facts" garbage dump.
...or it didn't happen. A quick Google did not turn up news that "Obama issued a FISA order...
You should do more than that.
https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+tower+fisa+lynch&oq=trump+tower+fisa+lynch
It's no surprise that the news outlets leaning right will say this happened, while the news outlets leaning left say it didn't. That's why I wrote we need to see if it's declassified.
Yes, Obama does not issue the actual FISA order, but he can ask for one. Certainly an order to tap the phones of a presidential candidate would need to be mentioned to Obama.
Given that you post is ignorant of real-world experience, I suggest you start reading up on the real world of politics rather than ignoring anything that contradicts your obvious bias.
This USA Today article is pretty well balanced: Did Obama spy on Trump?
As former prosecutor Andrew McCarthy summarizes in National Review, the Obama Justice Department considered a criminal investigation aimed at a number of Trump’s associates. When they didn’t find anything criminal, they converted the investigation into an intelligence probe under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Elements of that story have been confirmed by The New York Times, the BBC and McClatchy newspapers... as Obama officials well know, under the FISA process, it is technically the FISA court that ‘orders’ surveillance... So, the issue is not whether Obama or some member of his White House staff “ordered” surveillance of Trump and his associates. The issues are (a) whether the Obama Justice Department sought such surveillance authorization from the FISA court,... it seems to me that there is less than zero chance that could have happened without consultation between the Justice Department and the White House.
"This USA Today article is..."
There's where you went off script. You should be touting your new master's "news" web thingy! Breebart, or whatever the fuck passes for "information" to idiots who believe that there is a two party system, and those awful {right|left}-wing meanies are beating us up with verifiable information, instead of our traditional daily diet of "we're right, they're wrong" anecdotes and other unscientific horseshit, replete with files! And then to cozy up to your new pals Russia?! Wow, you are one fucked up "American." If that's what you call yourself these days. Keep going though! Us normal people are having quite a laugh at your expense! :P
I four year's time you won't be: richer, smarter, better off, or an American. It is known.
But according to Dear Leader, those news sources are all fake news.... Now where's the "I'm being snide and cynical icon"?
I trust both parties about as far as I can toss them which is not very far. Same for the MSM. If there's a consensus on from both parties or most media, then I'll know the truth is somewhere in there... it may be well hidden, but it's there.
Two things: TheGatewayPundit.com, first on the Google search you provided, is not credible.
"The Gateway Pundit is a hard-right website that is not afraid of conspiracy theories and the occasional flirtation with outright white supremacists. Not a credible source that occasionally publishes fake news. Bias: extreme right."
Interestingly, even the Gateway Pundit doesn't appear to say that an intercept was actually ordered on Trump phones. It thrashes around for a bit about the provenance of FISA court judges, and alleges that Lynch denied one intercept request from Justice. And it surreptitiously edges away from "Trump Tower phones were tapped" -- which is one thing -- and "a FISA warrant was issued to intercept communication between Russian agents and Trump associates", which is another thing altogether.
But Bill, those sites... Personally, I have better things to do than trawl through alt-right trash sites that post bullshit propaganda. When the news is reported by professional journalists I'll see it. But thanks for the look into the alternative fact freak-show. I guess.
Even the quote in your post puts it correctly: "...the issue is not whether Obama or some member of his White House staff 'ordered' surveillance of Trump and his associates. The issues are (a) whether the Obama Justice Department sought such surveillance authorization from the FISA court..." [emphasis added]
The Justice Department can request a FISA warrant. Which is what I wrote.
From a FISA FAQ: "Surveillance of an American citizen by U.S. intelligence or law enforcement requires that a federal judge or the FISA court sign off, and those orders are requested not by the White House, but by the FBI or Justice Department if they believe a crime has occurred."
".....The Justice Department can request a FISA warrant....." Strangely, when Obambi and chums were in the Whitehouse, and Obambi's pet, Lynch, was at the DoJ, there doesn't appear to have been the same eagerness to investigate the Clinton Foundation and their ties to foreign governments, oligarchs and the like.....
@Matt Bryant: what, you're on the Fake News tour as well now?
there doesn't appear to have been the same eagerness to investigate the Clinton Foundation and their ties to foreign governments, oligarchs and the like
There was, as the Republicans were desperate to find something to stop Hillary from winning. Thankfully they got more direct help from James Comey who then commented on other investigations in the Clinton camp, but kept utterly silent about the already started investigation of the Trump team ties with Russia - an investigation that has already collected so much evidence that Trump had to start another Twitter panic to keep it out of the headlines.
If you want a real scandal, check out how much donor money Trump was pocketing during his election campaign, how much he's paying himself now in building rent and how much he is making being President benefit himself.
Oh, wait, that's OK - the Constitution no longer applies, which makes Trump's oath as President quite simple another lie in a long list. Which is fact.
"....There was, as the Republicans were desperate to find something to stop Hillary from winning....." Firstly, the Republicans didn't need to, as Shrillary shot herself in both feet with wonderfully stupid comments like "We are going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business" - those miners and their families didn't buy her hogwash about replacing their lost jobs with ones in mythical "clean energy" industries. Sure, such crap went down well in hippyville California, but just sounded like more East Coast elitism and waffle to ordinary workers. Secondly, the so-called investigation was run under Obambi's pet, Loretta Lynch, a Democrat appointee. We'll probably never know what she and Bill Clinton had a cosy chat about at their secret airport meeting, but it was no surprise the Obama administration found nothing wrong with the Clinton Foundation, or Clinton's lying about secret material on her email server.
".....check out how much donor money Trump was pocketing during his election campaign....." LOL, let me know when that imaginary figure matches the hundreds of millions from "donations" to the Clinton Foundation from foreigners trying to curry favour with Clinton whilst she was Sec of State.
Oh, easy, let me know when an FBI actually finds something despite being aggressively spurred on by desperate Republicans. That's the problem with all the accusations the Republicans and Trump have come up with: zero evidence. Nada. Not a thing.
BTW, as for the coal miners, yeah, they can now continue mining coal, because Trump has found a real good solution for letting that problem take care of itself.
Their chosen leader scrapped the EPA, and further removed their access to affordable health care so you could say they effectively voted themselves into extinction. Either that happens quickly when a mine blows up or slowly when their working conditions go downhill and the miner's lung makes a come back. By then it'll be too late - that's a one-way ticket to a particularly unpleasant death.
"Interestingly, even the Gateway Pundit doesn't appear to say that an intercept was actually ordered on Trump phones"
Funnily enough there was a similar item on CNN over the weekend about the link between the Trump organisation and Alfa bank. loads of 'Well, it's Russian, so state controlled' (it's not, by the way), and 'lots of questions to be answered', but essentially the whole 10 minute item boiled down to 'The <some 3 letter acronym> are investigating *whether* anything actually took place which might, conceivably point a finger of blame at somebody they'd like to blame'
seems both sides are now using the 'Let's shake it and see if anything drops out' investigative method.
Have an up vote Palpy
To add to your point FISA orders are top secret so the reports cannot be taken as facts.
It is just downright stupid that people can keep repeating as fact the president assertion that President Obama ordered a wire tap. NO PRESIDENT CAN ORDER A WIRE TAP ON ANYONE.
The more appropriate story on the issue is that the so called 'leader of the free world" with the best intelligence apparatus available in the world seems to be depending on widely discredited conspiracy theory "NEW SITES" for his basic day to day information.
The news broke two days ago that Obama issued a FISA order to wiretap all communications through Trump Tower one month before the election. Obama's Attorney General Lynch signed off on the FISA order.
This statement may fly with someone who is not a lawyer, but Obama happens to be one and he would not have done so - because he CANNOT as a president. That news also seems to assume that Obama is as dumb as the idiots believing this news: the administration was leaking as a sieve at the time, so if Obama had done so it would have leaked before the ink of his signature had dried.
I really like people quoting alt-right stuff - it immediately identifies them as gullible idiots incapable of independent thought, and I have plenty of bridges to sell..
"Actually, Trump doesn't need the defense. The news broke two days ago that Obama issued a FISA order to wiretap all communications through Trump Tower one month before the election. Obama's Attorney General Lynch signed off on the FISA order."
What you meant to say, in stead of 'the news broke', was 'some bloke in a bar said', as it has about that level of reliability.
If there really was a FISA order, then the extinction event may not be the DNC's.
Such things need to be signed off by a judge, and reasonable proof provided - specifically because of the activities of a certain republican president named Richard Milhous Nixon (incidentally the only other president in recent US history to have an "enemies" list)
Also thanks to that president's actions, it's illegal for a US president to even ASK for such a tap, and a constitutional law professor (Obama) would know that.
So by all means, let's see that FISA order and the associated evidence. It would make for very entertaining reading if one exists.
He can do a deal with Noddy, for all I care.
He will still be subject to UK law - which he egregiously (not a word I use often enough) flicked two fingers to by absconding.
The UK has no statute of limitations - he will have to do the time sometime.
Looks like Farage is on the case - last seen on a visit to Ecuadorean Embassy in London.
Though he may have been there as part of negotiations for sales of our high class jam and preserve products to South America post Brexit....
"The UK has no statute of limitations - he will have to do the time sometime."
The standard penalty for bail breaches (and not just a first offence either) is a smack on the wrist and warning not to do it again.
Given that's done with serious violent offenders, if Asshat's given more severe treatment then his lawyers would be all over it like a badly fitting shirt.
ever consider that the leak might have been INTENTIONAL? You know, the CIA 'throwing a bone' for some old vulnerabilities that "other gummints" might have just discovered, and so the CIA *WANTS* THESE HOLES PATCHED ???
Just a thought. 'Spy vs Spy' and all that. Wikileaks as a tool. Yeah, it could happen.
It would be MUCH easier for them to simply report those holes through one or more of the established channels, via front companies if they don't want their role known. This release puts egg on their face and makes them look incompetent in managing their own information security, so I can hardly see how it benefits them.
Besides according to Apple and Google many of these holes have already been fixed, some quite a while ago. If you want stuff fixed, why include holes that have already been fixed?
"This release puts egg on their face and makes them look incompetent in managing their own information security, so I can hardly see how it benefits them."
Maybe very competent people want to be seen to be incompetent? Maybe people now think they are safe from the CIA because their device wasn't on this list? And so on.
I doubt this, but it's easy to find reasoning for this.
How all the people feel who criticized Apple when they denied adding a backdoor on the iPhone?
Back then the US government said they would never use it illegally, after which the news about government agencies hacking and compromising just about anything which suited their purpose almost kept going in an endless media stream. This being yet another example.
Seems Apple was quite on the mark back then, history sure proved them right.
Those people aren't going to change their minds, because they have such a fear of the bogeyman that they're willing to give up nearly any amount of personal liberty in exchange for a feeling of greater safety. The same thing that created the security theater known as the TSA, the Patriot Act, and is behind Trump's border wall.
Besides, the FBI will argue that these tools don't help them - once the phone is locked, the key needed to access much of the data is tucked away in the secure enclave (not on the San Bernadino shooter's 5c, but everything newer than that) No exploit can get at it, not unless an exploit is developed to attack the secure enclave which is highly unlikely, so getting Apple to give them a backdoor remains their only way in.
If he was unharmed after the Manning leak, I don't see why this changes anything. All Wikileaks did was post the information, someone else committed the crime to get hold of it.
Besides, notwithstanding Trump's previous praise of Wikileaks, due to the whole Russian thing - not to mention Roger Stone's deleted tweet about having been in contact with Assange during the campaign - he's got to worry that they might have something damaging on him locked away, with Assange having left instructions "release this in the event of my untimely demise, disappearance without a trace, or extradition to the US".
Someone who has a lot to lose from leaks probably doesn't want to risk a fight with a guy who makes a living dealing in leaks. Though Trump does defy the rule of not picking a fight with those who buy ink by the gallon, so who knows!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
