And Another Thing: Chase Was Hit Before July 4th Too…


Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
July 14, 2017

Yesterday, I blogged about the silver “flash crash” of July 7, and earlier this week, about the NASDAQ flash crash, but, just in case you might have thought these were nothing but accidental “glitches” from the “coincidence” side of the glitch family, rather from the esteemed branch of the family of deliberately planned glitches, it looks as if things might be leaning definitely to the “deliberate action” side of the equation, according to this article shared, once again, by Mr. G.B.:

Nationwide outage hits Chase bank customers before 4th of July

Chase’s system went down coast to coast, but what’s very intriguing here is the suggestion that Chase might have been dealing with its own glitches, which it was calling “improvements”:

A message on the Chase website explained to customers that the outages were due to the bank “making a few improvements”according to the Cleveland Plain Dealer.

The bank said customers would not be able to access their information or schedule bill payments or transfers.

However, customers reported that entire branches had been shut down Monday, while others complained they were unable to pay their rent and bills, withdraw money from ATM’s, or even access their information over the phone or in person.

Now, as you might have guessed, I have all sorts of wild and crazy high octane speculations running through my head reading this, not the least of which is the thought that “two is coincidence, three is a conspiracy.” On my view that these types of events are the results of some systematic probing of financial cyber-architecture vulnerabilities, then targeting the NASDAQ, a commodities market, and Chase Manhattan, a large international bank, makes a lot of sense.

But that’s not the only thing running through my head, so let’s speculate on the very end of the twig, where the weight of speculation far exceeds the amount of evidence to prop it up.

Let’s posit a hypothetical bank, say, Deutsche-Manhattan-Cheese Banco dei Flaschi di Cesspool, and let’s say that, just before the beginning of August, when the entire country of France goes on vacation holiday, Deutsche-Manhattan-Cheese Banco dei Flaschi di Cesspool announces in the Toulouse Daily Whistle, that it is going to shut down its systems to make improvements just before the next holiday, stranding thousands of Frenchmen at their ATMs and keeping Paris unusually populated for the month of August. That’s quite an improvement, for during this period of being “down,” one might – just as a kind of hypothetical high octane speculation – be able to access the funds that its depositors could not access, and via a variety of cutouts, fronts, and so on, be able to place gobs of trades, make huge amounts of money, keep it all off the books (remember, the system is down – just before the holidays – to make “improvements”), trigger various flash crashes in various markets, and perhaps even target specific equities to be re-evaluated because of the reset when the circuit breakers kick in and halt all the trading.

But of course, nothing like that could ever happen, because we all know that big international mega-banks like Deutsche-Manhattan-Cheese Banco dei Flaschi di Cesspool are cleaner than a Wall Street toilet.

And thank goodness too, because I was beginning to lose my faith in crony finance crapitalism.

See you on the slip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Advertisements

WikiLeaks Vault 7 Reveals CIA Can Disguise Hacks, Malware As Russian Or Chinese


Source: ActivistPost.com
Matt Agorist
March 31, 2017

Moments ago, WikiLeaks released another set of data from the Vault 7 CIA documents which, believe it or not, paints an even more ominous picture of the world’s most unscrupulous spy agency. The latest leak consists of 676 source code files from the CIA’s anti-forensic “Marble” framework — which allows the CIA to covertly create malware, trojans, and hacking attacks — while attributing them to foreign entities.

With each release from these Vault 7 leaks, it becomes more apparent that everything we thought the CIA might get in this 1984-esque world — they already have.

According to WikiLeaks, Marble is able to hide or cloak their virus signature by “by hiding (“obfuscating”) text fragments used in CIA malware from visual inspection. This is the digital equivalent of a specialized CIA tool to place covers over the English language text on U.S. produced weapons systems before giving them to insurgents secretly backed by the CIA.”

Marble is “[D]esigned to allow for flexible and easy-to-use obfuscation” as “string obfuscation algorithms (especially those that are unique) are often used to link malware to a specific developer or development shop.”

Over the course of the last 4 months, the deep state has claimed — without evidence — that Russia has interfered in US elections. With this technology, the CIA could theoretically present the evidence it needs to “prove” Russian meddling.

According to WikiLeaks, this blame game is possible due to the fact that the source code shows that Marble has test examples not just in English but also in Chinese, Russian, Korean, Arabic and Farsi. This would permit a forensic attribution double game, for example by pretending that the spoken language of the malware creator was not American English, but Chinese, but then showing attempts to conceal the use of Chinese, drawing forensic investigators even more strongly to the wrong conclusion, — but there are other possibilities, such as hiding fake error messages.

According to Marble, the CIA could create a virus that would potentially devastate entire systems — and then blame it on anyone they want.

As Leak of Nations reports, in the second batch of ‘Vault 7’ documents, WikiLeaks released a user guide for Sonic Screwdriver – an implant on the Apple Thunderbolt-to-USB converter that allows code to be booted onto an attached device, even if the device is password-protected.

What this means is that the CIA can infect the firmware of Macs at the core of the system with a trojan horse. Having a proverbial ocean of computers to choose from, the CIA could then pick one of those infected computers, launch an attack, use Marble to cover it up and blame it on whomever they wish.

It is no wonder Ubuntu founder Mark Shuttleworth called this “a trojan horse of monumental proportions.”

For now, however, the only one to be caught hacking US elections is the Department of Homeland Security. As the Free Thought Project previously reported, the Department of Homeland Security, under the Obama administration, attempted to hack the Indiana State electoral system nearly 15,000 times.

Prior to the hacks in Indiana, it was the State of Georgia to expose DHS meddling in their elections.

While these…

Read More At: ActivistPost.com

CrowdStrike EXPOSED: Cybersecurity Firm In Damage-Control Mode

Source: RT
March 29, 2017

CrowdStrike, the cyber-security firm that initially claimed Russia hacked the DNC and tilted the 2016 election in Donald Trump’s favor, is being accused of misattribution of quotes in a December report. They have since walked back key claims in said report, calling their credibility into serious question. RT America’s Alexey Yaroshevsky has the story.

Crowdstrike’s credibility crisis: Key Russia claims don’t hold up

Source: RT
March 23, 2017

The cybersecurity firm behind the allegations that Russia hacked the Democratic National Committee is yet again having a credibility crisis. The company’s latest misstep relates to an ‘investigation’ of who hacked Ukraine’s artillery systems, which they also blamed on Russia. RT America’s Alexey Yaroshevsky has the story.

Credibility of Cyber Firm that Claimed Russia Hacked the DNC Comes Under Serious Question


Source: LibertyBlitzkrieg.com
Michael Krieger
March 23, 2017

Before I get to the meat of this post, we need to revisit a little history. The cyber security firm hired to inspect the DNC hack and determine who was responsible is a firm called Crowdstrike. Its conclusion that Russia was responsible was released last year, but several people began to call its analysis into question upon further inspection.

Jeffrey Carr was one of the most prominent cynics, and as he noted in his December post, FBI/DHS Joint Analysis Report: A Fatally Flawed Effort:

The FBI/DHS Joint Analysis Report (JAR) “Grizzly Steppe” was released yesterday as part of the White House’s response to alleged Russian government interference in the 2016 election process. It adds nothing to the call for evidence that the Russian government was responsible for hacking the DNC, the DCCC, the email accounts of Democratic party officials, or for delivering the content of those hacks to Wikileaks.

It merely listed every threat group ever reported on by a commercial cybersecurity company that is suspected of being Russian-made and lumped them under the heading of Russian Intelligence Services (RIS) without providing any supporting evidence that such a connection exists.

Unlike Crowdstrike, ESET doesn’t assign APT28/Fancy Bear/Sednit to a Russian Intelligence Service or anyone else for a very simple reason. Once malware is deployed, it is no longer under the control of the hacker who deployed it or the developer who created it. It can be reverse-engineered, copied, modified, shared and redeployed again and again by anyone. In other words — malware deployed is malware enjoyed!

If ESET could do it, so can others. It is both foolish and baseless to claim, as Crowdstrike does, that X-Agent is used solely by the Russian government when the source code is there for anyone to find and use at will.

If the White House had unclassified evidence that tied officials in the Russian government to the DNC attack, they would have presented it by now. The fact that they didn’t means either that the evidence doesn’t exist or that it is classified.

If it’s classified, an independent commission should review it because this entire assignment of blame against the Russian government is looking more and more like a domestic political operation run by the White House that relied heavily on questionable intelligence generated by a for-profit cybersecurity firm with a vested interest in selling “attribution-as-a-service”.

Nevertheless, countless people, including the entirety of the corporate media, put total faith in the analysis of Crowdstrike despite the fact that the FBI was denied access to perform its own analysis. Which makes me wonder, did the U.S. government do any real analysis of its own on the DNC hack, or did it just copy/paste Crowdstrike?

As The Hill reported in January:

The FBI requested direct access to the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) hacked computer servers but was denied, Director James Comey told lawmakers on Tuesday.

The bureau made “multiple requests at different levels,” according to Comey, but ultimately struck an agreement with the DNC that a “highly respected private company” would get access and share what it found with investigators.

“We’d always prefer to have access hands-on ourselves if that’s possible,” Comey said, noting that he didn’t know why the DNC rebuffed the FBI’s request.

This is nuts. Are all U.S. government agencies simply listening to what Crowdstike said in coming to their “independent” conclusions that Russia hacked the DNC? If so, that’s a huge problem. Particularly considering what Voice of America published yesterday in a piece titled, Cyber Firm at Center of Russian Hacking Charges Misread Data:

An influential British think tank and Ukraine’s military are disputing a report that the U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has used to buttress its claims of Russian hacking in the presidential election.

The CrowdStrike report, released in December, asserted that Russians hacked into a Ukrainian artillery app, resulting in heavy losses of howitzers in Ukraine’s war with Russian-backed separatists.

But the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) told VOA that CrowdStrike erroneously used IISS data as proof of the intrusion. IISS disavowed any connection to the CrowdStrike report. Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense also has claimed combat losses and hacking never happened.

The challenges to CrowdStrike’s credibility are significant because the firm was the first to link last year’s hacks of Democratic Party computers to Russian actors, and because CrowdStrike co-founder Dimiti Alperovitch has trumpeted its Ukraine report as more evidence of Russian election tampering.

How is this not the biggest story in America right now?

Yaroslav Sherstyuk, maker of the Ukrainian military app in question, called the company’s report “delusional” in a Facebook post. CrowdStrike never contacted him before or after its report was published, he told VOA.

VOA first contacted IISS in February to verify the alleged artillery losses. Officials there initially were unaware of the CrowdStrike assertions. After investigating, they determined that CrowdStrike misinterpreted their data and hadn’t reached out beforehand for comment or clarification.

In a statement to VOA, the institute flatly rejected the assertion of artillery combat losses.

“The CrowdStrike report uses our data, but the inferences and analysis drawn from that data belong solely to the report’s authors,” the IISS said. “The inference they make that reductions in Ukrainian D-30 artillery holdings between 2013 and 2016 were primarily the result of combat losses is not a conclusion that we have ever suggested ourselves, nor one we believe to be accurate.”

In early January, the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense issued a statement saying artillery losses from the ongoing fighting with separatists are “several times smaller than the number reported by [CrowdStrike] and are not associated with the specified cause” of Russian hacking.

But Ukraine’s denial did not get the same attention as CrowdStrike’s report. Its release was widely covered by news media reports as further evidence of Russian hacking in the U.S. election.

In interviews, Alperovitch helped foster that impression by connecting the Ukraine and Democratic campaign hacks, which CrowdStrike said involved the same Russian-linked hacking group—Fancy Bear—and versions of X-Agent malware the group was known to use.

“The fact that they would be tracking and helping the Russian military kill Ukrainian army personnel in eastern Ukraine and also intervening in the U.S. election is quite chilling,” Alperovitch said in a December 22 story by The Washington Post.

The same day, Alperovitch told the PBS NewsHour: “And when you think about, well, who would be interested in targeting Ukraine artillerymen in eastern Ukraine? Who has interest in hacking the Democratic Party? [The] Russia government comes to mind, but specifically, [it’s the] Russian military that would have operational [control] over forces in the Ukraine and would target these artillerymen.”

Alperovitch, a Russian expatriate and senior fellow at the Atlantic Council policy research center in Washington, co-founded CrowdStrike in 2011. The firm has employed two former FBI heavyweights: Shawn Henry, who oversaw global cyber investigations at the agency, and Steven Chabinsky, who was the agency’s top cyber lawyer and served on a White House cybersecurity commission. Chabinsky left CrowdStrike last year.

CrowdStrike declined to answer VOA’s written questions about the Ukraine report, and Alperovitch canceled a March 15 interview on the topic. In a December statement to VOA’s Ukrainian Service, spokeswoman Ilina Dimitrova defended the company’s conclusions.

In its report last June attributing the Democratic hacks, CrowdStrike said it was long familiar with the methods used by Fancy Bear and another group with ties to Russian intelligence nicknamed Cozy Bear. Soon after, U.S. cybersecurity firms Fidelis and Mandiant endorsed CrowdStrike’s conclusions. The FBI and Homeland Security report reached the same conclusion about the two groups.

If the company’s analysis was “delusional” when it came to Ukraine, why should we have any confidence that its analysis on Russia and the DNC is more sound?

Answer: We shouldn’t.

Read More At: LibertyBlitzkrieg.com