To Hannigan’s frustration, he could not see its actual content. “In the inartful terminology of the digital world, it was mostly “metadata,” Hannigan’s staff told him. “On this particular day, around Easter in 2016, a series of messages plucked out of the Russian networks stood out.” “Hannigan thought Putin was causing a “disproportionate amount of mayhem in cyberspace.” His staff of thousands of code breakers, signal-intelligence officers, and cyber defenders had soon learned to place the raw evidence of that mayhem atop the pile of intelligence they brought him each day, culled from their own piles of intercepted computer messages and phone calls. ![]() Yet once he settled into the job, he found a player who worried him more than Facebook and Google: Vladimir Putin.” ![]() “However much they may dislike it,” he wrote, “they have become the command-and-control networks of choice for terrorists and criminals,” and must learn how to cooperate with the intelligence agencies of the Western democracies. Past heads of GCHQ barely communicated with the public, but on his first day on the job Hannigan took a direct shot at Silicon Valley firms in a column in the Financial Times. “Hannigan’s job was to bring GCHQ into the 21st century, the century of cyber conflict. This was the story too in the reaction to what GCHQ was discovering. As noted above, overall, we did not respond effectively to Russia’s brazen attack on our election in real time. Now Daily Beast has some new reporting o n just how much the British intelligence agency GCHQ-the British equivalent of our NSA-was picking up on Russia’s activities in our election. This doesn’t reflect on Steele’s veracity simply that the Russians knew what he was up to and were able to inject the disinformation. Recently Wood had yet another scoop-that Cambridge Analytica had Clinton’s emails a month before Wikileaks leaked them as noted in chapter A.įN: Regarding Steele’s Dossier I have since come around to EmptyWheel’s argument that there is a decent amount of disinformation-ie deliberate misinformation-in it. Some of the best reporting has also come from Britain where Paul Wood first reported on the Steele dossier. We were warned though we didn’t do enough to respond during the election-both the FBI and Obama himself should have done better. Some of the best intelligence on Russia’s interference in our election came from the Dutch, the Australians-it was, Alexander Downs, Australia’s top diplomat who informed the US about Papadopoulos which led to the start of the FBI’s Russia probe in July, 2016-and certainly the Brits-starting, of course, with Christopher Steele. ![]() The Brits warned us about Russia’s interference.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |