How Bin Laden Emailed Without Internet: Sneakernet-To-The-Home

from the well,-that's-one-way-to-do-things dept

Thu, May 12th 2011 2:56pm — Mike Masnick

There have been plenty of reports about how the compound where Bin Laden apparently lived for the past few years had no phone or internet connections (and, in fact, that was part of what tipped US intelligence off to who was in there). However, at the same time, it was known that Al Qaeda regularly used email to communicate, leading some to assume that Bin Laden wasn't as involved. However, new reports from the technology seized at the compound apparently show that Bin Laden was a regular emailer, he just used a human courier to act as the "last mile" between his computer and the network in order to avoid detection:

Holed up in his walled compound in northeast Pakistan with no phone or Internet capabilities, bin Laden would type a message on his computer without an Internet connection, then save it using a thumb-sized flash drive. He then passed the flash drive to a trusted courier, who would head for a distant Internet cafe.

At that location, the courier would plug the memory drive into a computer, copy bin Laden's message into an email and send it. Reversing the process, the courier would copy any incoming email to the flash drive and return to the compound, where bin Laden would read his messages offline.

Of course, this also means that the emails were stored, meaning that US officials now have a bunch of email info. What's interesting is that the AP article suggests this means the feds will now issue a ton of National Security Letters to get info on those accounts. What I'm wondering is why use NSLs in this situation, when it shouldn't be difficult at all to get a full warrant from a court? It seems that they would have plenty of info to get a warrant. So why use NSLs?

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: bin laden, email, national security letters

38 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 12 May 2011 @ 3:09pm

Because the government never makes sense.

Why don't they release the Bin-Laden's death photos? The world will come to an end? But then they released the death photos of Saddam Hussein. and guess what? The world didn't come to an end (on top of that a Hussein death video even leaked).

Far be it for the government to make sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- :Lobo Santo (profile), 12 May 2011 @ 3:12pm
  
  Re: Deadly Pictures
  Obviously the gov hasn't had time to produce some good fake photos yet.
  
  I heard a rumor Bin-Laden died in like 2004(?) and they tossed his body off the ship where they executed him... who'd they kill lately then?
  
  /super-sarc!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chosen Reject (profile), 12 May 2011 @ 3:16pm
  
  Re:
  No, in this case I think they are making sense. Here's a situation where they can use NSLs knowing they'll retrieve valuable info. So they use it, get the good stuff, and use that knowledge to stop some terrorist threat. This way, the next time someone questions NSLs, they point to this situation and say that it was a good thing NSLs existed. It doesn't matter that in this case they didn't need NSLs (as that little bit of info will be easily overlooked or be a footnote that few will read). It only matters that they used it and the data they obtained is obviously good for us to have. This way they can show how valuable NSLs are. Makes a lot of sense.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 12 May 2011 @ 3:21pm
    
    Re: Re:
    While that's the most convoluted logic I've seen in about a week or so, I marked it as funny because it's probably true.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Yuliq Mahbaht, 15 May 2011 @ 3:09pm
  
  Re: Anonymous Coward
  You just don't get it do you? America would be a much better place without rednecks and idiots running around thinking that a friggin' photo is going to make all the difference in the world.
  
  Get rid of the ignorant morons like yourself first.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Dan (profile), 12 May 2011 @ 3:12pm

Cooking the numbers
Obviously it's so they can say the NSLs were crucial to catch whatever number of terrorists turn up from this, to use in their argument for why NSLs are necessary to fight terrorism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Christopher (profile), 12 May 2011 @ 7:04pm
  
  Re: Cooking the numbers
  Harsh and suspicious to a fault.... but most likely accurate in this case.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
umb231 (profile), 12 May 2011 @ 3:24pm

Kinda hope I'm wrong, but the cynic in me is saying they're using NSLs so that if they find something they don't want the public to know, it stays under national security lock instead of possibly be open to public scrutiny through FOIA type requests? but I dunno how any of this stuff interacts, so I'm probably way off.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- G Thompson (profile), 13 May 2011 @ 2:11am
  
  Re:
  Exactly what I was thinking..
  
  In fact if a court is given the information about the email accounts a court then has a duty to keep that information on record, even if under seal it is still on file somewhere and might at some later date be either leaked, given out under FOIA or some other legal means. Especially since courts are by definition public entities, and supposedly are not beholden to the other two branches of government.
  
  So if for example, hypothetically of course ;) , one or more of those email accounts were either to ex CIA buddies of OBL or even the Bush family, well..... you get the idea.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 May 2011 @ 3:24pm

Mike seriously, read over the last 3 sentences, and then ask yourself why the hell does it matter? You worry about the dumbest shit ever..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 12 May 2011 @ 3:31pm
  
  Re:
  So fourth amendment principles don't matter then?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 12 May 2011 @ 3:41pm
    
    Re: Re:
    (and BTW, I'm not saying that the requests violated any fourth amendment principles, that's part of the topic of this discussion. I'm merely saying that the discussion is related to the fourth amendment and it's not as unimportant as you may think).
    
    Also, Mike discusses what he finds interesting. He can wonder about things. Some people wonder why the sky is blue. "but it's dumb, why worry about it". What's even dumber is for you to worry about others who worry about things that you find no interest in (ie: because you think they don't matter). Some people may think art is dumb and that artists shouldn't worry about creating art.
    
    Mike posts what he finds interesting and many people come to his blog because they find what he posts to be interesting. If you don't like it, why not visit a blog that worries about things that matter to you. Or start your own blog.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 12 May 2011 @ 3:34pm
  
  Re:
  "You worry about the dumbest shit ever.."
  
  and your worrying about his worrying is any better?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- G Thompson (profile), 13 May 2011 @ 2:13am
  
  Re:
  For some uncanny reason I do not think Mike is worrying about you.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike42 (profile), 12 May 2011 @ 3:28pm

Why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike42 (profile), 12 May 2011 @ 3:29pm

What I'm wondering is why use NSLs in this situation, when it shouldn't be difficult at all to get a full warrant from a court? It seems that they would have plenty of info to get a warrant. So why use NSLs?

That's just what they'd be expecting us to do!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ike, 12 May 2011 @ 3:51pm

NSLs have a gag order built in
I imagine NSLs were used for their builtin gag order. By using NSLs, the targets shouldn't get tipped off that the government is on to them, allowing the government to surveil them in order to identify other members of the terrorist group.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Christopher (profile), 12 May 2011 @ 7:14pm
  
  Re: NSLs have a gag order built in
  That might be part of the reason why they are being used. However, there is a civilian version of a warrant that serves the same purpose.... which makes me wonder by the civilian version is not being used.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
aldestrawk (profile), 12 May 2011 @ 4:06pm

treasure trove?
I know the government is saying they have the biggest collection of terrorist intelligence ever, but I am wondering why Bin Laden wouldn't have encrypted everything with strong encryption. It's conceivable that he was too arrogant to think he would ever be captured or maybe he was too stupid to think of cryptography. However, Al Qaeda leaders did learn not to carry cell phones, so they can't be that stupid. Osama Bin Laden, in particular, knew the U.S. would never stop trying to find him. So, why wouldn't he assume that would happen eventually and prepare for it. I am wondering if the US isn't just claiming a treasure trove to help flush out any other leadership.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 12 May 2011 @ 4:57pm
  
  Re: treasure trove?
  That's exactly what I have been thinking. Especially after his laptop turned up in Afghanistan when he hastily left. He would have to be a real dumbass not to learn from that an start using any form of encryption. Unless he kept his passwords on post-it notes stuck to his monitor. Or unless the feds have a backdoor into most encryption or access to quantum computing to make cracking it a trivial process.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - aldestrawk (profile), 12 May 2011 @ 9:04pm
    
    Re: Re: treasure trove?
    Most, if not all, cryptographers do not think that strong encryption algorithms, like AES, has a backdoor. There may be weaknesses known only to the NSA which gives them an advantage by doing slightly better than a brute force attack on the key. However, no one thinks the NSA can currently decrypt a message encrypted with AES-256, for example. You do have to be pretty careful about what you are doing however. The Verona decrypts of Russian communications from WWII, were made possible by repeating the use of a one-time pad. A one-time pad is unbreakable encryption, but you have to use it properly.
    I would expect the U.S. to "leak" some more "critical details" within the next two weeks. This should be true, whether or not they really have access to a load of unencrypted emails, as they just need to convince Al Qaeda that this is true.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 13 May 2011 @ 8:01am
      
      Re: Re: Re: treasure trove?
      Assuming AES-256 doesn't have a "backdoor," how trivial would it be for OBL to use a freely available program like TrueCrypt? I find it really hard to believe that OBL would have been that arrogant or stupid to not use a nominally secure encryption method on his communications. Maybe I give them too much credit but I find it hard to believe the "treasure trove" is as truly valuable as the feds would have the people believe.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 12 May 2011 @ 5:01pm
  
  Re: treasure trove?
  The U.S. government has been known not to encrypt much of its sensitive data either, they probably consider it an inconvenience. Bin Laden is probably no different.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Christopher (profile), 12 May 2011 @ 7:15pm
    
    Re: Re: treasure trove?
    True..... considering the government didn't encrypt a bunch of stuff and didn't limit a bunch of stuff so that a PRIVATE was able to leak a lot of Top Secret level stuff (though not as much as you would think or was claimed)... I can understand Bin Laden not using encryption.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - aldestrawk (profile), 12 May 2011 @ 8:48pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: treasure trove?
      If you are referring to Private Manning, he did not have access to the Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System (JWICS) which carries top secret information. He had access only to SIPRNet.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- G Thompson (profile), 13 May 2011 @ 2:17am
  
  Re: treasure trove?
  Or OBL created Canary traps throughout the emails...
  
  I'm wondering though if there was a "In Case of Death" package placed somewhere that is about to see the light of day that could seriously embarrass, even more than it already has been, the USG and other 'allied' intelligent services and corporate interests.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
hmm (profile), 12 May 2011 @ 4:09pm

well
in that case they probably got him because Nike has a secret-room where they turn over all sneaker-related information to the CIA/FBI/Foot police....and they have sensors+webcams in every pair "for the customers protection".....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 May 2011 @ 4:14pm

I have a few guesses:
Can't you contest a warrant? A NSL isn't subject to an approval or appeal process.

Guess #2: If you look for a warrant, you are treating the targets as criminals, not militants. That might mean shakey legal ground when they try to kill said militants. (Lookup what Osama's son said about the legality of the raid to see what I mean.)

Guess #3: The information is classified and seeking a warrant would violate that security clearance.

IANAL, though, so please folks, feel free to comment. (Who am I kidding, you would anyway.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 May 2011 @ 4:16pm

What's interesting is that the AP article suggests this means the feds will now issue a ton of National Security Letters to get info on those accounts. What I'm wondering is why use NSLs in this situation, when it shouldn't be difficult at all to get a full warrant from a court? It seems that they would have plenty of info to get a warrant. So why use NSLs?

Because the raid on UBL's compound was not legal?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Christopher (profile), 12 May 2011 @ 7:20pm
  
  Re:
  Actually, considering that Pakistan (a supposed ally) didn't approve the raid, it probably wasn't legal on the face of it.
  
  Necessary, yes. Legal, no. The killing of Osama bin Laden was another thing altogether.... neither legal nor necessary to shoot an UNARMED man, except that some 'secrets' might have come to light that our government might not have liked... perhaps CIA involvement in Al-Qaeda.
  
  Yes, people... it is QUITE possible that the CIA have had people in Al-Qaeda for years.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
johnnyC, 12 May 2011 @ 5:40pm

NSL or Warrant.
Most likely they are using non-US based ISP's so can't the ISP just ignore the NSL or Warrant any way. I mean a US court order has no power outside the United States so why would a NSL be any different especially if it's a Pakistan based ISP.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 May 2011 @ 7:30pm

No one should ask why NSL's are used;
there are several reasons for tracability
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous, 12 May 2011 @ 9:17pm

You really believe the Main Stream Media?
Do any of you people here actually believe these stories about Bin laden? (Nothing against you if you do!) Personally I find it so laughable that I can't even bother to read most of them anymore.

They can't come up with a shred of proof to back up their claims about killing him. It's a huge information war going on. Governments and Corporations are desperate to influence what we think and believe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mike allen (profile), 13 May 2011 @ 12:00am

OK being a Brit what the hell is a NSL in the uk it means
NOTTINGHAMSHIRE SENIOR LEAGUE which is to do with soccer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- aldestrawk (profile), 13 May 2011 @ 12:14am
  
  Re:
  National Security Letter, an administrative subpoena used mainly by the FBI but can also be used by the DOD, CIA, and DHS.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - mike allen (profile), 13 May 2011 @ 11:31am
    
    Re: Re:
    thanks.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stephen, 13 May 2011 @ 8:36am

like my old boss
the sneakernet is alive in america too. my old boss used to have his secretary print his emails, he scrawled a response on them, then she typed up the response and replied to the email.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gene Cavanaugh (profile), 13 May 2011 @ 1:31pm

Why NSLs?
I don't know the answer, but I will point out two things I have learned over the last 80 years:

1. Democracy=checks_and_balances; dictatorship=unilateral action. As George Bush said (and I am NOT sure he was joking!) "a dictatorship is a lot easier".

2. While there is a place for security (and I would love to see a CIVILIAN panel passing on what should or should not be classified!), when secrecy has been in place for a long time, it degenerates into a means to protect the guilty; and eliminating democratic checks and balances is a first step.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]