Is The CIA Hosting A Wikileaks Mirror? [Updated]

from the honeypot-or-not? dept

Whatis42? points us to an interesting post on Reddit, which is initially just highlighting a Google heatmap showing the locations from which people are searching for the term "wikileaks." Not surprisingly, the hottest spot on the heatmap is the Northern Virginia, Washington DC area. Shocking, I know.

But, perhaps more interesting is a comment on the thread, which notes that it appears at least one of the Wikileaks mirrors appears to be hosted by the CIA, or at the very least a company associated with the CIA using (for a time) a CIA netblock. The address, wikileaks.psytek.net no longer appears to be hosting anything (right now it just leads you to a standard Apache install page that says "It works!"). There's an interesting discussion in the Reddit comments over what this means -- ranging from everything to someone suggesting this is just a joke, to the "honeypot" question, to the one that seems most plausible to me: as a mirror that is quickly updated as Wikileaks puts up new documents, it allows the CIA to get access to what's being released as quickly as possible. Updated: And, as noted in the comments, it appears the answer is "no." Or, at least, if it is, it ain't this particular site.

Filed Under: cia, mirrors, wikileaks
Companies: cia, wikileaks

CIA Claims Cyberattacks At Fault In Blackouts

from the now-they-tell-us dept

A few years back, after a major blackout hit the northeast, many people immediately assumed that it had something to do with a terrorist attack on the electricity system or perhaps a computer worm/cyber attack. It turned out to be neither, but it wasn't that surprising that people jumped to that conclusion. However, afterwards, people began discussing how likely it was that a cyberattack really could take out the power grid for a city, and some people felt that it was fairly unlikely to occur. The CIA, apparently, would disagree. Late Friday, a CIA official claimed that cyberattacks have been to blame for certain blackouts over the past few years, and that the agency had debated whether or not to release that information publicly. Of course, without much in the way of detail, it's difficult to have any sense of what's actually happening here and how accurate the information really is. However, we will repeat what we said after that huge blackout: even if it was a cyberattack, it wasn't particularly damaging. Yes, it was an inconvenience. And, yes, it was annoying, and some businesses were temporarily hurt due to the blackout. But, compared to other types of attacks, shutting off the power certainly seems relatively minor.

Filed Under: blackouts, cia, cyberattacks, cyberterrorism
Companies: cia

Folks In Europe Trying To Connect The CIA To Every Successful American Internet Company?

from the I-mean,-seriously... dept

Earlier this week, some readers sent in the utterly ridiculous article from the Guardian in the UK working out all sorts of laughable conspiracy theories behind Facebook. It seemed rather strange that a publication like the Guardian would publish such a shoddy column. It bizarrely suggests that libertarians and neoconservatives are the same thing, when they're practically opposites on the political spectrum. Then it tries to link Facebook to the CIA via one of the more tenuous links out there. The idea that the CIA ran Facebook got some buzz on conspiracy sites a year or so ago, but to see it in a respected publication is really surprising. The connection discussed (the same one from the conspiracy sites) isn't just weak, it's wrong.

It tries to connect In-Q-Tel, the well-known venture capital arm of the CIA to Facebook. There are just a few problems with this. First, In-Q-Tel is run quite separately from the CIA. It is true that the CIA provides the money and In-Q-Tel looks for investments that in some way could help the CIA (though, often that's a very loose connection), but it's not like it's a bunch of spies running around and investing. It's basically a separate organization, run by experienced industry folks, not CIA agents. Then, the article claims that In-Q-Tel was formed in response to the events of 9/11, even though In-Q-Tel was formed in 1999 (which is noted in the article). It's difficult to see how it could have been formed in '99 as a result of an event two years in the future (I see now that the Guardian has issued a correction on that point). The fact is that 9/11 had no bearing on the creation of In-Q-Tel. Even more to the point: In-Q-Tel has no investment in Facebook. The actual connection is that some of Facebook's investors sat on the board of the National Venture Capital Association, with Gilman Louie, who originally ran In-Q-Tel (which he came to from a toy company, not from being a spy). That's like saying Warren Buffet really controls Microsoft, because he plays bridge with Bill Gates every once in a while. Just because the two are on the same board of a well-known group for venture capitalists, doesn't mean there's even the slightest connection between Facebook and the CIA.

And it's not just Facebook that's apparently got scary CIA connections. A video making its way around Digg is claiming "The Shocking Truth Behind Google's Ideology." It's not entirely clear what the origin of the video is, but the supervisor credited at the end is a professor in Germany. The video has scary music and frightening language. "The former students' project now rules the World Wide Web." And "the so-called PageRank." Oooh, scary. It also refers in ominous tones to "The Google Master Plan" which is a well-known (well, at least to some folks) joke.

It also throws in something about how Google wants to control all the world's information, rather than just organize it, which is a misleading addition to Google's actual mission. It tosses in some nice scare-mongering about how Google is doing this "all for free." It incorrectly states (with a very ominous image) that Google "stores the entire known web." Google does cache a portion of the public web, but that's quite different. Then it brings up the old claim about Google "scanning all your emails," implying that it's not just matching context for ads, but building a database of info about you based on your emails -- which is simply not true. It also falsely implies that Google is conducting research into genetics. It is true that Google invested in Sergey Brin's wife's company, which does genetics-related research, but that's not the same as saying that Google is doing that research. The video also takes the wild leap to somehow claim that Google will somehow get access to everyone's genetic info. And, then, of course, there's the CIA connection. The video claims that Google is actually creating "dossiers" on everyone and "working undercover with the CIA," according to the claims of a "former CIA agent," which involves a report on a well-known conspiracy theory radio show without any proof, that Google took some money from the CIA and now does things for the CIA.

The video doesn't ever get around to revealing any "shocking truth." It merely makes a bunch of ominous sounding, but either incorrect, or at least questionable, statements, and piles them together to say that something bad must be going on. Between these two things, coming out at about the same time, is there just some bizarre desire by some folks in Europe to accuse successful American internet firms of having some dark connection to the CIA?

Filed Under: cia, conspiracy theories
Companies: cia, facebook, google

Spying Goes All 2.0

from the pssst,-slip-me-some-ajax-in-the-dead-drop dept

While the US intelligence community has a long history of expensively botched computer systems, it does seem like they've suddenly became Web 2.0 believers. Last year we wrote about the internal Wikipedia-like offering called Intellipedia, that would let members from different agencies in the intelligence community share information more easily. It appears that things have progressed beyond that as well. They now have a social networking app just for the intelligence community, called A-Space, along with a del.icio.us clone and internal blogs. Of course, it seems like some in the intelligence arena (especially those who happen to be undercover) aren't entirely thrilled with the concept -- but it will be interesting to find out how it develops (as if we'll ever find out). What would be really nice to know is how much these efforts are costing compared to the $600 million that was thrown away on useless computer systems.

Filed Under: cia, fbi, intelligence community, social networking, web 2.0
Companies: cia, facebook, fbi, myspace