That's chilling enough to have me looking over my shoulder here at home.
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:37 PM, Martin Baxter <truthseeker...@hotmail.com>wrote: > > > Mr Worf, the examples of such I've met have far less facial-recognition > value. You wouldn't know about them until they were standing right next to > you. Literally. First one I met was a Dr Bice, back when I was a student at > Virginia State. He ran the computer department (then called Business > Information Systems). Looked like anyone's grandfather. If said grandfather > were ex-OSS, ex-CIA and ex-NSA. The first day he met me (making it a point > to do so, because he'd seen my grades and wanted to recruit me), he calmly > told me about two things in my life I'd NEVER told anyone before. I almost > dropped out that day, so afraid I was. > > "If all the world's a stage and all the people merely players, who in > bloody hell hired the director?" -- Charles L Grant > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQUxw9aUVik > > > > > ------------------------------ > To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com > From: hellomahog...@gmail.com > Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 15:43:26 -0800 > Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] Cyberwar Hype Intended to Destroy the Open > Internet > > > They are scarier than being occupied by any foreign government because > they are already in our government. Some of them would easily be diagnosed > as sociopaths. > > An example of one would be Newt Gingrich. > > > On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Martin Baxter > <truthseeker...@hotmail.com>wrote: > > > > I agree with you entirely, Mr Worf. heck, I believe that I've met pieces of > it in the past. Uber-scary guys, these were. > > > "If all the world's a stage and all the people merely players, who in > bloody hell hired the director?" -- Charles L Grant > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQUxw9aUVik > > > > > ------------------------------ > To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com > From: hellomahog...@gmail.com > Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 12:50:58 -0800 > Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] Cyberwar Hype Intended to Destroy the Open > Internet > > > I believe that there is still an element within our government that has > the "old way" of thinking. That the best country we can have is having the > populace of this nation controlled with an iron fist by any means necessary. > The easiest way to do it is to trick the population into thinking that we > need this kind of control over us. > > > On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Martin Baxter <truthseeker...@hotmail.com > > wrote: > > > > What else, from a career spook? > > I'll be dropping my congressman a line about this ASAP. Would hit my > senator, but he's probably drooling at the thought of this, good little > neocon he is. > > "If all the world's a stage and all the people merely players, who in > bloody hell hired the director?" -- Charles L Grant > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQUxw9aUVik > > > > > ------------------------------ > To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com > From: hellomahog...@gmail.com > Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 19:26:19 -0800 > Subject: [scifinoir2] Cyberwar Hype Intended to Destroy the Open Internet > > > > Cyberwar Hype Intended to Destroy the Open Internet > > - By Ryan Singel <http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/author/ryan_singel/> > [image: > Email Author] <r...@ryansingel.net> > - March 1, 2010 | > - 6:56 pm | > - Categories: > Cybarmageddon!<http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/category/cybarmageddon/> > - > > [image: > michael_mcconnell]<http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2010/03/michael_mcconnell.jpg>The > biggest threat to the open internet is not Chinese government hackers or > greedy anti-net-neutrality ISPs, it’s Michael McConnell, the former director > of national intelligence. > McConnell’s not dangerous because he knows anything about SQL injection > hacks, but because he knows about social engineering. He’s the nice-seeming > guy who’s willing and able to use fear-mongering to manipulate the federal > bureaucracy for his own ends, while coming off like a straight shooter to > those who are not in the know. > When he was head of the country’s national intelligence, he scared > President Bush with visions of > e-doom<http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/01/feds-must-exami/>, > prompting the president to sign a comprehensive secret order that unleashed > tens of billions of dollars into the military’s black budget so they could > start making firewalls and building malware into military equipment. > And now McConnell is back in civilian life as a vice president at the > secretive defense contracting giant Booz Allen > Hamilton<http://www.boozallen.com/>. > He’s out in front of Congress and the media, peddling the same > Cybaremaggedon! > <http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/category/cybarmageddon/>gloom. > And now he says we need to *re-engineer* the internet. > > We need to develop an early-warning system to monitor cyberspace, identify > intrusions and locate the source of attacks with a trail of evidence that > can support diplomatic, military and legal options — and we must be able to > do this in milliseconds. *More specifically, we need to re-engineer the > Internet to make attribution, geo-location, intelligence analysis and impact > assessment — who did it, from where, why and what was the result — more > manageable.* The technologies are already available from public and > private sources and can be further developed if we have the will to build > them into our systems and to work with our allies and trading partners so > they will do the same. > > Re-read that sentence. He’s talking about changing the internet to make > everything anyone does on the net traceable and geo-located so the National > Security Administration can pinpoint users and their computers for > retaliation if the U.S. government doesn’t like what’s written in an e-mail, > what search terms were used, what movies were downloaded. Or the tech could > be useful if a computer got hijacked without your knowledge and used as part > of a botnet. > *The Washington Post* gave McConnell free space to declare that we are losing > some sort of > cyberwar<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/25/AR2010022502493.html?sid=ST2010022502680>. > He argues that the country needs to get a Cold War strategy, one complete > with the online equivalent of ICBMs and Eisenhower-era, secret-codenamed > projects. Google’s allegation that Chinese hackers infiltrated its Gmail > servers and targeted Chinese dissidents proves the United States is “losing” > the cyberwar, according to McConnell. > But that’s not warfare. That’s espionage. > McConnell’s op-ed then pointed to breathless stories in *The Washington > Post* and *The Wall Street Journal* about thousands of malware infections > from the well-known Zeus virus. He intimated that the nation’s citizens and > corporations were under unstoppable attack by this so-called new breed of > hacker malware. > despite the masterful PR about the Zeus infections from security company > NetWitness (run by a former Bush Administration cyberczar Amit Yoran), the > world’s largest security companies McAfee and Symantec downplayed the story. > But the message had already gotten out — the net was under attack. > Brian Krebs, one of the country’s most respected cybercrime journalists and > occasional Threat Level contributor, > described<http://www.krebsonsecurity.com/2010/02/zeus-a-virus-known-as-botnet/>that > report: “Sadly, this botnet documented by NetWitness is neither unusual > nor new.” > Those enamored with the idea of “cyberwar” aren’t dissuaded by > fact-checking. > They like to point to Estonia, where a number of the government’s websites > were rendered temporarily inaccessible by angry Russian citizens. They used > a crude, remediable denial-of-service attack to temporarily keep users from > viewing government websites. (This attack is akin to sending an army of > robots to board a bus, so regular riders can’t get on. A website fixes this > the same way a bus company would — by keeping the robots off by identifying > the difference between them and humans.) Some like to say this was an act of > cyberwar, but if it that was > cyberwar<http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2007/08/cyber-war-and-e/>, > it’s pretty clear the net will be just fine. > In fact, none of these examples demonstrate the existence of a cyberwar, > let alone that we are losing it. > But this battle isn’t about truth. It’s about power. > For years, McConnell has wanted the NSA (the ultra-secretive government spy > agency responsible for listening in on other countries and for defending * > classified* government computer systems) to take the lead in guarding all > government and private networks. Not surprisingly, the contractor he works > for has massive, secret contracts with the NSA in that very area. In fact, > the company, owned by the shadowy Carlyle > Group<http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aa9gcBDBo03g&refer=home>, > is reported to pull in $5 billion a year in government contracts, many of > them Top Secret. > Now the problem with developing cyberweapons — say a virus, or a massive > botnet for denial-of-service attacks, is that you need to know where to > point them. In the Cold War, it wasn’t that hard. In theory, you’d use radar > to figure out where a nuclear attack was coming from and then you’d shoot > your missiles in that general direction. But online, it’s extremely > difficult to tell if an attack traced to a server in China was launched by > someone Chinese, or whether it was actually a teenager in Iowa who used a > proxy. > That’s why McConnell and others want to change the internet. The military > needs targets. > But McConnell isn’t the only threat to the open internet. > Just last week the National Telecommunications and Information > Administration — the portion of the Commerce Department that has long > overseen the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers — said it > was time for it to revoke its hands-off-the-internet policy. > That’s according to a February 24 > speech<http://www.ntia.doc.gov/presentations/2010/MediaInstitute_02242010.htm>by > Assistant Commerce Secretary Lawrence E. Strickling. > > In fact, “leaving the Internet alone” has been the nation’s internet policy > since the internet was first commercialized in the mid-1990s. The primary > government imperative then was just to get out of the way to encourage its > growth. And the policy set forth in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was: > “to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists > for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by > Federal or State regulation.” > This was the right policy for the United States in the early stages of the > Internet, and the right message to send to the rest of the world. But that > was then and this is now. > > Now the NTIA needs to start being active to prevent cyberattacks, privacy > intrusions and copyright violations, according to Strickland. And since NTIA > serves as one of the top advisers to the president on the internet, that > stance should not be underestimated. > Add to that — a bill looming in the Senate would hand the president > emergency powers over the > internet<http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/83961-forthcoming-cybersecurity-bill-to-give-president-new-powers-in-cyberattack-emergencies>— > and you can see where all this is headed. And let the past be our guide. > Following years of the NSA illegally spying on Americans’ e-mails and phone > calls as part of a secret anti-terrorism project, Congress voted to legalize > the program in July 2008. That vote allowed the NSA to legally turn > America’s portion of the internet into a giant listening device for the > nation’s intelligence services. The new law also gave legal immunity to the > telecoms like AT&T that helped the government illegally spy on American’s > e-mails and internet use. Then-Senator Barack Obama voted for this > legislation, despite earlier campaign promises to oppose it. > As anyone slightly versed in the internet knows, the net has flourished > because no government has control over it. > But there are creeping signs of danger. > Where can this lead? Well, consider England, where a new bill targeting > online file sharing will outlaw open internet connections at > cafes<http://www.eweekeurope.co.uk/news/digital-economy-bill-threatens-public-wifi-hotspots-5573>or > at home, in a bid to track piracy. > To be sure, we could see more demands by the government for surveillance > capabilities and backdoors in routers and operating systems. Already, the > feds successfully turned the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement > Act (a law mandating surveillance capabilities in telephone switches) into a > tool requiring ISPs to build similar government-specified eavesdropping > capabilities into their networks. > The NSA dreams of “living in the network,” and that’s what McConnell is > calling for in his editorial/advertisement for his company. The NSA lost any > credibility it had when it secretly violated American law and its most > central tenet: “We don’t spy on Americans.” > Unfortunately, the private sector is ignoring that tenet and is helping the > NSA and contractors like Booz Allen Hamilton worm their way into the innards > of the net. Security companies make no fuss, since a scared populace and > fear-induced federal spending means big bucks in bloated contracts. Google > is no help either, recently turning to the NSA for help with its rather > routine infiltration by hackers. > Make no mistake, the military industrial complex now has its eye on the > internet. Generals want to train crack squads of hackers and have wet dreams > of cyberwarfare. Never shy of extending its power, the military industrial > complex wants to turn the internet into yet another venue for an arms race. > And it’s waging a psychological warfare campaign on the American people to > make that so. The military industrial complex is backed by sensationalism, > and a gullible and pageview-hungry media. Notable examples include the *New > York Times*’s John “We Need a New > Internet<http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090215/1044233771.shtml>” > Markoff, *60 Minutes’* “Hackers Took Down Brazilian Power > Grid,<http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/11/brazil_blackout/>” > and the *WSJ*’s Siobhan Gorman, who ominously warned in an a piece lacking > any verifiable evidence, that Chinese and Russian hackers are already hiding > inside the U.S. electrical > grid<http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/04/put-nsa-in-char/> > . > Now the question is: Which of these events can be turned into a Gulf of > Tonkin-like fakery that can create enough fear to let the military and the > government turn the open internet into a controlled, surveillance-friendly > net. > What do they dream of? Think of the internet turning into a tightly > monitored AOL circa the early ’90s, run by CEO Big Brother and COO Dr. > Strangelove. > That’s what McConnell has in mind, and shame on *The Washington Post* and > the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation > Committee<http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5idcpI-eFNCzvuFP57bK1JztcgIbg>for > giving McConnell venues to try to make that happen — without > highlighting that McConnell has a serious financial stake in the outcome of > this debate. > Of course, the net has security problems, and there are pirated movies and > spam and botnets trying to steal credit card information. > But the online world mimics real life. Just as I know where online to buy a > replica of a Coach handbag or watch a new release, I know exactly where I > can go to find the same things in the city I live in. There are cons and > rip-offs in the real world, just as there are online. I’m more likely to get > ripped off by a restaurant server copying down the information on my credit > card than I am having my card stolen and used for fraud while shopping > online. “Top Secret” information is more likely to end up in the hands of a > foreign government through an employee-turned-spy than from a hacker. > But cyber-anything is much scarier than the real world. > The NSA can help private companies and networks tighten up their security > systems, as McConnell argues. In fact, they already do, and they should > continue passing along advice and creating guides to locking down servers > and releasing their own secure version of Linux. But companies like Google > and AT&T have no business letting the NSA into their networks or giving the > NSA information that they won’t share with the American people. > Security companies have long relied on creating fear in internet users by > hyping the latest threat, whether that be > Conficker<http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/04/conficker-war-r/>or the > latest PDF flaw. And now they are reaping billions of dollars in > security contracts from the federal government for their PR efforts. But the > industry and its most influential voices need to take a hard look at the > consequences of that strategy and start talking truth to power’s claims that > we are losing some non-existent cyberwar. > The internet is a hack that seems forever on the edge of falling apart. For > awhile, spam looked like it was going to kill e-mail, the net’s first killer > app. But smart filters have reduced the problem to a minor nuisance as > anyone with a Gmail account can tell you. That’s how the internet survives. > The apocalypse looks like it’s coming and it never does, but meanwhile, it > becomes more and more useful to our everyday lives, spreading innovation, > weird culture, news, commerce and healthy dissent. > But one thing it hasn’t spread is “cyberwar.” There is no cyberwar and we > are not losing it. The only war going on is one for the soul of the > internet. But if journalists, bloggers and the security industry continue to > let self-interested exaggerators dominate our nation’s discourse about > online security, we will lose that war — and the open internet will be its > biggest casualty. > *Photo: Michael McConnell, then-Director of National Intelligence, watches > on in 2008 as President Bush announced the Protect America Act. White House > file photo.* > > Read More > http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/03/cyber-war-hype/?intcid=inform_relatedContent#ixzz0gzCb8sru > > > -- > Celebrating 10 years of bringing diversity to perversity! > Mahogany at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mahogany_pleasures_of_darkness/ > > > ------------------------------ > Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. Sign up > now. <http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469226/direct/01/> > > > > > -- > Celebrating 10 years of bringing diversity to perversity! > Mahogany at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mahogany_pleasures_of_darkness/ > > > ------------------------------ > Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. Get it > now.<http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469230/direct/01/> > > > > > -- > Celebrating 10 years of bringing diversity to perversity! > Mahogany at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mahogany_pleasures_of_darkness/ > > > ------------------------------ > Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. Get it > now.<http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469230/direct/01/> > >
