Why didn't Snowden disclose Heartbleed (and others)?

Ted Smith tedks at riseup.net
Wed Apr 16 09:19:44 PDT 2014


On Tue, 2014-04-15 at 18:16 +0200, Lodewijk andré de la porte wrote:
> F, I couldn't find exactly to which date his documents go. Heartbleed
> was merged December 31 2011 (lonely night? sneaky vacation timing?).
> Assuming the NSA checks patches (ofc they do) they should've found it
> in Jan 2012. Snowden. Ah. Found it. "reenwald began working with
> Snowden in either February[113] or in April after Poitras asked
> Greenwald to meet her in New York City, at which point Snowden began
> providing documents to them both" That'd be April 2013.
> 
> 
> He still might've stolen the documents earlier, but who knows?

I think the documents are significantly earlier than that. I think it's
probably a mix of A and F; more sensitive information is probably more
watched even if it's still just TOP SECRET.

Also, there are definitely classifications above and within TOP SECRET.
Look at the annotations on the Snowden documents.

-- 
Sent from Ubuntu
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20140416/f823628b/attachment-0001.sig>


More information about the cypherpunks mailing list