Stuxnet Leaks Came From Administration Itself
from the I-am-Jack's-utter-lack-of-surprise dept
It was pointed out towards the end of June that the Justice Department was investigating the "leaks" that led to David E. Sanger's book on the Stuxnet virus, along with a widely-read New York Times article that preceded it. At that time, indications were given that the target of the investigations was the former second-highest ranking member of the military, General James Cartwright.
Mike pointed out then that it would be interesting to see how Cartwright was treated for his leaks as compared to Bradley Manning. It looks like there will be plenty of "interesting" comparisons to be made in the near future, as a Washington Times article by Rowan Scarborough has discovered (with the help of documents acquired by Freedom Watch) that the trail of Stuxnet leaks leads directly back to the White House itself.
The Obama administration provided a New York Times reporter exclusive access to a range of high-level national security officials for a book that divulged highly classified information on a U.S. cyberwar on Iran’s nuclear program, internal State Department emails show.The theory that the administration is very amenable to leaks that make the administration look good is again confirmed here.
The information in the 2012 book by chief Washington correspondent David E. Sanger has been the subject of a yearlong Justice Department criminal investigation: The FBI is hunting for those who leaked details to Mr. Sanger about a U.S.-Israeli covert cyberoperation to infect Iran’s nuclear facilities with a debilitating computer worm known as Stuxnet.
The scores of State Department emails from the fall of 2011 to the spring of 2012 do not reveal which officials told Mr. Sanger, but they do show an atmosphere of cooperation within the administration for a book generally favorable toward, but not uncritical of, President Obama.While many writers have been granted insider access to the White House over the years, rarely does their level of access trigger an investigation, as Sanger's did. General Cartwright was "targeted," but conveniently avoided any further action (at least to this point) from the Justice Department by retiring. Thomas Donlion, then National Security Advisor, was called out as being the "hero" and "commenter of record" in Thomas Ricks' review of Sanger's book. Good call by Ricks. Donlion resigned in June and left his post in July.
The Times article also details accusations made by Republican critics that the administration had broken laws by divulging classified information to Sanger. More damning were the accusations that these leaks were done solely to pump up Obama's reputation during the 2012 election run.
The evidence released so far paints a pretty damning portrait of an administration prone to convenient transparency. Whistleblowing and leaks are fine as long as the administration approves of the message. What will be telling is how these leakers are punished for coughing up classified information directly related to national security.
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: administration, barack obama, david sanger, james cartwright, leaks, stuxnet, white house
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Or, perhaps more directly...
ie: "The law is not applied evenly."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Or, perhaps more directly...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They need to rescue their position, and their complicity in this will damage their business. They need to realize this isn't going away and they'd better choose the constitutional side because the lying toerags are not winning.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
and I doubt Sergey Brin wants to be kicked in the googleads
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Which prompts the cynical question: how hostile are they in reality?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If you directly contradict their orders and oh, I don't know, release information on how Tony Blair had info on Iraq completely pulled out of his ass, then they cut your wrists, let you bleed to death and then dump your corpse in a field (all on Blair's direct order of course).
One day David Kelly will get a REAL inquest that wasn't controlled behind the scenes by whitehall trying desperately to cover up a vicious, evil crime against ANOTHER whistleblower.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Aiding the enemy
Treason
Terrorism
I expect to see these charges leveled against whoever did the leaks and everyone in the room when they were discussed and approved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stuxnet Leak
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Stuxnet Leak
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Trespassing is illegal. But when I let you on my property, it's not trespassing.
Leaking state secrets is illegal. But when the White House gives you security access, it's not leaking.
The problem I see here is that the White House wanted Stuxnet to look like--and be treated in the media like--a leak, when it wasn't actually a leak. But it's not a leak, so no, it won't actually be prosecuted as a leak. (Duh.) It is however certainly deplorable and speaks to some hypocrisy from the White House with respect to how they treat actual leakers, and certainly reflects poorly on the media for playing along, and more so, for they were playing along AGAINST US.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well
Further tech blogs had been talking about stuxnet for a year before and it had been dissected by antivirus companies already. And Iran had already removed it from their systems.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cyber Pearl Harbour
What part of the stuxnet attack on a sovereign nation made the US-Israel look good?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cyber Pearl Harbour
You could argue several sides about doing this to Iran; but then BRAGGING about it, just screams criminal stupidity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Cyber Pearl Harbour
I feel a hint of hypocrisy when the US officials talk about Chinese hackers attacking the US infrastructure, when the only documented attack was done by the US..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]