Showing posts with label counterintelligence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label counterintelligence. Show all posts

Monday, October 14, 2024

Blog Comments and Brain Death


This is the kind of stupid shit we get when I open up blog comments to just anyone.  Read this, it was posted two years ago.  




The point is, they may use words like "statistical" but I doubt they know what it means.  My guess is that this could be a Russian troll or an American Republican.  In the latter case, they are just being stupid.  In the former case it is sad that American counter intelligence has failed to protect us.

Saturday, August 7, 2021

Intelligence, Ambiguity and the SONY Hack

draft

[Since I wrote this blog post, I came across evidence that maybe the NSA does actually know what happened. See https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/19/world/asia/nsa-tapped-into-north-korean-networks-before-sony-attack-officials-say.html]

I am slowly going to get around to the issue of who perpetrated the SONY hack. I am pretty sure that whoever it was executed a fishing expedition and that Amy Pascal was a victim but not an original target. Whoever this was hoped there would be good stuff in the emails, and of course they started from the top down, and released a bunch of stuff and hoped that some of it would cause trouble and they were right. The first rule is to not put anything in email you would not want to see in the NY Times. Yesterday I read what was supposedly the supposedly horrible content of the Pascal/Rudin dialog about Obama and some actor, and you know, it's not enough in my mind to have caused this level of reaction. What they said was that someone of a certain ethnic group likes to see positive depictions of that ethnic group in film, I think. And that a specific actor wanted money for work they wanted him to do and that they did not want to pay him. Big whoopie. So Amy goes into independent production but that does not make SONY any more or less racist. Thank goodness they were not discussing Michael Jackson. What a mess that would have been!

I had not realized that the DOJ had in fact filed a case against a mysterious Korean who N. Korea says does not exist. So while the USA may be ineffectual, and FBI Counterintelligence was not able to protect our poor, helpless SONY executives, we did step up to the plate to formally complain and so I retract my inflammatory statement that we did nothing. There isn't much they can do after the fact. The issues of N. Korea, who our government believes did this hack, see below, are complicated. We are already doing what we can short of war to rein those maniacs in. Our State Department's worst fear is that Kim is deposed and the whole sucking puddle of shit collapses and we have a real mess. We may look back in nostalgia to the days of Kim and SONY and say, "Wow, wasn't that great! We didnt know how great it was."

As outsiders to the world of intelligence, we can not really know with certainty what is going on, but if you pay attention, and watch over time, then there are things you can know, up to a point. Sometimes you may have to wait but even then it's not as if you can prove anything to everyone's satisfaction. There are classic examples here. We knew the government thought that Julius & Ethel Rosenberg were guilty but the real evidence, not the stuff presented in court, was withheld for 30 + years and that is one of the reasons that, decades later, they went public with Venona and many people still dont believe it. (1) Many cases are not brought to trial because the intelligence community is not willing to expose the evidence and by definition the sources. There are mysteries about the Ellsberg matter, mysteries that have never been resolved, that if anyone knows the answer to, they are not talking. Pretty much everyone thinks the Warren Commission was a coverup but of what? It was only recently that I finally heard a theory that I believe in... that it was a CIA fuckup but not the way most people believe. (2) But do I really know? Of course not.

N. Korea has proven to be a plucky little nation even if they are really annoying. They came this close to winning the Korean war at the beginning. They are probably behind one of the most successful counterfeiting operations in the history of counterfeiting. (3) And who can forget their recent sinking of a S. Korean destroyer? Or the assassination of a relative of Kim by secret agents? Or the fabulous operation using the Yakuza to steal from Japanese ATMs that involved a hack involving banks, special ATM cards and intense rules. (4) N. Korea has proven their capability in this area over and over again. They are a player in cybercrime and cyberwar. They have the capability to execute the SONY hack, many believe. But if not them, who?

Some believe that the hack was perpetrated by an individual or perhaps a small team of disgruntled SONY employees as an extortion plot and that the demand to withdraw the famous satirical film about a fictional Kim was just cover. I know that some cybersecurity officials believe that there is evidence that the hack was perpetrated by a state actor. These things are not all that subtle, you know. There is a level of skill and of effort over time that is found with state hacking operations in contrast to talented individuals or groups like Anonymous or private criminal groups. And generally each of these groups have a track record and leave a series of clues that indicate modus operandi.

I know that generally the DOJ does not file a case in this kind of thing unless they think they have enough evidence that can be presented in open court should it ever come to trial. But maybe they knew this would never come to trial so they decided to use this as a way to embarrass N Korea, which is basically impossible because they are shameless, but whatever. Cui bono? One could make a case for the disgruntled insiders who eventually released the material to make good their threat did it. And of course the N. Koreans could have done it and had motivation.

But do I really know, no I dont. If someone knows for sure, through unspecified intelligence sources, well I cant know about that. I havent seen the evidence and I am not qualified to evaluate it. In the absence of a plausible candidate or candidates for the insider theory, and for all I know there is such a candidate but no one is talking about it because it is defamation in the absence of good evidence, I think, then I propose that the most plausible candidate is N. Korea. I will probably never know for sure. That is the fate of most judgments or assessments that we make about intelligence matters. In the absence of a confession, and maybe not even then, we can not be sure.




______________



1. A pretty good description is at https://www.osti.gov/opennet/manhattan-project-history/Events/1945-present/venona.htm. But if you dont believe it, then by all means go to the NSA site on Venona and there is much more detail. There are people who to this day deny that Ethyl knew what Julius was up to which is, frankly, ridiculous. There are others who say that even if they were spies, their work did not really help the Soviets. People will believe whatever they want to believe. I would not be surprised to hear that some people believe that Venona is a fake and was made up to frame the Rosenbergs. How could I possibly know?

2. An article I read by an academic who studies the JFK assassination believes that recently released evidence shows what some people believed at the time. That the CIA knew more than they were saying and that they had been tracking Oswald in Mexico City, had tapped his phone, knew that he had visited various embassies, knew that he was up to no good. Then instead of acting, or communicating their concerns to FBI Counterintelligence, they just dropped it. And when JFK got shot by their guy, Oswald, they knew that no one would believe that they had not had a hand in it or that they could be so stupid as to not warn anyone so they suppressed the information about how much they knew. That is one theory which may be supported by the evidence, but as you know, there is a lot of evidence and a lot of controversy about that evidence. It would take maybe a year, probably more, just to review the evidence that is public and form some sort of conclusion that is actually informed.

3. This is so much harder to do than most people realize. Yes, North Korea, may have had help. I certainly hope so. And N. Korea is not the only source of these dollars. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdollar.

4. See https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/04/26/the-incredible-rise-of-north-koreas-hacking-army

Saturday, November 17, 2018

What Everyone Who Studies Intelligence Knows about Wikileaks

draft

Many Americans don't like what they think is the "intelligence" business.  There are good and bad reasons why this might be, but its sufficiently important that I think that people should know more about it so that they can make more accurate or possibly nuanced judgments about it.  It is, after all, *their* intelligence community and is genuinely working, for the most part, in what they believe is the nation's interest as ordered by the POTUS and the relevant committees of Congress.

Even though there is a lot we can not and will not know about the world of intelligence there are lots and lots of things that we can know by paying attention and knowing the history of these things.

And so, in light of this, here is one comment on current events.

It has been obvious for years, certainly at least a decade and possibly more, that whatever else Wikileaks may be, it is probably also a tool of foreign Intelligence.  From the material released and the timing of that release it is likely that Wikileaks has been chosen as the "public mouthpiece" of materials collected by foreign intelligence agencies that have collected the material from one source or another, and are looking for a way to get this material into the world at a time of their choosing to influence some political process ongoing in the West.  This has been completely obvious, and if it is not true, a lot of people will be surprised. But what does it mean?  What should we do about it? And what does it not mean?

It does not mean that the people running Wikileaks are insincere or believe that they are doing anything but what a freedom loving person of the world should be doing. They may be completely uncompromised in their goals.  Nor does it mean that they have necessarily committed any crimes, although they may have.  But even so, be aware that a crime in one country may not be a crime in another.   On the other hand, I think it is likely from what little I know that they very well may have knowingly committed some crimes that are in fact illegal in this country, but that is to be seen.

All I am really saying here is that you should not be so naive as to think that Wikileaks is a completly independent, do-good-for-the-world, totally disinterested organization.  They serve a very useful purpose for people who are not friendly to this country.  That said, they may provide a useful service for the rest of us, that would depend on your point of view on many other issues.

Sunday, May 7, 2017

Russian Apt 28 Behind Attack on French Elections


draft

So it was APT 28 that hacked the French, eh? The same group that attacked Hillary and the DNC. Of course the FBI does nothing to protect us, but perhaps French counterintelligence is more, shall we say, effective and less politically motivated to aid the right wing than our FBI.

See this article in DefenseOne here.




Thursday, October 27, 2016

Three Cold War Intelligence Stories


When the Cold War ended, or at least morphed into another form, many people claimed to expect a peace dividend. I never did, I thought that was the most egregious wishful thinking as clearly the world was leaving one set of perils and diving right into another. (To be fair, the people calling for a "peace dividend" knew this very well, they were merely arguing for more money for such things as education after years of being told there was no money for it, we had to spend the money on the Cold War). 

On the other hand, I did expect and we are slowly receiving an “intelligence voyeur dividend” as events that happened during the Cold War became explained, or partially explained, or revealed, or whatever. What is the value of such exposure? I think that there is value in telling the history of that time, or at least some of that history, and there is also value in having a better educated citizenry, one which will have some understanding of the way the world works and what has been happening around them in the recent historical past. 

We have here three essays, all published in The Guardian in the UK about three different people who were involved in intelligence matters in the Cold War and whose story, what is known about them at least, is worth reading if you care about this sort of stuff.

The first is an article on Ashraf Marwan who was killed in London in 2007. He died a very rich man. He may have been assassinated, he may have committed suicide. He was certainly a spy for Israel, or was he a double agent under the control of Egypt? Its a wonderful story that suggests an answer to one of the mysteries, but by no means all.


The second is about a Czech / Soviet spy who penetrated the CIA and was the last prisoner traded to the Soviet Union in the cold war. 


The final story is about a dyslexic member of the US Intelligence community (possibly the National Reconnaissance Office) who collected material and tried to sell it to interested parties and how they caught him.



Spy vs Spy from Mad Magazine

Sunday, January 11, 2015

FBI Issues Cyberalert Regarding Iran


As part of the ramp up of the war taking place in cyberspace between various nations and non-state actors, the FBI, in their role as the lead counterintelligence agency for this country when inside our borders, has issued an alert about Iranian cyber activites.

Although most Americans do not consider the FBI to be an intelligence agency, they are, in fact, one of the famous 3 - letter agencies (CIA, NSA, DIA, NRO, etc) and they are responsible for seeing that bad people who are attacking American citizens or corporations or whatever are thwarted. Particularly when whatever is happening takes place inside our national borders where agencies like the CIA are not allowed to operate, generally speaking.

Thus, when the predecessor to the NSA started decrypting Soviet messages (Venona) and discovered that they, the Soviets, were running significant intelligence operations in the US, it was the FBI that the NSA turned to as the proper authority to disrupt these activities and where possible identify and prosecute the Soviet agents.

As you presumably know, the war in cyberspace has been ongoing for over a decade, but the US has only in the last few years started mobilizing cyberdefense and cyberoffense activites.

Of course, certain announcements by the FBI regarding Cyberwar have not always worked out.  For example, SONY was probably not hacked by North Korea, but rather by a very spiteful and talented former employee and IT worker.

Nevertheless, it is the FBI's job in all this to investigate but also to educate and warn Americans who may be at risk. Hence this alert.


Page 1 of the Alert


You may read the entire notice at the following link.

If you do not know the Venona story referenced above you really should read about it. Its one of the few activities that the NSA feels it can talk about, since it is long over and since it was compromised decades ago.




Saturday, November 15, 2014

A Commentary on the NSA Disaster from British Cinema of the 1960s


Many Americans do not understand the NSA disclosures and fall into a juvenile and narcissistic (1) explanation based on an endless diet of “evil CIA conspiracies to murder the president and destroy friendly freedom loving countries” plot meme of American movies and TV Shows.  The reality is so much less interesting but in ways that, sadly, require a bit of history to appreciate and that has never been an American strong point. 

This problem of "NSA explanation" extends to our allies in the West who for some reason want to know what is going on and do not trust us,  How funny that an American should have to remind Europeans about history, how very ironic.  These same Europeans are always lecturing us about their superior knowledge of history as learned in elite European universities, something us poor Yanks could never hope to understand given our inferior breeding. This history reminder is especially odd in the case of the United Kingdom. Surely we can count on them for understanding?

Well, yes and no. The more informed of us realize that the NSA disclosures involve operations that are shared with and in part originated with the British and various members of their Commonwealth, but even our well-bred friends seem to have slipped a bit and forgotten that one of the unusual aspects of post 1945 intelligence is the cooperation between the US, the UK and their Commonwealth, a cooperation that, to everyone's surprise, survived the last world war and continues to this day. In other words, its not "us vs them" in this case, it is more likely to be some version of “us vs us” when the full story comes out, if it ever does.

But I speculate, and in the great tradition of retroactively finding meaning in works of art and fiction, I have noticed an oddly plausible discusssion for some of what we know about the NSA disaster in a venerable, indeed perhaps penultimate, spy movie from the Cold War, The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (1965) as directed by Martin Ritt from a novel by John le Carre, aka David Cornwell, a veteran of British M.I. {5, 6}.


Control discussing intelligence methods with Leamus in The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (1965) 


Although the movie does not discuss anything like the NSA disclosures it does contain words of wisdom, I think, for how people in the Intelligence Community see this sort of thing.

The movie is remarkably faithful to the book, and both are confusing as can be which touches on some of the ambiguity and complexity of the real Cold War. It seems to me that one should not have to worry about spoilers in a movie that came out in 1965, especially to readers of this blog, but the fact is that not everyone has seen this fabulous, if depressing, movie. The good news is that one can discuss major elements of the film and not give anything away, you will still be confused unless you read and/or watch this film several times and spend some time thinking about it.

But fortunately, the scene in question is near the very beginning of the film, and gives very little away except perhaps upon reflection in light of other developments. It is the briefing between the protagonist, Leamus, and his boss in British intelligence, whose work name is Control. In this briefing, Leamus has returned from Berlin where he has just seen the collapse and death of one of his networks, and is meeting with his boss to see if he will be retired, or transferred to a non-operational job, or given another assignment in the field.

As we have discussed earlier in this blog, I believe that one of the greatest of all devices in the history of the cinema is the device of The Explanation. In this scene, the head of the British Foreign Intelligence service explains to an agent some of the rationale behind their work.

I have put the scene up at Youtube, until they take it down, education not being seen as a valid excuse for Fair Use no matter what Congress or the FCC may say. I have also provided a transcript below. The italics are mine. You may watch this scene here.


Control: Would you like a drink?
Leamus: No, I'll wait.
Control: You can still do that?
Leamus: (startled at Control's rudeness)
Control: I wondered whether you were tired, burnt out.
Leamus: (silence)
Control: Well this phenomenon we understand here. Its like metal fatigue. We have to
    live without sympathy, don't we. You can't do that forever. One needs to come in,
    in from the cold.
Leamus: I'm an operator, Control. Just an operator.
Control: There is a vacancy in banking section that might suit you.
Leamus: Sorry, I'm an operational man. I'll take my pension, I don't want a desk job.
Control: You don't know whats on the desk.
Leamus: Paper.
Control: I want you to stay out in the cold a little longer. Please do sit down.
Control: Our work as I understand it is based on a single assumption that the West is never
    going to be the aggressor. Thus, we do disagreeable things, but they are defensive.
    Our policies are peaceful but our methods can't afford to be less ruthless than those
    of the opposition. Can they?
Leamus: (silence)
Control: No, I'd say that since the war our methods, our techniques that is, and those
    of the communists have become very much the same. Right. I mean, occasionally,
    we have to do wicked things. Very wicked things indeed. But, uh, you can't be less
    wicked than your enemies simply because your government's policies are benevolent,
    can you?
Leamus: (silence)
Control: What I have in mind for Mundt is a little out of the ordinary. You haven't met
  have you?
Leamus: Mundt? No.
Control: He was here in 59 posing as a member of the East German steel mission.
Leamus: I was in Berlin.
Control: And, uh, how do you feel about him?
Leamus: Feel?
Control: Yes.
Leamus: He's a bastard.
Control: Right.


Those students of the filmmaking arts will notice that this is not a pure Explanation as it also makes good use of those tired narrative cliches of foreshadowing, well-written dialogue and great acting.

This movie also has several great examples of the art of the Explanation beyond the one already cited. Another one can be found herebut trust me, this one is a spoiler if you have not seen the film.

So in conclusion, I would like to suggest that this fictional discussion from the cold war should serve to remind us that our faithful public servants are often aware of the moral ambiguity of some of their work. Also, in judging this situation without solid knowledge let us not forget that, generally speaking, the NSA is on our side.


The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (1965) on IMDB


________________________________________________

1. The great narcissism of the American Public is revealed in the presumption that the NSA has nothing better to do than to gleefully and egregiously spy on them as if the NSA was an infinitely resourced department of the Divine Will that watches over every one of God's, or the IRS's, creatures.  Unlike Santa Claus, he knows when you are sleeping, he knows when you're awake, not.

Tuesday, August 12, 2014

Anti-Social and Criminal Behavior in Social Media


What to do when people attack you on the Internet?   There are many techniques possible including revenge, laughter, threats of violence (which are illegal by the way) and so forth.  

One solution is to help your enemies by telling them what has already been tried so that they do not waste your time.   That is the technique of Ms. Fitzpatrick who has written a letter to her attackers describing what has already been tried and what effect it had.  

The kind of behavior that she is responding to is amazingly bad.  We are talking juvenile, delusional, psycho-pathological, paranoid, vindictive, violent, anti-social, hateful, racist, sexist, vicious, obsessive and criminal.

Just an average day on the Internet, I suppose.

Here are the first three paragraphs of her post:

      Did you come to my blog because you saw something I wrote on an Internet forum or Twitter 
      which you didn't like?

      Are you now frantically Googling my name and trying to "come up with something on me" so 
      you can try to discredit my ideas along with me?

      Let me help. Save yourself some time, and realize that you don't have to spend hours 
      Googling and drilling needlessly on the Wayback Machine, because there's no scandal here.
      If you're trying to silence my legitimate speech and criticism by trying to "come up with 
      something" on me, give it up. Use words, if you have an argument against my blogs, and don't
      try to harass me with "doxing," vilification, smearing, etc. It's not going to work.


Ms. Fitzpatrick's advice to her enemies is very long but worth reading if you have the time.

I come from the period of early online communities. I remember programs like Talkomatic on Plato, and I have used various text based MUDS or whatever they were called.  I participated in early email lists on the ARPAnet like everyone else until I got tired of the flames and the time it took to participate.  I helped test an early version of the Warner Bros multi-person online game "The Palace".   I sponsored and helped implement one of the early versions of a networked-multiperson game, Mazewar. I screwed around with Second Life and once had a very pleasant makeout session with a beautiful virtual woman. Unfortunately my browser got caught in some sort of infinite loop while we were smooching and nothing ever came of it.

It all seemed to me to be playful, entertaining and certainly not harmful beyond the usual problems of distracting young people from their homework or household chores.

But obviously the world has changed and from the slime pits of online social networking we have real-world groups such as Wikileaks, Anonymous and the delusional and narcissistic actions of would-be freedom fighters who work to destroy their country on behalf of the most oppressive governments of the world.  (1)

In fact most of the attacks on Fitzpatrick stem from her non-politically-correct opinions about Snowden and his collaborators.

You may also wish to examine the case of the XX Committee and the actions taken to destroy the reputation and career of its author because of his very literate and compelling posts on the Snowden Operation.   The link for that is also at the end of the post.

This shit isn't funny anymore.


Advice to Google Witch Hunters
__________________________________________


1. This is just reality, kids.  You may not like it, but nothing Snowden or Greenwald has exposed was against American law.   You may disagree with the policies that led to those activities that were exposed, and if so I recommend you elect different representatives to Washington.   All of it, and I mean all of it, was under control of the President, the national security apparatus and the courts.   It was thus all under the control of your legally elected representatives.  If you believe in changing our government by illegal means,  Snowden and Greenwald may have value.   They have certainly collaborated with foreign, hostile intelligence services, independent of whether or not those services sponsored and controlled their activities from the beginning. They are certainly in the service of foreign intelligence today.    Do not think for one moment that the activities of Snowden and Greenwald was legitimate whistle blowing because it wasn't.  They are pursuing a radical political agenda of their own and using illegal means.   There is another discussion that one can have about whether illegal means are legitimate in the context of such events as the Bush coup d'etat of 2000, but that is a separate discussion and even if we decide that they are legitimate, and I do not necessarily do so, I still would not agree with or approve of the Snowden Operation.



Saturday, September 7, 2013

The Summer of SIGINT


The title of this post is a rip from a new blog I have been reading, the 20 Committee, which is written by a former NSA counterintelligence guy.

He has a lot of interesting things to say about Snowden, the NSA, Wikileaks, etc.  See his blog at
http://20committee.com.

I am pretty sure that recent events and disclosures do not mean what the Guardian and Snowden want you to think.    The question of the role of Wikileaks, which is not an innocent, activist, web site, looms larger.  The question of the probable moles in the intellilgence community signaled by the 10 illegals that were found in 2010 has not been answered. (For background on the illegals, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegals_Program).

I do think that big things are happening.   Are we in the opening stages of another war, or maybe its just a reminder that the intelligence war never went away.

Between the Canadian affair, the issue of the undiscovered moles, and Snowden's work for the Russians, it would appear that our intelligence community has been thoroughly penetrated.

Unfortunately, this is not a John LeCarre novel, this is real life, and I don't think there is any reason to think that the good guys necessarily have to win.


Monday, June 17, 2013

NSA, Surveillance, Secrets 1: Why Should We Trust the Government?


My theory is that the brouhaha about the NSA and surveillance is only partially about the NSA and surveillance.    It is about two other things as well: (a) Americans do not know anything about how their government works and (b) Americans do not trust their government.  I think that the former is regrettable and that latter is a fair judgment, the government has proven to not be trustworthy on many occasions.

There have been many occasions in the last 40 years when the US Government explained events or actions in ways that have not held up to scrutiny.     Exactly why certain things happened may or may not point to conspiracy to defraud the American people, I very much doubt that it is any one conspiracy given the wide range of actors and policies.   These are not subtle matters at the fringe of American life, these are matters of central importance.   It may be that there are explanations for each of them, but I have looked, and for the most part, they are not obvious.   Some like the Gulf of Tonkin may indeed have a degree of screw up to them instead of malicious intent.   But the fact is that most people in America do not believe the Warren Commission, whatever the truth may be.  Whatever happened with COINTELPRO, gross violations of American law by the FBI and their paid informers were never brought to justice.   Leonard Peltier is still in jail and he will die in jail for a crime we all know he did not commit.   The supreme court pissed on the constitution in public when they put G. W. Bush in power in 2000.    There were no WMD's in Iraq.    Each of these are different events with different causes and different factions and the only generalization that I am drawing from them is this: the American people have been given ample reasons to be skeptical about what their government tells them about any given matter.   Any given explanation should probably not be taken at face value if the issue is of importance to you, and further study is warranted.  That is certainly the case with the recent NSA brouhaha which I personally think is not even close to what most people think it is.

Nevertheless, I think that people are right to look closer and try to understand it and not take the government at their word.

Think of these recent disclosures as part of a giant civics lesson: you now have an opportunity to learn how your government works.   I don't think you are going to like it.

How do I know this stuff, you may ask.  Years of dedicated study, wasted years that will do me no good and only alienate me from my fellow biped who does not know this stuff and does not want to know.    A tremendous amount of this information is public even when the details of specific operations aren't.

So I am going to outline a basic introduction on how and why certain types of Intelligence matters are handled in this country, specifically NSA.   Using public sources, of course, what else?  But at the end of the day, if you do not trust the government, and if you do not believe that I know anything about this, then it won't make any difference.

I also realize that I am held in complete contempt by my friends who do not believe that I could possibly know anything about this stuff.   This has been made extremely clear to me in the last few days.   Be that way, see if I care.

Part 2:
http://globalwahrman.blogspot.com/2013/06/nsa-surveillance-and-civics-sources.html

Tuesday, May 21, 2013

Why China Attacked Google


In a brilliant stroke of counterintelligence, the cyberwarfare arm of the People's Republic of China raped Google's servers and aside from picking up their most proprietary intellectual property (their search engine core) they targeted and no doubt got their database on which individuals had been targeted for legal surveillance by court order.

First, let us review why this is excellent counterintelligence. Then, why I mention it to you and what it may mean for American policy.

When country A is spying on country B, it can do so with various means and approaches, the most famous of which is often badly represented in films: the clandestine agent or spy. (1) The clandestine agent may be a citizen of the target country, or he/she may be a foreign national masquerading as a citizen. The clandestine agent may be working at a sensitive position in industry or government, or socialize with such people, or recruit and then manage networks of people who pass on confidential information.


Since country B knows that country A is spying on them, they organize their resistance and defense against such spying and call it counterintelligence. But since country A knows that country B is protecting themselves, they have an incentive to hide and protect their sources, and this is also called counterintelligence, although it might more properly be called counter-counterintelligence.



Still with me?

China is spying on the US. The US investigates the spying. China wants to know who the US is investigating so that they can hide their agents, protect them, tell them to do nothing incriminating for a few years, or find some way to mislead the US about their spying.

How does China find out who the US suspects?

In general, when we use surveillance on a person in the USA, we need a court order. This is not trivial to do, but it is done all the time and requires a judge to agree that it would make sense to do surveillance as part of a criminal investigation. Court order in hand the counterintelligence agency can go to various organizations like the phone company or the internet provider and request information about what the user is doing and ask for records to be kept.

Naturally, the phone company or whatever keeps a record of who they are looking at. What China did was to penetrate Google, find their database of who they had been requested to keep information about, and steal it. In this way they can know a great deal about who we suspect may be a Chinese spy. They can then look at this list and know to a large extent how far we have gotten in our defense against their attacks and make adjustments.




This they have done. It is a fait accompli. All counterintelligence in this country that involves HUMINT and the Chinese is dead as of that date. New investigations may now come into being, but they will probably be compromised as well because China is massively attacking all such targets for this and other information.

This is one datapoint of many that indicates that China is waging an undeclared war against the Untied States. It is not a hot war in the sense that thousands of people die each year, but it is a war of intelligence among other things and dozens of people die each year. When countries execute massive intelligence campaigns against other countries, it is in preparation for real war, or in anticipation that there may be a real war.   And if there is a real war, which there very well may be, then thousands of people will die because of the intelligence gathered by the people who China has now successfully protected.

Again this is just one datapoint. There are many such datapoints, and if you doubt me, look up the euphemism "advanced persistant threat" and look for yourself.  

Since China is executing a campaign of massive espionage against the United States, possibly the largest in history, this helps to explain why we finance them by sending all our manufacturing to China, right?   This is why the Republicans defeat any attempt to require American business to protect sensitive information, right ?   Its the price we have to pay to make a fast buck.
A respectable article from the Council of Foreign Relations:
http://blogs.cfr.org/asia/2011/12/13/can-you-hear-me-now-the-u-s-sends-china-a-message-on-cyber-espionage/

See this link for a truly wonderful editorial on the implications of all this for private industry. It is of the great Internet rants, this time of the so-called INFOSEC world.
http://krypt3ia.wordpress.com/2012/10/17/counterintelligence-false-flags-disinformation-and-network-defense/


_________________________________________________

Notes

1. Modern intelligence takes many forms and the number increases with time. The classic clandestine spy is called HUMINT in todays jargon, e.g. human intelligence. Other types include SIGINT (signals intelligence), IMINT (imagery intelligence), MASINT (measurment intelligence), open source intelligence and the emerging field of cyber intelligence. The CIA keeps an excellent archive of declassified intelligence research and it is worth reading for background. https://www.cia.gov/library/index.html

Monday, November 19, 2012

Will Glamorous Spies Seduce Our Systems Administrators?


Now you can waste hours of your life reading new documents on the National Security Agency's "What's New" page which should really be titled "What's Newly Declassified"....

http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/whats_new/index.shtml

In particular, a paper written in 1991 called "Out of Control" spells out the vulnerability that comes from having classified material on systems with a systems administrator(s) with access to everything.

The specific conclusion was that systems administrators would become the targets of HUMINT operations by foreign intelligence services looking for root passwords.  The sysadmin could become the new "lonely cipher clerk" that is compromised by the beautiful foreign agent as seen during the cold war.


But first I must see your root password.


Would our loyal sysadmins be vulnerable to this insidious attack by attractive secret agents?  I think the answer is clearly "yes, they would".   An obvious countermeasure is to make sure that systems administrators are very good looking, well-adjusted and with healthy romantic lives. Presumably arranging a healthy romance for our sysadmins will become a standard part of counterintelligence in our nation's defense infrastructure or be a prerequisite for assignment to this sensitive position.

http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/cryptologic_quarterly/Out_of_Control.pdf

The seductive femme fatale is Honor Blackman.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_Blackman