Benghazi - Computers Come On In Middle of Night?

[DaisyDay]

I was under the impression that the best hackers are non-governmental, what with the bureaucracy and pay-scale.

 

[RDKirk]

To round out the revelations of “Number One,” he informs Attkisson that he’d found three classified documents deep inside her operating system, such that she’d never know they were even there. “Why? To frame me?” Attkisson asks in the book.

The federal courts would say, "So what?" Unless they have information of a connection to someone who had the clearance--and that's the person they'd want to prosecute--it's actually not illegal for someone without a clearance to find himself in possession of classified material.

Oh, they might visit you and sweat you a bit--maybe try to trick to you "lie to a federal officer"--but having classified material is not a crime unless you had a clearance.

 

[RDKirk]

I was under the impression that the best hackers are non-governmental, what with the bureaucracy and pay-scale.

Yes, this is true.

And that is why this is bullpuckey:

So CBS News hires an independent computer analyst whom Attkisson identifies as “Jerry Patel,” also a pseudonym. He finds a massive amount of suspicious activity in the computer, including the removal of all kinds of log messages. The author describes the scene as “Patel” does his work: “Now he’s breathing heavily. It alarms me because it alarms him and he’s not easily alarmed. His voice becomes more formal and he launches into what sounds like a speech for posterity. ‘In my professional opinion, someone has accessed this box … I see evidence that shows a deliberate and skilled attempt to clean the log files of activity.’” Intrusions of this caliber, concludes “Patel,” are “far beyond the the abilities of even the best nongovernment hackers.”

Maybe, though, he's referring to Russian and Chinese governmental hackers. But the statement strikes me as false--I don't think any real hacker or security expert would have made such a statement as "far beyond the the abilities of even the best nongovernment hackers.” They are aware of how consistently freelance hackers blow everyone out of the water.

 

[[serious]]

Sharyl Attkisson’s computer intrusions: ‘Worse than anything Nixon ever did’
By Erik Wemple October 27 

The breaches on Attkisson’s computer, says this source, are coming from a “sophisticated entity that used commercial, nonattributable spyware that’s proprietary to a government agency: either the CIA, FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, or the National Security Agency (NSA).” Attkisson learns from “Number One” that one intrusion was launched from the WiFi at a Ritz Carlton Hotel and the “intruders discovered my Skype account handle, stole the password, activated the audio, and made heavy use of it, presumably as a listening tool.”

To round out the revelations of “Number One,” he informs Attkisson that he’d found three classified documents deep inside her operating system, such that she’d never know they were even there. “Why? To frame me?” Attkisson asks in the book.

So CBS News hires an independent computer analyst whom Attkisson identifies as “Jerry Patel,” also a pseudonym. He finds a massive amount of suspicious activity in the computer, including the removal of all kinds of log messages. The author describes the scene as “Patel” does his work: “Now he’s breathing heavily. It alarms me because it alarms him and he’s not easily alarmed. His voice becomes more formal and he launches into what sounds like a speech for posterity. ‘In my professional opinion, someone has accessed this box … I see evidence that shows a deliberate and skilled attempt to clean the log files of activity.’” Intrusions of this caliber, concludes “Patel,” are “far beyond the the abilities of even the best nongovernment hackers.”




New book from former CBS News reporter cites an "undeniable link" between computer break-ins and the government.​

www.washingtonpost.com/.../erik-wemple/.../sharyl-at


As liberals are so quick to defend the rights (of even terrible people) why are they so quick to dismiss this? If true, and yes it rings true....how can it be so easily overlooked, brushed away, laughed off? Astounding, truly astounding.

Page not found.

 

[YeShallTread]

Page not found.

Washington Times, Fox News, WaPo, Breitbart, and more WaPo - See more at: Worse than Nixon; More details on how the government hacked Sharyl Attkisson's computer | Poor Richard's News

 

[DaisyDay]

Page not found.

Sharyl Attkisson’s computer intrusions: ‘Worse than anything Nixon ever did’ - The Washington Post

 

[[serious]]

Washington Times, Fox News, WaPo, Breitbart, and more WaPo - See more at: Worse than Nixon; More details on how the government hacked Sharyl Attkisson's computer | Poor Richard's News

First phrase, "I would wager that the majority of the country has never even heard of Sharyl Attkisson"

I would wager that's the root of the issue. If the government was hacking her, they would hire someone who understood how to actually delete files. Heck, if a 13 year old script kiddie was hacking her, he'd know how to actually delete files.

 

[YeShallTread]

First phrase, "I would wager that the majority of the country has never even heard of Sharyl Attkisson"

I would wager that's the root of the issue. If the government was hacking her, they would hire someone who understood how to actually delete files. Heck, if a 13 year old script kiddie was hacking her, he'd know how to actually delete files.

So, because you don't think (whether you are right or wrong) that the majority of the country knows who Sharyl Attkisson is....means this reporters computer and report on Benghazi can be trifled with by the government or some other nefarious source and we should just ho-hum it away?

Freedom of speech and truly spook-y goings on (I don't use the word spook-y lightly) is...the root of the issue. If our government is doing this, perhaps as sort of a warning to her about reporting on the truth of Benghazi...it should send shivers down the backs of Americans.

 

[[serious]]

So, because you don't think (whether you are right or wrong) that the majority of the country knows who Sharyl Attkisson is....means this reporters computer and report on Benghazi can be trifled with by the government or some other nefarious source and we should just ho-hum it away?

Freedom of speech and truly spook-y goings on (I don't use the word spook-y lightly) is...the root of the issue. If our government is doing this, perhaps as sort of a warning to her about reporting on the truth of Benghazi...it should send shivers down the backs of Americans.

Do you think the government hacked her computer to delete text in an ineffective yet photogenic way?

Seriously, it would be like saying the IRS was robbing you and releasing a photo of a guy in an old timey robber outfit carrying bags with dollar signs on them.

figure 1: proof IRS robbed me.

 

[YeShallTread]

Do you think the government hacked her computer to delete text in an ineffective yet photogenic way?

Seriously, it would be like saying the IRS was robbing you and releasing a photo of a guy in an old timey robber outfit carrying bags with dollar signs on them.

We must consider...either something really terrible is going on or she lied. I don't think she lied so, to me, the question is...a who done it. I believe it was an attempt to frighten her away from finishing what she started. A threat without speaking a thing. As for the "classified files" found "deep in her system," I agree that it would be to "frame her" should she persist in continuing.

 

[RDKirk]

We must consider...either something really terrible is going on or she lied. I don't think she lied so, to me, the question is...a who done it. I believe it was an attempt to frighten her away from finishing what she started. A threat without speaking a thing. As for the "classified files" found "deep in her system," I agree that it would be to "frame her" should she persist in continuing.

She didn't "start anything" the government is that concerned with. She didn't have any new information, she didn't have any secret source, she was another pesky fly on an old pile of manure.

If anything, she contracted one of the millions of worms out there in the wild, some worm designed to mess with you rather than simply delete files.

And as I said before, planting a classified file on a civilian is not a "frame up" because it's not prosecutable. I see all kinds of classified information out in the wild. Heck, when I first read one of Tom Clancy's early novels, I got rid of it after reading it because it had a lot of information I was responsible for myself. But nobody arrested Clancy.

 

[[serious]]

We must consider...either something really terrible is going on or she lied. I don't think she lied so, to me, the question is...a who done it. I believe it was an attempt to frighten her away from finishing what she started. A threat without speaking a thing. As for the "classified files" found "deep in her system," I agree that it would be to "frame her" should she persist in continuing.

Frame her for possessing classified files? Wouldn't they want to frame her for something illegal?

 

[YeShallTread]

Frame her for possessing classified files? Wouldn't they want to frame her for something illegal?

Possessing things she should not have and asserting that she would publish them is framing her. It is destroying her credibility, much as is being done here with many of the comments that have been directed to her.

The name Julian Assange comes to mind as someone mixed up in the government and classified files. Not that he was "framed" but that the government is very involved. Could the threat be they would also be very involved in her life should she continue? Sort of like the IRS (nothing to see here...unless you're a tea party member).

 

[HorsieJuice]

We must consider...either something really terrible is going on or she lied.

The 3rd option is that she's some mixture of crazy, paranoid, and computer illiterate. Yes, a hardware problem with the keyboard could easily cause something like that. I used to have problems with a shift key that would cause all sorts of weirdness (those problems are exacerbated when you try to rely on key commands instead of the mouse, like I do).

And yes, the comment about the non-governmental hackers is ridiculous. Non-governmental hackers are responsible for most of the security breaches we hear about in the news - the ones that go undetected for months and steal tens of millions of credit card numbers. If you can analyze and exploit a weakness in a large company's financial systems, you can find a way to hack some reporter's personal laptop.

 

[[serious]]

Possessing things she should not have and asserting that she would publish them is framing her. It is destroying her credibility, much as is being done here with many of the comments that have been directed to her.

The name Julian Assange comes to mind as someone mixed up in the government and classified files. Not that he was "framed" but that the government is very involved. Could the threat be they would also be very involved in her life should she continue? Sort of like the IRS (nothing to see here...unless you're a tea party member).

Umm... since when does having access to files destroy credibility? I mean, Ellsburg, James Risen, not exactly discredited for their possession and publication of classified documents. That's kinda what journalists get awards for.

 

[YeShallTread]

She didn't "start anything" the government is that concerned with. She didn't have any new information, she didn't have any secret source, she was another pesky fly on an old pile of manure.

If anything, she contracted one of the millions of worms out there in the wild, some worm designed to mess with you rather than simply delete files.

And as I said before, planting a classified file on a civilian is not a "frame up" because it's not prosecutable. I see all kinds of classified information out in the wild. Heck, when I first read one of Tom Clancy's early novels, I got rid of it after reading it because it had a lot of information I was responsible for myself. But nobody arrested Clancy.

RDKirk....that sounds like a really interesting story. I wish it was one you could tell us about. I have some early Clancy novels...which one are you referencing?

She may well just have "some worm." I don't know but if this is in fact...factual, then shouldn't someone look into it's validity? Worm, government? It matters.

 

[YeShallTread]

Umm... since when does having access to files destroy credibility? I mean, Ellsburg, James Risen, not exactly discredited for their possession and publication of classified documents. That's kinda what journalists get awards for.

Destroying her credibility would be in placing her in the same class as Julian Assange. In her case...a lie and nevertheless...a viable threat. Having files and publishing files are not the same thing. If she is truthful then she never obtained these "files" in the first place. Could a hacker insert them or would the hacker HAVE TO BE associated with the government in order to place them there?


There are questions.

 

[RDKirk]

Possessing things she should not have and asserting that she would publish them is framing her. It is destroying her credibility, much as is being done here with many of the comments that have been directed to her.

Totally no. Just the opposite.

The name Julian Assange comes to mind as someone mixed up in the government and classified files. Not that he was "framed" but that the government is very involved. Could the threat be they would also be very involved in her life should she continue? Sort of like the IRS (nothing to see here...unless you're a tea party member).

The first issue, once again, is that she doesn't have anything important. If she actually had classified information--which Julian Assange actually has--the government would be concerned. But to begin with, she has nothing but more regurgitation of publicly known information.

The government would not reveal classified information to someone who had nothing to begin with. That's just silly to suppose.

 

[ThisBrotherOfHis]

All the protests about this being a publicity ploy by Attkisson would hold more water if not for this from CBS:

Attkisson releases video of computer hacking, 2012 Benghazi files deletionhttp://www.washingtontimes.com/news...sson-releases-video-of-computer-hack-d/?cachehttp://www.washingtontimes.com/news...sson-releases-video-of-computer-hack-d/?cache

A firm hired by CBS to examine Ms. Attkisson’s computer in 2013 concluded that it had been tampered with by an unknown third party.“A cybersecurity firm hired by CBS News has determined through forensic analysis that Sharyl Attkisson’s computer was accessed by an unauthorized, external, unknown party on multiple occasions late in 2012,” CBS News spokeswoman Sonya McNair said in June, The Washington Post reported. “Evidence suggests this party performed all access remotely using Attkisson’s accounts. While no malicious code was found, forensic analysis revealed an intruder had executed commands that appeared to involve search and exfiltration of data,” she added.

Also, the source she hired independently to investigate the hack said that a "sophisticated entity that used commercial, non-attributable spyware that’s proprietary to a government agency: either the CIA, FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, or the National Security Agency (NSA),” meaning that anyone could buy such software, given it is commercial grade. If you run Windows, you (should) already know that anyone can get remote access to your computer if they know your signon and password. So while I have questions about this video, I don't doubt her allegations are plausible.

 

[whatbogsends]

I hadn't watched that video with sound before. It certainly doesn't seem like "hacking". Every time there's an action on the screen, i hear a click (either a mouse or keypad). If you wanted to show someone "hacking" your machine, your camera shot would include your keyboard and peripherals, and there wouldn't be a "click" sound when an action was done on your computer.

I'm not saying "she wasn't hacked", but i am saying the video in the article doesn't make it look like she's hacked at all.