Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
by crikkett » Wed Dec 29, 2010 9:08 am
Plutonia wrote:
Condoms given out at recent hacker conference.@evgenymorozov Evgeny Morozov
WikiLeaks is a brand that keeps on giving: WikiLeaks condoms distributed at a hacker conference http://bit.ly/htRJ3B
by Plutonia » Wed Dec 29, 2010 6:53 pm
But I'm not suggesting that Wikileaks was created to foment that scare, there are other projects in the works for that, as I'm finding out. And if there is zeal at this moment to pigeonhole WL as a psyop or terrorist front, that could change the moment WL gives the embattled middle-Americans access to BoA's nasty secrets cause nobody but the swindlers are gonna fault them for that.82_28 wrote:Let's see, there was the Red Scare and that worked for a while. Then there was the post 9-11 Terror Scare and before that the Crime-wave/Nigga/Gangsta Scare of the 80's/90's. Oh yeah, pre-war there was the Anarchist Scare and the Jew Scare. So are we entering a period of Hacker Scare to frighten people into shut-the-fuck-up? More fear-your-neighbour propaganda except now it's your digital compatriot who may be spying on you. Maybe so, maybe so.
Since this whole issue confuses me, I'm still staying out, but this is what myself and others were saying from the very beginning.
Out. . .
Wired published the first chat logs on June 10, 2010. In the article, they indicate that these represent roughly 25% of the logs they received from Adrian Lamo of his chats with Bradley Manning. Later, Wired’s Kevin Poulsen told Glenn Greenwald of Salon that the logs were complete with the exception of “Manning discussing personal matters that aren’t clearly related to his arrest, or apparently sensitive government information that I’m not throwing up without vetting first.”
Lamo also provided Ellen Nakashima of the Washington Post with a complete version of the logs, which were also excerpted on June 10. And on June 19, BoingBoing published what was purported to be a more complete version of one section of the log. The three versions have been merged in the text below:
* Black text – Wired version
* Red text – Washington Post version
* Brown text – BoingBoing version
* Bold — sections BoingBoing believes to have been edited
* Orange text — Both Washington Post and BoingBoing
* Blue text – Both BoingBoing and Wired
* Pink text — Both Washington Post and Wired
* Green text — Washington Post, Wired & BoingBoing versions
May 21
(1:41:12 PM) Bradley Manning: hi
(1:44:04 PM) Manning: how are you?
(1:47:01 PM) Manning: im an army intelligence analyst, deployed to eastern baghdad, pending discharge for “adjustment disorder” [. . .]
(1:56:24 PM) Manning: im sure you’re pretty busy…
(1:58:31 PM) Manning: if you had unprecedented access to classified networks 14 hours a day 7 days a week for 8+ months, what would you do?
(1:58:31 PM) Adrian Lamo [AUTO-REPLY]: Tired of being tired
(2:17:29 PM) Manning: ?
(6:07:29 PM) Lamo: What’s your MOS?
(3:16:24 AM) Manning: re: “What’s your MOS?” — Intelligence Analyst (35F)
May 22
(12:15:11 PM) bradass87: hypothetical question: if you had free reign over classified networks for long periods of time… say, 8-9 months… and you saw incredible things, awful things… things that belonged in the public domain, and not on some server stored in a dark room in Washington DC… what would you do?
(12:16:38 PM) bradass87: or Guantanamo, Bagram, Bucca, Taji, VBC for that matter…
(12:17:47 PM) bradass87: things that would have an impact on 6.7 billion people
(12:21:24 PM) bradass87: say… a database of half a million events during the iraq war… from 2004 to 2009… with reports, date time groups, lat-lon locations, casualty figures… ? or 260,000 state department cables from embassies and consulates all over the world, explaining how the first world exploits the third, in detail, from an internal perspective?
(12:22:49 PM) bradass87: the air-gap has been penetrated… =L
(12:23:19 PM) Adrian: how so?
(12:26:09 PM) Adrian: yt?
(12:26:09 PM) bradass87: lets just say *someone* i know intimately well, has been penetrating US classified networks, mining data like the ones described… and been transferring that data from the classified networks over the “air gap” onto a commercial network computer… sorting the data, compressing it, encrypting it, and uploading it to a crazy white haired aussie who can’t seem to stay in one country very long =L
(12:27:13 PM) bradass87: im here
(12:27:24 PM) Adrian: Depends. What are the particulars?
(12:28:19 PM) bradass87: theres substantial lag i think
(12:29:52 PM) Adrian: I don’t understand.
(12:30:13 PM) bradass87: what was the last message you recieved?
(12:30:47 PM) Adrian:
(12:28:19 PM) bradass87: theres substantial lag i think
(12:30:56 PM) bradass87: before that
(12:31:09 PM) Adrian:
(12:26:09 PM) bradass87: lets just say *someone* i know intimately well, has been penetrating US classified networks, mining data like the ones described… and been transferring that data from the classified networks over the “air gap” onto a commercial network computer… sorting the data, compressing it, encrypting it, and uploading it to a crazy white haired aussie who can’t seem to stay in one country very long =L
(12:27:13 PM) bradass87: im here
(12:27:24 PM) Adrian: Depends. What are the particulars?
(12:31:43 PM) bradass87: crazy white haired dude = Julian Assange
(12:33:05 PM) bradass87: in other words… ive made a huge mess :’
(12:35:17 PM) bradass87: im sorry… im just emotionally fractured
(12:39:12 PM) bradass87: im a total mess
(12:41:54 PM) bradass87: i think im in more potential heat than you ever were
(12:41:54 PM) Adrian : I have more messages than resources allocatable to action them. Please be very patient.
(12:45:59 PM) Adrian: not mandatorily
(12:46:08 PM) Adrian: there are always outs
(12:46:17 PM) Adrian: how long have you helped WIkileaks?
(12:49:09 PM) bradass87: since they released the 9/11 “pager messages”
(12:49:38 PM) bradass87: i immediately recognized that they were from an NSA database, and i felt comfortable enough to come forward
(12:50:20 PM) bradass87: so… right after thanksgiving timeframe of 2009
(12:52:33 PM) bradass87: Hilary Clinton, and several thousand diplomats around the world are going to have a heart attack when they wake up one morning, and finds an entire repository of classified foreign policy is available, in searchable format to the public… =L
(12:53:41 PM) bradass87: s/Hilary/Hillary
(12:54:47 PM) Adrian: What sort of content?
(12:56:36 PM) Adrian: brb cigarette
(12:56:43 PM) Adrian: keep typing <3
(12:59:41 PM) bradass87: uhm… crazy, almost criminal political backdealings… the non-PR-versions of world events and crises… uhm… all kinds of stuff like everything from the buildup to the Iraq War during Powell, to what the actual content of “aid packages” is: for instance, PR that the US is sending aid to pakistan includes funding for water/food/clothing… that much is true, it includes that, but the other 85% of it is for F-16 fighters and munitions to aid in the Afghanistan effort, so the US can call in Pakistanis to do aerial bombing instead of americans potentially killing civilians and creating a PR crisis
(1:00:57 PM) bradass87: theres so much… it affects everybody on earth… everywhere there’s a US post… there’s a diplomatic scandal that will be revealed… Iceland, the Vatican, Spain, Brazil, Madascar, if its a country, and its recognized by the US as a country, its got dirt on it
(1:01:27 PM) bradass87: i need one myself
(1:10:38 PM) bradass87: its open diplomacy… world-wide anarchy in CSV format… its Climategate with a global scope, and breathtaking depth… its beautiful, and horrifying…
(1:10:38 PM) Adrian : I have more messages than resources allocatable to action them. Please be very patient.
(1:11:54 PM) bradass87: and… its important that it gets out… i feel, for some bizarre reason
(1:12:02 PM) bradass87: it might actually change something
(1:13:10 PM) bradass87: i just… dont wish to be a part of it… at least not now… im not ready… i wouldn’t mind going to prison for the rest of my life, or being executed so much, if it wasn’t for the possibility of having pictures of me… plastered all over the world press… [...]
(1:14:11 PM) bradass87: i’ve totally lost my mind… i make no sense… the CPU is not made for this motherboard…
(1:30:32 PM) bradass87: >sigh<
(1:31:40 PM) bradass87: i just wanted enough time to figure myself out… to be myself… and be running around all the time, trying to meet someone else’s expectations
(1:32:01 PM) bradass87: *and not be
(1:33:03 PM) bradass87: im just kind of drifting now…
(1:34:11 PM) bradass87: waiting to redeploy to the US, be discharged… [...]
(1:34:45 PM) bradass87: all while witnessing the world freak out as its most intimate secrets are revealed
(1:35:06 PM) bradass87: its such an awkward place to be in, emotionally and psychologically
(1:35:06 PM) Adrian : I have more messages than resources allocatable to action them. Please be very patient.
(1:39:03 PM) Manning: i cant believe what im confessing to you :’(
(1:40:20 PM) Manning: ive been so isolated so long… i just wanted to be nice, and live a normal life… but events kept forcing me to figure out ways to survive… smart enough to know whats going on, but helpless to do anything… no-one took any notice of me
(1:40:43 PM) Manning: :’(
(1:43:51 PM) Lamo: back
(1:43:59 PM) Manning: im self medicating like crazy when im not toiling in the supply office (my new location, since im being discharged, im not offically intel anymore)
(1:44:11 PM) Manning: you missed a lot…
(1:45:00 PM) Lamo: what kind of scandal?
(1:45:16 PM) Manning: hundreds of them
(1:45:40 PM) Lamo: like what? I’m genuinely curious about details.
(1:46:01 PM) Manning: i dont know… theres so many… i dont have the original material anymore
(1:46:18 PM) Manning: uhmm… the Holy See and its position on the Vatican sex scandals
(1:46:26 PM) Lamo: play it by ear
(1:46:29 PM) Manning: the broiling one in Germany
(1:47:36 PM) Manning: im sorry, there’s so many… its impossible for any one human to read all quarter-million… and not feel overwhelmed… and possibly desensitized
(1:48:20 PM) Manning: the scope is so broad… and yet the depth so rich
(1:48:50 PM) Lamo: give me some bona fides … yanno? any specifics.
(1:49:40 PM) Manning: this one was a test: Classified cable from US Embassy Reykjavik on Icesave dated 13 Jan 2010
(1:50:30 PM) Manning: the result of that one was that the icelandic ambassador to the US was recalled, and fired
(1:51:02 PM) Manning: thats just one cable…
(1:51:14 PM) Lamo: Anything unreleased?
(1:51:25 PM) Manning: i’d have to ask assange
(1:51:53 PM) Manning: i zerofilled the original
(1:51:54 PM) Lamo: why do you answer to him?
(1:52:29 PM) Manning: i dont… i just want the material out there… i dont want to be a part of it
(1:52:54 PM) Adrian: i’ve been considering helping wikileaks with opsec
(1:53:13 PM) bradass87: they have decent opsec… im obviously violating it
(1:53:34 PM) bradass87: im a wreck
(1:53:47 PM) bradass87: im a total fucking wreck right now
______________________________
(2:04:29 PM) Manning: im a source, not quite a volunteer
(2:05:38 PM) Manning: i mean, im a high profile source… and i’ve developed a relationship with assange… but i dont know much more than what he tells me, which is very little
(2:05:58 PM) Manning: it took me four months to confirm that the person i was communicating was in fact assange
(2:10:01 PM) Lamo: how’d you do that?
(2:12:45 PM) Manning: I gathered more info when i questioned him whenever he was being tailed in Sweden by State Department officials… i was trying to figure out who was following him… and why… and he was telling me stories of other times he’s been followed… and they matched up with the ones he’s said publicly
(2:14:28 PM) Lamo: did that bear out? the surveillance?
(2:14:46 PM) Manning: based on the description he gave me, I assessed it was the Northern Europe Diplomatic Security Team… trying to figure out how he got the Reykjavik cable…
(2:15:57 PM) Manning: they also caught wind that he had a video… of the Gharani airstrike in afghanistan, which he has, but hasn’t decrypted yet… the production team was actually working on the Baghdad strike though, which was never really encrypted
(2:16:22 PM) Manning: he’s got the whole 15-6 for that incident… so it wont just be video with no context
(2:16:55 PM) Manning: but its not nearly as damning… it was an awful incident, but nothing like the baghdad one
(2:17:59 PM) Manning: the investigating officers left the material unprotected, sitting in a directory on a centcom.smil.mil
(2:18:03 PM) Manning: server
(2:18:56 PM) Manning: but they did zip up the files, aes-256, with an excellent password… so afaik it hasn’t been broken yet
(2:19:12 PM) Manning: 14+ chars…
(2:19:37 PM) Manning: i can’t believe what im telling you =L
May 23
(7:19:12 AM) Lamo: hey you
(7:19:19 AM) Lamo: resend?
(7:19:19 AM) Manning: whats up?
(7:19:29 AM) Manning: i just said hello
(7:19:46 AM) Lamo: waking up. got up about an hour ago, 0615.
(7:20:10 AM) Manning: heh, the evening is still young here
(7:20:26 AM) Lamo: how’re you feeling today?
(7:20:37 AM) Manning: im feeling a little better…
(7:20:52 AM) Manning: i had a lot on my mind, keeping to myself
(7:22:18 AM) Lamo: anything new & exciting?
(7:24:21 AM) Manning: no, was outside in the sun all day… 110 degrees F, doing various details for a visiting band and some college team’s cheerleaders…
(7:24:43 AM) Lamo: cheerleaders.
(7:24:46 AM) Manning: ran a barbecue… but no-one showed up… threw a lot of food away
(7:25:20 AM) Manning: yes, football cheerleaders… visiting on off season… apart of Morale Welfare and Recreation (MWR) projects
(7:25:39 AM) Lamo: *sigh*
(7:26:01 AM) Manning: >shrug<
(7:26:37 AM) Manning: im sunburned… and smell like charcoal, sweat, and sunscreen… thats about all thats new
(7:26:47 AM) Lamo: Is there a Baghdad 2600 meeting? ;>
(7:28:04 AM) Manning: there’s only one other person im aware of that actually knows anything about computer security… he’s a SIGINT analyst, of course
(7:28:41 AM) Lamo: Is he the other one who pokes around t he network?
(7:29:26 AM) Manning: no… afaik, he doesn’t play around with classified networks… but im sure he’s capable
(7:30:09 AM) Lamo: then it stands to reason that you have at least 3 people who have some infosec knowledge
(7:31:15 AM) Manning: im not quite sure what you’re saying
(7:31:23 AM) Manning: infosec knowledge of what?
(7:31:29 AM) Manning: the networks?
(7:32:13 AM) Manning: i know a lot of computer security people
(7:32:44 AM) Lamo: i mean, in a way that would lend itself to a meeting.
(7:33:33 AM) Lamo: i’m writing a message trying to tie meetings together globally with a sampling of only ~3000 people to work with and get to go out and evangelize, so i have it on the brain
(7:33:50 AM) Manning: not really… different types of people… know how to, but dont
(7:34:33 AM) Manning: you don’t want these people having a meeting
(7:34:48 AM) Manning: though… i guess you do
______________________________
(8:01:30 AM) Lamo: Does Assange use AIM or other messaging services? I’d like to chat with him one of these days about opsec. My only credentials beyond intrusion are that the FBI never got my data or found me, before my negotiated surrender, but that’s something.
(8:01:53 AM) Lamo: And my data was never recovered.
(8:02:07 AM) Manning: no he does not use AIM
(8:02:37 AM) Lamo: How would I get ahold of him?
(8:02:59 AM) Manning: he would come to you
(8:03:26 AM) Lamo: I’ve never failed to get ahold of someone.
(8:03:29 AM) Manning: he does use OTR though… but discusses nothing OPSEC
(8:03:42 AM) Lamo: I cornered Ashcroft IRL, in the end.
(8:04:19 AM) Manning: he *might* use the ccc.de jabber server… but you didn’t hear that from me
(8:04:33 AM) Lamo: gotcha
(8:06:00 AM) Manning: im going to grab some dinner, ttyl
(8:06:18 AM) Lamo: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=3 ... &id=704990
(8:06:47 AM) Lamo: i didn’t pass security, either. or rather, i did ;>
(8:06:52 AM) Lamo: enjoy dinner.
(8:06:55 AM) Lamo: twys.
(9:12:38 AM) Manning: bk
(9:22:54 AM) Manning: interesting… marine uniform… illegal, but certainly easy
(9:24:11 AM) Manning: why ashcroft?
(9:24:24 AM) Manning: oh, nevermind… DoJ
(9:24:29 AM) Manning: >yawn<
(9:26:52 AM) Manning: im really not familiar at all with FBI stuff
(9:27:04 AM) Manning: americans have so many more rights than non-americans
(9:31:42 AM) Manning: its awful
(9:46:11 AM) Lamo: Ashcroft´s DOJ tried to use the USA PATRIOT Act on me.
(10:06:24 AM) Lamo: around?
(10:12:34 AM) Manning: yeah
(10:12:57 AM) Lamo: are you baptist by any chance?
(10:13:34 AM) Manning: raised catholic… never believed a word of it
(10:13:59 AM) Manning: im godless… i guess i follow humanist values though
(10:14:15 AM) Manning: have custom dogtags that say “Humanist” [...]
(10:17:56 AM) Manning: i was the only non-religous person in town
(10:18:17 AM) Manning: more pews than people…
(10:18:37 AM) Manning: i understand them though
(10:18:53 AM) Manning: im not mean to them… they *really* don’t know
(10:19:39 AM) Manning: i politely disagree… but they are the ones who get uncomfortable when i make, very politely, good leading points…
(10:20:48 AM) Manning: (by leading points, i mean ask multiple questions, with obvious answers, then ask a question based on the answers from the previous questions that challenges their normal response to the same question) (10:21:26 AM) Manning: [excellent example of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yhN1IDLQjo] (10:28:21 AM) Manning: new yorker is running 10k word article on wl.org on 30 may, btw
(10:33:07 AM) Lamo: one moment fone
(10:33:30 AM) Manning: (tracking device)
(10:37:28 AM) Manning: trust level increasing? [quantify]
May 25
(02:03:10 AM) Manning: amazing how the world works
(02:03:27 AM) Manning: takes 6 degrees of separation to a whole new level
(02:04:12 AM) Lamo: hey, vacaville
(02:04:18 AM) Lamo: er
(02:04:23 AM) Lamo: vacaville
(02:05:12 AM) Manning: its almost bookworthy in itself, how this played
(02:07:41 AM) Manning: event occurs in 2007, i watch video in 2009 with no context, do research, forward information to group of FOI activists, more research occurs, video is released in 2010, those involved come forward to discuss event, i witness those involved coming forward to discuss publicly, even add them as friends on FB… without them knowing who i am
(02:08:37 AM) Manning:they touch my life, i touch their life, they touch my life again… full circle
(02:08:58 AM) Lamo: Life’s funny.
(02:09:24 AM) Lamo: *random* are you concerned aboutCI/CID looking into your Wiki stuff? I was always paranoid. (02:09:40 AM) Manning: CID has no open investigation
(02:10:28 AM) Manning: State Department will be uber-pissed… but I dont think they’re capable of tracing everything…
(02:10:44 AM) Lamo: what about CI?
(02:10:51 AM) Manning: might be a congressional investigation, and a joint effort to figure out what happened (02:11:23 AM) Manning: CI probably took note, but it had no effect on operations
(02:11:48 AM) Manning: so, it was publicly damaging, but didn’t increase attacks or rhetoric…
(02:12:10 AM) Lamo: *nod*
(02:12:34 AM) Manning: re: joint effort will be purely political,”fact finding”… “how can we stop this from happening again”
(02:12:46 AM) Manning: regarding State Dept. cables
(02:13:12 AM) Lamo: Would the cables come from State?
(02:13:21 AM) Manning: yes
(02:13:25 AM) Manning: State Department
(02:13:29 AM) Lamo: I was always a commercial intruder.
(02:13:51 AM) Lamo: Why does your job afford you access?
(02:13:59 AM) Lamo: except for the UN.
(02:14:03 AM) Manning: because i have a workstation
(02:14:15 AM) Lamo: and World Bank.
(02:14:17 AM) Manning: *had*
(02:14:36 AM) Lamo: So you have these stored now?
(02:14:54 AM) Manning: i had two computers… one connected to SIPRNET the other to JWICS…
(02:15:07 AM) Manning: no, they’re government laptops
(02:15:18 AM) Manning: they’ve been zerofilled
(02:15:22 AM) Manning: because of the pullout
(02:15:57 AM) Manning: evidence was destroyed… by the system itself
(02:16:10 AM) Lamo: So how would you deploy the cables? If at all.
(02:16:26 AM) Manning: oh no… cables are reports
(02:16:34 AM) Lamo: ah
(02:16:38 AM) Manning: State Department Cable = a Memorandum (
02:16:48 AM) Lamo: embassy cables?
(02:16:54 AM) Manning: yes
(02:17:00 AM) Manning: 260,000 in all
(02:17:10 AM) Manning: i mentioned this previously
(02:17:14 AM) Lamo: yes
(02:17:31 AM) Lamo: stored locally, or retreiveable?
(02:17:35 AM) Manning: brb latrine =P
(02:17:43 AM) Manning: i dont have a copy anymore
(02:17:59 AM) Lamo: *nod* (02:18:09 AM) Manning: they were stored on a centralized server…
(02:18:34 AM) Lamo: what’s your endgame plan, then?
(02:18:36 AM) Manning: it was vulnerable as fuck
(02:20:57 AM) Manning: well, it was forwarded to WL
(02:21:18 AM) Manning: and god knows what happens now
(02:22:27 AM) Manning: hopefully worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms
(02:23:06 AM) Manning: if not… than we’re doomed
(02:23:18 AM) Manning: as a species
(02:24:13 AM) Manning: i will officially give up on the society we have if nothing happens
(02:24:58 AM) Manning: the reaction to the video gave me immense hope… CNN’s iReport was overwhelmed… Twitter exploded…
(02:25:18 AM) Manning: people who saw, knew there was something wrong
(02:26:10 AM) Manning: Washington Post sat on the video… David Finkel acquired a copy while embedded out here
(02:26:36 AM) Manning: [also reason as to why there's probably no investigation]
(02:28:10 AM) Manning: i want people to see the truth… regardless of who they are… because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public
(02:28:10 AM) Lamo : I’m not here right now
(02:28:50 AM) Manning: if i knew then, what i knew now… kind of thing…
(02:29:31 AM) Manning: or maybe im just young, naive, and stupid…
(02:30:09 AM) Lamo: which do you think it is?
(02:30:29 AM) Manning: im hoping for the former
(02:30:53 AM) Manning: it cant be the latter
(02:31:06 AM) Manning: because if it is… were fucking screwed
(02:31:12 AM) Manning: (as a society)
(02:31:49 AM) Manning: and i dont want to believe that we’re screwed
(02:32:53 AM) Manning: food time… ttys
______________________________
(02:26:01 PM) Manning: i dont believe in good guys versus bad guys anymore… i only a plethora of states acting in self interest… with varying ethics and moral standards of course, but self-interest nonetheless
(02:26:18 PM) Manning: s/only/only see/
(02:26:47 PM) Lamo: the tm meant i was being facetious
(02:26:59 PM) Manning: gotchya
(02:27:47 PM) Manning: i mean, we’re better in some respects… we’re much more subtle… use a lot more words and legal techniques to legitimize everything
(02:28:00 PM) Manning: its better than disappearing in the middle of the night
(02:28:19 PM) Manning: but just because something is more subtle, doesn’t make it right
(02:29:04 PM) Manning: i guess im too idealistic
(02:31:02 PM) Manning: i think the thing that got me the most… that made me rethink the world more than anything
(02:35:46 PM) Manning: was watching 15 detainees taken by the Iraqi Federal Police… for printing “anti-Iraqi literature”… the iraqi federal police wouldn’t cooperate with US forces, so i was instructed to investigate the matter, find out who the “bad guys” were, and how significant this was for the FPs… it turned out, they had printed a scholarly critique against PM Maliki… i had an interpreter read it for me… and when i found out that it was a benign political critique titled “Where did the money go?” and following the corruption trail within the PM’s cabinet… i immediately took that information and *ran* to the officer to explain what was going on… he didn’t want to hear any of it… he told me to shut up and explain how we could assist the FPs in finding *MORE* detainees…
(02:35:46 PM) Lamo : I’m not here right now
(02:36:27 PM) Manning: everything started slipping after that… i saw things differently
(02:37:37 PM) Manning: i had always questioned the things worked, and investigated to find the truth… but that was a point where i was a *part* of something… i was actively involved in something that i was completely against…
(02:38:12 PM) Lamo: That could happen in Colombia.
(02:38:21 PM) Lamo: Different cultures, dude.
(02:38:28 PM) Lamo: Life is cheaper.
(02:38:34 PM) Manning: oh im quite aware
(02:38:45 PM) Lamo: What would you do if your role /w Wikileaks seemed in danger of being blown?
(02:38:48 PM) Manning: but i was a part of it… and completely helpless…
(02:39:01 PM) Lamo: sometimes we’re all helpless
(02:39:34 PM) Manning: try and figure out how i could get my side of the story out… before everything was twisted around to make me look like Nidal Hassan
(02:40:15 PM) Manning: i dont think its going to happen
(02:40:26 PM) Manning: i mean, i was never noticed
(02:41:10 PM) Manning: regularly ignored… except when i had something essential… then it was back to “bring me coffee, then sweep the floor”
(02:42:24 PM) Manning: i never quite understood that
(02:42:44 PM) Manning: felt like i was an abused work horse…
(02:43:33 PM) Manning: also, theres god awful accountability of IP addresses…
(02:44:47 PM) Manning: the network was upgraded, and patched up so many times… and systems would go down, logs would be lost… and when moved or upgraded… hard drives were zeroed
(02:45:12 PM) Manning: its impossible to trace much on these field networks…
(02:46:10 PM) Manning: and who would honestly expect so much information to be exfiltrated from a field network?
(02:46:25 PM) Lamo: I’d be one paranoid boy in your shoes.
(02:47:07 PM) Manning: the CM video came from a server in our domain! and not a single person noticed
(02:47:21 PM) Lamo: CM?
(02:48:17 PM) Manning: Apache Weapons Team video of 12 JUL 07 airstrike on Reuters Journos… some sketchy but fairly normal street-folk… and civilians
(02:48:52 PM) Lamo: How long between the leak and the publication?
(02:49:18 PM) Manning: some time in february
(02:49:25 PM) Manning: it was uploaded
(02:50:04 PM) Lamo: uploaded where? how would i transmit something if i had similarly damning data
(02:51:49 PM) Manning: uhm… preferably openssl the file with aes-256… then use sftp at prearranged drop ip addresses
(02:52:08 PM) Manning: keeping the key separate… and uploading via a different means
(02:52:31 PM) Lamo: so i myself would be SOL w/o a way to prearrange
(02:54:33 PM) Manning: not necessarily… the HTTPS submission should suffice legally… though i’d use tor on top of it…
(02:54:43 PM) Manning: but you’re data is going to be watched
(02:54:44 PM) Manning: *your
(02:54:49 PM) Manning: by someone, more than likely
(02:54:53 PM) Lamo: submission where?
(02:55:07 PM) Manning: wl.org submission system
(02:55:23 PM) Lamo: in the massive queue?
(02:55:54 PM) Manning: lol, yeah, it IS pretty massive…
(02:55:56 PM) Manning: buried
(02:56:04 PM) Manning: i see what you mean
(02:56:35 PM) Manning: long term sources do get preference… i can see where the “unfairness” factor comes in
(02:56:53 PM) Lamo: how does that preference work?
(02:57:47 PM) Manning: veracity… the material is easy to verify…
(02:58:27 PM) Manning: because they know a little bit more about the source than a purely anonymous one
(02:59:04 PM) Manning: and confirmation publicly from earlier material, would make them more likely to publish… i guess…
(02:59:16 PM) Manning: im not saying they do… but i can see how that might develop
(03:00:18 PM) Manning: if two of the largest public relations “coups” have come from a single source… for instance
(03:02:03 PM) Manning: you yeah… purely *submitting* material is more likely to get overlooked without contacting them by other means and saying hey, check your submissions for x… Manning described the first time he watched the Iraq video, after finding it in a network directory where an Army JAG officer left it. He speculated that Washington Post writer and book author David Finkel already had a copy of the video when he wrote his book The Good Soldiers, published last year.
(03:07:26 PM) Manning: i recognized the value of some things…
______________________________
(03:07:33 PM) Manning: knew what they meant… dug deeper
(03:07:53 PM) Manning: i watched that video cold, for instance
(03:10:32 PM) Manning: at first glance… it was just a bunch of guys getting shot up by a helicopter… no big deal… about two dozen more where that came from right… but something struck me as odd with the van thing… and also the fact it was being stored in a JAG officer’s directory… so i looked into it… eventually tracked down the date, and then the exact GPS co-ord… and i was like… ok, so thats what happened… cool… then i went to the regular internet… and it was still on my mind… so i typed into goog… the date, and the location… and then i see this http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/13/world ... 3iraq.html
(03:11:07 PM) Manning: i kept that in my mind for weeks… probably a month and a half… before i forwarded it to [Wikileaks]
(03:11:54 PM) Manning: then there was the Finkel book
(03:12:16 PM) Manning: im almost certain he had a copy Manning discussed how common and easy it was for soldiers to bring removable media into their work environment, making it easy for him, or anyone else, to siphon data from classified networks without raising suspicion.
Time Lapse
[Wired chat logs drop back one hour with; context suggests these are not from the May 25 sequence]
(01:52:30 PM) Manning: funny thing is… we transffered so much data on unmarked CDs…
(01:52:42 PM) Manning: everyone did… videos… movies… music
(01:53:05 PM) Manning: all out in the open
(01:53:53 PM) Manning: bringing CDs too and from the networks was/is a common phenomeon
(01:54:14 PM) Lamo: is that how you got the cables out?
(01:54:28 PM) Manning: perhaps
(01:54:42 PM) Manning: i would come in with music on a CD-RW
(01:55:21 PM) Manning: labelled with something like “Lady Gaga”… erase the music… then write a compressed split file
(01:55:46 PM) Manning: no-one suspected a thing
(01:55:48 PM) Manning: =L kind of sad
(01:56:04 PM) Lamo: and odds are, they never will
(01:56:07 PM) Manning: i didnt even have to hide anything
(01:56:36 PM) Lamo: from a professional perspective, i’m curious how the server they were on was insecure
(01:57:19 PM) Manning: you had people working 14 hours a day… every single day… no weekends… no recreation…
(01:57:27 PM) Manning: people stopped caring after 3 weeks
(01:57:44 PM) Lamo: i mean, technically speaking
(01:57:51 PM) Lamo: or was it physical
(01:57:52 PM) Manning: >nod<
(01:58:16 PM) Manning: there was no physical security
(01:58:18 PM) Lamo: it was physical access, wasn’t it
(01:58:20 PM) Lamo: hah
(01:58:33 PM) Manning: it was there, but not really
(01:58:51 PM) Manning: 5 digit cipher lock… but you could knock and the door…
(01:58:55 PM) Manning: *on
(01:59:15 PM) Manning: weapons, but everyone has weapons
(02:00:12 PM) Manning: everyone just sat at their workstations… watching music videos / car chases / buildings exploding… and writing more stuff to CD/DVD… the culture fed opportunities
(02:01:44 PM) Manning: hardest part is arguably internet access… uploading any sensitive data over the open internet is a bad idea… since networks are monitored for any insurgent/terrorist/militia/criminal types
(02:01:52 PM) Lamo: tor?
(02:02:13 PM) Manning: tor + ssl + sftp
(02:02:33 PM) Lamo: *nod*
(02:03:05 PM) Lamo: not quite how i might do it, but good
(02:03:22 PM) Manning: i even asked the NSA guy if he could find any suspicious activity coming out of local networks… he shrugged and said… “its not a priority”
(02:03:53 PM) Manning: went back to watching “Eagle’s Eye”
______________________________
(02:12:23 PM) Manning: so… it was a massive data spillage… facilitated by numerous factors… both physically, technically, and culturally
(02:13:02 PM) Manning:: perfect example of how not to do INFOSEC
(02:14:21 PM) Manning: listened and lip-synced to Lady Gaga’s Telephone while exfiltratrating possibly the largest data spillage in american history
(02:15:03 PM) Manning: pretty simple, and unglamorous
(02:16:37 PM) Manning: *exfiltrating
(02:17:56 PM) Manning: weak servers, weak logging, weak physical security, weak counter-intelligence, inattentive signal analysis… a perfect storm
(02:19:03 PM) Manning: >sigh<
(02:19:19 PM) Manning: sounds pretty bad huh?
(02:20:06 PM) Lamo: kinda
(02:20:25 PM) Manning: :L
(02:20:52 PM) Lamo: i mean, for the .mil
(02:21:08 PM) Manning: well, it SHOULD be better
(02:21:32 PM) Manning: its sad
(02:22:47 PM) Manning: i mean what if i were someone more malicious
(02:23:25 PM) Manning: i could’ve sold to russia or china, and made bank?
(02:23:36 PM) Lamo: why didn’t you?
(02:23:58 PM) Manning: because it’s public data
(02:24:15 PM) Lamo: i mean, the cables
(02:24:46 PM) Manning: it belongs in the public domain
(02:25:15 PM) Manning: information should be free
(02:25:39 PM) Manning: it belongs in the public domain
(02:26:18 PM) Manning: because another state would just take advantage of the information… try and get some edge
(02:26:55 PM) Manning: if its out in the open… it should be a public good
(02:27:04 PM) Manning: *do the
(02:27:23 PM) Manning: rather than some slimy intel collector
(02:29:18 PM) Manning: im crazy like that
______________________________
(03:38:07 PM) Manning: its not much of a pic, but here’s harry ponting http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3161/281 ... 25f27d.jpg the man who’s mission it is to sell the benefits of NCD throughout the State Department, Military, and IC
(03:38:18 PM) Manning: i feel terribly, terribly sorry for the guy
(03:39:17 PM) Manning: im not a bad person, i keep track of everything
(03:39:30 PM) Manning: i watch the whole thing unfold… from a distance
(03:40:07 PM) Manning: i read what everyone says… look at pictures… keep tabs… and feel for them
(03:40:18 PM) Manning: since im basically playing a vital role in their life
(03:40:29 PM) Manning: without ever meeting them
(03:40:53 PM) Manning: i was like that as an intelligence analyst as well
(03:41:09 PM) Lamo: i know the feeling, in a way.
(03:41:44 PM) Manning: most didnt care… but i knew, i was playing a role in the lives of hundreds of people, without them knowing them… but i cared, and kept track of some of the details, make sure everybody was okay
(03:42:07 PM) Manning: them knowing me
(03:43:27 PM) Manning: i dont think of myself as playing “god” or anything, because im not… im just playing my role for the moment… i dont control the way they react
(03:44:15 PM) Manning: there are far more people who do what i do, in state interest, on daily basis, and dont give a fuck
(03:45:01 PM) Manning: thats how i try to separate myself
(03:45:13 PM) Manning: from my (former) colleagues Lamo asked what additional material Manning gave to Julian Assange at Wikileaks.
______________________________
(04:32:05 PM) Manning: oh, the JTF GTMO papers… Assange has those too
(04:32:16 PM) Lamo: Read it.
(04:33:21 PM) Lamo: Anything else interesting on his table, as a former collector of interesting .com info?
(04:33:44 PM) Manning: idk… i only know what i provide him xD
(04:34:14 PM) Lamo: what do you consider the highlights?
(04:35:31 PM) Manning: The Gharani airstrike videos and full report, Iraq war event log, the “Gitmo Papers”, and State Department cable database
(04:35:50 PM) Lamo: Not too shabby.
(04:36:03 PM) Manning: thats just me….
(04:36:26 PM) Manning: idk about the rest… he *hopefully* has more
______________________________
(04:42:16 PM) Manning: im not sure whether i’d be considered a type of “hacker”, “cracker”, “hacktivist”, “leaker” or what…
(04:42:26 PM) Manning: im just me… really
(04:44:21 PM) Manning: starts off like every physics / astro class intro… ever
(04:44:21 PM) Lamo : I’m not here right now
(04:44:45 PM) Manning: albeit without the algebraic proofs
(04:45:20 PM) Lamo: or a spy
(04:45:48 PM) Manning: i couldn’t be a spy…
(04:45:59 PM) Manning: spies dont post things up for the world to see
(04:46:14 PM) Lamo: Why? Wikileaks would be the perfect cover
(04:46:23 PM) Lamo: They post what’s not useful
(04:46:29 PM) Lamo: And keep the rest
______________________________
Wired, 6/10/2010: “[Manning] said that Julian Assange had offered him a position at Wikileaks. But he said, ‘I’m not interested right now. Too much excess baggage.’”
Manning: my family is non-supportive . . . im losing my job . . . losing my career options . . . i dont have much more except for this laptop, some books, and a hell of a story.
Manning: i’m exhausted . . . in desperation to get somewhere in life . . . i joined the army . . . and that’s proven to be a disaster now . . . and now i’m quite possibly on the verge of being the most notorious ‘hacktivist’ or whatever you want to call it . . . its all a big mess i’ve created.
“[Manning] confided in Lamo that he was homeless in 2006 and had drifted from Tulsa to Chicago before landing at his aunt’s house in Potomac.”
Claims made about other things contained in the chat logs, not included in the releases:
Wired, 6/6/2010: “Manning told Lamo that he enlisted in the Army in 2007 and held a Top Secret/SCI clearance, details confirmed by his friends and family members.”
CBC Radio, 6/7/2010: LAMO: “[Manning] also also mentioned to me a top secret operation that the Army for lack of a better word freaked out over when I mentioned it to them. They would not even say it out loud, they wrote it on paper and showed it to somebody else when discussing it….It was when I initially confirmed through a friend of mine who had experience in military counterintelligence and had him virtually blanche — or at least I imagined over the telephone — when I mentioned the operation, that I knew that I had to act.”
New York Times, 6/7/2010: “[Lamo] said that Army investigators were particularly concerned about one sensitive piece of information that Specialist Manning possessed that Mr. Lamo would not discuss in more detail.”
Washingtonian, 6/8/2010: “Lamo declines to elaborate on the nature of any condition or the circumstances behind Manning’s discharge but says that Manning described them …When The Washingtonian asked whether Manning was being discharged under “don’t ask, don’t tell,” Lamo said, “It’s not my place to speak on Mr. Manning’s behalf. In general terms, he was not a supporter of the [DADT] policy, as a number of soldiers are, both straight and gay.” Lamo says that Manning expressed his views on the military’s policy “at least in passing once or twice”… Lamo says that Manning never showed him the cables but that after he mentioned a specific military operation by name, Lamo was afraid he could become implicated in Manning’s alleged leak.”
Wired, 6/10/2010: “He said that Julian Assange had offered him a position at Wikileaks. But he said, ‘I’m not interested right now. Too much excess baggage.’”
Risky Business, 6/10/2010: LAMO: “There were issues other than the cables that I can’t get into that were very specific and did have significant ramifications in terms of our safety, both economic and national.”
CNET, 6/12/2010: “Manning told Lamo that he leaked the code name and details of a government investigation being conducted regarding the attacks on Google, Lamo said.”
AOL, 7/21/2010: “Their [Army counterintelligence's] immediate response when I related the code name for one of the operations was ‘Never say those words again,’ ” Lamo told me. “Literally, ‘Forget you ever heard those words.’ And when I met with two federal agents to discuss them, they had me write it down on a piece of paper rather than say it aloud.”
CNN.com, 7/29/2010: “As far as I know, he conducted the database himself but got technical assistance from another source,” Lamo said. “[Manning] was aware of one other person in military engaged in accessing databases without authorization.”
CNN.com, 7/30/2010: “[Lamo] also said that the logs contained personal information that he does not want exposed. And that there’s information that he has that no one has seen, that could compromise National Security.
Boston Globe, 8/1/2010: “Adrian Lamo, a former computer hacker who traded instant messages with Manning and later turned him in to authorities, said he knew of five people whom Army officials have interviewed over the past few months in the Boston area…Lamo said he doubts Manning had the technical savvy to copy all the data on his own. He thinks Manning received help from hackers in the area who provided him with encryption software to send the classified information to WikiLeaks, and who helped him ensure those leaks were featured prominently on the website….Lamo said he thinks the group in Boston provided Manning with software that allowed him to download thousands of documents without alerting network monitors at the Defense Department. He added that Manning had one of his associates in Boston physically provide WikiLeaks with documents he downloaded on CDs.”
CNN.com, 8/4/2010: “Lamo confirmed he told Manning the soldier’s online conversations could be protected under the California shield law because it could be seen as a conversation with a journalist. Lamo says he does consider himself a journalist and that he made the offer in good faith.”
BBC News, 8/6/2010: “I was a private citizen in a private capacity – there was no source, journalist relationship,” [Lamo] told BBC News. “I did tell him that I worked as a journalist. I would have been happy to write about him myself, but we just decided that it would be too unethical.”
New York Times, 12/16/2010: “Private Manning is said to claim that he had been directly communicating with Mr. Assange using an encrypted Internet conferencing service as the soldier was downloading government files. Private Manning is also said to have claimed that Mr. Assange gave him access to a dedicated server for uploading some of them to WikiLeaks. Adrian Lamo, an ex-hacker in whom Private Manning confided and who eventually turned him in, said Private Manning detailed those interactions in instant-message conversations with him. He said the special server’s purpose was to allow Private Manning’s submissions to “be bumped to the top of the queue for review.” By Mr. Lamo’s account, Private Manning bragged about this “as evidence of his status as the high-profile source for WikiLeaks….Wired magazine has published excerpts from logs of online chats between Mr. Lamo and Private Manning. But the sections in which Private Manning is said to detail contacts with Mr. Assange are not among them. Mr. Lamo described them from memory in an interview with The Times, but he said he could not provide the full chat transcript because the F.B.I. had taken his hard drive, on which it was saved.”
CNN August 01, 2010 MIT students helped WikiLeaks suspect, hacker says
Adrian Lamo, the former computer hacker who tipped off federal authorities to WikiLeaks suspect Bradley Manning, says two men in the Boston area have told Lamo in phone conversations that they assisted Manning.
Lamo said both men attend the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, but he refused to identify them because, he said, at least one of them has threatened him. One of these men allegedly told Lamo they gave encryption software to Manning and taught the Army private how to use it, Lamo said.
...
Lamo claimed both men are working for WikiLeaks. Also, both men are Facebook friends with Lamo and Manning, and at least one continues to post Facebook messages on Lamo's wall, the former hacker said.
Asked for comment about Lamo's allegation that men working for WikiLeaks assisted Manning, WikiLeaks responded in an e-mail: "As a matter of policy, we do not discuss any matters to do with allegations relating to the identity of sources."
The New York Times reported Saturday that Army investigators looking into the document leak have expanded their inquiry to include friends and associates who may have helped Manning. Specifically, the Times spoke to two civilians interviewed in recent weeks by the Army's criminal division, who said that investigators apparently believed that the friends, who include students from MIT and Boston University, might have connections to WikiLeaks. The civilians, who the Times did not name, told the newspaper they had no connection to WikiLeaks.
The Boston Globe interviewed a recent MIT graduate who it said acknowledged Saturday that he met Manning in January and exchanged as many as 10 e-mails with him about security issues. But the individual "adamantly" denied any role in the document leak, the Globe reported. The Globe also reported that this MIT graduate, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said he was interviewed several months ago by Army investigators to find out whether he or "others in the local computer hacker community" helped Manning.
A spokeswoman for MIT, Patti Richards, told CNN: "We are monitoring the situation closely, but are not commenting at this time."
CNN has previously reported that the FBI is assisting the Defense Department in the WikiLeaks investigation of Manning. One FBI official told CNN the bureau is involved in the investigation of potential civilian co-conspirators who may have played a role in the leaking of the classified material.
Attempts to reach an attorney for Manning have so far been unsuccessful.
by JackRiddler » Wed Dec 29, 2010 10:26 pm
What there are is there are many hundreds of root servers at over 130 physical locations in many different countries. There are twelve organisations responsible for the overall coordination of the management of these servers.
There is a technical design limitation that means thirteen is a practical maximum to the number of named authorities in the delegation data for the root zone. These named authorities are listed alphabetically, from a.root-servers.net through m.root-servers.net. Each has associated with it an IP address (and shortly some will have more than one as IPv6 is further rolled out).
Another thing you may hear is that some of these root servers are just copies, whilst others are the “real” name servers. The reality is that every single root server is a copy, and none of them are more special than the others. In fact, the true master server from which the copies are made is not one of the public root servers.
Joseph Friedman 11.19.07 at 6:29 pm
John,
David mentioned above that these “hidden master” servers are still administered by VeriSign (who administers the “A” root as well.)
So other than this change of distribution from the “A” root to the hidden master servers being of a technical nature, VeriSign still physically “controls” (for lack of a better word) the distribution of this master data, although in theory I assume IANA determines its contents.
Is this a fair analysis?
Joseph Friedman 11.19.07 at 7:21 pm
One other point worth understanding is why is VeriSign administering (as per David above) these hidden master servers as opposed to them being administered by IANA directly?
Is this service included in VeriSign’s .com/.net registry contract with ICANN? And if so, why.
Kim Davies 11.20.07 at 9:56 am
VeriSign’s role in the root publication process is dictated by a cooperative agreement between VeriSign and the US Department of Commerce. It is documented at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/nsi.htm
by Plutonia » Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:52 am
They look fishy to my eye - timing is off and Lamo seems so uncaring, disinterested and yet also digging for something that it's hard to imagine anyone confiding anything of interest to him.JackRiddler wrote:.
We'll have to take a good look at the chat logs sometime soon. And what's with Lamo claiming there's Manning helpers?!
Yeah. We need a pro to help us make sense of this, but I found it curious that the hacker doc stated the "13 servers" under US control as fact. Esp since it appears that the film was delivering a message to hackers- that of Patriotism and Doing Good and working for Team America. Or else.But for now: the ICANN blog explaining that there are not 13 root servers.
2010:
December 24:
* Manning releases a holiday message through his attorney, David Coombs
December 23:
* David House writes at FDL: Bradley Manning Speaks About His Conditions
* Dr. Jeffrey Kaye: Bradley Manning & the Torture That Is Solitary Confinement
* UN says it will investigate Manning’s treatment
* David House appears on MSNBC talking about Manning’s Detention
December 22:
* Julian Assange tells Cenk Uygur that Bradley Manning is a “political prisoner”
December 19
* David House visits Manning at Quantico brig
December 18
* Manning’s attorney, David Coombs, writes a blogpost describing Manning’s conditions in the Quantico brig
* The Independent reports that Manning is being offered a deal to roll on Julian Assange
* David House visits Manning at Quantico brig
December 17
* US military challenges allegations about Manning’s detention conditions
* Daily Beast interviews Manning’s attorney, David Coombs, who backs up Glenn Greenwald’s reporting on Manning’s conditions
* Guardian article on Manning’s deteriorating mental state, including interview with David House
December 16
* Glenn Greenwald writes that the government is using techniques accused of being torture on Bradley Manning to get him to flip on Julian Assange
* Charlie Savage of the New York Times uses Adrian Lamo as the sole source for an extremely dubious story on how Manning supposedly gave the cables to Wikileaks. Contra what he told CNN on July 30, Lamo says he doesn’t have chat logs because his hard drive was “taken” by the FBI.
December 15
* Glenn Greenwald breaks the news about the harsh conditions of Bradley Manning’s detention
December 11
* David House visits Manning at Quantico brig
November 9
* Manning’s friend and supporter David House’s computer seized by customs’ agents and FBI
October 22
* Wikileaks publishes Iraq War Diaries.
October 14
* Assange scheduled for interview in Sweden he does not attend.
Late September: Assange leaves Sweden.
August 21
* Sweden withdraws rape charges.
August 20:
* Ms A and Ms W go to the police; news of their accusations leaked to the press.
* Assange leaves Ms A’s apartment.
August 16
* Assange meets up with Ms W again, they have consensual sex followed, the next morning, by allegedly non-consensual sex.
August 14
* Assange’s talk in Stockholm. He goes to a movie with Ms W.
August 13
* Ms A returns to Stockholm earlier than planned. That night she and Assange have consensual sex, though the condom breaks.
August 11
* Assange arrives in Stockholm, stays at Ms A’s apartment.
August 2
* Lamo now tells Wired he did not receive classified documents from Manning, and Uber was mistaken.
August 1
* Lamo confirms Chet Uber’s initial version of events to Computerworld magazine, in which he says Lamo received classified documents from Manning, and called him about it in “early June.”
* Lamo refuses to tell Wired whether he received classified documents from Manning or not.
* Uber tells Wired he first spoke with Lamo “one or two days before Lamo had his first face-to-face meeting with federal agents, which was on May 25.”
July 30
* Lamo tells CNN’s Ashley Fanz that he knew of one person in the military who had helped Bradley Manning but wouldn’t elaborate. Says he no longer has chat transcripts because he “gave” his hard drive to the FBI.
July 25
* Wikileaks publishes Afghan War diaries.
July 6
* US military announces it is pressing criminal charges against Manning for allegedly transferring classified data onto his personal computer and adding unauthorized software to a classified computer system.
June 28
* Lamo issues statement hoping that Manning gets a plea deal and accusing Assange of exposing his role in the Manning arrest.
June 19
* Boing-Boing publishes an allegedly more complete version of the alleged Lamo/Manning chats
June 18
* Poulsen tells Glenn Greenwald that he published all of the chats that Lamo gave him, with the exception of “Manning discussing personal matters that aren’t clearly related to his arrest, or apparently sensitive government information that I’m not throwing up without vetting first.”
* Greenwald compares Wired’s published chats with the Washington Post’s, and finds there are things that are neither “personal matters” nor “sensitive government information,” which Wired nonetheless withheld.
June 17
* Glenn Greenwald interviews Lamo, who says he informed Manning he was an ordained minister who would treat Manning’s conversations as a confession, which would compel Lamo by law to keep them confidential
June 14
* Using their Twitter account, Wikileaks directs their followers to the Boing-Boing comment alleging Lamo and Poulsen were working together with the FBI “in order to gain Manning’s trust and mislead him into confessing.”
June 13
* Comment appears in Xeni Jardin Boing Boing article, alleging that Poulsen and Lamo “worked their target, Bradley Manning, for days — in co-operation with the FBI and US Army CID,” classic “COINTELPRO tactics.”
* “The only reason to even think that PFC Manning was ‘risking lives’ is the unconfirmed innuendo made public by Adrian Lamo who has every reason in the world to justify the breach of trust he committed by willfully initiating a clandestine interrogation of PFC Manning,” says the comment.
June 11
* Wikileaks commissions lawyers to defend Manning
* Assange allegedly sends and email to Lamo requesting copies of the chats to aide in Manning’s defense. Lamo refuses, telling Poulsen that Manning’s attorney “can get them by discovery like everyone else.”
June 10
* Wired Magazine posts the heavily redacted chats provided to them by Adrian Lamo
* Washington Post’s Ellen Nakashima also publishes redacted version of the chats
June 9
* Lamo informs John Cook of Yahoo News he told Manning he was a journalist and offered to speak to him as a reporter, which would grant him protection under the shield law, and that Manning refused
* Yahoo asks Lamo to provide that portion of their chats; Lamo says he will have to check with his lawyer
June 7
* Julian Assange, on Twitter, casts doubt on the credibility of the Wired article: “Adrian Lamo & Kevin Poulson are notorious felons, informers & manipulators. Journalists should take care.”
* Lamo tweets: “I was not acting as a journalist.”
* Lamo issues a press release, saying he will respond by June 8 to “allegations that he was instrumental in the arrest of PFC Manning”
* Washington Post denies they sat on Wikileaks video, but David Finkel evasively says he “was on book leave” from the paper when the Manning transcripts allege he acquired it
June 6
* Poulsen and Kim Zetter of Wired Magazine report the arrest of Manning
* They also report that a friend of Manning’s, Tyler Watkins, says Manning told him he had gotten his hands on sensitive information and was considering leaking it
June 1
* Lamo lifts embargo on chat logs, per Poulsen
May 29
* Manning arrested, according to his Charging Documents. He detained at Camp Arifjan in Kuwait.
May 27
* Poulsen meets with Lamo in Sacramento for several hours. Alleges Lamo tells him for the first time the details of his chats with Manning, and he learns Manning’s name.
* Poulsen says he leaves Lamo at 3pm with the chats on a thumbnail drive
* At 4pm, Lamo says he met with FBI for the second time and FBI told him Manning was arrested the previous day in Iraq
* Manning’s Charging Documents, however, say Manning’s alleged activities continued until “on or about 27 May 2010.
May 26
* Poulsen asks Lamo for the chat logs
* Lamo agrees to provide them if Poulsen will drive to Sacramento and pick them up, provided he embargoes them until Lamo grants permission
* Former Army counterintelligence agent Timothy Webster says Lamo called him to ask a hypothetical question about Manning, and that this was the first contact Lamo had in reporting Manning. Lamo confirms this account to AP.
* Manning is arrested in Iraq, per Lamo and Wired.
* Lamo later tells CNET, “I and the FBI wanted to continue feeding him disinformation,” but the criminal investigation unit of the Army had other plans.
May 25
* Lamo tells Wired he met with FBI for the first time, at a Starbucks near his house in Carmichael, California.
* Chet Uber says Lamo called him during the meeting, and then took agents back to his house to show them the classified documents.
* Lamo says he called Poulsen after the meeting and told him the details of what happened.
May 24
* Poulsen claims Lamo tells him for the first time of his chats with Manning, after Lamo had already scheduled his first meeting with the FBI the next day
May 23 or 24
* “Security pro” Chet Uber gets a phone call from Lamo, who says he has “received classified documents from a U.S. Army intelligence analyst named Bradley Manning and wanted advice about what to do.”
* Uber puts him in touch with the former DOJ head of computer crimes, Mark Rasch. Uber suggests Lamo told him him about having received emails–but when Uber refers Lamo to Rasch, he describes ongoing AIM chats.
May 23
* Lamo begins “cooperating with federal agents,” he tells AOL, after he “passed on what he knew to his ex, who happened to work for Army counterintelligence.”
May 21
* First chats begin between Lamo and Manning, according to Wired.
* Lamo tells Greenwald he lost the PGP key and never decripted emails from Manning, but sent him an invitation to chat over AIM anyway and the two began their alleged exchanges
* Kevin Poulsen’s Wired Magazine article appears about Adrian Lamo’s involuntary psychiatric hold
* Lamo tweets that people should donate to Wikileaks
* Bradley Manning contacts Adrian Lamo on AIM “out of the blue,” Lamo tells Yahoo News. He tells Glenn Greenwald Manning first contacted him via encrypted email.
May 12
* Adrian Lamo photographed at his parent’s house for use in upcoming Wired story by Kevin Poulsen
May 7
* Adrian Lamo discharged from mental hospital
May
* Manning demoted after an assault according to Army spokesman, who says Manning was not facing early discharge. This contradicts what Manning ostensibly said to Lamo in chat logs
April 28
* Adrian Lamo’s backpack with his antidepressants is stolen. He calls the police, who have him involuntarily committed to a mental facility under state law allowing “the temporary forced hospitalization of those judged dangerous or unable to care for themselves.”
April 10
* Wikileaks publishes Collateral Murder, video of helicopter killing Reuters journalists, which Manning purportedly discusses in chats with Lamo.
March 25
* Assange tweets about being tailed in Iceland.
March 22
* Wikileaks volunteer detained and questioned about Assange.
March 18
* Two people carrying diplomatic passports follow Assange from Iceland to Norway.
March 15
* Wikileaks publishes March 18, 2008 NGIC document analyzing the threat Wikileaks posed to the Army.
February 18
* Wilikeaks publishes Rejkjavik cable dated January 13, 2010. According to Manning, after the leak, he tracked the Northern Europe Diplomatic Security Team tailing Assange in Sweden.
February:
* Manning gave Wikileaks the video of the 2007 Army helicoper attack on Iraqi insurgents, according to Adrian Lamo in the Washington Post
2008:
* U.S. Army Counterintelligence Center prepares a classified report placing WikiLeaks on “the list of the enemies threatening the security of the United States.” That Report discussed ways to destroy WikiLeaks’ reputation and efficacy, and emphasized creating the impression that leaking to it is unsafe.
October:
* Manning enters the Army as a private
by JackRiddler » Thu Dec 30, 2010 2:28 am
by Joe Hillshoist » Thu Dec 30, 2010 2:37 am
The psy-op debate has also obscured more interesting and complicated questions about the pros and cons of the Wikileaks model and philosophy; the internal deliberations and conflicts at the organization; the consequences of entanglements with the corporate media, including organs that are in contact with the USG while redacting cables; and the extent to which Wikileaks (or other groups that follow the model) is used, has been used, or will be used to pass on leaks strategically planted by intel services and other truly unsavory characters.
by Plutonia » Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:11 am
*snip*
It comes down to this: is there anything Wired can say about the logs that helps others verify Lamo's increasingly erratic recollections of them, without compromising its journalistic duty to protect sources and subjects? Though Greenwald's aggressive style alienated many, few today seem entirely happy with Wired's given answer, which was "No."
But why is this? One reason is because Adrian Lamo keeps getting fresh press attention by describing what's in the chat logs, but in a way that contradicts established facts or seems otherwise inconsistent or shifty. Wired may be in a position to at least fact-check him without further compromising anyone's privacy, but hasn't.
Another reason is because the story's enormous importance makes every detail seem equally important, even if it isn't. We become fixated on Poulsen's personal associations because its easy to imagine moral hazard spreading like kudzu in the shadow cast by the journalist's shield.
*snip*
*snip*
U.S. prosecutors are said to be building a case against Assange. Such a case would, according to legal analysts, have to prove he actively helped Manning leak classified information rather than act merely as a journalist working with a source.
There is already a vague reference in the already-published part of the logs to a hypothetical secure FTP server. But public statements by Lamo suggested that such a server may in fact have been provided for Manning to upload classified documents, leading to intense debate over the unpublished part of the chat logs.
*snip*
Poulsen's comment appears to suggest Lamo's claims cannot be sourced to the remaining chat logs, only to the published sections or other communications. Along with Hansen's tweet, that leaves no new smoking guns in the unpublished portion or the logs, and little to suggest the degree of collaboration between Pvt. Manning and Wikileaks that prosecutors may need to pursue charges.
*snip*
You see what they just did there? Kevin and Evan both independently verified that in the unpublished portions of the chat logs between Adrian Lamo and Bradly Manning there is no further reference to private FTP servers, and no further discussion about the relationship between Manning and Assange.
That's kind of a big deal, because the published portions of the logs do not support or back up the statements Adrian Lamo seems to have been making. And that would mean that his claims are based solely on opinion, not based on evidence in the chat logs.
IANAL, but this would not appear to be good news for anyone attempting or threatening to prosecute Julian Assange and/or Wikileaks.
What could have been a smoking gun now looks more like an empty water pistol.
by KudZu LoTek » Thu Dec 30, 2010 6:43 am
Plutonia wrote:Rob Beschizza @ Boing Boing lays out the situation with concision and precision:*snip*
It comes down to this: is there anything Wired can say about the logs that helps others verify Lamo's increasingly erratic recollections of them, without compromising its journalistic duty to protect sources and subjects? Though Greenwald's aggressive style alienated many, few today seem entirely happy with Wired's given answer, which was "No."
But why is this? One reason is because Adrian Lamo keeps getting fresh press attention by describing what's in the chat logs, but in a way that contradicts established facts or seems otherwise inconsistent or shifty. Wired may be in a position to at least fact-check him without further compromising anyone's privacy, but hasn't.
Another reason is because the story's enormous importance makes every detail seem equally important, even if it isn't. We become fixated on Poulsen's personal associations because its easy to imagine moral hazard spreading like kudzu in the shadow cast by the journalist's shield.
*snip*
by Nordic » Thu Dec 30, 2010 2:06 pm
Middle Eastern leaders who've become friendly with the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) could face severe retribution from their local populations if WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is killed or jailed for a lengthy amount of time.
That's because, in a recent interview with Arabic news network Al Jazeera, Assange allegedly warned that he had a document which reveals the identities of officials who voluntarily cultivated relationships with the CIA.
"These officials are spies for the US in their countries," he reportedly told the network.
“If I am killed or detained for a long time, there are 2,000 websites ready to publish the remaining files," Assange was quoted as having said. "We have protected these websites through very safe passwords."
He reportedly added that the files also reveal the locations of facilities where US prisoners are sent to be interrogated and tortured.
"If I am forced we could go to the extreme and expose each and every file that we have access to," he allegedly said.
The remarks were first carried outside of Al Jazeera by Qatar newspaper The Peninsula, then picked up stateside by progressive blog FireDogLake, triggering a CBS News report on the comments.
Assange allegedly showed the interviewer the file he was speaking of, but no names were stated publicly. The interview reportedly aired last night.
Video of the conversation -- part two of an earlier talk with Al Jazeera interviewer Ahmed Mansour -- was not available online Thursday morning and The Peninsula appeared to be the source offering most detail about the conversation.
A request for comment or confirmation, sent to Al Jazeera's press office in Qatar, went unanswered at time of publication.
It's not the first time Assange has threatened to release a potentially devastating cache of information onto the Internet.
"Due to recent attacks on our infrastructure, we've decided to make sure everyone can reach our content. As part of this process we're releasing archived copy of all files we ever released," WikiLeaks said in a message posted to its website earlier this month.
WikiLeaks took the precaution of posting a 1.4-gigabyte file on peer-to-peer networks, encrypted with a 256-digit key said to be unbreakable. Titled "insurance.aes256," the file was big enough to contain all the US cables said to be in WikiLeaks's possession, but there's no word on what it may actually contain.
The encryption makes it unreadable until passwords are supplied -- at which time all its contents, or just portions depending on which password is used, would become available to those who downloaded it.
"It's a ticking time bomb with a remote fuse," one expert told NBC News. "So this bomb can go off the second that they release the key and the key will spread around the internet in a matter of seconds."
Appearing on the BBC in early December, Assange's lawyer defended the move.
"They need to protect themselves," Mark Stephens said. "This is what they believe to be a thermo-nuclear device effectively in the electronic age."
With prior reporting by David Edwards
by Bruce Dazzling » Thu Dec 30, 2010 2:17 pm
#
Posted by: diginess78 | 12/29/10 | 10:51 pm |
Wow…previous post must’ve been caught by a filter. In any case, read Greenwald’s response. It handles every one of both of these journalists points with cites.
We have many serious problems in our country, and quite pointedly, our executive branch is running amok. Our Federal Reserve loaned 3.3 Trillion to other countries during the height of the recession, our president is apparently able to get away with whatever he likes with just about no accountability. That’s a bigger problem than just one president, one administration. We have very little accountability in our government. The only people to stand in their way now are sites like Wikileaks, and the only thing we can depend on journalists like Hansen and Poulsen to do is to add to our problems by sitting on evidence.
When all of our journalists are in tight with the government, silenced by, or simply don’t hold government accountable to the truth, we all suffer. Never forget that.
#
Posted by: milford | 12/29/10 | 10:52 pm |
If we grant every one of your other points, will you release all the non-personal pieces of the chat files? Or explain why not?
#
Posted by: liambussell | 12/29/10 | 11:48 pm |
Wired, I posted as a comment over at Greenwald’s site, and I’m also posting one here. I think there are serious concerns about your journalistic integrity, and I believe that you have “dropped the ball” on this one. Apart from the vitriolic tone (which I addressed in my post) a number of Greenwald’s points have some merit.
1) Why did Lamo put himself in the middle of this, then turn around as quickly as possible and drop Manning “in it” and why did you not address this?
2) Why are none of your many mentions of Lamo in the least bit critical or even subject to the least bit of analysis?
3) If you wish to be perceived as a cutting edge news organization, you need to be held to a higher standard than that of your parent company’s other publications, which are clearly “light entertainment” Trying for the fame of being “the people who brought it to you first” needs to be coupled with “and gave you the whole story”
I like your magazine, but I hope you will try harder, this is an important issue, an your coverage has not been stellar thus far.
#
Posted by: Kevin Poulsen | 12/29/10 | 11:59 pm |
I’ve switched the forum to fully moderated, after someone helpfully posted my home address. Regrettably, that means legitimate (and illegitimate) new comments will be subject to delay.
#
Posted by: cookek | 12/30/10 | 1:22 am |
Your article is a red herring. Release the logs.
#
Posted by: includao | 12/30/10 | 3:29 am |
As a long-time Wired reader who has followed Threat Level since it was 27B Stroke 6, I must say that I am extremely disappointed by the behavior of Hansen and Poulsen. Greenwald raises a legitimate point – that Lamo has given contradictory accounts of the chats to various news organizations which are not supported by Wired’s excerpts – and calls on Poulsen to publish the portions of the chat which confirm which (if any) of Lamo’s stories are correct.
.
Instead, Wired unleashes a torrent of logical fallacies designed to distract the reader from Greenwald’s main premise; Lamo’s contradictory statements and Wired’s failure to confirm or deny any of them. I must say that I am quite disappointed with the behavior of Wired’s editors in this case.
.
I am so disappointed that I will start boycotting all Conde Nast properties. I will not read them or forward them on to my friends. Vote with your eyeballs.
#
Posted by: stingray5000 | 12/30/10 | 5:03 am |
Greenwald is compelling even in your rebuttal. Thanks, I don’t even need to read his article.
#
Posted by: 3rdCoastPolitics | 12/30/10 | 7:59 am |
This sad excuse for a retort to Glenn Greenwald’s very simple questions for WIRED re: the majority of Lamo’s chatlogs with Pfc. Brad Manning was a personal disappointment for me. I love GG and I love(d) Wired, I’ve read your magazine since I was a little kid in the late 90s and I will not continue to do so. His material is so much better sourced than yours in this regard. You had a real opportunity to shed light on why you’re refusing to release this information and you squandered it. Your response reeks of journalistic defensiveness and insteads fails to meet Glenn toe-to-toe on anything of substance. I encourage anyone to read Glenn’s 3rd (4th?) takedown of Wired on this matter at Salon entitled “Wired’s refusal to release or comment on the Manning chat log” instead. Maybe give it another chance? Don’t let Kevin Poulsen in on it this time; it’s clear now: he and Lamo have something to hide.
#
Posted by: Trollout | 12/30/10 | 9:03 am |
I find thee supporters of Manning And Assange amazingly consistent in their willingness to promote/publish other people’s data while never exposing their own.
From chat logs and home addresses, from mining web searches and scanning of old photos, they will always try to out someone elses’ data. Yet all of them, including Assange, take offense when info about them is published.
.
/Fuckin’ Hypocrites.
#
Posted by: scmcg | 12/30/10 | 9:45 am |
Agree with diginess78 – every one of your “litany” of errors has been refuted by Greenwald (except Applebaum’s connection with Wikileaks, which appears to have not been generally known).
It must surely be time for you to face the substantive part of his accusation, that you are withholding that which you should not be. If there is personal information in there, take that out, that’s fine. If you don’t have the bandwidth to do it yourself, I am pretty sure that Glenn would be willing to do it for you. Please do this, you are journalists, your job should be to report and disclose at every turn. You are protecting the powerful and hurting the powerless by your actions.
#
Posted by: mn_woods | 12/30/10 | 11:35 am |
Evan and Kevin,
Please just confirm or deny Lamo’s statements against what’s in the logs. I don’t care about Manning’s personal information disclosed in the chats, and I don’t think many other people here care, either. Redact what you have to. We want clarity, considering the timeline of events and the manner in which they occurred (IM vs. encrypted email, Twitter vs. Wired article, before May Wired article posted vs. after, etc.) has been called into question by Greenwald and other journalists, as well as by Lamo himself when he issued conflicting accounts to multiple media outlets, accounts which have been replicated across the globe.
.
I have read Greenwald’s “character attack” post, your joint response, and his subsequent response. I want to remain measured and not pick sides, since it appears both parties are wrestling to throw the opposing party under a bus.
.
The problem here, I believe, is that you (Evan and Kevin) and Greenwald both think your positions are irrefutably correct. Should hubris bow to truth? I think so.
Posted by: robertwaldmann | 12/29/10 | 3:20 am |
Dear Evan Hansen
Your post is entirely based on a false claim of fact. You assert that Greenwald demands that you release the logs ignorning all privacy problems. This claim is false. He proposes releasing the logs, but also describes another option. I quote from Greenwald’s post
” For the last six months, Poulsen has not only steadfastly refused to release any further excerpts, but worse, has *refused to answer questions about what those logs do and do not contain*.”
and later “Whether Manning actually said these things to Lamo could be verified in one minute by “journalist” Kevin Poulsen. He could either say: (1) yes, the chats contain such statements by Manning, and here are the portions where he said these things, or (2) no, the chats contain no such statements by Manning,”
Note that in the quoted passage Greenwald does not ask for anything which is currently private to be revealed. He asks for Poulson to confirm or deny a claim publicly made by Lamos.
Since you are an editor, I assume that you are functionally literate. You must know that your accusations against Greenwald are false. I think that you clearly libeled him.
In any case, if Wired is to make any claim to be any sort of legitimate journalistic enterprise, it must confirm or deny public claims which are either proven or disproven by the evidence in your possession.
This is what Greenwald demanded in spite of your libelous lies about what he wrote.
Also Poulson’s criminal record is absolutely relevant to the case. The reason is that Poulson quotes the man who prosecuted his crimes as a source without acknowleging their previous interaction. Again I quote from Greenwald
” Yet at no point — through today — have Poulsen or Wired ever bothered to disclose that the person who “helped to turn over [Manning] to the FBI and Army intelligence” is (a) the same person who put Poulsen is prison for several years, (b) a regular contributor to Wired and (c) a long-time associate and source for Poulsen. Just on journalistic grounds, this nondisclosure is extraordinary.”
Clearly Rasch is relevant to the story. The interaction of Rasch and Poulson is relevant to the story. Poulson’s criminal record is relevant. You must know this as the man who prosecuted him is (or claims to be) a regular contributor to Wired. Due diligence required you to click the link provided by Greenwald to that public claim.
One falsehood might be forgiven. Given the two blatant lies in this brief post, I think the only honorable course of action for you is to resign from “Wired” and cease to claim to be a journalist.
Sincerely yours,
Robert Waldmann
by Plutonia » Fri Dec 31, 2010 12:56 am
Plutonia wrote:CNN August 01, 2010 MIT students helped WikiLeaks suspect, hacker says
*snip*
CNN has previously reported that the FBI is assisting the Defense Department in the WikiLeaks investigation of Manning. One FBI official told CNN the bureau is involved in the investigation of potential civilian co-conspirators who may have played a role in the leaking of the classified material.
Jesus Xrist!! I mean WTF? He wrote that to show his 007 spy-a-lisciousness?Former New York Times Hacker Calls For New Charges in Wikileaks Case
Ex-hacker Adrian Lamo, whose alleged victims included Microsoft, Yahoo!, Google, MCI Worldcom, SBC, America Online and others, said today that Bradley Manning was "induced and aided" by co-conspirators in what is rapidly becoming USA v. Wikileaks.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
PRLog (Press Release) – Nov 20, 2010 – Ex-hacker Adrian Lamo pressed for new charges against alleged co-conspirators in the Wikileaks case, extending beyond Bradley Manning.
"Known co-conspirators reside in districts competent to arrest, prosecute, and punish these people for their involvement in one of the greatest breaches of trust in the history of our intelligence community," Lamo said, adding ".... it would be irresponsible in the extreme for us to not use all the tools available to us in bringing them to justice.
Leaning forward, almost imperceptibly, Lamo emphasized: "All the tools."
Okay, so now we know he is batshit insane.cont...
Praise was also in order, as Lamo lauded investigatory efforts, highlighting the lawful and brief invitations extended to David Maurice House, inter alia, to explore, during recent detentions, the mandatory safety facilities which most civilians never get to enjoy.
Lamo noted "It is also my sincere desire for Wikileaks founder Julian Assange to face justice for his deplorable actions. The cowardice of certain members of the international community in failing to take the gloves off in dealing with this information pirate and criminal is not yet so far gone that swift, stern action cannot redeem it."
"Much like O.J. Simpson, Assange and his co-conspirators in the U.S. are likely to find that none are truly bulletproof," Lamo concluded. "The truth tends to itself."
Extending an olive branch, Lamo put forth his personal and heartfelt sympathy to Bradley Manning for his extended detention, encouraging Manning to extend all possible cooperation needed to cement his acceptance of responsibility, adding hopes that Manning returns to serving his country honorably by exposing those who would threaten the lives of its citizens through acts of information-sabotage.
Lamo will be available for questions via e-mail. He added his approbation of the hard work of USACIDC, DOS, NSA, and other government agencies in the case.
--
Adrian Lamo is a journalist, public speaker, and former hacker who exposed Bradley Manning's role in the Wikileaks scandal.
# # #
Although Lamo is an officer in Reality Planning LLC, a business intelligence interest, Adrian Lamo is Adrian Lamo's premiere information security concern.
by JackRiddler » Fri Dec 31, 2010 3:26 am
There is one person who could immediately confirm whether Lamo's claims are true: Kevin Poulsen of Wired. Yet he steadfastly refuses to do so. Instead, he is actively concealing the key evidence in this matter -- hiding the truth from the public -- even as that magazine continues to employ him as a senior editor and hold him out as a "journalist." For anyone who cares at all about what actually happened here, it's imperative that as much pressure as possible be applied to Wired to release those chat logs or, at the very least, to release the portions about which Lamo is making public claims or, in the alternative, confirm that they do not exist.
* * * * *
Poulsen's concealment of the key evidence is rendered all the more bizarre by virtue of previously undisclosed facts about Wired's involvement in Manning's arrest. From the start, the strangest aspect of this whole story -- as I detailed back in June and won't repeat here -- has been the notion that one day, out of the blue, Manning suddenly contacted a total stranger over the Internet and, using unsecured chat lines, immediately confessed in detail to crimes that would likely send him to prison for decades.
More strangely still, it wasn't just any total stranger whom Manning contacted, but rather a convicted felon who is notorious in the hacking community for his dishonesty and compulsive self-promotion, and who had just been involuntarily committed to a psychiatric hospital three weeks earlier (notably, Poulsen's May article on Lamo's hospitalization began with this passage: "Last month Adrian Lamo, a man once hunted by the FBI, did something contrary to his nature. He picked up a payphone outside a Northern California supermarket and called the cops" -- of course, a mere three weeks later, Lamo would "call the cops" again, this time to turn informant against Bradley Manning). Add to all of that the central involvement of Lamo's long-time confidant, Poulsen, in exclusively reporting on this story and one has a series of events that are wildly improbable (which doesn't mean it didn't happen that way).
But now there are new facts making all of this stranger still, and it all centers around a man named Mark Rasch. Who is Rasch? He's several things. He's the former chief of the DOJ's Computer Crimes Unit in the 1990s. He's a "regular contributor" to Wired. He's also the General Counsel of "Project Vigilant," the creepy and secretive vigilante group that claims to gather Internet communications and hand them over to the U.S. government. Rasch is also the person who investigated and criminally pursue Kevin Poulsen back in the late 1980s and early 1990s and, thus helping to put him in prison for more than three years (added: see the post here, near the bottom, regarding Poulsen's objections to this sentence and the evidence that supports it). As detailed below, Rasch also has a long and varied history with both Poulsen and, to a lesser extent, Lamo. And -- most significantly of all -- Rasch is the person who put Lamo in touch with federal law authorities in order to inform on Manning:A former top U.S. Justice Department prosecutor helped to turn over an alleged Wikileaks source to the FBI and Army intelligence, CNET has learned.
Mark Rasch, previously the head of the Justice Department's computer crime unit who is now in private practice in the Washington, D.C., area, said during a telephone interview that he identified investigators who would want to know that an U.S. Army intelligence analyst in Kuwait may have handed over sensitive documents to the world's most famous document-leaking Web site. . . .
Lamo contacted Chet Uber, a computer security specialist and the founder of a group called Project Vigilant. Uber then contacted Rasch.
"I got a call from Chet saying Adrian has a guy he's been chatting with online who has access to classified cables," Rasch said. "So I found him people in the intelligence community and law enforcement community he could report it to."
Let's consider what this means based just on these facts. First, for the first several weeks after the story of Manning's arrest, it was Wired that was exclusively reporting on the relevant facts by virtue of Poulsen's close relationship with Lamo. Yet at no point -- through today -- have Poulsen or Wired ever bothered to disclose that the person who "helped to turn over [Manning] to the FBI and Army intelligence" is (a) the same person who (added: helped) put Poulsen is prison for several years, (b) a regular contributor to Wired and (c) a long-time associate and source for Poulsen. Just on journalistic grounds, this nondisclosure is extraordinary (Poulsen even wrote a long article about Uber's role in pressuring Lamo to inform to the Government without once mentioning Rasch). As Poulsen was writing about this Manning story all while working closely with Lamo as he served as FBI informant -- and as Poulsen actively conceals the chat logs -- wouldn't you want to know that the person who played such a key role in Manning's arrest was the same person who investigated and criminally pursued Poulsen and regularly contributes to his magazine?
Then there's the way that these facts make this already-strange story much stranger still. It isn't just that Manning -- when deciding to confess to these crimes over the Internet to a total stranger -- just happened to pick a convicted felon (Lamo) who spent little time in prison given the crimes of which he was convicted. Beyond that, Lamo, at the time Manning contacted him, was working with this group -- Project Vigilant -- whose self-proclaimed mission is to inform federal authorities of crimes taking place over the Internet, and whose general counsel is the former head of the DOJ's Computer Crimes Unit. If that's really what happened, that's some really, really, really bad luck on Manning's part: to randomly choose someone to whom to confess who was not only once under the thumb of DOJ authorities, but who was working at that very moment with a federal-government-connected group and the DOJ's former top computer crimes prosecutor. To describe that as improbable is to understate the case (but again, that doesn't mean it didn't happen: improbable events do sometimes occur).
Beyond all of this, Poulsen has a long history with Rasch even beyond the fact that Rasch criminally investigated him. Poulsen's first job when getting out of prison was with Security Focus, the same entity for which Rasch also regularly wrote. Although it was Poulsen who almost always and exclusively wrote about Lamo's exploits, in 2003, Poulsen was unable to do so because he had been subpoenaed by the DOJ in connection with Lamo's prosecution, and it was thus Rasch who took up the slack to write about Lamo for Security Focus. Moreover, Rasch has been a long-time source for Poulsen going back to 1999 and 2001, including when Poulsen was writing about Lamo, and was also Poulsen's source repeatedly for articles he wrote at Wired. Rasch has also been a regular source for Wired's Kim Zetter, who was Poulsen's co-author on the Manning articles (on November 29, an ABC News story on Manning featured Rasch as an "expert" analyzing the accusations without any disclosure of the key role he played in Manning's arrest).
Back in June, WikiLeaks -- citing this comment at BoingBoing -- suggested that Poulsen was not merely a reporter writing about Lamo's informing on Manning, but was an active participant in helping that to happen and was even himself a government informant. Poulsen vehemently denied that both to me (without my even asking) and in an interview he gave to The Columbia Journalism Review. Part of the problem here was Poulsen's own doing: when he first broke the story about Manning's arrest, he not only failed to disclose the fact that he had been speaking to and meeting with Lamo before Manning's arrest (while Lamo cooperated with the government), but actively misled readers about that fact by including this sentence in his first article: "'I wouldn't have done this if lives weren't in danger,' says Lamo, who discussed the details with Wired.com following Manning’s arrest." In fact, Poulsen had extensively spoken with and even met with Lamo before Manning's arrest.
As I wrote back in June and as is still true, there's no evidence to support that specific "informant" accusation against Poulsen. Poulsen has done good journalism in the past in exposing government wrongdoing (while at Wired, he also worked to locate various sex criminals online who were then prosecuted by a local computer crimes unit).
But what is incontrovertibly true is that a Wired contributer -- who just so happens also to be Poulsen's criminal investigator and long-time source -- played a key role in putting Lamo in contact with government authorities in order to inform on Manning. Poulsen never mentioned any of that, and -- even once Rasch's role was publicly reported -- never once disclosed his multi-faceted relationship to Rasch in all the times he's written about Manning and WikiLeaks. What's also true is that while many convicted hackers had very rigid restrictions placed on them when leaving prison (Kevin Mitnick, for instance, was originally barred from using the Internet entirely), Poulsen not only quickly began writing online as a journalist about the hacker world, but did so at the very same publication -- Security Focus -- that also repeatedly published articles by his criminal investigator, Mark Rasch.
What makes all of this particularly critical is that we still have no real idea how and under what circumstances Manning and Lamo actually began speaking. Lamo repeatedly claimed -- and Poulsen and others repeatedly "reported" -- that those two began speaking when Manning contacted Lamo in a chat. But Lamo told me something much different in the interview I conducted with him in June: that before chatting with him, Manning had sent Lamo several encrypted e-mails which -- Lamo claims -- he was never able to read before turning over to the FBI because he was unable to find his encryption key. Between Lamo's alleged inability to describe these initial e-mails and Poulsen's ongoing refusal to publish the chat logs, the evidence of how Manning and Lamo came to speak and what was said is being actively hidden (and Marcy Wheeler raises several compelling reasons why it seems Lamo was cooperating with government authorities as he spoke to Manning before the time he and Poulsen claim that cooperation began).
* * * * *
When I first wrote back in June about Wired's concealment of these chat logs, the excuses Poulsen gave were quickly proved to be false. Poulsen told me that the only portions of the chats that Wired was concealing were "either Manning discussing personal matters that aren't clearly related to his arrest, or apparently sensitive government information that I'm not throwing up without vetting first." But after that, The Washington Post's Ellen Nakashima quoted from the chat logs and included several parts that (a) Wired had withheld but (b) were not about personal matters or national security secrets; see this analysis here of what was disclosed by the Post, Wired and others. (Nakashima and the Post refuse even to say whether they possess all the chat logs. When I asked Nakashima several months ago, she referred my inquiry to a corporate spokeswoman, who then told me: "We don't discuss the details of our newsgathering." But I focus here on Poulsen because of his central role in these events, his long-standing relationships with the key parties, and the fact that -- unlike the Post, which obviously has nothing to do with journalism -- I actually expect better of Wired).
But even if one back then found Poulsen's rationale persuasive for concealing 75 percent of the chat logs, circumstances have clearly changed. For one, WikiLeaks has now published hundreds of thousands of documents, including almost 2,000 diplomatic cables; thus, at least some of the "sensitive government information" in the chats over which Poulsen was acting as self-anointed Guardian has now presumably been publicly disclosed. More important, Lamo has spent months making all kinds of public claims about what Manning supposedly told him as part of these chats -- claims that are not found in the chat excerpts released by Wired. Those subsequent public statements by Lamo create an obligation for Poulsen either to release the portions of the chats that Lamo is describing or confirm that they do not exist (and thus reveal that his close, long-time "source," Lamo, is lying or significantly misremembering).
Whether by design or effect, Kevin Poulsen and Wired have played a critical role in concealing the truth from the public about the Manning arrest. In doing so, they have actively shielded Poulsen's longtime associate, Adrian Lamo -- as well as government investigators -- from having their claims about Manning's statements scrutinized, and have enabled Lamo to drive much of the reporting of this story by spouting whatever he wants about Manning's statements without any check. This has long ago left the realm of mere journalistic failure and stands as one of the most egregious examples of active truth-hiding by a "journalist" I've ever seen.
by Elvis » Fri Dec 31, 2010 11:10 am
Of course these are all things Lamo might very well ask on his own, but they jumped out to me as just what the authorities might have him ask.(6:07:29 PM) Lamo: What’s your MOS? [Lamo was never in the military, apparently, but this is his first question in the logs]
...
(12:46:17 PM) Adrian: how long have you helped WIkileaks?
...
(1:45:40 PM) Lamo: like what? I’m genuinely curious about details.
...
(7:28:41 AM) Lamo: Is he the other one who pokes around t he network?
...
(8:01:30 AM) Lamo: Does Assange use AIM or other messaging services? I’d like to chat with him one of these days about opsec.
...
(8:02:37 AM) Lamo: How would I get ahold of him?
...
(02:09:24 AM) Lamo: *random* [random, huh?] are you concerned aboutCI/CID looking into your Wiki stuff?
...
(02:13:51 AM) Lamo: Why does your job afford you access?
...
(02:14:36 AM) Lamo: So you have these stored now?
...
(02:16:10 AM) Lamo: So how would you deploy the cables? If at all.
...
(02:18:34 AM) Lamo: what’s your endgame plan, then?
...
(02:38:45 PM) Lamo: What would you do if your role /w Wikileaks seemed in danger of being blown?
...
(02:50:04 PM) Lamo: uploaded where? how would i transmit something if i had similarly damning data
...
(02:52:31 PM) Lamo: so i myself would be SOL w/o a way to prearrange [fishing for a way "in" to WL]
...
(02:56:53 PM) Lamo: how does that preference work?
...
(01:56:36 PM) Lamo: from a professional perspective, i’m curious how the server they were on was insecure [...] i mean, technically speaking
...
(04:46:14 PM) Lamo: Why? Wikileaks would be the perfect cover
(04:46:23 PM) Lamo: They post what’s not useful
(04:46:29 PM) Lamo: And keep the rest
[This seems odd after Lamo said he'd like to work for WL on opsec]
That's an odd auto-reply and sounds like Lamo is worn down---maybe pressured or threatened into cooperating with the feds (and who knows what went on during his involuntary 'mental' confinement).(1:58:31 PM) Adrian Lamo [AUTO-REPLY]: Tired of being tired
As Lamo would well know, and saying this encourages Manning to continue.(12:46:08 PM) Adrian: there are always outs
(12:56:36 PM) Adrian: brb cigarette
by chump » Fri Dec 31, 2010 11:58 am
by JackRiddler » Fri Dec 31, 2010 12:18 pm
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 161 guests
