WikiLeaks Posts Mysterious 'Insurance' File

reply to post by Slippery Jim


Really?
Wake me up when they start killing the journalists in mass.

Originally posted by Slippery Jim
You have no idea of their surveillance abilities.

If you have downloaded the file they know who you are.

I suggest you stop giving out false information. If you want to give further details backing up your claims, please do. Otherwise you should stop spreading your personal opinions as facts.

Remember that an IP address does not necessarily make it possible to connect traffic to a specific person. Also remember that it is not a crime to download this file according to the laws in most countries.

Thank you.


[edit on 9-8-2010 by Copernicus]

Originally posted by Copernicus

Originally posted by Slippery Jim
You have no idea of their surveillance abilities.

If you have downloaded the file they know who you are.

I suggest you stop giving out false information. If you want to give further details backing up your claims, please do. Otherwise you should stop spreading your personal opinions as facts.

Remember that an IP address does not necessarily make it possible to connect traffic to a specific person.
Also remember that it is not a crime to download this file.

Thank you.


[edit on 9-8-2010 by Copernicus]

An ISP (and remember, you can't have an IP address without an ISP) knows who you are and logs your identity on even dynamic IPs at any particular time.

You are never as anonymous as you think you are.

Trust me.


[edit on 9-8-2010 by Slippery Jim]

reply to post by Slippery Jim


Sigh.

I really dont want to go into all the ways you can make 100% certain that your ISP doesnt know what you are doing on the Internet.

You need to do research, that is all I will say.

Trust me.

No.


[edit on 9-8-2010 by Copernicus]

Originally posted by Copernicus

Originally posted by Slippery Jim
You have no idea of their surveillance abilities.

If you have downloaded the file they know who you are.

I suggest you stop giving out false information. If you want to give further details backing up your claims, please do. Otherwise you should stop spreading your personal opinions as facts.

Remember that an IP address does not necessarily make it possible to connect traffic to a specific person. Also remember that it is not a crime to download this file according to the laws in most countries.

Thank you.


[edit on 9-8-2010 by Copernicus]

And what about all those who used a proxy server????

Originally posted by Slippery Jim
If they have your IP they can backtrack you via your ISP.

Not exactly, if I downloaded the file from my workplace they will get the company's IP address, but they don't have any way of knowing who in the company downloaded the file.

The same thing happens in all places in which Internet access is shared, unless they have a log of the transmissions for each device in the network.

If you try to release the file with its original name they can spot it and erase it.

If I publish it from a DVD on my home computer they do not have any way of erasing it, being a read-only file on a server in my home.

Hence why I advise renaming it and its file extention. Using the original file extention it is easy to match the file size and identify the file.

There are easier ways of knowing if the same is the same, like the SHA-1 ash Wikileaks uses as a way of seeing if the download was successful. A SHA-1 ash of the original file will be the same as the SHA-1 ash from the decrypted file, regardless of extension.

I added the "second line" because this site refused to display my original post because it was "too short." You're a Mod, thats your problem.

I forgot about that limitation, sorry.

If someone wanted to be really paranoid about this, then they could run it through winrar and split the file up, then rename the parts, and place those parts in separate partitions, cd's, flash drives, etc... If this mythical hunt to find every copy of the insurance file were to ever take place, then any 1+ gig file would be suspect...

so it should look like this?

#!/bin/sh

pws=(`cat superpasswordarchive.txt | tr "\n" " "`)
names=(aes-128-cbc aes-128-ecb aes-192-cbc aes-192-ecb aes-256-cbc
aes-256-ecb base64 bf bf-cbc bf-cfb
bf-ecb bf-ofb );
mkdir -p outfiles;
for pass in $[pws[@]]
do
for name in $[names[@]]
do
of=outfiles/out_"$pass"_$name.dec;
openssl enc -d -$name -in insurance.aes256 -out $of -pass pass:$pass;
if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
# remove the file
rm -f $of;
else
echo GOOD: $of;
fi
done
done

exit 0;

statsman, yes that looks correct ...

give it a spin.

Freedommusic it still place the files in o\the outfiles folder. I (if it can be done) Want it to make a text file with all the successful decrypts. Or should I make a smaller password list? it's 14.1 mbs ( some are repeats but I was lazy) so if that is possible thanks or if you do not know tell me and I will actually look.

statsman, all this does is remove any files that result from a fail when you run openssl.

You are all deluding yourselves.

They can track anything.

I'm just trying to warn you to take precausions.

Originally posted by Slippery Jim
You are all deluding yourselves.

They can track anything.

I'm just trying to warn you to take precausions.

No, You are deluding yourself into thinking you know what's up.
You do not.

Also, Some people choose not to constantly live in fear and paranoia of their shady ass government.

Honestly, Who cares!?
They know everything they need to know about everyone they need to know it about, Who really gives a $____?

This is how this world has worked for a long time, it's nothing new.

If you're not truly a criminal, or a bad person,
then effin relax dude.
It's not healthy for ya.
It's also not healthy to pretend like you know things when you do not.
You're not worrying or fooling anyone but yourself.

Seriously, go curl up in a ball in fear somewhere else.
Most people here are not worried about such petty crap.
as well, most here are smart enough to be able to watch and cover their own asses without scared folks trying to make everyone else afraid with them..

We are aware of what these spooks can do.
Believe it or not, we aren't all clueless little children.

[edit on 9-8-2010 by Ahmose]

I agree. Technology now a days says to me they can track you if they wanted too.

[edit on 9-8-2010 by JBA2848]

Originally posted by Ahmose

No, You are deluding yourself into thinking you know what's up.
You do not.

Also, Some people choose not to constantly live in fear and paranoia of their shady ass government.

Honestly, Who cares!?
They know everything they need to know about everyone they need to know it about, Who really gives a $____?

This is how this world has worked for a long time, it's nothing new.

If you're not truly a criminal, or a bad person,
then effin relax dude.
It's not healthy for ya.
It's also not healthy to pretend like you know things when you do not.
You're not worrying or fooling anyone but yourself.

Seriously, go curl up in a ball in fear somewhere else.
Most people here are not worried about such petty crap.
as well, most here are smart enough to be able to watch and cover their own asses without scared folks trying to make everyone else afraid with them..

We are aware of what these spooks can do.
Believe it or not, we aren't all clueless little children.

[edit on 9-8-2010 by Ahmose]

I repeat... I'm just trying to warn people.

If you feel safe then fair enough.

Be happy.

reply to post by Slippery Jim


That's cool.
But you telling very intelligent, very informed people they are 'delusional' is a little tacky.

I do feel safe,
Safe enough anyway. thanks.

Now I just wish you did.

peace

reply to post by Slippery Jim


You give the government way much credit.
Watch the news without building conspiracy theories for one time.
Yes, they are mostly just that - plain incompetent.
Take even this wikileaks mess.. They are telling us that a 23 year old Brad somehow got a Top Secret clearance and walked out with the whole bunch of documents on a cd labeled "Lady Gaga" from a military base and then bragged about it to an ex-hacker while chatting with him by the nick bradass87. That story alone is .. just hilarious.

reply to post by the.krio


Some of the details of the story probably haven't been revealed, and others may have been slightly misrepresented. Most of what I have to say is speculation.

It does seem unlikely that Manning would have access to all that he released. However, lots of lower enlisted have Top Secret clearance. Security clearance is required of certain job fields, like most jobs in MI.

Also, the documents on WikiLeaks are pretty much low level, not really that secret. I read that DoD didn't closely track access from Iraq and Afghanistan.

From reading all the news, I think what Manning said he did was transfer data to a disk at work and then upload an encrypted version someplace on the net where he could access it later. Even if someone was monitoring traffic, they would not know what he was uploading. Soldiers in the field in Iraq have laptops and internet available in their off-duty hours.

The Lamo confession is strange, but what may have happened is that Manning wanted to get more publicity for his released files. He had already released the helicopter video and some other stuff. I think he was trying to justify his actions to the media. Lamo has some connection with Wired. Manning probably tried to disguise his identity using proxies, but Lamo was involved with some civilian internet spying company. Lamo probably told him that he was a journalist and would protect his sources anyway.

All of this is from released news articles and is based on fact.

reply to post by Slippery Jim


When things are well done, you are anonymous!

Jim, real network life is more complicated that what you think it is!