Tag Archives: DGSE

A land in fear

That happens, countries like people can be in fear. The stand of a country is usually set by the speakers of that land. That is what I personally believe and behold, we get the Arab News giving us (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/2572458/middle-east) with the headline ‘Iraq’s top Shiite cleric calls for end to Israeli ‘aggression’ on Lebanon’, which is fun, because at present the larger collection of western nations are trying to figure out how it was done. I think that the NSA had a direct line to DARPA and I reckon they figured it out. The DGSE, ASIO, MI6 and BND were pretty much in the dark (until they received a call that is). So as we are given “Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, Shiite Islam’s highest authority in Iraq, appealed Monday for “every possible effort” to end Israeli “aggression” against Lebanon, where it is targeting the Shiite Hezbollah movement.” With the missing paragraph “On 8 October 2023, Hezbollah started firing guided rockets and artillery shells at Israeli positions in the occupied Shebaa Farms, which it said was in solidarity with Palestinians following the Hamas attack on Israel that took place a day earlier.” They have been attacking for the larger part of 26 weeks and now we get Iraqi clerics about the Israeli “aggression” on Lebanon? I think certain people are getting afraid. Allegedly Israel completed an attack against Hezbollah laid waste against the communications of Hezbollah. And no one really knows why. It happened under the noses of everyone and everyone missed it. 

So when we get to “Sistani called for “the exercise of every possible effort” to end this “barbaric aggression and to protect the Lebanese people.”” How about ending rocket launches on Israel? This has been going on and on (and on) and now people wonder what kind of creativity comes next. I am still in favour of my new solution to ment down the nuclear reactors of Iran and Russia. Then there is my stealth system that could end the use of harbours in several places. These are merely two solutions that are out in the open and I reckon that Iraq feels safe from my second system as they really do not have any naval bases, but for Iran and Russia it is a different matter. 

So when we get to “Sistani called for “the exercise of every possible effort” to end tensions” I wonder when he called Hezbollah to tone it down, but I feel fairly certain that this didn’t happen and in the mean time Hezbollah and the enemies of Israel will face a next wave of their creativity. As such we see Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, Shiite Islam’s highest authority in Iraq speak his mind and subsequently his fear to Arab News. Yes, this has every chance of escalating in the near future. 

Why does this happen?
My issue isn’t Iraq, it is Iran and I reckon that they wanted someone else to speak their Shiite state of mind. I thinks it is too hypocritical (even) for Iran to ship weapons to Hezbollah whilst asking (read: demanding) for Israel to sit back and await the impact of the weapons. And in this it amounts to the fact that everyone (and I mean everyone) didn’t see coming what Israel had up its sleeve. I reckon that plenty of terrorist providers are shaking in their boots. They idea that pagers explode makes the entire communication realm they rely on, a little shaken. But that is merely my point of view. And the fact that they now optionally rely on foreign clerics on the one sided message is a much larger problem as I see it. Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani is merely the first but I doubt he s alone in this. If this is an Iranian move (as I speculate) there is every chance that Shiite clerics have an increasing problem in the nearby future. This is not a given, but other countries would possibly be taking a firmer stance on Shiite clerics. Am I right? I honestly do not know, but there are definitely markers that could imply this. 

It is a worry and a larger upcoming stage towards destabilisation. A setting Iran likes (Russia too), the rest of the country is not on board with this and I speculate that the Sunni clerics are not happy either. They have enough of an issue in foreign nations to get the Islamic message across, I doubt they want this, but that is merely my non-Islamic point of view.

Lets try to enjoy the day before we consider the hassles of tomorrow.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics, Religion

A 28 month delay

Yes, that is how I see it and it all started by a story in the Naval News (at https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2024/01/red-sea-crisis-houthis-demonstrate-increased-capability-coalition-demonstrates-increased-presence/) they were not alone, but there I saw a quote that set me in motion. The quote that set it off was “The introduction of a one-way attack USV is of concern”, you see that was an incorrect statement. I made clear reference of this in ‘The Iranian play’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/08/30/the-iranian-play/) there I wrote “Yemen has no infrastructure for this, Iran is the only player willing to supply Houthi forces and that is the problem” I wrote this 28 months ago and in 28 months the Houthi forces never gained the ability to do so, they never had the option or (at that time) trained staff to do anything we saw. The west and others sat on their asses all whilst the problem evolved and ONLY now, now that the fat cats are losing margins in the red sea, NOW we see action. So how stupid was that to begin with?

Al Jazeera (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/1/10/us-uk-forces-shoot-down-21-drones-and-missiles-fired-by-houthis) gives us “No injuries or damage reported in what the US military said was the 26th attack by the Yemen-based group since November 19” as I personally see it, this is pushed by others, happy to use Houthi forces as cannon fodder, but the west remains ignorant and I personally believe it is an intentional form of ignorance. 

Who did anything to stop these drones from getting there in the first place? I can’t have been the only one seeing this 28 months ago? So who was drowning the proper investigations? Who was stopping the media from asking the right questions? Perhaps it was all for the digital dollar. I doubt it, I personally believe this was another setting towards destabilisation of the middle east. It is a personal view and I might be wrong, but ask yourself. Now we see what was clear that many months ago? Are the red sea margins that important to the west? Are margins all they care about or is all that only possible as the middle east stays destabilised? You tell me, I am honestly clueless on what the answer is. Yet when you consider how long these Houthi forces are receiving support in hardware and training all whilst the west has been unable to stop them? 

Now consider three of the least capable parties in all this CIA, MI-6 and DGSE and no one saw this? I will let you ponder all this as the news comes in. Yet consider The Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/10/britain-warns-severe-consequences-houthi-attack-red-sea-repelled) giving us “The Houthis, once seen as a minor localised military force, say the attacks are intended to force Israel to allow more humanitarian aid into Gaza” all whilst I gave the lowdown 28 months ago and you tell me, who is doing a number of whom? 

Enjoy the moment when you are merely one day away from Friday.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

Gapping data

I did take notice of the story, but there were other considerations. So what is the issue with a two week old story? Actually there is nothing wrong with the time gap, it actually works out nicely. Yet before we go anywhere, lets take a look at ‘A data ‘black hole’: Europol ordered to delete vast store of personal data’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/10/a-data-black-hole-europol-ordered-to-delete-vast-store-of-personal-data) there we are given “The EU’s police agency, Europol, will be forced to delete much of a vast store of personal data that it has been found to have amassed unlawfully by the bloc’s data protection watchdog.” Here I have an issue with the stage of “amassed unlawfully”, then we get “The unprecedented finding from the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) targets what privacy experts are calling a “big data ark” containing billions of points of information. Sensitive data in the ark has been drawn from crime reports, hacked from encrypted phone services and sampled from asylum seekers never involved in any crime.” There we get “hacked from encrypted phone services and sampled from asylum seekers never involved in any crime” You see, the biggest problem in any data set are the data gaps. MISSING VALUE analyses will not get you anywhere and data cannot be analysed on data that is not there. As I see it, the commercial world amasses worlds of data and the EDPS (European Data Protection Supervisor) does next to nothing. We could start an argument that the EDPS is catering to organised crime, but that might be a stretch. I know my data has been collected by CIA, FBI, GCHQ, Mossad, DGSE and at least two other organisations. You think I care? I live my life and keep doing what I am legally allowed to do. The data merely reinforces this. So why is there such a rush to maim the mobility of Europol? I have nothing against laws, I believe that laws are important, but how stupid is it to set up the laws to hinder the law? When our data is all over Microsoft, Google, Amazon, GTCOM and whatever Russia has. The 4,000 TB that is to be deleted will serve organised crime and criminals, no one else. And more importantly it will not protect refugees, if anything, the data shows them to be innocent. Did no one make that leap? You see I oppose “Europol had worked with the EDPS “to find a balance between keeping the EU secure and its citizens safe while adhering to the highest standards of data protection”, the agency said.” I oppose it because data does not protect or endanger lives, it is the one wielding all that data does and whilst commercial enterprises are given a wide berth avoiding their ‘legal’ teams, the EDPS has to prove its existence by having a go at Interpol.

Yes, it is their job, but in what job do you hand opportunity to criminals, organised crime and terrorists? 

And the Guardian is appeasing the stage buy giving the simplest of examples, the example that makes you go ‘awww’. But the example “The political activist, whose only serious run-ins with police amount to breaking a window to gain entrance to a building and create a squat for homeless people, was removed from the Dutch watch-list by authorities in 2019. But a year prior to this removal he had moved to Berlin, which unknown to Van der Linde at the time prompted Dutch police to share his data with German counterparts and Europol. The activist discovered his entanglement with Europol only when he saw a partially declassified file at Amsterdam city hall.” So a criminal, guilty of breaking and entering, that is the simple truth. But we are not supposed to see that, are we? And when the next assault is not in London, but Amsterdam and the gapped data will show to have been an option to stop this, what will the EU give as a response? 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Military, Politics, Science

The intelligence nightmare

Yes, that is how I see it. You think that you have seen it all? It is about to get worse and the BBC actually is showing us the start of it. With ‘Thousands of pro-Russia Serbs march in Belgrade’ we are merely scratching the surface. The article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-60630351) does not give much, but it gives us “Friday’s march was a show of support for Moscow after its invasion of Ukraine. Serbia has religious, ethnic and political ties with Russia that have existed for centuries” You see it is a lot worse, Serbian arms dealers are all over Europe. Paces like Rotterdam, London and Paris come to mind, but there are more and now as we see all the pro Russian events starting, we see a stage where Serbs could destabilise most of western Europe. They can fuel lone wolves tying hands all over the place and they sit back and watch the chaos unfold. A setting Moscow really likes. So how speculative is this? Well the issues with arm dealers in these three places alone are worrisome and they have been for the longest of times seeing a lot more visibility in 2020. Now with this BBC article it is still speculative to connect the two, but I am not sure that it is merely speculation. There have been issues for the longest of times and it is merely brought to the surface and a more visible pedestal now. 

The problem is that a lot was not monitored for the longest of time and now the intelligence organisations are lacking information on too many sides. Some sources (unconfirmed ones) give rise to activities in Denmark, Sweden, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, UK, Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Luxembourg, USA, Norway, Montenegro and Austria. Do you really think it is all speculation? They have been busy under nearly everyones noses for over a decade and now that Russia is pushing the buttons, some are claiming allegiance, some are waking up and some are set to set Western Europe on fire. Which is which? I cannot tell, but there are connections on all kinds of levels. Did no one consider why Russian weaponry was relatively easy to get in Amsterdam and Rotterdam? In 2020 the Times gave us “While Serbia had a glut of Cold War-era stockpiles and a robust but underused defence industry, the Iraqi government was ill-equipped to battle an insurgency. So in late 2007 the two countries struck a £190 million deal to bring Serbian assault rifles, machine guns, anti-tank weapons, ammunition, explosives and other ordnance to Iraq”, I personally believe that these pipelines were there to also get Russian weapons into Iraq, and not merely the ones they have, to a larger degree the Russians provided hardware and that sets a new station, the station of storage. The Netherlands has been (for the longest time), a transitional port of arms, but there is also the speculation (never proven) that at times a container was ‘misplaced’ and ended on Dutch soil, a container filled with arms. So, how much of this is speculation? There is a fair amount of it, but I worked in the harbours of Rotterdam, when I was young and gullible, so anything is possible. Yet in this day and age, when serbs are ‘proclaiming loyalty’ do you want to take that chance? I will let you figure it out.

And whilst you do the Intelligence organisations of Europe will have to take a harsh look at what they have on the Serbs in their domain, because they really do not get to have a choice in that matter, not anymore.

And me? I have found a few more cogs to add to the previous story, I like to remain creative.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

This is weird!

Yup, it is weird and you will see what I talk about soon enough. You see, not unlike the Sony fiasco, some players are all about blaming the one we all see as a boogeyman, it happens and it lulls us all to sleep. Yet when the BBC gave us 18 hours ago ‘North Korea hackers stole $400m of cryptocurrency in 2021, report says’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-59990477) I took a little time to mull a few things over. You see, it is nice that we are given a (state) hacker and a setting what apparently gave them $400,000,000, yet the danger is different. For me it started with the Sony hack, it gave me an idea to create a new hack that was never done before and the nice part is that it could be implemented in several ways and in several places. Yet then I started to think: “How can a nation observed by so many agencies pull this off, all whilst we saw evidence, journalist supported evidence, that military officers in North Korea had NEVER seen a smartphone, or one of its base functionalities?” This thought matters, because that lack tends to seep through the fabric of ANY organisation (to some degree). So I felt certain that the Sony hack was never done by North Korea, and several accredited and more capable cyber people than me felt the same way. 

So here when I see “From 2020 to 2021, the number of North Korean-linked hacks jumped from four to seven, and the value extracted from these hacks grew by 40%,” Chainalysis said in a report” I feel that I am in a stage where I am watching a blame game develop, all whilst the fault is somewhere else. And there is more, the report the BBC talks about gives us “These complex tactics and techniques have led many security researchers to characterise cyber actors for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) as advanced persistent threats (APTs). This is especially true for APT 38, also known as “Lazarus Group,” which is led by DPRK’s primary intelligence agency, the US- and UN-sanctioned Reconnaissance General Bureau. While we will refer to the attackers as North Korean-linked hackers more generally, many of these attacks were likely carried out by the Lazarus Group in particular.” It is an issue, because “cyber actors for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) as advanced persistent threats (APTs)” implies an infrastructure, one that a lot of open nations do not get to have. I am not stating North Korea is innocent (well, they might be of this), I am stating that someone wants us to think it is North Korea, so that others stop looking in THEIR direction. You see, the reference to the Lazarus group (one I personally take offence with) and the DPRK gives a rather large voice, but in that it could only be if senior ranking North Korean officers knew what a smart phone was and that part is weird as some journalists who were in North Korea (2019, I believe) saw the opposite. This does not make sense. As such we cannot ignore hackers, optionally hackers who for a fee took shelter in or near North Korea, yet that puts them in the most watched part of the internet by at least half a dozen players. Personally it makes much more sense if they were working from China. 

And now we get to the good stuff. This is seen in “Once North Korea gained custody of the funds, they began a careful laundering process to cover up and cash out,” the report on last year’s cyber attacks added. A United Nations panel that monitors sanctions on North Korea has accused Pyongyang of using stolen funds to support its nuclear and ballistic missile programmes as a way to avoid international sanctions.” I reckon that laundering is not beyond the abilities of North Korea. Yet the setting of “accused Pyongyang of using stolen funds to support its nuclear and ballistic missile programmes” something that is possible, but the knowledge North Korea has stops this, moreover, their ballistic programmes are set upon failure after failure. Which with $400,000,000 in merely 7 operations sounds goofy to say the least. 

It is my personal feeling that the hackers might be anywhere but in or near North Korea. The Sony hack is optionally a slice of evidence towards that. Consider that Russia has now Arrested REvil, yet no one is wondering how this group had “more than 426 million rubles (£4m), including about £440,000 worth of crypto-currency”, including 20 premium cars. These things get noticed, as such I believe that REvil had some massive levels of protection, a setting North Korea cannot do, it is too unbalanced. With REvil, there was a Russian valve of protection, a state player that is on the top tier, a place where North Korea has no access. When you see these elements questions rise and a lot more questions rise that one would expect. So who did steal that $400,000,000? I have no idea, but consider that someone offering North Korea in its current state is offering $100,000,000 for denying the blame, is that good business practice? It would allow the perpetrators months to set safe 75% and a nice settlement in a very nice place. I would definitely consider such a move and with the world searching, getting the not look in the wrong place is a good place to start.

In all this, I could be wrong, but am I? How much evidence of advanced computer technology (outside of Olympus has fallen) regarding North Korea have we seen? We saw the images of a North Korean president and his top staff looking amazed at a 3 year old Dell computer, one we see in many households. Where is the advanced hardware needed to remain undetected? All questions in addition to the dozens watching their every digital move. If they get away under these conditions, they would be more able than the NSA, DGSE, or FSB. How likely is that? When you look at the larger frame, too much of this is weird. On the other hand, it gave me the idea to create the Hop+1 listening systems, just a little idea I had to scare the Pentagon a little (I need my amusement too). So perhaps this will set me on track for another piece of IP, I have done more with less, so here is hoping.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Military, Politics, Science

The company we keep

There is a setting that we tend to ignore, we are by the grace of our own undoing limited by the company we keep. And here is the problem, when that person is Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri it tends to be a problem (for the US). The man is allegedly a traitor (decently proven) and a thief (a little less proven). Although, when a person comes into a country with $387,000,000 questions tend to rise, especially when that person was an intelligence officer. I will be honest, to the best of my knowledge no government pays its intelligence officers THAT well. Doubt me? Ask MI5 (+4420 7930 9000) or MI6 (same number), I could give you a whole range of numbers, but after these two and the laughter you’ll experience, you will have had enough of it. Oh, I just discovered that the money Al Jabri had amounts to 50% of the entire DGSE budget, so there.

So why does this matter?
Well normally I do not give a hoot, no matter how it plays, but when the Middle East Eye gives us ‘US court dismisses Saudi case against former intelligence officer Saad al-Jabri’ (at https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/saudi-saad-aljabri-us-court-dismisses-case) it does matter. For one, the man is and lives in Canada, so why is the US involved? The quote “US government intervened to stop classified documents being used in the case as it would ‘harm national security’” if there was a real national security issue it might sway people and it does make sense to protect national security. And when we are given “As a top spy, Jabri worked with the CIA on counter-terrorism projects. He was a close aide to Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, the former Saudi interior minister ousted by Mohammed bin Salman as heir to the throne in a 2017 palace coup, which prompted Jabri to flee to Canada.” In this is no one wondering why he did not move to the US? So when we are given “Sakab accused Jabri of embezzling state funds while working under Mohammed bin Nayef, which Jabri denies” question need to be asked and they are not being asked. Why is that? Then we get another setting that was reported on earlier and we see with the quote “Jabri filed a lawsuit in the US saying that Canadian authorities foiled a plot by a 50-strong “hit squad” sent by Mohammed bin Salman to kill him in Canada. The alleged incident is said to have occurred less than two weeks after the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in October 2018, in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul.” So pardon my directness. If someone needs Al Jabri dead, one person might fit the bill, 50 do not. This was about something else and in this there is a case that the US is looking away. So whilst there is no claim on the Canadian side, all this goes to court in the US (yet again) and no one is asking questions. 

As for the imagination, depending on the security he has, a mere one person job with a drone carrying a claymore will most likely do the trick, the other 49 were overkill and useless. If the hit is done properly, the pilot is 4-6 blocks away, has a near direct line of sight, flies in boom! Problem solved. Yet in all this I am not afraid to ask questions from the other side either. When we see the quote “a lawsuit filed by a Saudi state-owned firm, Sakab Saudi Holding, which accused Jabri of embezzling state funds.” What evidence does Sakab Saudi Holding have and if it is enough, why not hand it to the press? At this point no one is getting anywhere and as far as Bazooka Joe knows, Al Jabri is a mere CIA operative working on counter-terrorism projects. So why does he have to do that from Canada? It is a simple enough question. 

The Americans made. Choice, which is fair enough, but why is Al Jabri hiding in Canada? And in all this we see case after case and no one is looking into the matter how Al Jabri got his fortune, or why exactly he has access to billions? Then we see Al Jabri pleading to the US to get his kids out of Saudi Arabia, so why not ask Canada? He is hiding there, is he not? There is however an upside to all this, at some point if the US would like to hold onto the weapons sales with Saudi Arabia, they might have to retracts all protection from Al Jabri, should be fun seeing exactly what protection Canada will offer, and particularly where the alleged stolen fortune from Saudi Arabia becomes a national security issue for the US, perhaps the CIA was involved in that heist. I actually  do not know, I am merely speculating but the more I read on these events the less any of it makes sense, from any side. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Military, Politics

From one to the other

That is a setting we are all familiar with. We get one and it tends to lead to the other. This is as generic as it can be stated and it applies to pretty much anything. In my case it is more than speculation, although it is important to realise that speculation is part of this setting. The idea started recently as I got a hold of an interesting PDF, there are many like it, but this one is now downloaded and mine (a Stanley Kubrick pun). It is also a larger station in the actions of the CIA and NSA towards the ICIJ (their favourite tool) and the Pandora Papers. You know that trough of information with millions of documents and relying mostly on flames and 600 essay writers. There was a side I had suspected, but I am (still) lacking in evidence. Yet suddenly my eyes cross a research paper that was published in 2016. It is called ‘Analysing How People Orient to and Spread Rumours in Social Media by Looking at Conversational Threads’, yet the more I saw of it, the more the secondary station became ‘Analysing How People Orient to instigated Rumours in Media by starting Conversational Threads’. The research gives a lot and the setting of the ICIJ and the insanely stupid articles written by essay writers is starting to show a new surface. Now, I cannot state that this is the CIA and NSA, but the amount of transgressions leave the NSA as only viable option and as this is a stage to change the international political grounds of the US it seems more than likely that the CIA is holding the hands of the NSA (courting them) and that is a speculative view, but it is the one I have.

Consider the hundreds of thousands of documents. Consider the headlines we have seen and now we see ‘Panama Paper leaks: More than Rs 20,000 cr undisclosed credits detected for 930 India-linked entities, says govt’ (source: Times of India) and all whilst they still have had no time to make a dashboard. Now we can go with “India’s Income Tax Department has detected total undisclosed credits worth Rs 20,353 crore for 930 India-linked entities in the Panama and Paradise paper leaks, the government Parliament on Tuesday.” We can accept that, or realise that someone is there as a secondary channel whispering certain people certain things via another channel. Like: “I just noticed something interesting. Did someone look at the tax records of …..?” Yes, it is a bit of a stretch, but when you seek the original raw files and consider how many people were ‘suddenly’ found all whilst the ICIJ never gave a clear dashboard implies that there is some form of orchestration and no one is asking questions, especially the media.

We can go all conspiracy theory on this, or we can analyse (I opt for the second one), when you set out those threads things make little sense, it is almost top-line reporting by the chaotic, and I do not really go for that. 

To understand the link with the two elements, I offer “The spread of misinformation is especially important in the context of breaking news, where new pieces of information are released piecemeal, often starting off as unverified information in the form of a rumour. These rumours then spread to large numbers of users, influencing perception and understanding of events, despite being unverified. Social media rumours that are later proven false can have harmful consequences both for individuals and for society” from the article. In it self a statement, a theory (one that has been proven correctly) but a simple observation. I am altering it (to a small extent) to give us “where new pieces of information are released piecemeal, often handed to us as ‘from anonymous sources’ giving us a speculative ‘more than a rumour’ and eagerly accepted by the hungry, angry and frustrated media observers.” Here we need to observe two elements. Because my version fits, does not make it true, the data of this research was captured with other means and other observational investigations, you cannot take a research on Apples and a research on pears and combine them into research on fruit. It does not work that way, yet the eery side of how certain stages match and the ICIJ with their “We got it as long as we did not investigate the source”, If it was GCHQ, DGSE, FSB or the MSS, these 600 essay writers would be all over the limelight breaking that deal after the data was received, leaving us with the NSA and by popular foreign demand the CIA as a linked buddy. 

So, yes there is speculation and as long as you realise that you are OK. Yet the document (added at the end) shows a few more images (as phrases go) and that sets in motion a larger area of consideration (which is not the same as a larger stage). At first we see “One of the main challenges when studying rumours is to come up with a sound definition of the concept”, as well as “Highly reputable users such as news organisations tend to support rumours, irrespective of them being eventually confirmed or debunked, tweet with certainty and provide evidence within their tweets.” And when you combine the two you see the fictive validity of the ICIJ (as I personally see it). There is a snag, it is not out in the open, but the population at large is more and more questioning what defines a ‘reputable users’ and as such news organisations catering to certain elements are less and less seen as reputable. And there are cases all over the world where being first tends to imply that vetting can be done afterward. Not unlike the image below.

So as we see the escalation of the Pandora Papers more and more lacking clear evidence and relying on flames, there is now a perspective view that the CIA is setting a stage where THEIR political stage is altered and less desirable political players (and their wealthy friends) are suddenly in the limelight, with al the angry people aimed through emotional articles and flames.

Am I right? Am I wrong? 

I honestly do not know, but there is more and more published evidence adding to my side of the scales and it does not look good for the global press at present, or perhaps to the pool of media supporting the ICIJ with their own essay writers. I will let you decide, yet consider what is already out there and how the media is spiking its population to themselves for all kinds of reasons and why the neutral absolute truth is not considered. I am not super intelligent (more intelligent than most), as such others especially in media would have seen these elements, but somehow they do not report it, why?

I will let you brood over that part of the equation.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics

The New business

The BBC informs us(via another route) that there is a new business in town, this business works on the old premise of the bully and the backstabbing method called Ransomware. Now, this method was not unknown, we have seen it before, yet the article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-57946117) called ‘Ransomware key to unlock customer data from REvil attack’ gives us “US IT firm Kaseya – which was the first to be targeted earlier this month – said it got the key from a “trusted third party”.” Yes, this might sound true, but I still have an issue here. And the quote “Kaseya’s decryptor key will allow customers to retrieve missing files, without paying the ransom. The company’s spokeswoman Dana Liedholm declined to answer whether Kaseya had paid for access to the key”, I get it, Kaseya accepts that there is a cost to doing business, without the key they are helpless, but in this instance they have also given voice to the new business. This is not on Kaseya, ransomware is a much larger stage and the law is not ready to deal with it. So when we get “But members of the group disappeared from the internet in the days following the incident, leaving companies with no way of retrieving the data until now”, I think that it was not merely fear. I think that they found a weakness in their armour and they needed to fix it, perhaps the FBI and NSA got too close? It is speculation, but I reckon that any hacker inviting the wrath of the NSA has something to fear, only the stupid do not fear that hunting machine. So when we get to the jewel of the article, a setting that describes a few elements by Joe Tidy (Cyber reporter), we see “Firstly, giving away the key now is far too late for most of the victims of this massive ransomware attack. Secondly, the mystery gifter was most probably linked to – or working with – the criminals directly.” I feel that he is on the right track, I get that Kaseya prefers the term ‘trusted source’, but that does not put Kaseya in the clear, moreover, as I reported the massive bungles that were made and the lack of oversight within Kaseya gives them a reason to cooperate with organised crime, but not a right, a right to do that is a form of treason towards ALL their customers and as Joe said it “giving away the key now is far too late for most of the victims of this massive ransomware attack”, if you doubt that call Coop (at +46107400000) and ask them the damage of 500 supermarkets shutting down, as well as a loss of data. And then Joe gives us the gem at the heart of this “I’m told by a hacker who claims to be a part of the inner circle that it was “a trusted partner” who gave the key away on behalf of the group’s leader, who calls himself Unknown. My contact says it’s all part of “a new beginning”.” I understand that this is hard to swallow and optionally it is a form of bragging, but I am not convinced that this is the case, as Joe gives us “it could well be the start of something else”, yes that has the ring that sounds true. It is the start of a new business venture and Kaseya is merely the pilot. In this we have two sets of minds, the first is that the shortsighted greed drive of Kaseya (as I discussed it in ‘Dream number three’, at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/07/06/dream-number-three/) needs to have consequences. The dominant sales types with their ‘we’ll fix it down the road’ can no longer be allowed in this industry. The second part is that we have no choice but to return to a stage of targeted killing, and I do not care whether one of the hackers is a poor little 16 year old person hiding behind  ‘minor protection laws’, they guilty they get the $0.17 solution (price of a 9 mm bullet). We have no choice, the law did nothing for too long, giving hackers pass after pass as they ‘claimed’ that it was the only way. Well, so far it did nothing for a lot of people spanning a timeline that is a little over a quarter of a century, it is like an armistice race with too many casualties and the law merely shrugging at the damage that was not theirs. With Kaseya a large corner is turned and Kaseya partially has itself to thank for that. And in all this is has become time to recognise that Kaseya is not merely a victim (no matter what Dana Liedholm tells us), it did this to themselves as the source in the other article “were helping Kaseya plug the hole long before the hackers found it”, as such the ‘we’ll fix it down the road’ no longer holds water, especially as we take tally of the victims that are victims because of the shortsightedness of Kaseya. And they are not alone, there is every indication that the Microsoft exchange group and Solarwinds are part of that same stack. I have personally seen how the needs of proper testing took a back seat to Marketing and the board room drive of greed in more than one instance and that too needs to be addressed, yet I feel that the media will paint over that part with articles in emotional ways, their stake holders will not allow that to be any other way, adhering to their bonus whilst relying on marketing and sales to set out a new path based on ‘we’ll fix it down the road’, should Joe Tidy be correct (and I believe he is), we will soon see a new wave of REvil attacks and the law will be on the sidelines, as will governments all pointing at one another, all whilst keeping their ‘friends’ out of the line of fire.

It is merely my look on things, and I expect to be proven correct before the end of 2021. 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Science

From horse to course

Yes, there is a horse, it is not Mr. Ed, there is no kind conversation. This one has wings, and there are a few versions, including the off-spring of Lord Poseidon. Whether we believe Hesiod or not, it does not matter. Pegasus became a part of our oldest mythological stories. Yet today, Pegasus is something else, a figment from the imaginations of the NSO group and it was made real. It has been out for some time and last week we got the media and their overemotional response that it had a connection to 50,000 people, with 0.36% of these people journalists.

So what gives?
It is important to look at a few sources. The first is the BBC (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-57922543) who gives us ‘Princess Latifa and Princess Haya numbers ‘among leaks’’, perhaps yes, perhaps no, who cares? We do get “The discovery of the princesses’ phone numbers on the list – and those of some acquaintances – has raised questions about whether they could have been the possible target of a government client of the group.” And here the questions start and the BBC is not asking them. Just like it is steering clear of alleged man-slaughterer Martin Bashir. So when we see ‘could have been the possible target of a government client of the group’ could is here the operative word. You see, no one is doubting that list, no one has given us a clear rundown of the names, a dashboard if you like, with the option to drill per nation and per class of person. This could all be a ruse of anti-Israeli groups, optionally the ruse of a competitor. And when we see “NSO has denied any wrongdoing. It says the software is intended for use against criminals and terrorists, and is made available only to military, law enforcement and intelligence agencies with good human rights records”, so which government leaked the list and how did THAT government leak what is implied to be a complete list? Then we get to the option that the leak came from within the NSO Group, which might be the most ludicrous thought, but I tend to look at all angles, so it is an angle that is most unlikely, but the chance is not zero. The article is all about Princess Latifa, not much about the NSO Group, it is an emotional lamentation to steer clear of massive screw ups like Jimmy Savile, Lord McAlpine, Sir Cliff Richard, and Lady Diana Spencer. As some say, the credibility of the BBC has never been lower. 

The second article is also from the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-57922664) less than a day ago gives us ‘Pegasus spyware seller: Blame our customers, not us, for hacking’. Here we are given “Investigations have begun as the list, of 50,000 phone numbers, contained a small number of hacked phones”, silly me for thinking that when we see ‘Investigations have begun’, we also get ‘a small number of hacked phones’, as such there is a much larger stage, and the BBC gives us “Pegasus infects iPhones and Android devices, allowing operators to extract messages, photos and emails, record calls and secretly activate microphones and cameras”, so if there are only a small number of hacked phones, how does that part matter? And when we get “a consortium of news organisations, led by French media outlet Forbidden Stories, has published dozens of stories based around the list, including allegations French President Emmanuel Macron’s number was on it and may have been targeted.” We get the real deal, a consortium of news organisations, led by Forbidden Stories hide behind ‘allegations’ and ‘may have been targeted’. Is anyone catching on? The media want to create emotional waves, yet does not want to be held accountable for their actions. The stakeholders are key here. A ‘consortium’ implies shareholders and stakeholders. It implies also that their issue is not that the NSO Group might do something outside of governments, it might show that the media does a lot more to anger the audience it desperately needs. 

And then the media does one more jab towards a currently missing journalist no one cares about with “including those close to murdered Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi”, this is the emotional stage handed to us. It is “67 agreed to give Forbidden Stories their phones for forensic analysis. And this research, by Amnesty International Security Labs, reportedly found evidence of potential targeting by Pegasus on 37 of those”, so out of 50,000 we see that 67 are investigated and potentially we see 37 are targets, but there is no evidence that the NSO Group did this, these 37 might have been targets of the NSA or even the DGSE. 

And at this point there is one interesting flaw. If it was me, the first think I did was set up a dashboard that allows us to see where these 50,000 names are part of, where they are and how they were hacked. They have had a week and the stretch of media that gives us emotion after emotion is a much larger stage of stakeholders that need a negative view to be pushed onto the NSO Group. I admit that my view is equally speculative, but is it a wrong view? 

Finally there is the Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/jul/22/israel-examine-spyware-export-rules-should-be-tightened-nso-group-pegasus) where we see ‘Israel to examine whether spyware export rules should be tightened’. Here we are treated to “An Israeli commission reviewing allegations that NSO Group’s Pegasus spyware was misused by its customers to target journalists and human rights activists will examine whether rules on Israel’s export of cyber weapons such as Pegasus should be tightened”, I can accept that view, but that also means that governments are largely to blame for this mess, if the list is real that is. There is every chance that this was a ruse to make the NSO Group less large, less of a challenge to a competitor and this is exactly what stakeholders tend to do, and using the media as their bitch is not out of the question.

My view is reinforced by “NSO has said Macron was not a “target” of any of its customers, meaning the company denies he was selected for surveillance using its spyware, saying in multiple statements that it requires its government clients to use its powerful spying tools only for legitimate investigations into terrorism or crime”, so as Macron was never a target, the BBC articles are less than accurate and that leaves the media open to all kinds of attacks. Yes, I will admit that it is a he said she said setting (she being the media), but that also means and implies that the NSO Group is not out of the woods at present. And let’s be honest, who needs a tool like this to keep track of the Dalai Lama? The man is out there in nowhere land and when he is travelling we see 50-150 reporters surrounding him, all ways to keep track, no NSO Group required.

As we see the horse Pegasus go on a course towards the government destinations, I see less of an issue with the NSO Group and a hell of a lot more with the Stakeholders who do not have the ideas, the innovations, but they really like the money attached to it. Do you still think I am on the wrong horse track?

There is always the time will tell part, but consider that if the media has not released a dashboard of these 50,000 numbers, I believe that my case is rather clear, I would personally consider that list is nothing more than the fabrication of a stakeholder who needs the revenue that the NSO Group currently has.

2 Comments

Filed under Media, Military, Science

Reprieve the explosives

The Guardian woke me up this morning with ‘MI5 policy allowing agents to commit crimes was legal, say judges’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/09/mi5-policy-agents-take-part-crimes-lawful-appeal-court-judges). Here we are told that Maya Foa, the director of Reprieve is challenging the case that “The idea that the government can authorise undercover agents to commit the most serious crimes, including torture and murder, is deeply troubling and must be challenged”, now, I agree that this is probably an ideological approach to the matter, but this is not some scuffle with the local constabulary, when you are active enough for MI5 to look into the matter, you are an actual optional problem (read: danger) to the British people. 

We look at the example “Home Office sources cited the case of Naa’imur Zakariyah Rahman, who was jailed for life in 2018 for plotting to kill the former prime minister Theresa May. He was caught following an undercover operation in which he was provided with what he thought was a jacket and rucksack packed with explosives.”, or as one might say, he went to the target holding a block of grey putty, 5 wires and an egg timer. The issue is not what they do, the issue is for MI5 agents to get into the fold and those folds are extremely paranoid of the people they allow in but do not know, they tend to demand extreme examples of their commitment. Some sources in the political field give us “Ayman al-Zawahiri isn’t trying to plan another 9/11 attack—because he doesn’t need to.” Yet in this MI5, if not all the people in the UK cannot take that lacks a standing, What if the next time it is not the World Trade Centre, what if it becomes the Shard? That building is visible to the largest part of London, right in front of a train station. The chaos would be visible for months, and it is for that reason that players like MI5 need as large as possible a leeway to get their job done. We will never hear of their successes, but any failure will be front page news for years to come and the stakes are only getting higher. OK, I admit by creating IP that could sink the Iranian fleet, I did not help any, but I am not some Reprievalist, I created a solution to get things done (that’s how I roll).

Yet the article is not all ‘problems’, there is validity in “a limit to what criminality may be authorised”, I get it, there should be some form of limit, but that also means that the players will go that far in finding a solution to weed out any legal interference brought to them by MI5 (and like minded opposition) and that is definitely not a good thing. We might think that this is ‘common’ ground, but the Dutch AIVD, French DGSE and let’s not forget the American bringers of fairy tails, the CIA. They are all wielding their limited bat because of similar restrictions. In opposition to the FSB, GRU, the Inter-Services Intelligence of Pakistan, Iranian VEVAK (now VAJA), as well as the Chinese Ministry of State Security (MSS), aka Guoanbu. These 5 players do not have such restrictions. The best way to lose a war is to state that you can only play soldier with a M1 Garand, a rifle with a range of no more than 500 metres. All whilst the rest have the equivalent of a Druganov, or the Chinese QBU-88 both have an effective range well over twice the distance, as such it is like sending your own troops to get slaughtered. Yes, there is appeal in the moral high ground, but how high is that moral ground when you worship your convictions like a golden calf? A stage where we say, this is how it is and this is what our troops (read: intelligence operatives) need to adhere to, isn’t that just another form of targeted killing (in the most negative way)? And the politicians waving it away with ‘Our people are just so much more intelligent’ they are required to put their own children in the field, in harm’s way so to speak. I wonder how long it takes for them to get off that high moral horse. So when we see a person like Maya Foa take the limelight with a big eyed smiley face, consider who she is willing to lead to the slaughter in this. 

And that is when we consider state actors, Terrorists have access to much of the needed hardware and none of the governmental restriction and that is what MI5 faces. She is not alone, we are seeing the CAAT now limiting British economy (a setting I am happily willing to take advantage of). We see more and more of these moral high ground settings, all whilst the people around us have no such restrictions and they are all helping the abyss creep up closer to our way of life, in a time when no one can afford such changes. Even now (read: two weeks ago) as we were told “Salini Impregilo has won a contract in Saudi Arabia: a project worth about $1.3 billion in Riyadh with the Saudi Arabia National Guard”, the setting not mentioned is that the project was a lot larger and other construction players (read: Rusian/Chinese) are getting a slice of that. The size of that slice is not known, but as they become more and more adept in negotiating, the slices of WeBuild (Salini Impregilo) will get smaller and smaller in an economic setting that the EU cannot afford. WeBuild is now facing increased competition from China State Construction Engineering Corporation (CSCEC), as well as the Russian PIK group. Even as Russia has a few issues to work from, the Chinese side has a diminishing threshold to deal with and over the next few years it could cost the EU billions. One group, one industry and that much damage, is the Reprieve danger sinking in? The stage is a lot larger than we think because any action here by terrorists will have larger repercussions on the international stage and all whilst we give some moral high ground against terrorists. It’s like telling Ken McCallum that he can only kill the nasty troll with a butterknife. How screwed up is that setting?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Military, Politics