How the Spooks Would Attack YOU and ME Too.

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: How the Spooks Would Attack YOU and ME Too.

Postby JackRiddler » Fri Feb 18, 2011 3:03 pm

.

I tried publicizing on some of this stuff here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... 439x448357

Let's see how it goes...

JackRiddler wrote:Military, spook and corporate plans to deploy "personas" (sock-puppets) on Internet: New examples...


Does anyone still doubt that government and corporate agents routinely engage in manipulation of Internet debates? Two examples will be treated here.

But first, for clarity, let's define official or corporate "manipulation" of Internet discourse as including, at the very least, any case in which an Internet "persona" delivers organizational talking points or conducts other missions at the behest of an organization, as part of a systematic campaign, while pretending to be a private individual acting out of personal conviction.

It would be manipulation if, for example, anyone at a discussion site like DU pretends to be Mr. or Ms. Josephina Blow, Citizen, who wandered in to relate an individual perspective, but is in fact here to argue a point of view assigned by the United States Air Force.

Other terms for this kind of manipulation are organizational sock-puppetry or electronic astroturfing. If we're lucky and smart, Internet culture will one day universally come to strongly revile such conduct and regard it as the worst possible rules violation on any free speech site. It already is that to many of us, but most of our Internet nation compatriots aren't even aware of it as a major problem.

Above I mentioned the Air Force because of our first example:

The USAF last summer put out a call for contractors to provide "Internet persona" software. Such programs would allow a single user to manage several or a dozen fake user profiles, all of which would be designed to look like different individuals. Among other missions, these virtual propaganda soldiers can be sent on trolling missions to deliver USAF talking points around the Internet.

We users who lack such software must post our ideas manually, in single personas. With the help of this software, one soldier could, with the same effort (and while on salary!) appear as ten different passionately committed political activists who are posting out of conviction, and not for the money.

Interestingly, the solicitation for contract proposals comes from MacDill Air Force Base, home to Special Operations Command (SOCOM), the probable contractor, since the sites of operation or "places of performance" include Kabul and Baghdad.

It's vital to remember that if the theater of action is the Internet, it doesn't matter where the operator sits. Internet posts automatically become worldwide and therefore include the United States within their theater. Locating "persona" (sock-puppet) operators outside the United States may be a way of evading legal complications of conducting psychological warfare operations that will inevitably spill over into the US public -- that is, if the US public is not the actual target in the first place. (It's the classic model for circumventing domestic law by acting from outside one's own country's borders, as when CIA recruited domestic spies by approaching US students studying abroad, or when spy agencies perform illegal domestic missions by having their own citizens spied upon by foreign ally agencies.)

The second example, from the DailyKos diary of one "Happy Rockefeller," details the latest fallout from the exposure of illegal plots involving the government security contractor HBGary and its business partners and potential customers.

It turns out that HBGary was also engaged at least in plotting "persona" operations, which is to say: the commission of massive sock-puppet fraud in the course of corporate psychological warfare aimed against unsuspecting audiences.

An essential point Happy Rockefeller makes is that the awesome "incompetence" of HBGary must not blind us to the reality that it's just one small exposed part of a much larger biotope of surveillance and control, in which freelance elements come together with corporations and governments to conduct extra-legal and illegal operations against opposition.

Please note that one of HBGary's partners, Palantir, was founded in part by Peter Thiel, the same billionaire (an investor in Facebook, among other ventures) who partly financed the O'Keefe-Breitbart video hoax operations against ACORN. O'Keefe and his CIA recruiting buddy Stan Dai came out of the many campus covens of future spooks set up with money from both the CIA and neocon foundations.

The point here is that we are looking at small parts of far more complex, wide-ranging covert networks of surveillance and control that involve private freelance parapolitical operators and contractors with official agencies of the government and the corporate superpowers like Bank of America, the Kochtopus and the Chamber of Commerce.

They are engaging in post-Nixonian dirty tricks aimed at neutralizing perceived domestic enemies such as antiwar groups, unions, free media, community organizers... in short, most of us here at DU, too! Internet sock-puppet ("persona") operations would be a small part of the big picture.


First Example: USAF Solicitations for "Persona Management" Software

Note: One funny aspect that we will see in the following solicitations for software that will allow users to conduct lawless operations is that the USAF as contractee in each case mentions the desire to purchase valid user fees, and thus presumably pay (more than) fair price for propietary software. This bizarro-land paradox of legalistic respect for property rights combined with barely-hidden plans for outlaw activity by a rogue superpower is at turns amusing and infuriating.

From https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity ... e&_cview=1

Solicitation Number:
RTB220610
Notice Type:
Sources Sought
Synopsis:
Added: Jun 22, 2010 1:42 pm Modified: Jun 22, 2010 2:07 pmTrack Changes
0001- Online Persona Management Service. 50 User Licenses, 10 Personas per user.
Software will allow 10 personas per user, replete with background, history, supporting details, and cyber presences that are technically, culturally and geographacilly consistent. Individual applications will enable an operator to exercise a number of different online persons from the same workstation and without fear of being discovered by sophisticated adversaries. Personas must be able to appear to originate in nearly any part of the world and can interact through conventional online services and social media platforms. The service includes a user friendly application environment to maximize the user's situational awareness by displaying real-time local information.



NOTE: Do you see what's going on here? We are all in a worldwide, multi-factional information war and the USAF sees itself empowered to create a bunch of cloned information warriors with faked details and send them out into the PUBLIC domain of the Internet, where their dispensation of propaganda will end up EVERYWHERE.

The solicitation continues with requests for a number of related support functions to such psychological warfare operations, such as software to allow the fake personas to access the Internet from multiple hoaxed IPs, thus giving the appearance that the USAF trolls are people from all around the world. The first item would be very useful in spying on any and all sites on the Web, so that they don't know a military agency is watching them (which may be actionable in the case of American sites).

0002- Secure Virtual Private Network (VPN). 1 each
VPN provides the ability for users to daily and automatically obtain randomly selected
IP addresses through which they can access the internet. The daily rotation of
the user s IP address prevents compromise during observation of likely or
targeted web sites or services, while hiding the existence of the operation. In
addition, may provide traffic mixing, blending the user s traffic with traffic from
multitudes of users from outside the organization. This traffic blending provides
excellent cover and powerful deniability.
Anonymizer Enterprise Chameleon or equal


0003- Static IP Address Management. 50 each
Licence protects the identity of government agencies and enterprise
organizations. Enables organizations to manage their persistent online personas
by assigning static IP addresses to each persona. Individuals can perform
static impersonations, which allow them to look like the same person over time.
Also allows organizations that frequent same site/service often to easily switch IP
addresses to look like ordinary users as opposed to one organization.
Anonymizer IP Mapper License or equal


In case you are still under the illusion that the targets of the USAF's Internet-based psychological warfare operations will be conveniently foreign (as though this would legitimate it), note the next item: software that would allow operators outside the Continental United States or CONUS (and thus removed from US law) to appear to be posting from inside CONUS. In other words, appear to be US residents speaking as such in a private capacity, even though they are actually US military personnel on a foreign base acting on USAF orders.

0004- Virtual Private Servers, CONUS. 1 each
Provides CONUS or OCONUS points of presence locations that are setup for
each customer based on the geographic area of operations the customer is
operating within and which allow a customer?s online persona(s) to appear to
originate from. Ability to provide virtual private servers that are procured using
commercial hosting centers around the world and which are established
anonymously. Once procured, the geosite is incorporated into the network and
integrated within the customers environment and ready for use by the customer.
Unless specifically designated as shared, locations are dedicated for use by
each customer and never shared among other customers. Anonymizer Annual Dedicated CONUS Light Geosite or equal

0005- Virtual Private Servers, OCONUS. 8 Each
Provides CONUS or OCONUS points of presence locations that are setup for
each customer based on the geographic area of operations the customer is
operating within and which allow a customer?s online persona(s) to appear to
originate from. Ability to provide virtual private servers that are procured using
commercial hosting centers around the world and which are established
anonymously. Once procured, the geosite is incorporated into the network and
integrated within the customers environment and ready for use by the customer.
Unless specifically designated as shared, locations are dedicated for use by
each customer and never shared among other customers. Anonymizer Annual Dedicated OCONUS Light Geosite or equal

0006- Remote Access Secure Virtual Private Network. 1 each
Secure Operating Environment provides a reliable and protected computing
environment from which to stage and conduct operations. Every session uses a
clean Virtual Machine (VM) image. The solution is accessed through sets of
Virtual Private Network (VPN) devices located at each Customer facility. The
fully-managed VDI (Virtual Desktop Infrastructure) is an environment that allows
users remote access from their desktop into a VM. Upon session termination,
the VM is deleted and any virus, worm, or malicious software that the user inadvertently downloaded is destroyed. Anonymizer Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) Solution or equal.

Contracting Office Address:
2606 Brown Pelican Ave.
MacDill AFB, Florida 33621-5000
United States

Place of Performance:
Performance will be at MacDIll AFB, Kabul, Afghanistan and Baghdad, Iraq.
MacDill AFB , Florida 33679
United States
Primary Point of Contact.:
Russell Beasley,
Contracting Officer
russell.beasley-02@macdill.af.mil
Phone: (813) 828-4729
Fax: (813) 828-5111


.............................................

Second Example: HB Gary's Persona Management

[[...Happy Rockefeller excerpt from DKos follows...]]

Again, Happy Rockefeller makes the essential point that the evident incompetence of HB Gary as exposed in the last week is no reason for relief on our part. In fact, these people are just as dangerous whether or not they are competent.

I don't know about you, but this concerns me greatly. It goes far beyond the mere ability for a government stooge, corporation or PR firm to hire people to post on sites like this one. They are talking about creating the illusion of consensus. And consensus is a powerful persuader. What has more effect, one guy saying BP is not at fault? Or 20 people saying it? For the weak minded, the number can make all the difference. And another thing, this is just one little company of assholes. I can't believe there aren't others doing this already. From oil companies, political campaigns, PR firms, you name it. Public opinion means big bucks. And let's face it, what these guys are talking about is easy. ...

SNIP

Lastly, some here are falling for the meme that HB Gary personel, and especially Aaron Barr himself, are incompetent buffoons. This is a mistake. ... I have rummaged through the leaked email, some of which contain resumes for employees there. These guys are recruiting people with incredibly advanced skills from many different agencies and top universities like MIT. ... HB Gary and its subsidiary, HB Gary Federal, as well as Berinco and Palantir, employed a lot of extremely qualified people with backgrounds in the NSA and ATT and other major organizations/corporations. These guys are pros.



Among other things we've learned about HBGary, the CEO Aaron Barr had wrongly identified some poor patsy in San Francisco as the alleged single CEO-type head of Anonymous (which does not actually appear to have a hierarchy of that kind at all). Barr intended to sell this as "intelligence" to the FBI! If this had resulted in the patsy's arrest, as Barr hoped, it would have been no consolation to him to know that Barr is an incompetent fool who got it wrong.

In the same way, the US military filled up its torture prison in Guantanamo with innocent patsy shepherds and taxi drivers kidnapped by US-allied militias in Pakistan and Afghanistan, who sold the victims to the US for a bounty. Is this "incompetence"? I'd say that how smart the criminals are is a very secondary consideration as long as they retain the power to harm people, or remain in office untouched by justice for their crimes.

The first step in counteracting this type of warfare on our minds is to acknowledge that it exists and should be addressed.

A second step might appear to be formal and powerless, but I would consider it very important: to make it clear on all Web sites that "personas" are not tolerated, and that all users have an obligation to announce if and when they are working for an organization or campaign designed to distribute talking points around the Web.

Some of you may laugh and say, so what? They'll keep mum about their connections and get away with the operation anyway. I would argue, however, that this is the first step: to tell everyone unmistakably and programmatically that lying about who dispatched you is not permitted. Make it clear to them, even if they won't confess any time soon, that they are liars and their actions are against the rules, both of civilized behavior and of each Web site on which they practice their manipulation.

Awareness and a clear stand create a climate in which other means of self-defense will be devised, and in which sooner or later there will be defectors and whistleblowers. It's a start.


One of the site's resident technocrats replied:

ProgressiveProfessor wrote:Fri Feb-18-11 01:44 PM

4. One of the solutions touted for this are "Internet Licenses"

Mostly some form unforgeable internet ID. However who will issue and manage them on an international basis is far less than clear. There are also some technical limitations under the current schemes that would require radical restructuring of common services like NNTP, HTTP, IMAP, POP, SMTP and others to accomplish. The best current approaches are some of the anti spam tools being used at various discussion sites, and even there it is a weekly arms race.

Morphing/sock puppets/multiple personalities have been with us well before the Internet, not sure how we can solve technically what is a social issue.


Reply:

JackRiddler wrote:Fri Feb-18-11 01:53 PM

5. I don't believe in any tech fixes for this problem -- let alone "Internet licenses"!

The solution will come when this behavior is known to occur (and not denied), when it is universally knowledge, and when such behavior is universally reviled as wrong, disgusting and uncivilized.

The solution will come when all examples of such practices that are exposed are treated as general emergencies by Internet communities. It will come when the backfire for practitioners of psychological warfare becomes high-cost, when discovery is cause for bannings from sites, press reports about the practitioners, boycotts, economic counter-attacks and general public ridicule.

It will also come with appropriate skepticism any time hundreds of cookie-cutter pro-corporate or pro-government talking points on the issue of the day suddenly appear on Twitter, Facebook, discussion boards and so on. When people start to understand that they can be manipulated by such deceptions.

Anonymous just did more for the cause than any tech fix can ever do. They discovered HBGary engaging in persona fraud and promptly exacted a beautiful retribution that, importantly, is also educational. We have learned a great deal in the last week about what's in the electronic underbrush.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How the Spooks Would Attack YOU and ME Too.

Postby Plutonia » Fri Feb 18, 2011 4:05 pm

:clapping:

Nicely done. It's a crime against humanity, IMO.

JackRiddler wrote:Fri Feb-18-11 01:53 PM

5. I don't believe in any tech fixes for this problem -- let alone "Internet licenses"!

The solution will come when this behavior is known to occur (and not denied), when it is universally knowledge, and when such behavior is universally reviled as wrong, disgusting and uncivilized.

The solution will come when all examples of such practices that are exposed are treated as general emergencies by Internet communities. It will come when the backfire for practitioners of psychological warfare becomes high-cost, when discovery is cause for bannings from sites, press reports about the practitioners, boycotts, economic counter-attacks and general public ridicule.



Agreed. The 4chan "Forever Alone" meme I think addresses powerfully those that exhibit behaviors and/or values that toxic to the collective.

Expose them, mock them, revile them, ostracize them.

Also, instituting a social agreement around this may be a project for Wikiterms. :hihi:


Image
[the British] government always kept a kind of standing army of news writers who without any regard to truth, or to what should be like truth, invented & put into the papers whatever might serve the minister

T Jefferson,
User avatar
Plutonia
 
Posts: 1267
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 2:07 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How the Spooks Would Attack YOU and ME Too.

Postby Plutonia » Fri Feb 18, 2011 4:15 pm

Here's where they get their "scrubbed" IP's from:

From: Aaron Barr <aaron@hbgary.com>
To: Greg Hoglund <greg@hbgary.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 09:23:15 -0400
Subject: Re: this guy's program is blown?

From: Aaron Barr <aaron@hbgary.com>
cc: Ted Vera <ted@hbgary.com>,Bob Slapnik <bob@hbgary.com>
to: Greg Hoglund <greg@hbgary.com>

Attachments:
smime.p7s (3809 bytes)

No I don't think we can. We are specialists in anonymity and persona management. We can define the specific traits/backstopping for successful OPS. Anonymizer is in one of the best positions because they have a pool of publicly washed IPs that they can hide traffic in. Any organization wanting to compete with Anonymizer in this space needs to have some type of architecture for persistent covert traffic. Now there may be a solution that we can develop with Akamai, Blizzard, or some other company that has a very large global presence that we can develop COVCOM solutions in.

Anonymizers solutions are somewhat elegant for doing persona management. A few years ago I sat down with Lance, old CEO of Anonymizer and the main architect, and we spent half a day talking about the architecture. But I am not sure how healthy his pool of public IPs are given their rather public disclosure of their work with government.

The cost would vary widely depending on the architecture but I don't think any solution would be cheap. Depends on the partner. We have the know how certainly just not the resources.

Aaron

On Jun 30, 2010, at 12:51 PM, Greg Hoglund wrote:

>
> I met with a guy, the CEO of C5i, for dinner when I was in D.C. last. He told me he wants to take Anonymizers business away and compete with them. On a flip side, do you think HBGary Federal could compete in that space? How costly or painful is it to set something up?
>
> -G
>
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 7:14 AM, Aaron Barr <aaron@hbgary.com> wrote:
> yeah I have some history here.
>
> This RFI is written for Anonymizer. They have a set of non-public capabilities they try and pitch to the intel community. Some of them are pretty good. My biggest concern with Anonymizer is I am concerned since they were purchased by Abraxis, a known intelligence contractor, that their general user pool has significantly diminished. I tried to get the figures from them but they wouldn't discuss. If their user pool is shrinking then some of their technology could be a vulnerability.
>
> But they have existing persona management software and the RFI references Anonymizer multiple times. I need to get in front of the AFISR folks when I go down to GFIRST. We will send him our whitepaper and try to set up a meeting.
>
> Aaron
>
> On Jun 30, 2010, at 2:36 AM, Greg Hoglund wrote:
>
>>
>> This guy:
>>
>> russell.beasley-02@macdill.af.mil
>>
>> His digital-cover ops / program is posted all over the 'net as of like 15 days ago. Not sure wtf that is about. Here are the links I have found:
>>
>> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=w ... hhHI4_hEnw
>>
>> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=w ... F64sb5kYlw
>>
>> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=w ... DHYxRo5aoQ
>>
>> https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity ... e&_cview=1
>>
>> whoa man.
>>
>> -G
>
> Aaron Barr
> CEO
> HBGary Federal Inc.
>
>
http://hbgary.anonleaks.ch/aaron_hbgary_com/11878.html


ANONYMIZER: PROTECT YOUR IP(?) NOW!

Private Browsing Features Are Not Enough—Protect All Your Internet activity with Anonymizer Universal.

http://www.anonymizer dot com/
So they can sell them to the Feds for their Astroturf Droid Army. :evil:
[the British] government always kept a kind of standing army of news writers who without any regard to truth, or to what should be like truth, invented & put into the papers whatever might serve the minister

T Jefferson,
User avatar
Plutonia
 
Posts: 1267
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 2:07 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How the Spooks Would Attack YOU and ME Too.

Postby JackRiddler » Fri Feb 18, 2011 4:21 pm

.

How can someone coin a phrase for sock-puppetry like "persona management," connoted positively as a discipline of knowledge, and not promptly kill themselves in defense of humanity? Therein perhaps lies our problem: No fucking self-respect.

.

Or, to see a few stages past the present and give a rather universally pessimistic twist to the old Leninist wisdom: "The last human will program the robot that vaporizes him."

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How the Spooks Would Attack YOU and ME Too.

Postby Plutonia » Fri Feb 18, 2011 4:38 pm

JackRiddler wrote:.

Or, to see a few stages past the present and give a rather universally pessimistic twist to the old Leninist wisdom: "The last human will program the robot that vaporizes him."

.
I don't believe that about people.

What I do think is that, as Joseph Chilton Pearce says, culture is at odds with biology; meaning that as a culture develops into it's "High" phase, the healthy functioning of the people within it is necessarily undermined, resulting in widespread aberrant behavior and it's ultimate collapse.

Think of the peaks of what we might call mannered societies - Egypt, Rome, France, present-day USA. 'Nuff said.
[the British] government always kept a kind of standing army of news writers who without any regard to truth, or to what should be like truth, invented & put into the papers whatever might serve the minister

T Jefferson,
User avatar
Plutonia
 
Posts: 1267
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 2:07 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How the Spooks Would Attack YOU and ME Too.

Postby wintler2 » Fri Feb 18, 2011 5:50 pm

Plutonia wrote:.. as Joseph Chilton Pearce says, culture is at odds with biology..

YES! and we are currently so much more attached to our culture, which is crudely speaking rooted in our minds, than to biology, or our bodies. The last 10k years of ever-growing human power has made culture, via tribal membership and rank, more important in biological success/offspring than biology itself, eg. rich world babies survive genetic dysfunctions. Our culture has gone so nutso tho that adherence to it is no longer adaptive or a sure bet on success. Our reluctance to change our culture ourselves leaves natural selection to do the pruning.
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How the Spooks Would Attack YOU and ME Too.

Postby Stephen Morgan » Fri Feb 18, 2011 5:57 pm

Barr is brighter than I thought, being suspicious of Anonymiser.
Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that all was vanity; but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dream with open eyes, and make it possible. -- Lawrence of Arabia
User avatar
Stephen Morgan
 
Posts: 3736
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 6:37 am
Location: England
Blog: View Blog (9)

Re: How the Spooks Would Attack YOU and ME Too.

Postby Plutonia » Sun Feb 20, 2011 8:47 pm

Stephen Morgan wrote:Barr is brighter than I thought, being suspicious of Anonymiser.
I'd characterize it as envy, myself. :?


Here's some more ugly-buglies...

It's a 5 page article (whew!) so I'm just going to pull a couple of highlights for y'all:

Black ops: how HBGary wrote backdoors for the government

>snip details of HBGary's malware product line<

Psyops

In mid-2010, HBGary Federal put together a PSYOP (psychological operations) proposal for SOCOM, which had issued a general call for new tools and techniques. In the document, the new HBGary Federal team talked up their past experience as creators of "multiple products briefed to POTUS [President of the United States], the NSC [National Security Council], and Congressional Intelligence committees, as well as senior intelligence and military leaders."


The document focused on cartoons and the Second Life virtual world. "HBGary personnel have experience creating political cartoons that leverage current events to seize the target audience's attention and propagate the desired messages and themes," said the document, noting that security-cleared cartoonists and 3D modelers had already been lined up to do the work if the government wanted some help.

The cartooning process "starts with gathering customer requirements such as the target audience, high level messages and themes, intended publication mediums… Through brainstorming sessions, we develop concept ideas. Approved concepts are rough sketched in pencil. Approved sketches are developed into a detailed, color end product that is suitable for publishing in a variety of mediums."

A sample cartoon, of Iranian President Ahmadinejad manipulating a puppet Ayatollah, was helpfully included.

The document then went on to explain how the US government could use a virtual world such as Second Life to propagate specific messages. HBGary could localize the Second Life client, translating its menu options and keyboard shortcuts into local dialects, and this localized client could report "valuable usage metrics, enabling detailed measures of effects." If you want to know whether your message is getting out, just look at the statistics of how many people play the game and for how long.

As for the messages themselves, those would appear within the Second Life world. "HBGary can develop an in-world advertising company, securing small plots of virtual land in attractive locations, which can be used to promote themes using billboards, autonomous virtual robots, audio, video, and 3D presentations," said the document.

They could even make a little money while they're at it, by creating "original marketable products to generate self-sustaining revenue within the virtual space as well as promote targeted messaging."

We found no evidence that SOCOM adopted the proposal.

>snip<

DARPA didn't want incrementalism. It wanted breakthroughs (one of its most recent projects is the "100-Year Starship Study"), and Barr and Hoglund teamed up for a proposal to help the agency on its Cyber Insider Threat (CINDER) program. CINDER was an expensive effort to find new ways to watch employees with access to sensitive information and root out double agents or disgruntled workers who might leak classified information.

So Barr and Hoglund drafted a plan to create something like a lie detector, except that it would look for signs of "paranoia" instead.

"Like a lie detector detects physical changes in the body based on sensitivities to specific questions, we believe there are physical changes in the body that are represented in observable behavioral changes when committing actions someone knows is wrong," said the proposal. "Our solution is to develop a paranoia-meter to measure these observables."

The idea was to take an HBGary rootkit like 12 Monkeys and install it on user machines in such a way that users could not remove it and might not even be aware of its presence. The rootkit would log user keystrokes, of course, but it would also take "as many behavioral measurements as possible" in order to look for suspicious activity that might indicate wrongdoing.


What sort of measurements? The rootkit would monitor "keystrokes, mouse movements, and visual cues through the system camera. We believe that during particularly risky activities we will see more erratic mouse movements and keystrokes as well as physical observations such as surveying surroundings, shifting more frequently, etc."

The rootkit would also keep an eye on what files were being accessed, what e-mails were being written, and what instant messages were being sent. If necessary, the software could record a video of the user's computer screen activity and send all this information to a central monitoring office. There, software would try to pick out employees exhibiting signs of paranoia, who could then be scrutinized more closely.

Huge and obvious challenges presented themselves. As the proposal noted:

Detecting insider threat actions is highly challenging and will require a sophisticated monitoring, baselining, analysis, and alerting capability. Human actions and organizational operations are complex. You might think you can just look for people that are trying to gain access to information outside of their program area of expertise. Yet there are legitimate reasons for accessing this information. In many cases the activity you might call suspicious can also be legitimate. Some people are more or less inquisitive and will have different levels of activity in accessing information outside their specific organization. Some of the behaviors on systems vary widely depending on function. Software developer behavior will be very different than an HR person or senior manager. All of these factors need to be taken into account when developing detection capabilities for suspicious activity. We cannot focus on just [whether] a particular action is potentially suspicious. Instead we must quantify the legitimate reasons for the activity and whether this person has a baseline, position, attributes, and history to support the activity.


DARPA did not apparently choose to fund the plan.

>snip<


But the e-mails also remind us how much of this work is carried out privately and beyond the control of government agencies. We found no evidence that HBGary sold malware to nongovernment entities intent on hacking, though the company did have plans to repurpose its DARPA rootkit idea for corporate surveillance work. ("HBGary plans to transition technology into commercial products," it told DARPA.)

And another document, listing HBGary's work over the last few years, included this entry: "HBGary had multiple contracts with a consumer software company to add stealth capability to their host agent."

The actions of HBGary Federal's Aaron Barr also serve as a good reminder that, when they're searching for work, private security companies are more than happy to switch from military to corporate clients—and they bring some of the same tools to bear.

When asked to investigate pro-union websites and WikiLeaks, Barr turned immediately to his social media toolkit and was ready to deploy personas, Facebook scraping, link analysis, and fake websites; he also suggested computer attacks on WikiLeaks infrastructure and pressure be brought upon journalists like Glenn Greenwald.

His compatriots at Palantir and Berico showed, in their many e-mails, few if any qualms about turning their national security techniques upon private dissenting voices. Barr's ideas showed up in Palantir-branded PowerPoints and Berico-branded "scope of work" documents. "Reconnaissance cells" were proposed, network attacks were acceptable, "target dossiers" on "adversaries" would be compiled, and "complex information campaigns" involving fake personas were on the table.

>snip<


Actually Ars Technica has been doing great, in depth reporting on this -check out these so far:

Anonymous to security firm working with FBI: "You've angered the hive"
How one security firm tracked down Anonymous—and paid a heavy price
(Virtually) face to face: how Aaron Barr revealed himself to Anonymous
Spy games: Inside the convoluted plot to bring down WikiLeaks
Anonymous speaks: the inside story of the HBGary hack




And you can get the Team Themis reconnaissance cel proposal, presentation as well as the HBG/Berico teaming agreement here, if you swing that way. :wink:
[the British] government always kept a kind of standing army of news writers who without any regard to truth, or to what should be like truth, invented & put into the papers whatever might serve the minister

T Jefferson,
User avatar
Plutonia
 
Posts: 1267
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 2:07 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How the Spooks Would Attack YOU and ME Too.

Postby Nordic » Sun Feb 20, 2011 9:06 pm

JackRiddler wrote:.

I tried publicizing on some of this stuff here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... 439x448357

Let's see how it goes...



Looks like it didn't go so well:


The moderators on duty have determined by consensus that this message does not meet Democratic Underground's community standards. This message will remain hidden from public view until it is edited by the member who posted it. The member may also choose to self-delete the message.


Why do you bother with that joke of a site? Not meaning to be bitchy, it's a serious question. I gave up on them years ago.
"He who wounds the ecosphere literally wounds God" -- Philip K. Dick
Nordic
 
Posts: 14230
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Re: How the Spooks Would Attack YOU and ME Too.

Postby JackRiddler » Sun Feb 20, 2011 10:00 pm

Nordic wrote:
JackRiddler wrote:.

I tried publicizing on some of this stuff here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... 439x448357

Let's see how it goes...



Looks like it didn't go so well:


The moderators on duty have determined by consensus that this message does not meet Democratic Underground's community standards. This message will remain hidden from public view until it is edited by the member who posted it. The member may also choose to self-delete the message.


Why do you bother with that joke of a site? Not meaning to be bitchy, it's a serious question. I gave up on them years ago.


Ostensibly due to quoting too many paragraphs... from a DKos diary, of all things. Possibly just the excuse because it was confirmed material about sock-puppet campaigns, on a site obviously infested with them for most of the 10 years of its existence. Or not. They're very rules-happy.

Anyway, there's nothing stopping me from (sigh) deleting my own post and re-posting it without the quotes. I have yet to decide if I'm too proud to do that, because it is a waste of my precious time on a site where I am among the content providers and where we are treated as though the favor is being done for us.

So why do I bother with that site? Truth is, I shouldn't bother with any message boards, not even this wonderful one, but I engage in them because I am lazy about writing books or getting a dissertation done like I should (or starting a survivalist colony or getting back into political movements or something else semi-useful). I have instead conditioned myself to the instant gratification of pornography immediate publication, readers and responses within minutes or hours, very often interesting dialogues, the ability to build dossiers as news comes in (like on this very thread) and (not to be underestimated) combat with idiots, as well as sometimes combat with worthy adversaries. So I don't bother with "that site," I bother with readers on that site. A couple of hundred of them seem to like my stuff, and there are still a dozen whose stuff I like (and sometimes repost here if it's good, like with Hannah Bell). What other reason would there be? Anyway, don't make me question it too much, because that would lead me to question what I'm doing here, albeit RI is a smarter, smaller, friendlier, more intense place without irrational censorship, sexier management, etc.

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How the Spooks Would Attack YOU and ME Too.

Postby Nordic » Sun Feb 20, 2011 10:11 pm

Okay, man, don't think about it too hard! :)

I just found it really funny on that DU page, there's the paragraph where they say they've deleted your post, then right below that is a request for money.

Yeah, I'll give you money, provide you with free content, then you can delete it or censor it all you want. Uh, NOT.

Those assholes banned me not long after I'd sent them some money. What's wrong with that picture?

Hey, I was just curious, thanks. I've grown to loathe that place, but I don't have the patience to try to find out what little good might remain there ....
"He who wounds the ecosphere literally wounds God" -- Philip K. Dick
Nordic
 
Posts: 14230
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Re: How the Spooks Would Attack YOU and ME Too.

Postby bks » Mon Feb 21, 2011 10:11 am

One mundane example of the dangers of "persona management":
'This Is What Democracy Looks Like' in Wisconsin,
as Largest Crowd Yet -- 80,000 -- Opposes Union Busting

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/02/20

MADISON -- Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker finished a bad week with a misstep that emphasized his inability to generate support for his attempt to strip the state’s public employees of collective bargaining rights.

First, the governor’s radical proposal went to such extremes in its anti-labor bias that it sparked a protest movement so large, so steady and so determined in its demands that it is now commonly compared with the protests that have rocked Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries.

Then, the man that badges worn by marchers describe as “The Mubarak of the Middle West” really blew it. Saturday was supposed to be the day when the governor pushed back against the movement that has challenged his radical power grab. The governor’s Tea Party allies attempted to grab the spotlight with a rally at the state Capital. Unfortunately, the much-hyped event, which national Tea Party groups had poured money and organizing energy into generating, drew an anemic crowd of several thousand. Even by the optimistic estimates of the Tea Partisans themselves, the pro-Walker turnout was one-tenth the size of the crowd that came to oppose the governor’s so-called “budget repair bill.”

The governor made things worse for himself by going on CNN and announcing that he had received 19,000 emails from the “quiet majority” of Wisconsinites since he made his proposal and claimed that most of them were supportive.

Dumb move. Really dumb move.

Within hours of making his claim, the streets of Madison were filled by what veteran political organizers described as the largest demonstration ever seen in the city. Former Mayor Paul Soglin, a key organizer of anti-Vietnam War protests, said, “We had some big demonstrations in the sixties, but this is bigger.”

Organizers of a 2004 rally featuring Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry and rocker Bruce Springsteen, where the crowd was estimated at 80,000, pointed out that Saturday’s protest against Walker’s budget filled a significantly larger space. And, they noted, thousands of addition opponents of the governor’s proposal packed the Capitol.

Mahlon Mitchell, the president of the Wisconsin Professional Firefighters Association, which has been a high-profile participant in the demonstrations, surveyed the crowd while recounting Walker’s boast about the 19,000 emails.

“I think I have 19,000 people behind me,” said Mitchell.


Pointing to one edge of the massive audience arrayed before him, he said: “And 20,000 there.”

He pointed to the other edge of the crowd: “And 20,000 there.”

Finally, he pointed down State Street, the thoroughfare that stretches from the Capitol to the University of Wisconsin campus, which was packed with students who have backed the unions: “And 20,000 there.”

Rallying with Mitchell was Wisconsin Education Association Council president Mary Bell, who picked up on the “this-is-what-democracy-looks-like” theme that has become so central to the marches, rallies and pickets that have swept not just Madison but a state where even small towns have seen protests against Walker’s bill.

“The power of government in this state does not come from this Capitol,” she said of the building that was surrounded by teachers, educational assistants, nurses, snow-plow drivers and state engineers, as well as their tens of thousands of backers. “The power comes from the people.”

And while Scott Walker may claim a “quiet majority” of 19,000 emails received by his office, a noisy majority of more than 80,000 Wisconsinites braved a winter day to tell the governor that the people have spoken: They’re with the unions.


If Walker really believes (as I suspect he doesn't) that those 19,000 emails provide the justification for sticking to his guns (it wouldn't matter top him if he got none) , then it should be obvious why "persona management" is such an important subject. The percentage of those emails which are 'fake isn't the issue. It's that this is another step in distancing elected officials from the people who put them there. 'Persona manangement' threatens to poison the well, eventually leading to the discrediting of electronic communication as an indicator of popular opinion [which would be of course fine with oppressive leaders]. Thus, when email traffic runs against a policy, the government official in question will feel justified in questioning its authenticity [if it's even mentioned] and raise the specter of 'persona management'. When the emails favor repressive policies, they'll be championed as proof of a 'silent majority'.
bks
 
Posts: 1093
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 2:44 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How the Spooks Would Attack YOU and ME Too.

Postby JackRiddler » Mon Feb 21, 2011 12:28 pm

.

bks: Interesting. Think too how willingly we (in this case meaning a large part of the dissident classes and groups) have gone along with the convenience of e-mail campaigns, or "voting" in the nonsense surveys on what issues should be pursued at MoveOn.org or Change.org and even .gov, or in "signing" electronic petitions, or gak! participating in the bogus Internet polls of the media. I think at RI we're pretty good at distinguishing between real individual humans posting as themselves (or in personas that they created as individual expressions) and managed hordes of sock-puppets, but that's hardly the case at big media or large boards where there are literally thousands of posts or usernames in play and users don't remain on topic and get to know each other in long discussions, like here.

It's a complicated situation with conundrums, to be sure. Obviously decentralized e-media, if you can keep access to them in the crunch (big question), are incredibly useful tools for organizing real-world social movements. The same Twitter that allows a corporation or spook agency to fake or coopt or exaggerate or trash a movement can also be used to facilitate a real one. (You're still never going to get me to be writing 140 characters per post!) The only cure is that people learn to discriminate, although judging by debates here that's hard (we're all being duped every day by something according to some RI member or other).

In the old propaganda era they actually needed a physical man to play the "man on the street," or a real 15-year-old to be the "Kuwaiti hospital helper" who witnessed he murder of the non-existent incubator babies. Now they think they can get away with spam-bots and "persona management" and copy-paste in place of witnesses and protesting crowds. Except gradually people are learning the parameters of new media, finding their legs on the Internet.

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How the Spooks Would Attack YOU and ME Too.

Postby Plutonia » Mon Feb 21, 2011 12:42 pm

The Co$ has been doing sock-puppetry for years, in all venues. :?

In the Anonymous War on Scientology, one of the games Anon's played was In Before Terreo, which entailed following the news and getting to the stories critical about the Co$ and posting before the sock-puppets got there. Hilarity ensued.

Google "Scientology Terreo" and see the carnage. :twisted:
[the British] government always kept a kind of standing army of news writers who without any regard to truth, or to what should be like truth, invented & put into the papers whatever might serve the minister

T Jefferson,
User avatar
Plutonia
 
Posts: 1267
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 2:07 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: How the Spooks Would Attack YOU and ME Too.

Postby Maddy » Mon Feb 21, 2011 12:57 pm

Anonymous scares me.

They're still my heroes.

Scary, scary heroes. :scaredhide:
Be kind - it costs nothing. ~ Maddy ~
User avatar
Maddy
 
Posts: 1167
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 10:33 am
Location: The Borderlands
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests