Breaking: Wikileaks Publishes the Cyber Intelligence Capabilities of the CIA

[agent00f]

Hey booboo the stupid dog, still can't find your way out even with simple command, eh? What a shame. I know you are not too bright but I did not know you are this stupid. What a pity.

You're basically the perfect tool to showcase the modern conservative intellect. Even your peers who'll try to proclaim just about anything won't argue the mental capacity of these sorts.

 

[Svnla]

You're basically the perfect tool to showcase the modern conservative intellect.

Booboo the stupid dog ^^^is still lost, daze and confuse. Dear the readers, shall we look for a forever home for this dumb lying pathetic dog? Would anyone be kind enough to teach this dumb dog new trick? He ain't very bright but he sure loves to lie and boast.

 

[ivwshane]

Booboo the stupid dog is still lost, daze and confuse. Dear the readers, shall we look for a forever home for this dumb lying pathetic dog? Would anyone be kind enough to tech this dumb dog new trick? He ain't very bright but he sure loves to lie and boast.

I'm looking for an alt-right dictionary to try and figure out what the fuck you are saying. English doesn't appear to be your native tongue.

 

[agent00f]

Booboo the stupid dog ^^^is still lost, daze and confuse. Dear the readers, shall we look for a forever home for this dumb lying pathetic dog? Would anyone be kind enough to teach this dumb dog new trick? He ain't very bright but he sure loves to lie and boast.

At this point you're probably the only one who can't figure out what's going on, but don't let that stop you from further embarrassing your peers & ideology.

 

[Svnla]

At this point you're probably the only one who can't figure out what's going on, but don't let that stop you from further embarrassing your peers & ideology.

Booboo the stupid dog, still can't find that command? Damn, talk about a stupid dog that you are. No wonder you spend so much time in P&N.

 

[IGBT]

It looks like nothing of the sort. No evidence of that, nothing to support it. You'd just like to believe it. CIA, NSA and FBI all are on record as stating Russia interfered in the election, they hacked the DNC, used wikileaks to release propaganda and did it to help Trump's campaign. You confirmed my assessment of how irrational Trump fanatics are though. They have a preference for made up conspiracy theories that avoid the reality of what a disaster Trump is.

You picked Putin's guy. Well done, Comrade.

Liberals would have us believe that all the election results were somehow funneled into one building, one room, onto one computer screen. And that the screen read "Hillary Won" on election night. But that Trump somehow bribed 'the Russians' to sneak into that room and paint "Trump" over "Hillary". That is a lie, and utterly ridiculous. There is no way the Russians could have 'hacked' the election.

But Obama has a proven track record of abusing his office and spying on his political opponents, whether he did it personally, or if his 'czars' did it for him, or if his 'czars' acted on their own without asking him. No matter how you slice it, Trumps accusation that Obama and his people spied on him is much more plausible than the liberal media's accusations that Trump and his voters are 'crazy'.




"With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of attack types but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the "fingerprints" of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen from. UMBRAGE components cover keyloggers, password collection, webcam capture, data destruction, persistence, privilege escalation, stealth, anti-virus (PSP) avoidance and survey techniques."

"CIA uses techniques to make cyber attacks look like they originated from enemy state. It turns DNC/Russia hack allegation into a joke and more then likely it was a internal DNC leak that greased the skids for the hillary defeat.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Evidence that we can (and do) compromise others means their resources can act as our proxies.
In layman's terms... we can bounce hacks (targeting Americans) off foreign servers we already hacked.
Everyone should have already assumed this before... but this leak would help spell it out.

Long story short is the internet is too compromised to claim we really know who is doing what.
It'd be like me walking up to your PC, taking control, and typing threats to people. Evidence is you did it.
Truth is you don't always control your PC.

The potential of using a proxy computer/IP/whatever has always been there, hasn't it? I don't think people were saying it was impossible for a non-Russian to use a proxy in carrying out the DNC/Podesta leaks, it's just that a significant amount of other information (e.g. times of accession, language used in the hacking program, etc) also all led to Russia.

 

[Svnla]

I'm looking for an alt-right dictionary to try and figure out what the fuck you are saying. English doesn't appear to be your native tongue.

LOL. I was just speaking in tongue to poke fun at the forum idiot in chief agent fail troll. You have to scroll back, way back from beginning of the thread to figure out.

 

[ivwshane]

And there you have it folks! Obama himself ordered the hacking of the DNC, or the CIA has gone rogue in order to help trump win but only so they could blame it on the Russians.


Yes folks, people are really that stupid and crazy, IGBT is proof.

 

[agent00f]

Makes perfect sense these sorts of posts come from the same sort of minds:

Booboo the stupid dog, still can't find that command? Damn, talk about a stupid dog that you are. No wonder you spend so much time in P&N.

Liberals would have us believe that all the election results were somehow funneled into one building, one room, onto one computer screen. And that the screen read "Hillary Won" on election night. But that Trump somehow bribed 'the Russians' to sneak into that room and paint "Trump" over "Hillary". That is a lie, and utterly ridiculous. There is no way the Russians could have 'hacked' the election.

But Obama has a proven track record of abusing his office and spying on his political opponents, whether he did it personally, or if his 'czars' did it for him, or if his 'czars' acted on their own without asking him. No matter how you slice it, Trumps accusation that Obama and his people spied on him is much more plausible than the liberal media's accusations that Trump and his voters are 'crazy'.




"With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of attack types but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the "fingerprints" of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen from. UMBRAGE components cover keyloggers, password collection, webcam capture, data destruction, persistence, privilege escalation, stealth, anti-virus (PSP) avoidance and survey techniques."

"CIA uses techniques to make cyber attacks look like they originated from enemy state. It turns DNC/Russia hack allegation into a joke and more then likely it was a internal DNC leak that greased the skids for the hillary defeat.

 

[ivwshane]

LOL. I was just speaking in tongue to poke fun at the forum idiot in chief agent fail troll. You have to scroll back, way back from beginning of the thread to figure out.

So you wanted to validate his claims? Odd...

 

[Svnla]

So you wanted to validate his claims? Odd...

I don't have to do anything. His own words/posts do all of the validation.

I was just poking fun at the moron.

 

[ivwshane]

I don't have to do anything. His own words/posts do all of the validation.

I was just poking fun at the moron.

But instead, you did do something, you made an incoherent post and then tried to play it off as making fun of him. I'm sorry to tell you but it backfired.

 

[Svnla]

But instead, you did do something, you made an incoherent post and then tried to play it off as making fun of him. I'm sorry to tell you but it backfired.

Hey, that's your opinion. I say what I believe in and I will stand by what I say, unlike agent fail troll..aka..booboo the stupid dog.

 

[agent00f]

I don't have to do anything. His own words/posts do all of the validation.

I was just poking fun at the moron.

LOL @ acting as stupid as possible when accused of being as stupid as possible.

 

[Grooveriding]

Liberals would have us believe that all the election results were somehow funneled into one building, one room, onto one computer screen. And that the screen read "Hillary Won" on election night. But that Trump somehow bribed 'the Russians' to sneak into that room and paint "Trump" over "Hillary". That is a lie, and utterly ridiculous. There is no way the Russians could have 'hacked' the election.

But Obama has a proven track record of abusing his office and spying on his political opponents, whether he did it personally, or if his 'czars' did it for him, or if his 'czars' acted on their own without asking him. No matter how you slice it, Trumps accusation that Obama and his people spied on him is much more plausible than the liberal media's accusations that Trump and his voters are 'crazy'.




"With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of attack types but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the "fingerprints" of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen from. UMBRAGE components cover keyloggers, password collection, webcam capture, data destruction, persistence, privilege escalation, stealth, anti-virus (PSP) avoidance and survey techniques."

"CIA uses techniques to make cyber attacks look like they originated from enemy state. It turns DNC/Russia hack allegation into a joke and more then likely it was a internal DNC leak that greased the skids for the hillary defeat.

Right. All the intelligence agencies and members of government are lying about Russia's election interference. They are also just having a lark by investigating whether there was collusion between Russia and Trump's team with that interference.

Meanwhile when Trump makes something up, without evidence, that is just something he pulled out of his ass and put on Twitter - that is what is believable.

There is your logic.

 

[woolfe9998]

Not only was there no proof, but with Trump's win it appeared the American people cared more about the content of the leaks itself rather than if Russia was involved or not. Hillary already made the Russian arguement during debates, and how effective was that arguement was for her?

Bah, this kind of illogic is one of my pet peeves. It comes from people on both sides of the aisle, but I'll just address it here. Just because someone wins or loses an election, it doesn't validate or, in the case of a loss, invalidate, every political strategy they used. This logic is tantamount to concluding that Trump's unhinged twitter rants must be helping him politically, because after all, he ranted a lot on twitter and won an election. It's possible to win an election in spite of doing things that harm you politically, assuming it didn't harm you enough to make you lose. Likewise, it's possible to lose an election in spite of doing things that helped you politically, if such things just didn't help you quite enough. There were loads of variables which determined the electoral outcome here. Clinton's messaging on Russia hacking was but one.

We can't really say based on the election outcome how concerned Americans are about this Russia hacking business. But loads of current polls are showing that a majority of Americans want it investigated, and preferrably by an independent special prosecutor.

 

[uallas5]

I think the real question is how soon will Sean Hannity will fly out to London to have another interview with Assange. I mean they seemed to get along so well the last time when they could talk about Hillary's email.

 

[agent00f]

Bah, this kind of illogic is one of my pet peeves. It comes from people on both sides of the aisle, but I'll just address it here. Just because someone wins or loses an election, it doesn't validate or, in the case of a loss, invalidate, every political strategy they used. This logic is tantamount to concluding that Trump's unhinged twitter rants must be helping him politically, because after all, he ranted a lot on twitter and won an election. It's possible to win an election in spite of doing things that harm you politically, assuming it didn't harm you enough to make you lose. Likewise, it's possible to lose an election in spite of doing things that helped you politically, if such things just didn't help you quite enough. There were loads of variables which determined the electoral outcome here. Clinton's messaging on Russia hacking was but one.

We can't really say based on the election outcome how concerned Americans are about this Russia hacking business. But loads of current polls are showing that a majority of Americans want it investigated, and preferrably by an independent special prosecutor.

He does make a pretty good point that conservatives will support any level of degeneracy no matter what, and this thread makes such a claim rather evident.

Liberals tend to lose from assuming their political opponents are anything like themselves. It's simply a fact that nearly half the country is driven by completely different ideals.

 

[Vic]

Liberals would have us believe that all the election results were somehow funneled into one building, one room, onto one computer screen. And that the screen read "Hillary Won" on election night. But that Trump somehow bribed 'the Russians' to sneak into that room and paint "Trump" over "Hillary". That is a lie, and utterly ridiculous. There is no way the Russians could have 'hacked' the election.

But Obama has a proven track record of abusing his office and spying on his political opponents, whether he did it personally, or if his 'czars' did it for him, or if his 'czars' acted on their own without asking him. No matter how you slice it, Trumps accusation that Obama and his people spied on him is much more plausible than the liberal media's accusations that Trump and his voters are 'crazy'.




"With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of attack types but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the "fingerprints" of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen from. UMBRAGE components cover keyloggers, password collection, webcam capture, data destruction, persistence, privilege escalation, stealth, anti-virus (PSP) avoidance and survey techniques."

"CIA uses techniques to make cyber attacks look like they originated from enemy state. It turns DNC/Russia hack allegation into a joke and more then likely it was a internal DNC leak that greased the skids for the hillary defeat.

Yaknow, I keep seeing this straw man coming from the RWNJ crowd, but it has no basis in reality. The actual liberal concerns regarding Trump's connections with Russia are that his campaign violated the Logan act, presumably by negotiating to ease the economic sanctions against Russia should Trump be elected.

 

[IGBT]

Yaknow, I keep seeing this straw man coming from the RWNJ crowd, but it has no basis in reality. The actual liberal concerns regarding Trump's connections with Russia are that his campaign violated the Logan act, presumably by negotiating to ease the economic sanctions against Russia should Trump be elected.

Where's the Beef?? Another "Nothing Burger" yarn pulled off CNN.

 

[Vic]

Where's the Beef?? Another "Nothing Burger" yarn pulled off CNN.

No, the facts (multiple meetings by Trump campaign staff with high-ranking Russian officials) pretty much speak for themselves.

And hey, guy, you've spent the last 8 years here spouting every bizarre and improbable conspiracy theory about Obama ever devised, so don't go pretending like you have any credibility, because you don't.

 

[woolfe9998]

Yaknow, I keep seeing this straw man coming from the RWNJ crowd, but it has no basis in reality. The actual liberal concerns regarding Trump's connections with Russia are that his campaign violated the Logan act, presumably by negotiating to ease the economic sanctions against Russia should Trump be elected.

I wouldn't characterize the concerns as narrowly as "violating the Logan Act." The Logan Act, which precludes diplomacy by people not in official capacity, has almost never been prosecuted and might even by unconstitutional. The real concern is that Trump may have traded favors with a hostile foreign power, i.e. favorable policies in exchange for criminal hacking, which would make Trump an accomplice to said criminal acts, and worse, a violation of public trust if he agreed to alter US policy in exchange for it. If these allegations turn out to be true, Trump sold out the United States and its people in order to improve his chances of being elected. This is far, far worse than violating an obscure 200 your old statute.

 

[MikeMike]

So, the single strangest thing I'm seeing about this, is that everyone is focused on "well the CIA had the capability, so they probably did X,Y,Z"

Why the fuck is no one going "Shit, if the CIA has the capability, doesn't that mean that UK/China/Russia/India/Germany/France/etc also have the same capabilities, which means pretty much all governments can do X,Y,Z at any time they'd like?"

I get you can only see the direct connection to the CIA, but that's not seeing the forest for the trees

 

[Vic]

So, the single strangest thing I'm seeing about this, is that everyone is focused on "well the CIA had the capability, so they probably did X,Y,Z"

Why the fuck is no one going "Shit, if the CIA has the capability, doesn't that mean that UK/China/Russia/India/Germany/France/etc also have the same capabilities, which means pretty much all governments can do X,Y,Z at any time they'd like?"

I get you can only see the direct connection to the CIA, but that's not seeing the forest for the trees

Ironically, the Logan act was written in response to the XYZ affair (with France).