Rebane's Ruminations
March 2017
S M T W T F S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

George Rebane

Bankable stereotypes:  Government regulators are imperious, hubristic, and unbelievably ignorant in proportion to the power they wield.

Recently friends and colleagues have asked for my takes on the Wikileaks phenomenon, especially as it applies to its release of classified information and data that our government claims will compromise our national security.  The problems such an outlet presents to governments, important personages, and corporations are complex and hard to parse in order to attempt an assessment before even beginning to consider any feasible/practical solutions.

Here I want to focus on the recent release of 8K+ pages of CIA documents detailing the tools and some methods the CIA uses to capture every (written and spoken) communication within the US and those crossing its borders.  Andrew Napolitano has detailed these activities and their legal bases, a process that has been active since 2006.

Before going further it’s important to understand that ‘wiretapping’ involves two major tasks – data collection/storage and monitoring.  The former can and is overwhelmingly automated, the latter is mostly automated but ultimately involves human assessment.  So for our purposes we can presume that our federal government intelligence community has over ten years of collected data on everything from emails, financial transactions, through telephone conversations.

So here is what we know about the latest CIA leaks –

  1. Someone provided Wikileaks with the CIA documents. There is no evidence that Wikileaks has ever used its own employees or agents to obtain documents from their source (legal owner, or legal third party repository).  Wikileaks is the recipient and discretionary disseminator of such documents and/or the info/data contained in them.
  2. The latest CIA document tranche, labeled “Vault 7” by Wikileaks, was either 1) hacked remotely or 2) obtained by someone on the ‘inside’. Each means has its up and downsides.  The CIA is acting as if it was an inside job. (more here)
  3. We do know the CIA documents from Vault 7 Wikileaks has made available to the world – the ‘public tranche’. We don’t know whether/if Wikileaks has provided more information in confidence to third parties from the unknown ‘comprehensive tranche’ (more here).  Wikileaks claims that the comprehensive tranche is almost 100 times bigger than the public tranche and contains yet to be released computer codes related to the CIA hacking and monitoring tools named in the public tranche.
  4. We must presume that ALL the world’s bad actors have downloaded and are studying at least the public tranche of CIA documents – it would be imprudent to think and act otherwise. All of these governments and agencies have various capabilities to obtain, monitor, and place information on the internet.
  5. We presume the verity of the public tranche since the CIA and feds 1) have not discredited any of the released contents, and 2) continue to behave as if the release has done serious damage to their capability to surreptitiously capture and monitor the above described communications.

In assessing the role of Mr Assange and Wikileaks in this latest release, and such previous releases, it is important to distinguish between the party or parties that purloined the Vault 7 materials and those, mainly Wikileaks, who made possible their public dispersal.  From my perch as a patriotic American, the criminals who originally stole the information and data are traitors, and their crime has definitely compromised to a TBD level our national security.  They should be pursued, caught, and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

To judge Wikileaks role we must first ask ourselves – As American citizens are we entitled to know how competent our intelligence agencies are in keeping the nation’s secrets when such mishandled secrets are already in the hands and known by our enemies, or should we continue in a state of blissful ignorance, trusting in the presumed yet non-existent capabilities of our intelligence agencies to secure their classified materials?  In short, since our government agencies derive their power from and act under the watchful eye of our elected representatives, should American voters be the only ones affected (aided/punished) by such treasonous acts and incompetencies who are then to remain deprived of that information?

My answers to these questions are a resounding YES and NO respectively.

Given the above understanding and analysis, I view the activities of Assange and Wikileaks as those of an amoral conduit and welcome messenger informing me about important things which bear on my wellbeing, and which are already known to my enemies.  Therefore I take all these self-righteous huffings and puffings by the lamestream media and our government as nothing but an attempted smoke screen to hide their own failures to correctly discharge the commissions under which they were formed and operate.  Shooting the messenger is the last refuge of the incompetent.

Posted in , , ,

6 responses to “The Wikileaks Conundrum Resolved”

  1. Russ Avatar
    Russ

    George,
    I concur with your analysis and conclusions. I also think it was an inside job and that the DNC and John Podesta email hacks were also an inside job. One of my questions is when did the Vault 7 data arrive at Wikileaks? I suspect it was during the Obama administration and has been in Vault 7 maturing for a while. My next question is who set the release date for the information, was it determined by Wiki or was it set by the provider of the information? If it was the provider who set the release date, then one could consider the idea it was an inside-inside job. Another effort by Obama’s fellow travelers to level the playing field, reducing America’s intelligent collection capability to that of all third-world countries. America’s ability to collect and process intelligence is one of the features that made our military exceptional. Given the progressive desire to reduce our military capacity would it be reasonable to consider reducing our intelligence collection capacity a progressive goal? I would be looking for inside-insider.

    Like

  2. George Rebane Avatar

    Russ 1243pm – All that you say is plausible. My only question is setting the release date for Vault 7 contents. Why would Wikileaks agree to have someone else, e.g. the Vault 7 source, set the dates as to what gets released when? One answer could be that the source gave the materials on the stipulated condition, ‘you release it when I tell you, or 1) you’ll get no more from me, and/or 2) I can find alternative global distributors for the stuff. There’s also the likely contingency that the source has only described the contents of Vault 7 to Assange and transmitted only the first tranche of it to Wikileaks to make sure Assange plays ball. Given that, later installments will be forthcoming.

    Like

  3. Gary Smith Avatar

    The most puzzling part to me is the fact that our spy agencies cannot do anything about Wikileaks. The CIA can’t find out who the players besides Julian Assange are? Where they are storing this information? This has been going on for several years now unchecked. It gives me little confidence that our billions of dollars we spend on the intelligence community is money well spent. We can look at the failures of WMD in Iraq to Wikileaks, 9/11, the list goes on.

    Like

  4. ScenesFromTheApocalypse Avatar
    ScenesFromTheApocalypse

    re: GS @ 2:11PM
    “The most puzzling part to me is the fact that our spy agencies cannot do anything about Wikileaks.”
    Why would you think that there is a monolithic ‘our spy agency’? Without any hard evidence, my own working model is that what you are seeing is a civil war within and between the various pieces of the intelligence community.
    I do take your point on the failures of intelligence, although without a lot of hard data it’s difficult to say how inaccurate it is. lol, it wouldn’t surprise me if you’d get better civilian COMINT by just throwing a billion dollars at Google and having them scrape together a daily report, although the ability to predict the future might be just as shitty. As I opined before, I think this country will rue the day that it spent so much lucre on compromising instead of hardening computer systems.
    Quote of the day:
    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/600×315/e1/82/57/e18257b41390d7d2765fc52abb963dc0.jpg

    Like

  5. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Mr. Gary Smith @ 2:11pm.
    This former CIA head honcho has an opinion about the leaks. Makes sense to me after finding out what they are NOT teaching kids in school nowadays….like America history, civic duty, and America is not the Great Satan….stuff like that.
    https://www.infowars.com/ex-cia-chief-hayden-blames-millennials-for-vault-7-leak/

    Like

  6. ScenesFromTheApocalypse Avatar
    ScenesFromTheApocalypse

    “our spy agencies cannot do anything about Wikileaks”
    Then there is the issue of what ‘do’ might mean.
    Assange is a foreign national who is living in yet another foreign country’s embassy. The data is stored worldwide.
    Does ‘do’ imply the use of a scoped rifle and a US intelligence agency takeover of the world’s web hosting and data storage?
    Realistically, especially considering the thousands of contractors with access to these kinds of files, the people you might actually want to protect yourself from already knew all about it. The Prime Directive of US government security practice appears to consist more of keeping secrets from the US public, not foreign intelligence agencies. The second line of defense is a thoroughly politicized MSM.

    Like

Leave a comment