Hacker speaks on his findings in NASA's systems

This fella is legit. If he witnessed UFO/Alien documentation online is anyones guess but he very very genuinely did hack into the US Goverments top systems. Check my signature. I been backing this guy for a long time basically for being brave enough to go against the system

Why would they have to do anything about someone who has no proof what so ever of the claims he presents? He is just another crackpot with claims without any evidence what so ever. Not saying he didnt find anything, just that he has no proof behind his claims. So there really is no reason for the anyone to do anything about his claims. The internet is full of similar claims and you dont see them getting much attention so why should he, besides the obvious legal action which is to be expected.

Here's a theory I cannot prove. If you come back and say, "You can't prove that!' I'll say you are correct. I can't. I’m basing this on the public knowledge we have of the issue collectively, plus some information of my own.

1. From what we know this guy is not a particularly gifted hacker. He got into some un-secure machines which still had default passwords on a dial-up connection. The government says he caused damage. He says he found astounding pictures of UFOs, anti-gravity drives, etc. That’s the basic story.

2. His connection was dial-up, a maximum of 56Kbps. This is pretty darned slow. In practice a 56k connection does not get to 56K all the time, due to line noise, etc. The two modems negotiate a connection speed both can handle under the conditions and sit on a speed UP TO 56K. Many times it could be half that.

3. Pictures such as gifs and jpegs take a LOOOOONG time to show on a 56K connection even at their lowest resolution. You'd have to have the patience of Job to even deal with them to look at or to download. A high-resolution pic would be just about impossible to deal with on dial-up.

4. Our hacker friend seems to have failed to capture screen shots that would have helped prove his case. It is trivial to do this. Print Screen captures the desktop to the Clipboard where it can be spit back out into any program around with Ctrl-V (Paste) Why did he not?

5. Government security. It's easy for us to criticize the ineptness of government. Our view of military intelligence, for example, is that it is an oxymoron. We make a lot of jokes about inept bureaucrats, government bungling, and the like. Our world view is that they are complete idiots. We can easily believe that a top secret installation had computers on the internet with default passwords that were wide open. This fits our world view of the ineptness of government.

6. People who actually deal with Top Secret classifications know that number five above is a crock. 'Top Secret' is serious business. It's not a game. This is an adult activity engaged in by grown-ups who take it very seriously. Does it fail? Sure. You will notice, however, that the vast majority of failures are from people who managed to get a clearance and be on the inside, then spilled the beans for money or politics. Sometimes they manage to 'lose' something important, but for some reason this never does much harm and is quickly recovered. Rarely does anyone from the outside just wander in and pick up top secret stuff that is lying around.

7. Top Secret computers are not hooked to the Internet. There are separate systems. Anything truly classified is on an interior network. Believe it or not, but security personnel are quite aware that PCs and networks are vulnerable. “Communications Technicians” all have Top Secret security clearances and have been lectured ad nauseum about the issues.

8. For the record, I do have some knowledge of security procedures and have held security clearances in the past. It was part of my work. Even the slightest deviation from security procedures was taken very seriously. Once you see just how seriously and the mechanisms for making it work, you will tend to reject number five above. Although I have been privy to some ‘interesting’ material from various sources, none of it is directly relevant to UFOs. I am not now cleared for anything and claim no special contemporary knowledge. My reason for mentioning it is to show I am familiar with security issues from personal experience.

9. I believe what happened here is that our hacker did, indeed, get into a non-secure network and poke around. Whether he caused damage or not, I couldn’t say. That’s an issue for the government to prove. But I think he made up the UFO angle in an attempt to deflect attention away from the core issue that he did break into these machines. He certainly has not been able to give forth evidence of his claims. Instead, he has provided evidence that he broke into the machines. He’s admitted it. It wasn’t a very smart tactic. I think the tactic has back-fired on him. The government certainly does not appear worried that their coming down on him will cause a security issue or undue publicity. They’re pissed. He’s going down. Too bad.


[edit on 7/22/2007 by schuyler]

^What Schuyler said.

Seriously, excellent post; IMO you've hit it right on the money. He's using UFOs as a smoke screen, and in a quixotic bid to aid his plight with publicity.

To think that a hacker would be able to break through the kind of security he posits is simply fantasy; none of this stuff would ever be allowed to be connected to the net in the first place.

One of the best pieces of advice I ever read in a computer website was, if you want to secure your data, you keep it on a separate computer and never connect it to the web. Get yourself something cheap to surf the web and if you ever have to, transfer data physically between the two.

Now this is on the level of PC News. You don't think our military intelligence agencies don't know this?

great video, i've never seen this one before.allot of mixed reviews and feelings are felt here on this site about it. im surprised he's talking about what he's seen. someone commented on why aren't the other hackers coming forward if the story was true. Would you risk coming forward? i wouldn't. i know somethings about some dangerous people but i wouldn't speak up and endanger my self and loved ones for a conversation piece in the media spotlight. we don't know all the answers from this guy based off of his 15 minutes of q and a. He appears to be speaking sincere and confident of his claim. perhaps we could post questions to the interviewer and have him have a follow-up interview for him to ask them.
i can see our government leaving classified info for any basic hacker to find. it's not like we're being run or manged by the smartest president and the people he gives power too aren't getting the best grades either. " fema" 6 days to get water to the astro dome! WMD's ... what intelligence did this guy say he had? top secret ufo alien technology not secured on a computer with even a basic password? yeah i think i can picture some truth there.
And for the person who said the government would stop the u-tube video, i highly doubt that would stop the video from coming out. just look at the internet publicized movie " loose change" and why not use those "censer powers" to get rid of child porn and thieving fake sites.
anyhow i'd like to hear more from this guy and hope he has a great team of lawyers.

Gary McKinnon is the real deal. I have been monitoring his case for a good while, and have even signed his 'unlawful extradition' petition that went to 10 Downing Street. I trust him far more than any of our British politians. bare in mind, that this guy has absolutely nothing to lose/gain by talking of his discoveries. Anyhow, for a rain check, visit: freegary.org.uk...

The only thing 'lame' I find in this thread, are people who would believe the boy.

i. There is no evidence beyond his own word.
ii. Government systems have been said to be 'hacked' before, with or without jail-time, and been shown to be 'false-positives'.
iii. I am not sure about NASA, though I know the Military and Government use their own internet, erego, you can't reach it in the way he describes.
iv. He would not be jailed. You would not hear of him, if he actually encountered sensitive information, I imagine.

There is nothing in the public government sites that is worth any value, save for the occasional glitch or 'oops', such as the blueprints for the new green-zone embassy being released. Anything as far-fetched as 'Anti-gravity' would not be there.
It would not be on the civilian 'web'.
Erego, it can't exist.

Originally posted by Iblis
The only thing 'lame' I find in this thread, are people who would believe the boy.

i. There is no evidence beyond his own word.
ii. Government systems have been said to be 'hacked' before, with or without jail-time, and been shown to be 'false-positives'.
iii. I am not sure about NASA, though I know the Military and Government use their own internet, erego, you can't reach it in the way he describes.
iv. He would not be jailed. You would not hear of him, if he actually encountered sensitive information, I imagine.

There is nothing in the public government sites that is worth any value, save for the occasional glitch or 'oops', such as the blueprints for the new green-zone embassy being released. Anything as far-fetched as 'Anti-gravity' would not be there.
It would not be on the civilian 'web'.
Erego, it can't exist.

I am guessing you have never worked inside the government above the level of janitor.

You are obviously unaware of this particular case. Put simply, the extradition laws were re-written to justify Gary's extradition. Like I said before, this is for real. It has been widely documented in the UK's media. For me, having gone through the Maussan/Serada/Greer 'indoctrination', this for me, presents one of the stronger pieces of evidence

Why such a gifted and talented hack was using a 56k modem, I'll never know...that makes absolutely zero sense to me.

His hacking exploits happened around 5-6 years ago, and believe me, the UK only became fully broadband in the last 2 years or so.

If you are interested in researching this conspiracy phenomenon seriously, then investigate this:

freegary.org.uk...

If you guys want to see an interview with Gary conducted by "Project Camelot" - they're free to download stright from the site...

www.projectcamelot.net...

There's also a great interview with Sgt. Clifford Stone who claims to be an ET interpreter... Watch the video and make up your own mind...

And an interview with ATS's own John Lear....

Enjoy

[edit on 22-7-2007 by Amoungus]

Originally posted by TheStarMan
I am guessing you have never worked inside the government above the level of janitor.

Well, I sure have worked above the level of a janitor, and he's right.

The public stuff is on NIPRNET.

The interesting stuff is on SIPRNET, and he didn't get in there.

You also have to ask yourself just what NASA would be doing with "non-terrestrial officer" staffing rosters from military services. They have nothing to do with that sort of thing, you'd as likely find my last tax filing on there.

edit: What Schuyler said. Also, it's pretty common to put out faux information in honeypots to see who is trying to get in. DOE has several that offer to sell you gas-triggered switches, slappers, Li6D, HMX and the like - on a credit card. You have to go to the various sites that host the honeypots and "go off the menu system" to reach these pages (which proves you were 'tampering') but believe it or not, a low but steady stream of idiots try to buy the parts, and end up getting a DOE guy instead of the Fedex guy.

[edit on 22-7-2007 by Tom Bedlam]

Originally posted by believerofni
Has anyone seen this video?

This is only 10% of the available threads on Mckinnon.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Hes confirmed what Donna Hare said, yet that too could be lies. We can only goes by these peoples' words. Who knows, it could all be true, it could all be fake. What gary describes isn't all that fantastic.

Originally posted by schuyler

2. His connection was dial-up, a maximum of 56Kbps. This is pretty darned slow. In practice a 56k connection does not get to 56K all the time, due to line noise, etc. The two modems negotiate a connection speed both can handle under the conditions and sit on a speed UP TO 56K. Many times it could be half that.
[edit on 7/22/2007 by schuyler]

Heh, I used to own it up on 46k dial up playing games online Lagerlicous.


[edit on 22-7-2007 by Freezer]

Honestly, it sounds to me like the guy got in, got caught before finding what he was looking for and used that interview to insight others to pick up where he left off by providing tips on how to get in and exciting other hackers with what he says he found.

well between photoshop or even something as simple as frontpage to make a "website" would anyone believe screenshots if he got them?

make photo/website put it up on monitor (complete with url data etc) hit print screen and yer home free. so long as he had all the photoshopping done before he captured it to clipboard the exif data wouldnt throw anyone too far off...

and given the level of skeptisism even here on ats would anyone really accept a screenshot as proof?

and project camelot...isnt that what serpo evolved into. how's that for credibility? lol

Theory: Gov't sez "u disinfo out the yin-yang, and we let u walk"

Originally posted by believerofni
Honestly, it sounds to me like the guy got in, got caught before finding what he was looking for and used that interview to insight others to pick up where he left off by providing tips on how to get in and exciting other hackers with what he says he found.

I agree. He sounds like he knows his stuff, but he could have hit print screen or been capturing the whole thing. His excuse is that he was so excited and forgot. I also find it unbelievable they disconnected him right when he started viewing an image.

I dont buy it. Hackers DONT get caught. Hacks do though.
Most hackers worth a sh*t dont do it for 'fun'. They get payed.
They get in. Then they show how to the people who pay them.
Hackers don't put garbage on Youtube. Hacks do though.

[edit on 7/23/2007 by xout1]

Originally posted by xout1
I dont buy it. Hackers DONT get caught. Hacks do though.
Most hackers worth a sh*t dont do it for 'fun'. They get payed.
They get in. Then they show how to the people who pay them.
Hackers don't put garbage on Youtube. Hacks do though.

[edit on 7/23/2007 by xout1]

Agree, theres alot of things that don't really make sense in this case...
Well it has been established already that he's not exactly the worlds best hacker. But you're right in your statement...

Thing main points for me are:
No, the gov does not leave those types of files etc on their systems. Probably not even on the internet, more likely ( ALOT more likely ) on an intranet type system. I think it's almost impossible that the things he spoke of were found where he was looking...
But you never know... a careless employee could have left some files on his work computer, outside of the usual secured place, who knows...

But to make it work, you really have to stretch.