Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2015 10:10:07 GMT -6
The title is taken verbatim from Cryptome's header, and the header of the material they received to show for everyone to read. I don't know who Josh Wieder is, and I don't try to really socialize or 'get out' to know folks in these various communities to know names outside what hits major media or official material. So I cannot vouch for credibility or accuracy of the information, either way.
Cryptome sometimes posts things which are speculative, to be fair in describing it. However, Cryptome has never claimed to be a 'filtered' source of information. They seem to simply pass on what isn't outright illegal, and what appears legitimate or has a good basis to be considered by people with good critical thinking.
The above is quoted out of the posted Email up there to see now. Again..this isn't material I stand behind, but simply present for consideration, due to the very serious nature of any possibility this has merit as an active problem.
Source
Was there more to the Stratfor hack? A deeper story to all this? My spidey senses tingle at this...but I think I'll leave it to others for a change. My plate is totally full right now, outside the ability to share things in threads occasionally. So, take it for what you each personally will in value.
Cryptome sometimes posts things which are speculative, to be fair in describing it. However, Cryptome has never claimed to be a 'filtered' source of information. They seem to simply pass on what isn't outright illegal, and what appears legitimate or has a good basis to be considered by people with good critical thinking.
I am also a regular reader of Wikileaks (as well as Cryptome!). Back in March, I decided to take a look at the Stratfor emails that Wikileaks got from Lulzsec. Although Wikileaks first publicized the emails in 2012, they did not release all of them until two years later. I thought I might find information that was overlooked after the initial publicity wore off.
What I found, so far, was 18 email attachments infected with malicious software. Most of the malware is embedded inside documents like PDFs, DOCs and Excel spreadsheets. All of the programs allow those who read infected files to be identified and tracked - one script for example scrapes Windows software registration info like name and location and sends it to a remote server. Interestingly, the email headers indicate that nearly all of the malware originates from Stratfor employees. This is not spearphishing.
What I found, so far, was 18 email attachments infected with malicious software. Most of the malware is embedded inside documents like PDFs, DOCs and Excel spreadsheets. All of the programs allow those who read infected files to be identified and tracked - one script for example scrapes Windows software registration info like name and location and sends it to a remote server. Interestingly, the email headers indicate that nearly all of the malware originates from Stratfor employees. This is not spearphishing.
The above is quoted out of the posted Email up there to see now. Again..this isn't material I stand behind, but simply present for consideration, due to the very serious nature of any possibility this has merit as an active problem.
Finally, analysis of the malware - who designed it and how it circulated - is of public interest all on its own. Taken at face value, the email headers of several infected messages indicate that the wife of Stratfor's CEO was circulating infected files as early as 2003. The continued presence of these infected attachments strongly indicates that such intrusions were never discovered, investigated and repairs: a stunning display of operational security incompetence.
Was there more to the Stratfor hack? A deeper story to all this? My spidey senses tingle at this...but I think I'll leave it to others for a change. My plate is totally full right now, outside the ability to share things in threads occasionally. So, take it for what you each personally will in value.
