WHY make a fake GCHQ slide?

Travis Biehn tbiehn at gmail.com
Mon Oct 12 08:00:33 PDT 2015 

I'm not accusing Mike of misrepresenting his 'findings.' I think that's a
clear misread on his part.

-Travis

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Shelley <shelley at misanthropia.org> wrote:

> I don't recall Mike ever saying the words, "this slide is a fake."
>
> What is being put forth for discussion and review is the following:
>
> With the log files that were included in the Cryptome archive,
>
> *anyone* with access to those files could have made that slide,
>
> because the data in the log files are from the same time period referred
> to in the slide.
>
> Why is this so hard to comprehend?  I feel like this list has branched off
> into some alternate timeline where logic and critical thinking do not exist!
>
> -S
>
>
> On October 12, 2015 7:21:16 AM Michael Best <themikebest at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I never said I proved the slide is fake, Travis. In fact, I've said several
>> times that I've all done is prove that it could be fake. I said it in the
>> mailing list and in the original posts on my site.
>>
>> *Please* try to read what you're criticizing/arguing/responding to. I know
>>
>> it can be hard, or boring, or frustrating, but it's essential to a
>> dialogue
>> that you respond to what the other person/side/position said and not
>> confabulate something (as is human nature) or worse yet, build a strawman.
>>
>> Forcing your targets to *ahem* 'go dark' by instilling paranoia is exactly
>> > the opposite of what 'an IA / TLA' wants.
>>
>>
>> So categorical, monolithic and single minded! One might even say "overly
>> so" lol
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Travis Biehn <tbiehn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Mike,
>> > You haven't proven that they were fake. Being able to counterfeit a
>> dollar
>> > bill does not all dollar bills counterfeit make. It's been one giant
>> navel
>> > gazing exercise.
>> >
>> > These disclosures only serve to further confirm opsec procedures long
>> > recommended and employed. This slide is an advertisement for Tor (which
>> > some hold to be a government honeypot, I do not.)
>> >
>> > Forcing your targets to *ahem* 'go dark' by instilling paranoia is
>> exactly
>> > the opposite of what 'an IA / TLA' wants.
>> >
>> > -Travis
>> >
>> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:55 AM, Michael Best <themikebest at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> I think Snowden has become such a folk hero that some people may leap
>> to
>> >> defend what seems like an attack on him without taking as much time to
>> look
>> >> at the data/posts as they would otherwise.
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Shelley <shelley at misanthropia.org>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On October 12, 2015 6:20:46 AM Michael Best <themikebest at gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I tried to list their motives under the GCHQ/UK motives, who would be
>> >>>> more
>> >>>> likely to fake the slide anyway and are the ones alleged of having
>> >>>> leaked
>> >>>> documents to the Independent on behalf of JTRIG, are a fairly likely
>> >>>> candidate.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Yes, you did list a number of possibilities.  It sometimes seems as
>> >>> though the same few people do not read and/or comprehend responses
>> before
>> >>> replying to them.
>> >>>
>> >>> Faking a slide like this would be a good way to inspire paranoia
>> >>>> and divide a community, no? It got Cryptome to post a notice on their
>> >>>> site
>> >>>> for a week or two, alerting people to the possibility that they'd
>> been
>> >>>> targeted by GCHQ by visiting Cryptome. Sounds like JTRIG-ish
>> paranoia,
>> >>>> no?
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Agreed.  It could be an effective way to deter visitors to Cryptome,
>> >>> possibly to divert attention away from something posted there around
>> the
>> >>> time this all began.
>> >>>
>> >>> -S
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Georgi Guninski <
>> guninski at guninski.com
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> >
>> >>>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joint_Threat_Research_Intelligence_Group&oldid=670966374
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > In June 2015, NSA files published by Glenn Greenwald revealed new
>> >>>> > details about JTRIG's work at covertly manipulating online
>> >>>> > communities.[6]
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 08:58:33AM -0400, Michael Best wrote:
>> >>>> > > >
>> >>>> > > > So assuming Snowden "borrowed" the slide from the NSA and he
>> >>>> didn't get
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > > owned, the slide is _REAL_.
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > > I don't think I understand your mean, if we assuming it's real,
>> it
>> >>>> > follows
>> >>>> > > that it's real? I think I walked into a language barrier.
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > > > Having in mind Snowden likely have large pile of slides, if he
>> got
>> >>>> > > > owned, likely all/the majority of them would likely be fake.
>> >>>> > > > Is this plausible?
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > > Not necessarily, that's not how disinfo works a lot of the time.
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > > And did you missed the us-natsec trolling about the eu appearing
>> to
>> >>>> > > > trust Snowden's slides (though sometimes they can't prove it)?
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > > No, there just wasn't much to respond to.
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Georgi Guninski <
>> >>>> guninski at guninski.com>
>> >>>> > > wrote:
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > > > So assuming Snowden "borrowed" the slide from the NSA and he
>> >>>> didn't get
>> >>>> > > > owned, the slide is _REAL_.
>> >>>> > > >
>> >>>> > > > Having in mind Snowden likely have large pile of slides, if he
>> got
>> >>>> > > > owned, likely all/the majority of them would likely be fake.
>> >>>> > > >
>> >>>> > > > Is this plausible?
>> >>>> > > >
>> >>>> > > > And did you missed the us-natsec trolling about the eu
>> appearing
>> >>>> to
>> >>>> > > > trust Snowden's slides (though sometimes they can't prove it)?
>> >>>> > > >
>> >>>> > > >
>> >>>> > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 08:22:37AM -0400, Michael Best wrote:
>> >>>> > > > > No but as I and others have noted, he didn't look at all of
>> the
>> >>>> > materials
>> >>>> > > > > he handed over to journalists and couldn't possibly be
>> expected
>> >>>> to
>> >>>> > > > remember
>> >>>> > > > > all the ones he did see well enough to possibly be able to ID
>> >>>> this
>> >>>> > one as
>> >>>> > > > > altered or forged. He was only able to argue against the
>> other
>> >>>> > documents
>> >>>> > > > > because he had never been in touch with the outlet releasing
>> >>>> them,
>> >>>> > > > contrary
>> >>>> > > > > to their apparent belief.
>> >>>> > > > >
>> >>>> > > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Georgi Guninski <
>> >>>> > guninski at guninski.com>
>> >>>> > > > > wrote:
>> >>>> > > > >
>> >>>> > > > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 07:50:14AM -0400, Michael Best
>> wrote:
>> >>>> > > > > > > As I think I said in the other thread, less specific
>> >>>> charges that
>> >>>> > > > require
>> >>>> > > > > > > more specific proof and almost never leveled before a
>> trial
>> >>>> is
>> >>>> > set,
>> >>>> > > > > > because
>> >>>> > > > > > > it forces the issue to be tried in the court of public
>> >>>> opinion,
>> >>>> > > > where a
>> >>>> > > > > > lot
>> >>>> > > > > > > of information can't be released lest it spoil an
>> >>>> investigation
>> >>>> > or
>> >>>> > > > > > > potential trial. There's also the fact that there'd be
>> >>>> little to
>> >>>> > > > gain at
>> >>>> > > > > > > this point by alleging that the slides are fake since
>> there
>> >>>> > would be
>> >>>> > > > few
>> >>>> > > > > > > people to believe it,
>> >>>> > > > > > >
>> >>>> > > > > > > "NSA hasn't said it's fake" doesn't seem like a strong
>> >>>> argument -
>> >>>> > > > > > > especially for a non-NSA slide. And again - *Snowden
>> >>>> himself* has
>> >>>> > > > accused
>> >>>> > > > > > > outlets of releasing slides attributed to him that *he
>> says
>> >>>> he
>> >>>> > did
>> >>>> > > > not
>> >>>> > > > > > > provide*.
>> >>>> > > > > > >
>> >>>> > > > > > Likely the NSA would distribute fake slides just to
>> discredit
>> >>>> > Snowden.
>> >>>> > > > > >
>> >>>> > > > > > Does Snowden deny the authencity of this slide?
>> >>>> > > > > >
>> >>>> > > > > > This slide appeared in _too many_ news AFAICT to get
>> >>>> unnoticed.
>> >>>> > > > > >
>> >>>> > > >
>> >>>> >
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Twitter <https://twitter.com/tbiehn> | LinkedIn
>> > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/travisbiehn> | GitHub
>> > <http://github.com/tbiehn> | TravisBiehn.com <
>> http://www.travisbiehn.com> |
>> > Google Plus <https://plus.google.com/+TravisBiehn>
>> >
>>
>
>
>


-- 
Twitter <https://twitter.com/tbiehn> | LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/travisbiehn> | GitHub <http://github.com/tbiehn>
| TravisBiehn.com <http://www.travisbiehn.com> | Google Plus
<https://plus.google.com/+TravisBiehn>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 14058 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20151012/9ee77269/attachment-0002.txt>

More information about the cypherpunks mailing list